Good evening and good good evening everybody. Welcome to this regular planning board meeting September 25th 2025. Madam Secretary, can you please call the role? Julie Parker present. >> Jeremy Katz
>> here. >> Mr. Lily >> here. [Music] >> Mr. Heinman Mr. Kamoodi, Councilman Roman, Township Manager O Sullivan,
Deputy Mayor Makavoy, >> present, >> Vice Chair Freshy, >> here. Chair Pearson >> here. Uh Mr. Misera >> here. >> Kathleen Meech >> here.
>> And myself. >> Um Alvaro Gonzalez >> here. >> Sarine Tenwir >> here. >> And Rich Wallowitz >> here. >> Great.
um engineer engineer forester just um and our zoning code official. So will everybody please join me for the pledge of allegiance. >> I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the
republic for which it stands one nation under God indivisible with liberty and justice for all. [Music] Madam Secretary, would you please read the open public meetings act statement?
The notice requirements of the open open public meetings act have been satisfied with respect to this meeting of the township of Verona's planning board which is being held in person in the ballroom of the Veron Community Center located at 880 Bloomfield Avenue,
Verona. The time and date of this meeting were included in the annual meeting notice posted in the community center and sent to the official newspaper of the township, the Verona Cedar Grove Times, at least 48 hours preceding the start time of this meeting. The agenda and instructions on
how to comment will be provided at the appropriate time. All meetings are recorded. Those wishing to speak during any public comment period should only provide their name and municipality. Street addresses are not required. Please be advised that should a member
of the public choose to state their street address, it will not be redacted from this recording. Thank you. With that said, if any members of the public have any public comment or questions about anything that is not on this evening's agenda, please
approach the mic and just state your name and municipality for the record. Seeing none, I will now close public comment. General public comment I should say. Um,
and at this time we will look at our meeting minutes from July 26, 2025. Has everybody received a copy of those? Are there any corrections? Um, you wanted me to ask this. There were only um
>> only those that were present can vote. Right. So, okay. Doesn't matter if if it's one, it's fine. >> Absolutely. >> Okay. Just wanted to make sure. Um, does anybody have any corrections on these meeting minutes? >> All right. Uh, can I get a motion to
move and to pass these meeting minutes? >> Mr. Freski makes the motion. Can I get a second? >> I'll second. Um, can I just get a voice vote to pass the meeting minutes? Anybody who
was present at the meeting may vote. >> Approve. >> One, two, three. That's it. Just the three of us. >> Four. >> Who is the fourth >> right here? >> Sorry, I missed you. All right. So, the
um that would be Miss Parker, Mr. Lily, Mr. Fresky, and myself. Meaning minutes pass. Uh we have no resolutions, no consistency to termination, no
we have a subcommittee meeting on Monday, right? >> Um no. Um I talked to um township manager talked to the township manager and he said there's nothing new that we're going to go to our alternate date which um I think it was the following
Monday. I have to double check. Can you can you just jot a note to send us out a notification about that so people can replan their Monday? >> Yes, tomorrow I will. >> I appreciate that. >> He was out so I just heard back from him this afternoon. >> I appreciate it. Thank you. Mhm. >> Okay. So, we don't have a subcommittee
meeting next week and um we will now uh go back to planning board application 2025-021 wedgewood drive block 1712 lot 1. The application hearing for tree removal application heard at the March 27, 2025
hearing where testimony was taken. April 24th um carry May 22nd carry. We uh came to the June 26 to carry for them. Uh
we the what did we do? July requested to carry to the July meeting. Yeah, that's what we did. And then there was no new notice required. And then the applicant requested to be carried to the September meeting.
Uh and they noticed. Did you Did they renew this? >> Yes. Okay, they renewed us. Okay. Um, Mr. Hungle. >> Yes. Yes, madam chair person. >> Excuse me. Yes, madam chairperson.
>> Please proceed. >> Thank you, >> Madam Chair. If I just might, this is considered a new application. There was re there was renotice. Um, the application's been deemed complete. The applicant did submit uh supplemental um
um plans to uh >> we did not give it a new application number. Okay. >> We carried the same application number with it. Um I'm just stating for the record that >> that's fine. >> That doesn't change anything. No notice was provided. Um,
>> it seems like a a revised application, but >> but there was new notice because it it there was not a continuation of notice during public meetings. So that's why new notice is required. So that's the only distinction really between
whether it's a new app or not. >> So why did we come to the July meeting in the first place? >> We came to that meeting to carry it. >> It was a break and to be safe. I think I forget exactly what transpired but um it was carried but then >> there there was a break in the chain
somewhere. >> I don't believe we had a quarum in August. >> We didn't have the meeting. We didn't have a quarum in August. That's the only reason. >> Well, that was the break in the chain. Right. Right. >> Okay. Well, >> proceed. >> Thank you.
My name is Daniel Hankle of Hankle Law and I'm appearing tonight on behalf of the applicant Wedgewood Gardens Condominium Association. We are here tonight because the association is seeking the planning board's approval to remove seven trees at the Wedgwood Gardens Condominium in
connection with the road repaving project. Tonight's testimony will show that New Jersey law requires the association to obtain a reserve study identifying every component that it is responsible to maintain and repair. You will hear that
the reserve study provides a schedule of when these components useful life has expired and most importantly that state law requires the association to replace these components once they have reached the end of their useful life. To that point, the testimony and evidence will
show the applicant has obtained a reserve study showing that the parking lot has reached the end of its useful life. Consequently, the association must repave the parking lot to comply with its statutory obligations. It is important to recognize that the
applicant is not asking this board to approve the parking lot project per se. That is not the issue presented. We are here tonight because the roadway construction cannot be performed without causing irreparable harm to 17 trees that are located within 2 ft of the
curbs lining the roadways. The paving plans that will be introduced tonight are are being done for the purpose of providing context and showing the installation of multiple multiple catch basins to address drainage concerns raised by the township engineer.
