9 19 24 West Orange BOA ZB 24 06 PSEG Full size

Page 11 1 THE WITNESS: Well, yes. We are in 2 accordance with the Ordinance in terms of our tree 3 protection, as has been verified by Mr. Kipp, the town 4 Forester. And the limit of disturbance is really held 5 to the new construction improvements. Trees are only 6 removed within that disturbance. 7 BOARD MEMBER SCOTT: Thank you. Can you 8 tell us how many years will it take for trees that you 9 intend to plant to reach the height and breast of the 10 canopy that exists presently? 11 THE WITNESS: Probably 40 to 50 years to 12 reach maturity. That's a pretty standard growth rate. 13 BOARD MEMBER SCOTT: Forty to 50 years? 14 THE WITNESS: Yes, correct. We're talking 15 about heights as they are now probably in the 50- to 16 60-foot range. 17 Q. Yes, okay. There's a provision on page 18 eight of the June 2024 Tree Ordinance under prohibition 19 Items number 12, no person shall remove trees if it 20 would constitute a significant change in the screening 21 between existing or proposed structures on rows and/or 22 adjacent to lots. 23 CHAIRMAN NEUER: I'm sorry. Which 24 paragraph are you reading from, Mr. Scott? 25 BOARD MEMBER SCOTT: That is the June 2024

Page 12 1 Tree Ordinance under prohibition Item number 12. 2 CHAIRMAN NEUER: Thank you. 3 BOARD MEMBER SCOTT: Can you address at 4 that, Mr. Futey? 5 THE WITNESS: Well, as I mentioned, the 6 tree removal that we do have is really in direct 7 relation to the proposed work to facilitate the 8 improvements to the yard. 9 BOARD MEMBER SCOTT: As you know, a number 10 of West Orange residents have objected to a lot of the 11 tree removal. Do you find that they presented 12 evidence, their testimony, and I believe others will 13 this evening. Are you saying that all of those are not 14 relevant or that they just don't matter? 15 THE WITNESS: I'm not saying that they 16 don't matter, but I am saying that we are in compliance 17 with the new Tree Ordinance that was adopted in June of 18 this year. And that was after we were in compliance 19 with the original tree ordinance at the time of our 20 application. 21 I would also point out within the ordinance 22 that there is an exemption under that section. It's 23 actually Section "D" regarding public utilities and the 24 need for permits, but we're going through the 25 permitting process. We do have a review from Walt

Page 13 1 Kipp, the Town Forester, who is the ultimate surveyor 2 of the Ordinance verifying our compliance with the new 3 ordinance in terms of the counts, in terms of the 4 species. 5 BOARD MEMBER SCOTT: Thank you. Would it 6 be fair to say that if you cut the trees that you 7 propose to cut along the fence, the fence line on 8 Prospect Avenue and Mount Pleasant, it would remove the 9 screening that we were just discussing? 10 THE WITNESS: It will remove some of the 11 trees. A lot of the ones on Prospect Avenue have 12 already been removed. And that was at the direction of 13 the previous Forester, Ron Carr, who approached PSE&G 14 directly because they were posing a hazard. Limbs were 15 falling on the road. That was taken under advisement. 16 Those trees have been removed, so the safety hazard has 17 been taken care of. A lot of those trees on that 18 frontage have already been removed. We're not 19 proposing on removing many more. The only reason would 20 be, again, for the health of the trees only, not for 21 the tree replacement. 22 As you go on to Mount Pleasant we are 23 proposing, we're moving trees around the entry area for 24 the realignment of the road and the bioretention basins 25 and the fence installation. So there's a lot of work

Page 14 1 that's happening there. Trying to save anything there 2 I think would be detrimental to any of the trees there 3 and probably shorten their life, so we're going back 4 with new plants that can then establish in that 5 location, and they're mostly evergreen trees. 6 And that's one of the other things with the 7 new plan that we're going back with. We're being much 8 more intentional about the planting and the screening. 9 We are proposing a number of evergreen tree species 10 which do not exist on the site now. Right now, and I'm 11 sure as you saw when you visited the site, it's 12 primarily deciduous trees from the fence line all the 13 way back to the station. So in the wintertime, for 14 example, deciduous trees lose their leaves. The view 15 into that station you have the branches and everything 16 but you can see all the way through. What our plan 17 does is actually we have a zone more or less in the 18 middle of our planting along Prospect Avenue in 19 particular with those evergreen species. So we'll 20 maintain the I'll call it the visual capacity that you 21 get from what's there today with the deciduous trees 22 but we're going to have an actual evergreen barrier 23 behind that now. Now that we can be a lot more 24 intentional with what we're going back with. 25 CHAIRMAN NEUER: Mr. Scott, excuse me just

Page 15 1 one moment. Ms. Parlavecchio, do you have a Court 2 Reporter tonight? I didn't see the Court Reporter from 3 the last meeting on the screen. 4 MS. PARLAVECCHIO: I believe it is Iris. 5 THE COURT REPORTER: Yes, it is, Mr. 6 Chairman. Iris LaRosa. 7 CHAIRMAN NEUER: Thank you. Mr. Warner, 8 would you administer the oath to Ms. LaRosa? 9 (Whereupon, Mr. Warner administers the oath 10 to the Court Reporter.) 11 I R I S L a R O S A, the Certified 12 Shorthand Reporter is duly sworn. 13 CHAIRMAN NEUER: Thank you, both. Back to 14 you, Mr. Scott. 15 BOARD MEMBER SCOTT: Thank you. Mr. Futey, 16 you mentioned that some of the trees were being taken 17 up in order to accommodate a new road or -- 18 THE WITNESS: Road alignment. The 19 realignment of the entry off of Mount Pleasant. 20 BOARD MEMBER SCOTT: And in order to do 21 that you will be taking down more trees? 22 THE WITNESS: Well, the ones that are 23 accounted for at the -- closest to the corner of Mount 24 Pleasant and Prospect. And again, there's bioretention 25 basins there's, there's the road realignment, and

