9 12 24 West Orange BOA ZB 24 06 PSEG Full size Transcript

Page 31 1 mitigate the effects of the higher runoff rates from 2 the proposed development. 3 The bioretention basin systems are located 4 as I had previously shown. Each of these will 5 contain underdrains within the bioretention system. 6 Those will be routed to a pipe network that will 7 then be routed to the south and then to the west and 8 tie in to two different locations along Mount 9 Pleasant Avenue. 10 The bioretentions were designed so that 11 the post-construction peak runoff rates for the 12 current and future 2-, 10-, and 100-year-storm 13 events are less than 50 percent, 75 percent, and 80 14 percent, respectively, of the preconstruction peak 15 runoff. 16 During storm events, the bioretentions 17 will capture stormwater runoff which will filter 18 through the basin's media layers and drain out 19 through the network and tie into the existing 20 Township's stormwater system in Mount Pleasant 21 Avenue. 22 On the north side, where there is no 23 bioretention, you can see that the site generally 24 slopes from Mount Pleasant down towards the pad and 25 across the pad. That's kind of the existing

Page 32 1 conditions. And we did what we could to improve 2 some of that slope, but also continued the drainage 3 across the pad as it's currently designed. 4 The upgrades that were done as part of the 5 yard to the left, which is the 230 yard, there was a 6 stormwater collection system implemented to capture 7 a lot of that water. It is routed to the south and 8 then discharges into a filter system that was 9 designed by a different consultant and then 10 outletted on the property where it drains off into 11 the city storm sewer system. 12 Because the project is located in a 13 metropolitan planning area, groundwater recharge is 14 not required because it's considered an urban 15 redevelopment area. Water quality was not 16 required, but we did address it by utilizing the 17 bioretention systems. Therefore, we were able to 18 maintain, you know, or meet the minimum 80 percent 19 TSS removal for the new expansion area on the south 20 side. 21 And then, as I stated earlier, the main 22 reason for the bioretention was water quantity and 23 these were designed in accordance with N.J.A.C. 7:8, 24 green infrastructure regulations. 25 Next I'd like to -- well, I guess I

Page 33 1 shouldn't share it yet. I should ask. There were 2 photo simulations previously submitted, previous 3 discussions. You know, the last testimony we 4 talked about updating them. We went through that 5 process, and I wanted to see if the Board would 6 allow us to share these updated renderings. We 7 just finished them. We weren't able to get them 8 updated and submitted earlier due to the constraints 9 of the upgrades that we were making to the 10 renderings. 11 Is it acceptable to -- 12 MS. PORTER: Right. So it would be their 13 renderings. They were prepared for purposes as an 14 exhibit to the hearing this evening. So we would be 15 marking them as a new exhibit. And at the Board's 16 discretion, we would mark the entire set as A-1 or 17 we can mark each individual sheet as we go. It's up 18 to the Board. 19 ACTING CHAIR SCHWARZBAUM: Mark each one 20 as we go. 21 MS. PORTER: Okay. 22 BY MS. PORTER: 23 Q. So, Mr. Blake, as you're testifying, 24 introducing each one, if you could state who it was 25 prepared by and if there is an applicable date and

Page 34 1 title of each plan, and then proceed -- we would 2 mark it at that time and then you can proceed with 3 your testimony. 4 A. Okay. This is the viewpoint map exhibit. 5 It was prepared by Burns & McDonnell. 6 And then did you say you wanted -- what 7 additional information? 8 Q. And the title of that page. 9 A. Yeah, viewpoint map. 10 Q. Great. We would mark the sheet, then, as 11 Exhibit A-1. 12 (Whereupon, exhibit is presented and 13 marked Exhibit A-1 into evidence.) 14 A. Thank you. 15 This is an overall plan to show where the 16 next several exhibits will be taken from. There's 17 five viewpoints and they basically go down Prospect 18 Avenue and turn down the street towards Mount 19 Pleasant. 20 We're going to go to the next exhibit 21 which is viewpoint -- this will be exhibit Viewpoint 22 1 and it was prepared by Burns & McDonnell. 23 MS. PORTER: And then this would be 24 labeled, for the record, as Exhibit A-2. 25 ACTING CHAIR SCHWARZBAUM: Correct.

Page 35 1 (Whereupon, exhibit is presented and 2 marked Exhibit A-2 into evidence.) 3 A. On the -- on the top is the existing 4 picture that was taken. I believe it was in 2023, 5 March timeframe, I believe. But it's the existing 6 conditions. What you see right here is the 7 northeast access drive into this substation. As you 8 can see the existing wrought-iron fence that lines 9 the property. 10 And then below is a rendering with the 11 wrought-iron fence removed and in place is an 12 Ameristar fence, which is a product that we use on a 13 lot of electrical substations with PSE&G. 14 ACTING CHAIR SCHWARZBAUM: Can you enlarge 15 the rendering? 16 THE WITNESS: Would you like the top one, 17 the proposed? 18 ACTING CHAIR SCHWARZBAUM: So this way we 19 all can see the Ameristar fence. 20 Okay. Go ahead. 21 A. Next is Viewpoint Number 2, also prepared 22 by Burns & McDonnell, and this would be Exhibit A-3. 23 THE WITNESS: Correct? 24 CHAIRMAN NEUER: Yes. 25 (Whereupon, exhibit is presented and