The association is not asking to remove these trees because they are unwanted. It is asking to remove these trees because it cannot comply with statutory maintenance obligations unless the trees are removed. The testimony will show the construction will cause irreparable
damage to the trees. Not only would this construction violate the township's ordinance prohibiting tree mutilation, but it would create a dangerous condition because the tree would ultimately deteriorate. Perhaps more importantly, tonight's testimony will show that the plans relied upon were
revis I'm sorry, the the plans relied upon by the applicant were revised after an on-site meeting and in consultation with the township's foresters and engineers. To that end, the applicant is asking the board to allow the removal of these 17
trees, provided they are replaced with new trees in accordance with the proposed tree replacement plan. The plan was prepared by our landscape architect based upon data provided to him from our licensed tree expert. You will hear
testimony that the applicable ordinance requires more than 22 replacement trees. However, the testimony will show that the property cannot responsibly accommodate more than 22 replacement trees. The applicant is committed to paying a contribution to the township's
uh tree replacement fund in lie of placing uh I'm sorry, in lie of replanting additional trees that cannot be responsibly accommodated. Our landscape architect will discuss why he chose the particular location for each replacement tree and he'll also explain
why he chose a particular tree species. The testimony will collectively show there will be no negative impact to the criteria listed in ordinance section 493-24B. The testimony will show there will be no negative impact to drainage conditions,
soil erosion, dust concentration, or soil fertility. There will be no deterioration of property value, nor would the tree removal cause a delletterious effect on the land's physical condition. There will be no destruction of a buffer between residential and non-residential uses,
the contemplated work will not endanger life or property. But in the event the board finds the application that the applicant has not satisfied the negative criteria then the applicant seeks alternative relief
pursuant to section 493-24C's hardship ex exception that statute that ordinance rather states the planning board shall not permit removal of a tree unless the applicant proves that the removal of the
trees will not have a negative impact on any of the criteria listed above. or unless it determines that the continued existence of the tree will cause a hardship to the owner of the property or the occupant of the property where the tree is located or endanger
the public on the property where the tree is located or joining property owner. The evidence will demonstrate the applicant will suffer an undue hardship if the relief is not granted. Again, this repaving project is not discretionary. The applicant is required
to repair the roads pursuant to its statutory maintenance obligations. These 17 trees are literally standing in the way of the applicant's fulfillment of those duties. If relief is not granted, then the applicant will not be able to complete its paving project without subjecting itself to liability under the
applicable ordinances. So the applicant can choose to disobey state law in order to avoid liability with Verona or it can choose to comply with state law and subject itself to liability with Verona. This envision that has been created is an undue
hardship entitling the applicant to relief even if the negative criteria is not satisfied. We thank the board in advance for its time tonight and for keeping an open mind with respect to our application. With that being said, the applicant will call its first witness,
Mr. to Greg Danieli. >> Mr. Danieli, can you uh state your name and address for the record, please? >> Greg Daniel, uh Flanders, New Flanders, New Jersey. >> And can you uh do you have a business address, sir? Are >> that's
to the company, Fairfield, New Jersey. >> Okay. Um can you raise your right hand, please? Do you swear or affirm that the testimony you're about to give is the truth? I do. Thank you. Thanks. >> Would the panel prefer that Mr. Danieli sit here or stand at the microphone?
>> Sitting right there is fine. >> Thank you. >> Good evening, Mr. Danieli. >> Good evening. >> Uh could you please explain to us and the board uh your professional experience in and your current employment job title? >> My current employment job title is
property director. I am with Cedarrest Management. I have been in the property management industry for 30 years now. I have the highest license within property management. That's uh PCAM through CI Community Associations Institute. Um and
that was back in say maybe 2003 and I've been doing continuing education since then every year for property management and how to handle things. >> So you hold a license? >> Well, I should say a certificate. >> Certificate. There is no licensing >> from the community associations
institute. >> Correct. >> In property management, >> right? BAM. >> And the community associations institute. What is that? Is that a trade group of some sort? >> It's a um legislative governing body sort of um they do a little bit of everything like governing body sort of.
>> And they've credentialed you to be a certified property manager. >> In your capacity as a property manager, do you know what a reserve study is? >> Yes. >> Can you tell us what a reserve study is? The reserve study is um well now it's changed for the past couple of since
last year. Um it handles all the components that need to be replaced within the property uh items that need deferred maintenance over time and it's a it gives a useful life. It gives the life lifespan of the pro product and it gives you the what it costs the costs
and um basically the costs on there and nothing needs to be changed. And we do an inspection usually every 3 years. Um, New Jersey requires 5 years. CI says five, three years. So, we more or less go with three years because things deteriorate quite quickly in the
Northeast due to the weather conditions. So, we have to keep on top of things. >> Does the reserve study provide a schedule of when the repairs need to be made? Yes, it's uh it's a 30-year schedule on it's a 30-year outlook on
this uh reserve study and every every component will have a lifespan within that 30 years and then it will have its useful life upon the inspection of when they did that se when they did that uh reserve study inspection by the engineers. Do you know whether condominium
associations are I'm sorry rather is compliance with the reserve study discretionary or mandatory? >> Mandatory. >> Do you know how it's mandatory? >> I've never gone against it, so I really
don't know. >> Uh at this time, and I'm going to speak to Mr. Sarah on this. Um I'd like the witness to read in um some applicable provisions of the law um regarding uh reserve studies and the condominium
association's obligation to make those repairs. Um I have copies of the law for each member. >> Mr. I don't think that that's necessary. I think the board can take judicial notice of the law just as you know any other law that you're citing today, the municipal land use law which you know we
can get to. That's your prerogative. But I I don't think it's necessary. I think um you know the law speaks for itself. >> So in in lie of delving into that substantively through the witness um can for the record we note that um the panel
takes judicial notice of New Jersey statute 4522A-44.2 and 44.3. You don't like that. That's again short. uh NJSA 45 colon 22A-
44.2 and then the second statute is the same beginning just ends in 44.3 >> I think that's that's acceptable rather than reading the the statute you if you want to highlight some points I think that's your prerogative but
>> thank you Mr. Mera Mr. Danielle, I'm handing you a document that we have not marked. Would the panel prefer us to pre-mark exhibits or >> um I don't know that that even has to be an exhibit since it's we're taking judicial notice of it. So, it's not an exhibit.
>> We're we're offering this reserve study to show >> Oh, the the study itself that will be A1 tonight. If you haven't submitted it as part of the application, that would be >> it has been submitted to the to the board. There's copies. We just did not pre-mark the exam. then it's not uh it's not in exhibit this evening then if it's part of the application.
