O28 Litwornia West Essex Highlands Traffic Report 82225 FINAL

Page 1 LITWORNIA ASSOCIATES, INC. TRAFFIC, TRANSPORTATION & ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING 3 TRADING POST - P.O. BOX 2300 - MEDFORD LAKES, NJ 08055 PHONE 609-654-1334 E-MAIL alitwornia@litwornia.com August 22, 2025 Index Added Mr. Joseph Pannullo WeCare NJ Corp. West Orange, NJ 07052 Re: West Essex Highlands, Inc. PB 24-01 Township of West Orange, Essex County, NJ Block 179, Lot 32 LAI 2024-006 RE: RESIDENTIAL SITE IMPROVEMENT STANDARDS (RSIS) – TRAFFIC REVIEW BACKGROUND The project application is for a high-density residential project for 496 apartments in four mid-rise apartment buildings in the Township of West Orange, Essex County, New Jersey. The development will have access to Warner Road, a private two-lane roadway connecting to Oval Road, another two-lane roadway that connects with Eagle Rock Avenue. Thus, the project will in effect, form one large Cul-de-sac since there is only one connected roadway for the entire development and that roadway opening will be at Eagle Rock Avenue where the applicant has previously called for installation of a traffic signal with Oval Road. The project is defined as a high-density residential project by RSIS standards. This is the third application for this property with previous applications rejected for failure to follow the RSIS standards and residents’ objections related to those failures. RESIDENTIAL SITE IMPROVEMENT STANDARDS The Residential Site Improvement Standards (RSIS) of New Jersey presently govern residential development in the state. The RSIS was developed to streamline the development approval process and improve the efficiency of the application process by providing a uniform set of technical site improvement standards for residential land development. The standards for residential projects are based to the greatest extent possible upon sound objective site improvement standards rather than upon discretionary design standards (RSIS 5:21-1.3). It should be noted that the streets shall be provided in conformance with the RSIS standard.

Page 2 From RSIS: Paragraph 5:21-1.5 Scope and Applicability: (a) These rules shall govern any site improvements carried out or intended to be carried out or required to be carried out in connection with any application for residential subdivision, site plan approval, or variance before any Planning Board or Zoning Board of Adjustment created pursuant to the Municipal Land Use Law (N.J.S.A. 40:55D-1 et seq.); or in connection with any other residential development approval required or issued by any municipality or agency or instrumentality thereof. (b) Except as is otherwise specifically provided, these rules shall control all matters concerning the construction, alteration, addition, repair, removal, demolition, maintenance, and use of any site improvements constructed by a developer in connection with residential development. Except as otherwise required by rules or other permit requirements of the Department of Environmental Protection regarding stormwater management, the rules are to be interpreted as the minimum required to ensure public health and safety, and the maximum that may be required in connection with residential development Cul-de-sac To maintain safe development standards, cul-de-sacs were specifically defined and the number of trips per cul-de-sac was limited. Townships throughout the state have often limited the length of cul-de-sacs with different design standards. Therefore, the RSIS specifically addresses cul-de-sacs. Cul-de-sacs are defined and described, and the amount of traffic that can be accommodated from a cul-de-sac is limited. A cul-de-sac is specifically defined as a street with a single means of ingress and egress and having a turnaround, the design of which may vary (RSIS 5:21-1.4). Cul-de-sacs are further defined in Table 4.2 as: “A street with a single means of ingress and egress and having a turnaround, the design of which may vary. A divided - type entrance roadway to at least the first cross street with median of sufficient width to ensure freedom of continued emergency access by lanes on one side. Parking lots with a single means of ingress and egress shall not be included within the definition of cul-de-sac. In addition, the average daily traffic maximum is to be 250 vehicles per day.” Since this is exceeded the project cannot be approved. Warner Road from Oval Road is the only access to the cul-de-sac already

dition, the average daily traffic maximum is to be 250 vehicles per day.” Since this is exceeded the project cannot be approved. Warner Road from Oval Road is the only access to the cul-de-sac already existing with 300 units and the RSIS rules are already exceeded without any new development. Paragraph b above from RSIS controls the addition, alteration of an existing cul-de-sac and based on the “rules” no new development is supported by the current limited access on Warner Road. The proposed development violates the definition of a Cul-de-sac as follows: 1. The extension of Warner Road, the only way into the development of 496 mid-rise apartments is via a single roadway that, while now partly divided, is not wide enough to provide emergency access by lanes on one side of the median. It does not allow for two-way traffic on either side of the divided roadway. Thus, it does not conform to the RSIS.