Page 16 1 there's also the replacement of the fence that's 2 happening there. So there's a lot of work that's 3 happening there, construction access, for example. So 4 most of those trees in that zone in particular are 5 coming down. 6 BOARD MEMBER SCOTT: And about how many 7 trees will that be? 8 THE WITNESS: I have in that exact location 9 probably nine trees. 10 BOARD MEMBER SCOTT: And those are healthy 11 trees? 12 THE WITNESS: Those are viable trees per 13 the ordinance, yes. 14 BOARD MEMBER SCOTT: And do you know how 15 old those trees are? 16 THE WITNESS: I would estimate again we're 17 talking in the 40- to 50-year area. 18 BOARD MEMBER SCOTT: So to replace them 19 would take literally the life-span of pretty much all 20 of us here? 21 THE WITNESS: Yes, 40 -- for us a little 22 bit longer, but yes. 23 BOARD MEMBER SCOTT: Okay. That's what I 24 mean. Have you considered moving the road just a 25 little bit further in a different direction in order to

Page 17 1 save those trees? 2 THE WITNESS: That's really outside my 3 purview. That's really more of an engineering 4 decision. 5 BOARD MEMBER SCOTT: That's an engineering 6 decision? 7 THE WITNESS: Correct. 8 BOARD MEMBER SCOTT: Very well. Thank you. 9 How tall are the existing trees that you plan to cut 10 down that are located along Prospect and Mount Pleasant 11 Avenue? 12 THE WITNESS: Again, we're talking about 13 before -- I'd say 50 feet on average. Fifty, 60 feet 14 probably. 15 BOARD MEMBER SCOTT: And how many years 16 would it take for the new trees to provide screening 17 equal to the existing trees? 18 THE WITNESS: Well, that's I guess a little 19 bit of an interesting question. Because we have the 20 evergreen trees going in I would expect a pretty decent 21 screen with those within probably ten years they'll be 22 reaching an appreciable height. So you'll have that 23 visual barrier from the roadway looking into the 24 station. And they'll grow together as well, which is 25 the intent. We plant them so that the foliage

Page 18 1 essentially touches, so you'll get that wall of green. 2 BOARD MEMBER SCOTT: And in ten years about 3 approximately how many feet would that be? 4 THE WITNESS: Depends on the species, but I 5 would say you're getting a good 10 feet worth of 6 growth. 7 BOARD MEMBER SCOTT: And presently they're 8 15 feet you were saying; is that right? 9 THE WITNESS: Fifty. The existing, but 10 they're about 50 feet but they're also deciduous trees. 11 So again, deciduous as you know, foliage that's on the 12 trees it provides pretty excellent screening. However, 13 in the colder seasons, in the winter, dropping of 14 leaves. And as you can see on the site you can see all 15 the way through to the station. 16 BOARD MEMBER SCOTT: Has it ever been a 17 problem with that with the trees being bare in the fall 18 months? 19 THE WITNESS: No. I'm just saying in terms 20 of a visual looking into the site. 21 BOARD MEMBER SCOTT: Mr. Futey, have you 22 designed landscaping for PSE&G in the past, and if so 23 how many times? 24 THE WITNESS: I have. I mean, in terms of 25 the stations I'm involved in I would estimate seven or

Page 19 1 so. 2 BOARD MEMBER SCOTT: And of those projects 3 did they require cutting down trees 40 feet or more in 4 diameter? 5 THE WITNESS: I'm sorry. Can you repeat 6 that? The audio cut out a little bit. 7 BOARD MEMBER SCOTT: I'm sorry. Of those 8 times when you designed projects for PSE&G did it 9 require cutting down trees of 40 inches in diameter? 10 THE WITNESS: I don't know about 40 inches 11 but we've had some mature trees that we've had to take 12 down, sure. 13 BOARD MEMBER SCOTT: So they will be 14 smaller than 40? 15 THE WITNESS: Right. In the upwards of, 16 though. I mean, we've had I'd say trees of a similar 17 age span in some of those projects. 18 BOARD MEMBER SCOTT: Okay. Was it because 19 they were the communities that know, or what reason -- 20 if you had trees were there trees that were of that 21 size but you didn't take down? 22 THE WITNESS: Only if it was outside the 23 scope of the work, the limit of disturbance. We're 24 very conservative when we analyze these sites, so we're 25 not going to go out and indiscriminately recommend

Page 20 1 trees come down. But if we do see the nature of the 2 work, the proposed plan based on engineering 3 requirements that as I mentioned if there's an 4 improvement, there's grading in relation to that 5 improvement that might detrimentally impact the health 6 of that tree within a short span or even a long span we 7 will recommend that it does get taken down. 8 We also should mention that as part of our 9 process, our design process we work hand-in-hand with 10 PSE&G vegetation management within their internal team. 11 They are beholden to additional authorities that have 12 jurisdiction over these sites. So there are Federal 13 requirements, there are state of New Jersey Board of 14 Public Utility requirements that effectively -- it's 15 based on industry standards. There's an ANSI standard, 16 ANSI standing for the American National Standards 17 Institute. They follow that in terms of the evaluation 18 of trees. Basically anything that's proposed by us or 19 anything that's existing on-site they look at that 20 tree, they look at the species. They look at the 21 proposed, or I should say the habit of the tree, the 22 life-span of the tree, its proximity to their 23 equipment, and based on that it also impacts what can 24 and cannot exist around that equipment. 25 Obviously, reliability is of utmost