>> Okay. So we're going to >> it's saying part of the application. >> Okay. So we're going to mark this uh reserve study forward gardens as exhibit A1. >> If you want to mark it that's fine. Okay. >> Okay. It was submitted to our secretary
who dispersed it to us email. So it doesn't really need a number tonight. >> Okay. I'm sorry. I I gave copies for everybody. I thought I had them. I'm sorry. >> Yeah, they were in this. They were in everybody's >> Okay, great. Um,
Mr. Danieli, can I see that you just reviewed this document over the past few minutes? Can you explain what this document is? This is the um reserve study for produced by Falcon Falcon Groups reserve study capital reserve replacement fund analysis for garden
cond. And is Cedar Crest the uh custodian of the association's records? >> Yes. >> And is this record one of those? >> May I ask a question? The witness's answer wasn't recorded on the record. Uh >> is Cedar Crest the custodian of records
for the association? Yes. >> Is this reserve study one of the records that Cedar Crest maintains in the ordinary course of business? >> Yes. >> Is this the most recent copy of the reserve study? >> To my knowledge, this is it. >> Okay. Um, I'm going to direct your
attention to page C7. They aren't labeled numerically, but C7 is. >> And could you please read the caption of this page that's located on the very top left? >> Capital reserve study, excuse me, capital reserve replacement analysis
expenditure schedule. >> And do you see a table below that? >> Yes. And in that table, do you see a column for the fiscal year 2024? >> Yes. >> And when you go down that column, do you see repairs? >> Yes.
>> Okay. Could you please read to me line item number 50 >> site work road parking areas asphalt reconstruction and then it says references 18 uh fiscal year well it says present value of line item
expenditures at time window is 816,000 and 2024 bring it down 2024 is yep 816,000 >> so based upon your interpretation of this reserve study. Does it require the
parking areas to be reconstructed in the 2024 calendar year? >> Yeah. Yeah. >> Mr. Hank, well, I think um speaking to the chairman, I think uh the board will accept a stipulation that the reserve study is a uh the most recent per uh reserve study of the association. And
the association believes that as a uh part of compliance um with current New Jersey law that the association um uh must make repairs in accordance with current regulations.
>> That will save me some time. Thank you. >> I don't think we need to go further on that. >> Madam Chairperson, so and I'll just ask you one one last question, Mr. Danielle. It's your understanding that the association has to perform this uh paving lot project immediately. >> Yes. >> Okay.
>> I have no further questions, but sit here in case anybody else wants to. >> You can't dismiss him before the board has a chance to ask questions just in case. >> So, Mr. Daniel, what is your going to be your role in this project? I believe I'm just the property manager or the
director. I'll be overseeing not the construction work, not the paving work, but making sure that the contractors are on property taking care of what they need to take care of based on the proposals that were submitted and approved the contracts. >> And have you overseen a similar project
of sort of? >> Yes. Yes. Yes. in uh let's see Edgewater. I did the repaving there at uh Independence Harbor. Half on the half on the ocean, half on the river, half on the land. So I was doing dealing with the the um on the dock as well, dealing
with the repaving over on the top of the dock because half the community was on the dock. So >> I had to accommodate for storm water management. >> Oh yeah, cuz nothing was allowed to go into the river. So I had to make sure everything was going outside of the community. Yes. >> Thank you,
>> Deputy Mayor. Uh just curious uh when was the last analysis done on this property? Do you know? >> A reserve study analysis. >> Yes. >> Uh 2020. There you go. 2024. >> Yeah. >> Yes. 2024.
>> Prior to this >> prior to this one that I don't know. >> Okay. >> Maybe. If there are no further questions a question. >> Sure. >> Um, so you said that this money was, I guess,
allocated to that need in 2024 and we sat with your application in March of this year and consistently it kept getting delayed by the applicant himself. So I I see that you're saying
we have to do this immediately, but I'm just pointing out a simple fact that we've been basically waiting on you to come back to us, waiting on the application and the applicant to come back to us and here we are many many
months later. So the immediacy tone seems to fall a little flat with me because again we we even met in June just to you know basically carry this application for you in hopes that it
would be forthcoming soon. So do you have an answer for that either of you? >> I don't think a question was asked. >> Yes. I asked, "What is the immediiacy all of a sudden when you've had all this
time to respond to us since March 2025?" >> Well, the immediiacy is not dictated by the association's terms. It's dictated by the fact we have to do it. >> So, why the delay? Why why did it kept getting put off month after month? >> Madam Chairperson, >> yeah, can I ask the question a slightly
different way? you're um indicating here that this had to be done in 2024 and that's the immediacy and yet unless I'm missing something, the application wasn't even filed until 2025. So what's the reasoning for that?
>> We don't have a magic wand. The work would have been done in 2024 if the trees didn't need to be removed and we didn't need to come here. We've submitted our application because it took a considerable amount of time to prepare and coordinate with multiple professionals and during the summer we did coordinate with the township
foresters and engineers and to revise those plans in con in consultation with them. Um, we certainly appreciate that the panel has given us courtesies to hear this application, but at the same time, whether it believes that this is immediate or not, I'm not sure how that
necessarily impacts this application because the issue is whether or not the trees need to be removed and whether or not satisfied. >> Sir, that's that's not you. You said this has to be done immediately in one of your statements. >> I'm not testifying. I was just giving you an opening statement. I would
appreciate giving my professionals the opportunity to speak about the project. >> I I don't understand where you're coming from. I'm asking a question. There was a statement made about the immediiacy the immediate need for this and the application has been put off month after
month. I'm I guess I'm not going to get an answer to that as to why that happens because you are testifying. You're answering the question for the applicant. >> I'm going to read my statement and see if I see the word immediately. Stop it. >> Okay.
>> Someone asked council a question directly. >> Mhm. >> Okay. Council responded. Council generally um does not testify in planning board settings, but when asked a question, I think it's um typical that the attorney
would reply. It's not testimony. But um moving on from the um the issue right before us is um madam chairman what is the relevance of whether it is immediate or not and why are we going into
>> um because there was a claim that there's a hardship a hardship a hardship in the beginning opening statement and the immediacy and need to do this and basically um we're causing their hardship when this might have been
already taken care of had the application moved forward in a more timely manner through the process. >> Well, the planning board's not causing the hardship. The ordinance is causing the hardship because I'm sorry, >> the town the planning board is not causing the hardship. It's the ordinance.