Page 36 1 marked Exhibit A-3 into evidence.) 2 A. This is basically looking straight on from 3 across the street of Prospect Avenue. You can see 4 the control building that is the taller building in 5 the background. It's kind of a point of emphasis. 6 And then this is -- there's also an existing utility 7 pole right here. 8 So that kind of gives you a bearing of 9 where we're at. At the top is the existing fence 10 and then the bottom is the Ameristar fence. 11 CHAIRMAN NEUER: Can you say what the 12 basic difference other than the height from the 13 existing fence versus the Ameristar fence, the new 14 one that's going from 6 to 8 feet? 15 THE WITNESS: Correct. So the Ameristar 16 fence is 8 feet tall and the existing fence is 17 anywhere between 5 and 6 feet in height depending 18 on, you know, where you measure it. And then the 19 pillars appear to be, you know, anywhere from 8 20 to 10 inches higher than the top of the wrought 21 iron. 22 BY MS. PORTER: 23 Q. If you could describe the materials in 24 connection with the Ameristar fence or any specific 25 information you can provide the Board in terms of

Page 37 1 what it's made of and, you know, how the slats look. 2 A. Yeah. So the Ameristar fence -- I thought 3 I had it open. I apologize. I will get it open 4 here in just a second. But high level, the existing 5 fence is wrought iron. It's been, you know -- it's 6 been falling apart or, you know, is not in as great 7 a condition as it used to be. Wrought iron, you 8 know, is a material that requires a lot of 9 maintenance. 10 The benefit of this Ameristar fence is it 11 does give the wrought-iron look, but it's a much 12 more durable material. Additionally, the actual 13 individual posts are closer together, which provides 14 an anti-climbing factor to it and also helps with 15 some of the screening of the station. 16 And then it will be painted black, so it 17 will resemble the -- you know, a wrought-iron fence 18 from just the general person walking by. 19 ACTING CHAIR SCHWARZBAUM: And just to 20 confirm, so the brick pillars will be removed in 21 your proposal? 22 THE WITNESS: Yes. Right now the plan is 23 to remove the brick pillars. A lot of them are 24 deteriorating and they're not in good shape to 25 reuse. Also, it would be difficult to use with the

Page 38 1 Ameristar fence because it is much taller than -- it 2 is -- I don't know about much taller, but it is 3 taller than the brick pillars. 4 MS. PORTER: Mr. Vice-Chairman, in the EIS 5 memorandum that PSE&G submitted, there are specific 6 close-up pictures showing the condition of the 7 existing fence as well as the existing brick 8 pillars. 9 ACTING CHAIR SCHWARZBAUM: Thank you. 10 Okay. 11 You can continue, Mr. Blake. 12 THE WITNESS: Okay. I will move on to 13 Viewpoint Number 3 prepared by Burns & McDonnell. 14 This will be Exhibit A-4. 15 (Whereupon, exhibit is presented and 16 marked Exhibit A-4 into evidence.) 17 THE WITNESS: This viewpoint is 18 catty-corner from the station at the intersection of 19 Mount Pleasant and Prospect Avenue. Once again, 20 we'll zoom in on the existing conditions with the 21 wrought-iron fence and the brick pillars and then 22 move down to the proposed Ameristar fencing. 23 Exhibit 4 -- or, sorry, Viewpoint Number 4 24 by Burns & McDonnell, which will be Exhibit A-5, 25 this is the existing gate into the substation that

Page 39 1 is being reconfigured. 2 (Whereupon, exhibit is presented and 3 marked Exhibit A-5 into evidence.) 4 A. As you can see, the existing station, the 5 drive comes in at an angle. And then there's also 6 an existing guard shack that is going to be removed 7 as part of this. 8 The fence will be replaced with the 9 Ameristar fence as well. The gate will actually sit 10 back much farther than the current one to allow for 11 a smooth transition in. And it will be a 12 cantilevered sliding gate that will also be by 13 Ameristar to match the fencing. 14 ACTING CHAIR SCHWARZBAUM: And what's the 15 height of that gate? 16 THE WITNESS: It's 8 feet as well. 17 ACTING CHAIR SCHWARZBAUM: Okay. 18 THE WITNESS: And then this is Viewpoint 19 Number 5, also by Burns & McDonnell, and this will 20 be Exhibit A-6. 21 (Whereupon, exhibit is presented and 22 marked Exhibit A-6 into evidence.) 23 A. And this is from the western half of Mount 24 Pleasant Avenue, just a little bit past the existing 25 entrance drive looking back towards the station.

Page 40 1 Zooming in to the existing conditions, you 2 can see the existing wrought-iron fence which then 3 transitions to a chain-link fence with barbed wire. 4 And then -- 5 Q. Mr. Blake, what is the height of that 6 existing fence that you just pointed to? 7 A. That existing fence is 8 feet high. 8 Q. Okay. So that would be the same in 9 relationship to what's being proposed with the new 10 Ameristar fence? 11 A. Correct. So it's 7 feet to the top rail 12 and then there's a foot of barbed wire, so the total 13 height is 8. So, yes, that gives you kind of an 14 idea of how it compares to the pillars. 15 Q. Thank you. 16 And then could you just briefly address -- 17 other than, as you indicated, the maintenance of the 18 existing wrought-iron fence, is the new fencing 19 designed to meet National Electric safety 20 standards as well as PSE&G's internal security 21 standards? 22 A. Yes, it is. 23 Q. Thank you. 24 And that is what necessitates the 8 feet 25 in height that's being proposed?