24 12 11 Review 2

Gue Consulting & Municipal ASSOCIATES ENGINEERS Chairman and Members of the West Orange Township Zoning Board December 11, 2024 Re: Jose De Oliveira (ZB-23-11 - Amended) Our File No. VWRZ0055.01 Bulk Variance - Review #2 Page 3 B. DESIGN COMMENTS i ‘S:\West Orange\Zoning Board\VWRZ0055 01 - Jose De Oliveira\24-10-17 Amended Review #1 docx It remains for sheet C01 of the plans to be revised to show the proposed setbacks from the retaining walls to the property lines. it shows on sheet C01 that the lower southeast retaining wall encroaches onto adjoining lot 2.01, block 55.06 by 8 inches.. The applicant has submitted a copy of an executed Retaining Wall Easement which permits the existing encroachment to remain. The Applicant should address the Board regarding their plans to record this easement in the Essex County Clerk’s office. Section 25-8.4 of the Township Code stipulates that solid walls not higher than 6 ft are permitted in the rear yard and on the side property line up to the rear line of the Applicant’s house. We note that the maximum height of the northeast retaining wall will be 11’-0”. It shows on sheet C-01 that an upper retaining wall and a lower retaining wall are proposed along the common property line with adjoining lot 2.01. The upper wall will be setback approximately 4 ft from the lower wall. The lower wall will vary in height from 4’-7” to 6’- 3” while the upper wall will vary in height from 0’ to 6’-9”. It shows on the Northeast Wall Elevation on sheet C-01 that the northeast retaining wall will have a maximum height of approximately 11’. We note that the Property Survey shows that the existing wall had a maximum height of 9’-6’. Therefore, the Applicant should address the Board to clarify why the new wall is higher than the existing wall. Construction Note #1 on sheet C-02 lists the soil parameters that were used in the design of the retaining walls. The Applicant should address the Board to clarify if a geotechnical investigation was performed to verify the soil parameters shown on the plan. Construction Note #5 states that weep holes have been provided for drainage. The Applicant must demonstrate to the Board that the drainage discharge will not negatively impact the adjoining properties. Construction Note #10 states that a qualified engineer or technician shall supervise the wall construction to verify field and site soil

discharge will not negatively impact the adjoining properties. Construction Note #10 states that a qualified engineer or technician shall supervise the wall construction to verify field and site soil conditions. The Applicant should address the Board to clarify if this occurred when the walls were constructed. Construction Note #12 states that the site grading re-routes surface water around and away from the wall. Therefore, the Applicant should clarify how the site was graded when the walls were constructed. . The Northeast Wall Elevation on sheet C-01 shows that a wood batten fence is proposed along the top of the wall. The Applicant should address the Board to confirm that the batten fence has been installed. In addition, the Applicant should address the Board regarding the need to install a safety fence along both the lower level and the upper level of the southeast retaining wall.