>> If the ordinance did not exist, we would not be here because we could just remove the trees. >> You could steal too because then you wouldn't go to jail and then you wouldn't have that. >> Well, you wouldn't go to jail even if you removed 10 trees. It's not a criminal statute. >> Do you understand the point? >> I'm failing to I'm I'm failing to I think and I'm not sure what the
relevancy is because I'm trying to supplement uh my previous statement to provide some context and I think you just don't want to hear what I have to say. >> I I certainly do want to hear what you have to say. I just wish that you would be a little bit more kind in the way that we are communicating right now.
There's no reason to get contentious. I asked a simple question and apparently you want to spar and I don't want to. >> No, I don't want to spar either. But you just said that the question was asked under the presumption that this planning board is causing the hardship and I
responded that it is not. It is the ordinance that's causing the hardship because we have to do this repaving project to comply with >> and answered. Thanks. I appreciate it. >> I I Mr. Sarah, can I finish my statement to >> You're not testifying.
>> Well, the answer is not important. Why'd you ask? >> Unless M I'd like to ask Mr. Danieli one last question if anyone if there's no further questions for him as a redirect. >> Does anybody else have any further questions for Mr. Danieli?
>> No, we don't. >> Mr. Danieli, >> Mr. Danieli, are you aware as to whether the condominium association has hired a professional engineering firm to oversee the construction of this road work? >> Yes. >> And are you relying on those services in conjunction with your oversight duties?
>> Yes. >> Thank you. >> Is there any recross examination of the witness? >> Do any of our professionals have any questions for Mr. Danieli? >> Mr. Danielle, were you um take did you take part in the hiring of
the tree expert to do the assessment? >> No, I was not employed with Cedar Crest at the time. >> Okay. My question there is why why would a tree expert from a tree removal service be hired rather than just an independent arborist who may
not that would not >> do you know the reason could you please repeat the qu I >> Yeah. I was wondering why a tree expert was hired from a tree removal service as opposed to an independent arborist who could maybe make a more of a of an
unbiased assessment. >> I couldn't tell you why they were hired. Bartlett tree experts were or Bartlett tree services were hired. It was >> probably it probably went >> when did you join? You said I wasn't with Cedar Crest when the assessment was done. So you just joined in the last few
months. >> August. I'm here in since August. >> So two months. >> Yes. >> Not even. >> Okay. >> So you've been with Cedar Crest for >> two months. Correct. >> Well, congratulations on the new job. >> Thank you. Thank you.
>> Okay. Thank you. Okay. >> I can't excuse the witness. Oh, I'm so sorry. Does any member of the public, sorry, have any questions for Mr. Danieli? Seeing none, I will close public
comment. And now you may do what you will. >> Thank you. >> The applicant would like to call it next witness, Mr. Robert Ler of Falcon Engineering. do the way you have a seat. Just make sure you
>> Mr. Ler, can you state your name and business address for the record, please? And please spell your last name. >> Robert Laner Jr. L A N E R. I represent the Falcon Group, 95 um Mount Bethl Road in Warren.
>> Are you a member? Are you a member of the group or you said you're representing the group? >> I'm sorry. I am a senior project engineer with the group. >> Thank you. Can you raise your right hand, please? Do you swear or affirm that the testimony you're about to give is the truth? >> I do. >> Thank you. >> Thank you, Mr. Ler. Could you please
tell us about your education and professional background? >> Absolutely. I am a light um I don't want to go there yet. Uh my education background, I have my undergraduate degree in uh civil engineering from
NJIT. I have my master's degree in construction management from NJIT. Uh and professional background, I'm sorry. I have um 20 years of experience working with uh engineering consulting firms as well as about 20 years of
experience in the construction industry as well. So I have um designed it and I have built it. Do you hold any professional licenses? >> I do. I'm a licensed civil engineer in the state of New Jersey. Uh I achieved
my uh degree or my license in 2012 and I have been maintaining it with uh continuing education credits. >> And are you currently in good standing with the state of New Jersey or any uh board overseeing licensing for your profession? >> I am currently in good standing with the
board. >> Uh Mr. later. Who is your current employer? >> The Falcon Group. >> And what is your job title at the Falcon Group? >> I'm a senior project engineer. >> And can you tell us about some of your duties and responsibilities as a senior
project engineer? >> My duties um are involved working with the client uh regarding proposals for scopes of work that need to be done. uh working with the um other
designers within my group. I design the plans. I am also involved in the construction aspect of the Falcon Group where I oversee all the construction projects. I work on the bidding and work directly with the community managers to make sure that the work is being done in
accordance with the plans and specifications and meet the budget as close as possible. >> Thank you. Are you aware that the applicant has hired the Falcon Group in connection with its road repaving project?