Page 3 2. The Warner Roadway Extension will service 496 mid-rise apartments. The traffic volume from an apartment dwelling unit is defined in the RSIS as 5.5 trips per apartment dwelling unit. With 496 dwelling units, the traffic on Warner Road from this project is estimated to be 2728 trips per day ADT. This is a violation of the RSIS, as a street with a single means of ingress and egress can only allow 1000 trips per day ADT. Thus, the application is for a traffic volume that is 2.70 times the allowable traffic volume! 3. The applicant stated that emergency vehicles could get to those homes on the exit street by going the opposite direction, as traffic is not that great, this is not true as ADT computed 2.7 times the allowed volume in RSIS. It is common policy for fire departments to not allow the Big Res Truck (Fire Truck) to go the wrong way on a one way street or go across a grassed median to get to a fire. If there was a road blockage in this area, all traffic in and out of the site would be blocked. See the existing cul-de-sac accessed by Oval Road from Eagle Rock. Oval Road is private on the West Orange tax maps and Eagle Rock is a major collector. All other roads depicted are private residential streets of lowest hierarchy.

Page 4 Ku zi k D r Figure 1 - Existing Interior Private Roadways CONDOS Private Roads r Rd ne War a ESSEX FELLS COUNTRY CLUB THE GRANDE ad t iva Pr PLEASANTDALE CHATEAU o eR Oval Rd Eagle Rock Ave. (CR-611) LITWORNIA ASSOCIATES, INC. August 2025 PB-24-01

Page 5 A review of the development quickly points out that this development is not only a large culde-sac that violates the RSIS definition of a cul-de-sac as explained above, but the entire area with only one way in and one way out via Oval Road to the intersection of Oval Road and Eagle Rock Avenue creates in effect, a much larger cul-de-sac. In this instance, the various interconnected streets in the development form one large cul-de-sac since there is only one way in and out of the various developments via Oval Road. Thus, the expansion of a new cul-de-sac within another cul-de-sac will exacerbate an already tenuous situation and is not recommended to utilize Kuzik Drive. Kuzik Drive is private and is simply a branch off Warner Road, which is an extension of Oval Road allowing access to 300 housing units. When questioned, the applicant’s traffic engineer stated that if there was an accident on Oval Road “They would be impeded until it was cleared.” See page 88 of traffic engineer’s PB testimony. The applicant has provided plans that call for emergency exit/entrance from Kuzik Drive. It is my understanding that the applicant does not have approval from the homeowners to make that part of his application without permission from the land owners and adjacent townships. Also, Kuzik Drive terminates into Warner Road which is one way in and out. The applicant cannot use the cul-de-sac at the end of Road “D” as an emergency exit. That proposed exit has grade slope in excess of that required for emergency vehicles in winter conditions. Permission to use this route has not been approved by the property owners. Road and Sidewalk Grade Issues: RSIS Table 4.6 Street Grade, Curve, and Intersection Design Criteria. Road “D” services Building D which has 166 units with 1, 2, 3 bedroom units and parking for residents of all these units on a two level parking garage on one end and a one level parking garage on the other end. The garages have 3 entry and exits to the Road “D” that runs to the circle connecting to Warner Road the only exit road from Building “D”. Road “D” has sections where the travel lane grade is 10% which exceeds Table 4.6 Requirements (See Attachment 1 Table 4.6) grade limits for a major collector and is on the upper edge of a minor collector. Since Road “D” is a driveway and a dead end cul-de-sac this slope is objectionable. Further, the lower garage

ble 4.6) grade limits for a major collector and is on the upper edge of a minor collector. Since Road “D” is a driveway and a dead end cul-de-sac this slope is objectionable. Further, the lower garage exit into Road “D” appears to intersect in the 10% slope region. Considering this is essentially an intersection, Table 4.6 shows a limit of 5% slope on either street of the intersection but Road “D” is sloped 10%. This is a huge safety issue as the slope is twice what is allowed. The Kuzik Drive profile on drawing SP-46 has slope of 9.7%, also near to the intersection of the driveway into Building “A”. Since Kuzik Drive is so sloped then the driveway into the outdoor parking area must be sloped just as much to meet. Both conditions are safety issues especially the intersection with Kuzik Drive.

