WayMaker letter

GACCIONE POMACO ROBERT A. GACCIONE MICHAEL J. PIROMALLI FRANK POMACO A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION STEVEN M. AHRENDT DENNIS E. GAGLIONE ONE BOLAND DRIVE WILFREDO CARABALLO ALDO DITROLIO ANTHONY G. DEL GUERCIO. SUITE 102 Of Counsel WEST ORANGE, NEW JERSEY 07052 (973) 759-2807 TELEFAX: (973) 759-6968 LESLIE W. FINCH (1973-2000) DIANA POWELL McGOVERN December 4, 2024 Via email: ptriolo@bittigerelias.com Priscilla J. Triolo, Esq. Bittiger, Elias, Triolo & Diehl 12 Route 17 North, Suite 206 Paramus, New Jersey 07652 RE: The WayMaker, LLC 40 Eagle Ridge Way Block 106, Lot 20.03 Dear Ms. Triolo: As you may recall, I am the attorney for the West Orange Planning Board. I have now had the opportunity to confer with the attorney for the Zoning Board, Steven Warner, Esq. and as follow up to my November 27, 2024, I must point out some other significant application deficiencies. First, as you should already know, your client’s application was incorrect in that, among other things, it purported to seek preliminary and final site plan approval and for a single-family home. Pursuant to N.J.S.A. 40:55D-37 “individual lot applications for detached one- or two-family dwelling unit buildings shall be exempt from ...site plan review and approval.” Therefore, the application was filed with the wrong board and should have been directed to the Zoning Board for review. Further, while your application states that there are no required variances, please see the attached reports from the Board’s Engineering Expert and Planning Expert. Specifically attached is the report by Philip Scott, P.E., C.M.E. of Matrix New World Engineering dated November 26, 2024 and a report by Gerard M. Haizel, PP, AICP, Principal of Nishuane Group dated November 29, 2024. Both the Board’s Engineer and Planner find that the boulder retaining wall is in violation of Ordinance 25-8.4a. Of note, on page 10 of the Planner’s report, Mr. Haizel states: Further, the applicant provides no details of this wall on their plans, including the height, composition or construction details. In my opinion, it is not possible for the Board to fully assess this wall, without the necessary construction detail, which is not provided as part of the application. To that end, the applicant should provide details of the proposed boulder wall, {40 Eagle Ridge Way 2nd letter to atty}- SERVING THE COMMUNITY FOR MORE THAN

not provided as part of the application. To that end, the applicant should provide details of the proposed boulder wall, {40 Eagle Ridge Way 2nd letter to atty}- SERVING THE COMMUNITY FOR MORE THAN 50 YEARS - -