>> I am. >> And is the Wedgewood property one of the projects you are overseeing in your capacity at Falcon? >> It is. >> Would it be fair to say that you're familiar with the project and its scope of work? >> I am. >> Council, if I could, are you introducing
Mr. Falcon as an expert? >> Yes, I'm sorry. Skipped over that. we would ask that he be introduced as an expert as a professional engineer unless the board wants to void your further question. >> Right. So I don't think anybody has any uh reservations about accepting him as a
witness. Um if anybody does please speak up. He's accepted. >> Thank you madam chairperson. >> Mr. Ler are you familiar with the current condition of the roadways at Wedgwood? >> I am. And on a scale of 1 to 10, with
one being the least deteriorated and 10 being the most deteriorated, are you able to rate the condition of the condominium's roadways under current conditions? It's prior to the start of the repairs on the
site, the roads were at a solid 10. Since some of the repairs have been done, where the repairs have been made, the roads have been mitigated, but they are still substandard and beyond their life. >> Did Falcon Group prepare plans for this
repaving project prior to any work being performed? >> We did. Uh we started off first with uh performing cing samples or having an independent company come in and do cing samples throughout the property. um to
determine the viability of the asphalt to see how thick the asphalt was, if the asphalt could be um if the if the roadway would have to be fully repaired or whether we could do a partial repair on on the road. >> So,
did the condition of the roadways inform your decision-m at all as to the scope of the work that must be done? Repeat the question for me again. I'm sorry. >> Sure. Was the scope of the work that you deemed necessary dependent upon the
condition of the property? >> The scope of the work was uh necessary based on the information that we obtained from the cing samples where the surface course of the asphalt was deteriorating. The base course of the
asphalt was less than uh your standard design thickness. Uh and the cracking that was evident on the property as well as the asphalt being um decomposed uh rendered the life of
the asphalt useless um and out of its term and would have to be replaced. And due to the um I apologize, due to the severity of the asphalt, uh we would not be able to go in and simply perform a mill and overlay where we take off the
surface course, repair any of the base as necessary and repave it. The asphalt was beyond its life and we have to do a complete repair of the asphalt which is to which is to remove both layers of the asphalt and uh make sure that we have the adequate subbase in order to rebuild
the asphalt back up as well as install new curbs. >> And how far or are you familiar with the roadways adjacent to the trees 17 trees in question? >> I am. And in those areas, how deep do
the contractors need to dig in order to, you know, satisfy your your plan or scope of work? So, we'll be doing a complete like a complete roadway repair or roadway replacement and parking lot replacement which is going to like as I
I said again complete removal of all the asphalt making sure we have the proper subbase and when we put our curbs in um we will be excavating down from the top of the curb 22 in uh in order to put our new curb in with its uh footing as well
as the drainage stone that's underneath it. And the curb line is within 2 ft of the center mass of the trunks. Um, so there's going to be roughly a twoft wide by twoft deep excavation in order
to install the new work with the forms and be able to, you know, properly install the curve. >> So was it your testimony that is going to be digging about 22 in deep? Yes, we'll be digging about 22 in deep right
off the tree line. >> And as far as the curbs are concerned, you need to excavate on both sides of the curbs or just one side of the curb. >> Uh we will have to remove we'll be excavating on both sides of the curb for a total width of give or take 24 in.
>> Okay. Now, do you recall being at Wedgewood Gardens back in August for a site meeting? >> I do. Uh do you recall maybe maybe not names perhaps but do you recall who was there? >> Uh there were uh two gentlemen from the municipality that were representing the
municipality. They were the township's um arborists. Uh I believe Rich was one of them. Um there was also um the associations professionals, myself, yourself, their um Bartlett tree service
as well as our um the association's landscape architect. >> Do you recall whether or not the township's engineer was there? >> Oh, I'm so sorry. Yes, the township's engineer was there as well. We were specifically discussing some storm water issues. >> And did you walk the property during that August 7th site meeting?
>> Yes, I did. And did you review the location of each tree that's whose removal is being proposed? >> I was part of the group walked in the project. Yes. >> And based upon your site visit, did you make a determination as to whether the
paving project work could be completed without disturbing those trees? >> The paving project would not be able to be completed without destroying the trees and >> or damaging the trees. Thank Thank you.
Can you explain not I'm not I'm not going to ask you how the trees may be impacted health-wise as a result of the work. I'm just asking if you could explain how the work might disturb those trees. Typically, when we put together site
plans, we do not like to do any we like to mitigate the amount of grading, cut, or fill within the drip line of the trees. In this particular instance, the work that would need to be performed in order to
maintain the project in accordance with the reserve study would require excavation in roughly 2 ft in depth directly adjacent to the tree stump which was
going to cause um harm to the tree. and um Ben will be able to further discuss that as that is his area of expertise. >> Okay. While you were on the property back in August, did you and the township engineer discuss any potential drainage
issues that may arise due to the removal of these trees? >> Due to the removal of the trees, no. >> Did you discuss any potential drainage issues at all? We discussed that due to the grade of the project and the
adjacent streets to the northeast, there would be there's a large amount of water that comes down into the project. And in order to um prevent some of the water from going over the curbs and down into other
streets, we were going to install a few additional catch basins in the area that the engineer and I discussed. Um and the plans that are in front of you show that we installed three additional catch basins which are going to collect that um that rain water that's coming down
into the road. >> Mr. Mercer, can we mark uh Falcon's paving plans as exhibit A2? I just like >> it was it was also sent to us. >> Okay. So there's no need to mark it. >> I I believe it was >> if you want to keep going.
>> Yeah, sure. Why not? exists the trial attorney in me. I'm just pretty sure I have it. So, Mr. Laner, you just stated that based upon your conversations with the engineer, you revised the paving plans
to include some more catch basins. >> That is correct. But to your knowledge, those catch basins were being added to address existing storm water and not conditions that may be created by the result of
tree removal. The catch basins were to my knowledge installed to help mitigate the runoff coming from the site. Uh nothing to do with the actual removal of the trees. Okay.
Um, at this time I have no further questions for Mr. Laner unless the and the board like cross-examine. >> You know what? I'm just going to go because can you please show us? See, well, first of all, let me ask you a couple of questions. I'm sorry.
Were you involved in the beginning of this project or were you brought in later? >> I missed about the first month or so of the project. So you were brought in after the first application was heard. >> That is correct. >> Okay. Um because
very shortly after that about I would say 2/3 or at least half of the project has already been apparently completed. I I occasionally drive through there. I have a couple of friends there. Um the
roads have been paved. there were close to 50 trees being floated for removal and somehow now it's down to 17 um and paving got done of about half of the site. So the lower half of the site
it appears has been paved and a lot of the outlets that go down into where the garage bays are um towards Claremont Avenue and then again a garage bay that goes towards Rose Terrace and that entire back parking lot where all the
garages are that's all paved. Um, and I I think there might have been one or two trees lost in the process of that, but no trees were actively removed prior to getting a lot of this work done. Would
you say that that's correct? >> I would just say I'm not sure why that question being asked. >> Do I have to give you a reason for asking a question about the project getting partially done without removal of trees? What did that have to do with
his testimony? >> Well, you decided to go into excruciating level of detail like a trial attorney to talk about all the paving and building and grid lines and really I think what this board is just after is number one the original application had a substantial number of
trees which to our benefit was reduced which is great. I think we'd also like to understand why there's a discrepancy between the number of trees to be replaced as different on paper and you know if we can just summarize and stick to some parts of the relevant part of the application that's really what we're
after. >> Sure. Uh I believe our other witnesses be better prepared. >> Yeah, that >> that is true. I appreciate your experience as a trial attorney, but this is a planning board meeting. We we can try to keep it a little >> a little because this is we have
relevant questions. We're not in a trial here. or a planning board. We have an interest in protecting our town and doing the right thing according to our zoning code and our ordinances. So, let's just take it down a notch. And I'm asking the the
Thank you very much, by the way, for asking questions. >> I I understand to answer the questions. >> This is not a trial court, please. >> I I understand that it's a quasi judicial proceeding. >> No, it's I'm not allowed to answer. >> It's not. Okay, Mr. Hel. Um, I'm going
to ask Mr. uh I'm going to ask Mr. Landry a question. Mr. Landry, um Mr. Lier, I'm sorry. Um the original plan called for road work and um the removal
of many more trees than now um are being requested to be removed. Originally the applicant had requested the removal of the trees now that do not have to be removed because of road work. So now the
applicant is be before this board saying we have to do road work and because we have to do road work we have to remove trees. Why did the road work ultimately with the trees that remain that were previously identified for removal not
impact those trees? I think that's a long- winded way to ask what the chairperson was trying to ask. That question makes a lot of sense. [Music] >> The majority of the work that took place was not in direct proximity to the
trees. The remaining work along the the tree route. So, we're we have we have the remaining work around along the eastern, northern, and western portions of Wedgewood Circle. Um, >> okay, >> Madam Chair. So, if you if you were to
drive in and you come to the circle, there's some work to the top of the circle to the right. >> Correct. >> And then as you work your way around back down the circle is the is where the remainder of the work needs to take place. That work um the trees in that area are directly adjacent to the curb.