Page 6 Kuzik Drive has a 10% profile where it passes the entrance to the Clubhouse parking making this intersection in violation of the RSIS slope limits of 5% through an intersection. Kuzik Drive which runs past building “C” and “B” also has an intersection slope violation at the entrance to parking area of Building “B” where Kuzik is sloped 9.7% based on drawing SP-47 Profile. Kuzik Drive which runs down to the existing condominium community is also severely sloped as seen on drawing SP-47. Drainage storm water will flow down this paved slope like a waterfall flowing past the inlets to the basins and cause flooding in the existing neighborhood. Without Kuzik Drive extended there is reported flooding from the natural terrain. Warner Road has a similar issue with storm water despite the many basins and drainage pipes. Warner Road extended to the circle shown on drawing SP-29 also has severe slopes inconsistent with RSIS Table 4.6. In addition Warner Road collects all the traffic from Buildings A, B, C, D, and the clubhouse. The traffic from this extension of Warner Road is added to the existing traffic ADT of 1650 from 300 residential units already serviced by Warner Road and Oval Road exclusively. We also add the 72 single family homes in The Grande with 727 ADT accessing Oval Road. The combined total ADT of 5,105 greatly exceeds RSIS standards of 1000 ADT on a multi-unit cul-de-sac and further adds to Oval Road and Eagle Rock Road intersection traffic and degrades the levels of service. Additional traffic generated by Pleasantdale Chateau catering facility with approximately 300 parking spaces is unaccounted for. See the marked up modified tax map of the area.

Page 7 Figure 2 - Average Daily Trips (ADT) PB-24-01 Existing (2377) + WEHI Proposed Development Total = 5105 ADT B C CONDOS 1650 ADT Ku zi k D r *New* 2728 ADT D A Private Roads ii ad Ro Rd ner r a W I D ESSEX FELLS COUNTRY CLUB THE GRANDE 729 ADT O Pr te iva ad PLEASANTDALE CHATEAU Ro Oval Rd Average Daily Trips Eagle Rock Ave. (CR-611) LITWORNIA ASSOCIATES, INC. Condos 1650 Grande 729 Existing 2377 ADT August 2025 NEW Total 2728 5105 ADT

Page 8 This cul-de-sac has a major emergency exit issue because there are an estimated 1500 people residing in this cul-de-sac that in an emergency would need to leave by automobile. Our traffic engineering experience is that in this situation average speed would be limited to 5 mph due to density of traffic, conflicts at intersections and spacing. The number of automobiles estimated to evacuate the residents is 1000. Given a car space is 20 feet we have a line of 20,000 feet of cars to move at 7.3 feet per second which gives a 50 minute time frame. This assumes that Oval Road to Eagle Rock is cleared by police in first few minutes of declared evacuation minimizing the intersection bottleneck. The time elapse is more likely to be up to twice that long for various reasons making the time up to 100 minutes. An RSIS cul-de-sac is limited to 1000 ADT which limits the residents and vehicles to less than 200 and thus the evacuation time from a properly designed cul-de-sac would be 10 to 20 minutes. The RSIS ADT limits were used to provide a safe community for the public. Current conditions are already dangerous. On April 27, 2025, an emergency event on Oval Road blocked Warner Road egress for all existing condo residents for up to two hours. ADA regulations require sidewalks as does the RSIS. The rules specify every 200 feet or less a 5’ wide section for passing and turning. ADA also limits sidewalks to less than 5 % slope. A ramp is above 5% but ADA limits to 8.3%. Road slopes are at or near 10% and sidewalks along these roads will not be ADA compliant on any of the proposed roads in this application. This is a major safety issue for handicapped residents who by the regulations are required to have access to all the site facilities. All of the RSIS high density housing requires sidewalks on both sides of the street. The lack of sidewalks creates a severe hazard for pedestrians. Site Parking Analysis RSIS requires parking for each residential unit. For 1 bedroom units it is 1.8 parking spots per unit, for 2 bedroom units it is 2 parking spots per unit and for 3 bedroom units it’s 2.1 parking spaces per unit. The 1 bedroom units are balanced by the 3 bedroom units 2.1 parking spots per unit. RSIS also requires 0.5 spots per residential unit for visitors. We used 1.9 parking spaces for all units for this analysis. We computed the spaces required by the units in each