6 24 26 WO PB Draft Minutes

14 - Mr. MacNeill clarified the requested relief concerning the requirement to hold one-half of the projected two-year storm retention volume. He explained to the Board that, with new development, stormwater management regulations require reductions in stormwater flow for the 2-, 10-, and 100-year storm events. - Mr. MacNeill explained that when grass and trees are removed during new development, there is generally an increase in stormwater volume because additional areas become impervious. The regulations therefore require the applicant to hold back that additional volume. - Mr. MacNeill stated that the Township adopted an ordinance or code that is more restrictive than the DEP code. He clarified that this requirement is specific to West Orange and is not a DEP requirement. - Mr. MacNeill stated that, in his opinion, it makes sense to enforce this requirement for new development applications. However, in this particular case, Mr. Petry had indicated that the project is reducing impervious coverage. - Mr. MacNeill explained that reducing impervious coverage automatically reduces the stormwater volume, which is the intent of the ordinance requirement. Based on this, he agreed with the justification for the requested stormwater relief that Mr. Petry had placed on the record. - Mr. MacNeill stated that Mr. Petry had also confirmed that he could comply with all of the comments in Mr. MacNeill’s June 4, 2026 review letter. BOARD COMMENTS - Chairman Bagoff stated that he would be amenable to recommending to the board that, based on the applicant providing the information Mr. MacNeill needs, the C2 variances be provided. - Chairman Bagoff also addressed the gazebo. He stated that if the gazebo remained in its current location, he would recommend a condition requiring the owner to add evergreens or other greenery if the greenery behind it ever became sparse enough for neighboring properties to see through it. - Mr. Petry agreed to that condition. - Chairman Bagoff asked whether some of the lighting in the parking lot could use solar panels. - Mr. Petry said they could certainly look into it. - Chairman Bagoff stated that he had no problem with the signage because the applicant was revitalizing the existing signs rather than changing them, although the name would be changed. - He said that if the entrance or exit sign had to be moved, he would recommend granting the

pplicant was revitalizing the existing signs rather than changing them, although the name would be changed. - He said that if the entrance or exit sign had to be moved, he would recommend granting the variance with a condition that the zoning official approve the final location of the sign because the signs are related to safety. - Chairman Bagoff acknowledged the requirements of the ordinance but stated that creating all of those tree islands would cause significant damage. He also questioned whether the trees planted in those islands would ever become tall enough to fulfill the intent of the ordinance. - Chairman Bagoff recommended that there instead be one tree island in each parking lot. He suggested trees similar to those at the Target Shopping Center or Essex Green Shopping Center because they would be more consistent with what would work well at the property.