Whereas a lot of the other work that took place on site was in between buildings or um between the circle and the existing buildings. the trees weren't as close to the property. And I would also just like to mention that although you you may have been in there and you saw the roads were paved, they're not finished. That is only the
base course of asphalt. We still have to put asphalt all the asphalt that's in there still has to have the surface course put on. >> Right. But that doesn't entail the curbs are already put in in that section in those sections. >> Yes. where so where where the asphalt looks new, the curb work has been done
in those areas >> without the removal of trees, at least not >> intentional. >> Um, so you said that you added three drainage. Can you show me where on on the map? >> Absolutely. in that in those areas that
have yet to be paved where the because they seem almost at the height of the property rather than at the lower part where you would expect to put a drain down downstream. >> So the you you would come into the main
portion of the property this way that you'd come up unfortunately all the roads are wedgewood drive. So you know >> is that um >> the top of that is Cumberland. Uh I was >> or Hamilton Cumberland area. >> Thank you. >> So you as you enter the site through
from Cumberland and you come up Wedwood Drive, this whole area of the road is elevated up. Wedgwood Drive as you continue to the south also elevates and it comes into the corner where we need to do additional work. You continue along Wedgewood Drive heading to the
north. Um and elevation starts to drop as you come down around this boomerang here. >> Thank you. where you come down this boomerang is where we're adding the additional drains. >> Two drains there. >> We're adding three additional drains. We're adding We're adding one drain
right right by building six to help collect the water that's coming down the road. We have another drain on the other side of building six. And then we have a drain on the other side of the road to catch anything that's coming off this grass area where the topography drains as my fingers are coming across the
across here. So there's existing drainage all the way at the top up by Hamilton, there's some existing drainage right here. There's some existing drainage right here. There's drainage here, but the majority is down in this low section here. So what we're trying to do is the water
that's coming down and bypassing anything from here, the water that's coming down from here and any water that's coming over this green null, we're catching it before it hops the curb and gets towards these buildings here. And what exists going down towards on on the regular part of the roadway
that you just drove up before you went around the circle? >> What exists in that area? >> So So there is some there is some existing drainage that exists right here. We have some existing drainage at the bottom and we have the one drain at the top for water that's coming down
this way. We're catching it in this drain. We're catching it in this drain and then ultimately it's making it way down. If I could just for the for the record, Mr. Lard, >> what you're referring to as the top is actually the lower portion of that is C1 that you're looking at.
>> Turn that upside down. >> That is C1 that you're looking at. >> Yeah, this is C-1. >> C-1 of exhibit A2, >> correct? >> Okay. And again, I I didn't hear your answer. I apologize. >> It's the top portion of the page, but it topographically is the lowest area of
the property. >> Thank you. >> And that's where the additional drains are going. is where the lowest portion of the topography goes. >> Human. >> Yes. >> Thank you. Uh the drains you're adding and the
existing drainage, where does it leave the property? We're using structural means to remove the storm water. Where does it end up? That answer I do not know. >> Can I go
there? >> You can do whatever you want. >> So the idea when I was supposed to have because this area >> Can you grab the mic? >> Thank you so much. >> I got the contractor's voice.
So the idea here um is that all this area actually it drains all this area drains towards this corner >> and this part actually drains this way. >> Yes, that's a problem. >> Yes. So when we when I walk all the way
here what I notice is that for example on this street is Wedgewood Drive. Yes. >> Okay. So from this um it goes it drains this way. But what happens is that before um the codes before actually
allowed to put uh catch basin at a longer distances but currently you try to avoid that because for example during the winter you can have that runoff and and can actually freeze over here causing many problems. One of them is
the thaw and um and the freezing. Yes. And then and then you the the oso is going to suffer. So what you do is you try to pipe the runoff um as soon as possible and you avoid having those the run of running freely on the road. So
that was the the rational behind all this recommendation. So on this side what what I noticed is that there was no catchment here and this is a long run from here all the way here. it doesn't have any any catchment. Um so here we
proposed this catch basin and over here what I noticed in this area is that it since the slope is steep um was a combination that the I mean the asphalt is in bad condition it's old but the
sign was that also the runoff was causing erosion on the surface of the asphalt. So the idea was just to catch the runoff before um I mean because it's a long room so catch it before and pipe it and put it
here. So um I walk all the way um behind the buildings and it seems like this catchment here um is connected here and then goes here and then there isn't a manhole >> and it continues over to here goes out this way.
>> Yes, that's the way. It goes it it basically eventuates I'm sorry deputy mayor it eventuates onto uh the the road system and the pipes underneath Cumberland which is a very floodprone street. >> Yeah. So >> well what I madam chair what I would
like to also say is that we're not changing the drainage patterns that currently exist. >> You're withholding more storm water for a short period. Also, also the storm water that's going to be collected in these three new catch basins was storm water that was already coming down from
Hamilton and collecting into either this catch basin here, this catch basin here, this existing basin, or this existing basin. So, we're not changing the drainage patterns. We're not changing runoff coefficients. We're not adding any increased um imperous coverage,
which would then generate additional uh rainfall runoff. Um, so we're not changing anything. We're just collecting it sooner and we're piping it underground so that we're not we don't have to worry about the icing conditions that would happen on the site as well as
extend the life of the asphalt by collecting the water sooner. >> So, Mr. Laner, did you were you involved in the design of this? >> Yes, >> you were. So, was there any consideration since you're catching the water at an earlier point coming down off of Hamilton there, the first road
closer to you where you have the parking that indentation I know is parking there. Was there any consideration for curb cuts and rain gardens in that little courtyard area to collect the water prior to entering or prior to even having a need for more collection?
>> Well, you have you have existing catch basins that are right at the top of this Yep. parking lot already. So, the only water that's going to come down here is anything that may bypass this, this little triangle or this little rectangle here is what's going to be coming down the road. That's all.
>> Okay. >> Even that little bit because I know people on Cumberland right below in that far corner where all that water goes on heavy rainstorms. I've seen it. I've been in there and it is a river going out that corner onto those properties. So, has there was there any
consideration for rain gardens or would the applicant be willing to redesign? Because going down into that corner between the two buildings, there's a large courtyard there. Perfect opportunity. And I'm waiting for the tree person to come up and talk about tree locations. Perfect opportunity for
more trees and possible rain gardens to accept some of that water and naturally soak into the ground. So, we did not consider rain gardens for any additional improvements to the storm water as it occurs on the site as we were entering
into a maintenance project to just replace the asphalt and the broken curbs. During our meeting with township officials and their professionals, it was brought to our attention that, you know, we would like you to install some additional catch basins. So under the
recommendation of um your engineer, we added those additional catch basins. >> Okay. Would so would the applicant consider adding some rain gardens to reduce that runoff to the neighbors downstream? I mean being a neighbor of
a neighborly act of trying to mitigate some of this problem since we're we're doing a lot of work here. uh we in the spirit of cooperation we'd certainly uh something that the association would consider um we can't speak on on behalf of them um right now but at the same
time I would note that this exhibit was originally being profered for the purpose of showing uh there was going to be catch basins to help with drainage but it seems that's the testimony of Mr. ler and pat engineer that these catch basins are being installed to address
existing runoff water and not to mitigate any drainage conditions that may arise or any ad adverse drainage conditions that may arise due to the tree removal. Uh again, we'd be happy to consider those things as in the spirit of cooperation, but we just want to
clarify for the record that um these catch basins are are not being added for uh drains mitigation for the tree removal. It's being as mitigation for existing storm water runoff on the roads. >> And and my thought is to mitigate some
of the problem with the tree removal because we all know how much water trees absorb. Uh Mr. Laner talked about runoff from the island area like so on that bottom corner of the island would be maybe another good area for a rain
garden uh to not have any sheet runoff from that that center island as you just spoke about. So those are those are crucial areas on that property where we can help our neighbors not experience these flooding conditions when we get these heavy rains.
So, I would it would be nice if the applicant if this could be reviewed in adding rain gardens uh being that we are removing so many trees that are right along the roadways that soak up water. >> I can have our other professional speak more to that.
>> Okay, great. >> That's all I have. Thank you. >> I'm just >> Yeah. Can we go back to the to the disturbance around the curbs? So I thought earlier you said that you go 2 feet back from the curb >> towards the tree.
>> So just to clarify that. So the how do I want to try to explain this? So from the face of the curve that you would see, we would go back into the line um about about a foot a little bit more
than a foot back as well as into the roadway as well. So that the total excavation would be 2 ft wide. >> Okay. And that is to in to be able to allow the contractor to a remove the existing concrete footings, the ones
that are still in place. A lot of them are broken and no longer really there, but to remove the existing material, make sure he's got enough room to put his new forms in, form his concrete footing, and then install the new Belgian block.
>> And then the depth, he said, was 2 ft from the top. So from the top from the top of the curb, we'd be going down 22 inches of extra >> 22 inches. So you could really subtract out the height of the curb, right? Because that's above ground. So it's whatever the height of the curb >> well the grass that's adjacent to the
curb is at the height of the curb. So from that grass, we'd be going down 22 in of excavation. >> Okay? >> And again, that's to provide the stone footing. That's the the stone that's underneath the um concrete footing which
helps um um pull grater water away as well as the concrete footing itself for the block. >> No pipes are going to be replaced underneath the ground though. >> No. >> Right. You're just going to tie into existing pipes with canoe.
>> Correct. The the proposed catch basins are tying into an existing catch basin. No modifications to the underground conveyance system. >> Any other questions up here? Any of our professionals have any questions? >> Okay. Um, anyone from the public have
any questions? Please come up. Um, state your name in the microphone and your township of residency. You don't have to say your whole address. [Music] Good evening. Disgusting. >> That's okay. I'll I'll use my professor
voice. Good evening and thank you for the opportunity to to speak this evening. My name is Stephanie Rackfeld. I'm a resident of >> You have to ask questions of this witness. You can make comments later. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Great. Um, as a resident of this complex, I'm concerned about the
unfinished preliminary paving that was done. You mentioned it was the base layer. It looks pitted and popped to me. And the gentleman mentioned winter freeze spa. Are we at risk of that base layer being damaged during winter free spa?
>> Thank you. >> Did everybody hear her question? >> No. >> So, she's concerned about the aesthetic look of the asphalt and the pitted uh appearance. >> Not the aesthetic, the potential for winter >> as well as as well as Yes. Um, so the
aesthetic look of the asphalt, that's base asphalt. There's two different kinds. You have base and you have top. Base is a lot more porous. It has a lot larger stone. It provides a more structural base. Typically, within a
very short time frame after installing the base asphalt, we install the surface course, which is a lot more fine, doesn't have as many holes in it, and that is going to protect the asphalt. that's going to direct the water to wherever we need it to go to. And it is
our intention to get what is currently paved uh that has a base course on it to get the surface course on there. Um knowing that we do have winter coming in. Um knowing that the base course is usually a little bit lower than the catch basins that exist. So, you know,
you have to worry about water getting into the structures. Once we can get that final course on, once we can get the rest of the curb done and we can get the rest of the asphalt done, the intention is to pave the project going into winter so that you do not have the current road conditions that you
currently are experiencing. >> Try to speak into are we at risk that the existing materials would be damaged during winter? Speaking to the urgency of the project, >> there is the potential
of having the base asphalt exposed for an extended period of time that it could break down a little bit due to the freeze and thaw cycle because we don't have the final force on top. >> Thank you. That's my only question.
Thank you, >> professor. >> Anyone else from the public? >> Hi, Carol Thomas from the shade tree commission. I just want to be sure that we have another witness regarding from uh that we have another witness
regarding the tree choices. >> Yes, we do. >> So, I'll save everything till Thank you. >> Yeah. Are there any other members of the public that have a question for the engineer? Any any last final dates over here? No. Okay. Thank you.
>> Thank you very much. >> You have great projection. >> You have to learn to speak over construction equipment. At this time, the applicant would like to call our next witness, Mr. Matthew Burgess. Mr.
>> Burgess, could you state your name and business address for the record? >> My name is Matthew Burgess. Uh, our business address is 984 Road in Danville, New Jersey. >> Can you raise your right hand, please? Do you swear or affirm that the testimony you're about to give to the chief? >> Yes, sir.
>> Thank you, Mr. Burgess. Could you please uh explain to the planning board a little bit about your uh background and qualifications and uh any any professional licenses that you may hold? >> I am an arborist in the state of New
Jersey. I've been doing tree work for 32 years. Um, I'm a licensed tree expert with the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection. I have been licensed and in good standing since 2009. I also hold the ISA, which is the
International Society of Arbor Track TR R AQ qualification, which is a tree risk assessment qualification. Um, and that expires in 2029. Um, about the long and short of my arous
career. >> Um, and you're currently a licensed tree expert. >> Correct. My LTE number is 543. >> Uh, and you're in good standing? >> Yes, I am. >> Are you required to take any continuing education courses as part of uh being a licensry expert?
>> I am required every two years to obtain 35 CUS for renewal. >> And are you uh up to date with all those? >> I am current at the moment. Yes. Okay. Um, at this time, the applicant would ask the planning board accept Mr. Burgess as a licensed tree expert.
>> Yes. >> Um, excuse me, Mr. Burg, can you turn on your microphone? Can you turn on your microphone? >> Oh, thank you. >> Thank you. >> Uh, Mr. Burges, I'm handing you a uh a
report that was submitted, which we'll mark as uh A3. Could you uh please take a look at that briefly and tell me if you're familiar with that report? >> Yes, I am familiar with the report. Um and if I may speak to the gentleman uh
>> excuse me, could you identify the report please? >> This is the Wedgwood Gardens preliminary tree preservation report prepared by uh Keith Bimi who is a Bartlett Consulting Arborist. That organization within Bartlett is
separate from the actual arbist representatives like myself who work for Bartlett who actually go out, meet with clients, address their specific argicultural needs, propose, sell, perform the requisite duties of tree
care. Keith is a consulting arborist and not alone. We're not allowed to do consultations for clients. We have to physically get in touch with our consulting group and specifically have them intervene at that point and take care of consulting needs on behalf of our clients. We're not allowed to do
that >> even despite being a tree expert. >> Thank you. >> Yes, sir. >> So, you're not the guy that cuts trees down? >> Not anymore. >> Okay. Um, Mr. Burgess, did you get an opportunity
to review this report? >> Yes, I did. Let let me start over. Uh were you at the August site meeting at the Witchwood property? >> Yes, I was. >> And prior to that site meeting, did you have an opportunity to review this report? >> Yes.
>> Okay. And do you know whether this port report was revised after uh consulting with our the applicants professionals as well as the town's professionals? >> Yes. >> And is this report the revised copy that was just I'm sorry. Let me finish my
question before you answer so the record is clear. Was this revised port I'm sorry. Was this revised report completed after the consultation with talent professionals? >> Yes, it was. >> Okay. And you said that you reviewed this
report and the trees in it prior to the August 7th site meeting. >> Yes. And at the site meeting, did you assess or review each of the trees listed in this report? >> Yes, we walked the property
around the the map that the last gentleman was just pointing out and all the trees that were around the curb line. We went through them one by one along with uh members of the Wedgwood Gardens. Um the
township arborist and the engineer were all on site with us. >> Are you familiar with the the paving project at Wedgwood? >> Yes. >> And were you listening to Mr. Laner's testimony just now about the scope of the project?
>> Yes. >> Was Mr. Laner at the August 7th site meeting? >> Yes, he was. >> And did you walk the property with him? >> Yes, I did. >> Okay. At this time, I'm just going to go through each of the 17 trees that are proposed for removal and just ask you a
few questions about each. I'm going to direct your attention to page. >> I'm sorry. You're going to go through every one of the 17 trees that we have seen on this list. also copy and paste it onto his
>> unless you want to stip unless the board wants to stipulate that each of these trees need to be removed >> and we have it and we've read it. >> Okay. But it's not on the record. >> If please >> I think well I think if if council
believes that it's relevant then I think he should go forward with it. But >> um unless the board again wants to stipulate that the board is aware of each of the 17 trees, council, what is the nature of the the profer of the testimony is we would like the witness
to say that he reviewed each tree, its proximity to the uh proposed construction and issue an opinion as to whether or not um the harm that could befall the tree as a result of the disturbance. >> Is that included in the report though?
Well, I mean, we've been we've had this report for a while. >> He he's certainly permitted to to go through a report that has been submitted, but perhaps we can um we can um just ask if there is any tree in
particular or to, you know, I'm sorry, >> do the opposite. >> Do the opposite. Right. Go through the ones that he believes, you know, need to be need to be removed and for whatever reason. Well, that's all I intend on doing, but there's 17 trees that need to be well need to be removed.
>> Well, I think if they're all in the same category, I think that perhaps we can just elicit his testimony that way. >> Sure. >> Okay. >> So, Mr. Burgess, I'm going to direct your attention to page nine of the table. I'm
sorry, page nine of the report. >> Yeah. >> Do you see the tree inventory table? >> Yes, sir. And how how many trees are listed on that table? >> 17. >> And you reviewed each of these trees on
your site visit? >> Yes, I did. And is it your opinion that the contemplated construction work would irreparably harm these trees? >> Yes. >> What would happen if the tree roots were
cut but the tree was not removed? You know, the tree would ultimately be susceptible to wind throw failure in storms. Um, it could fall over. it would end up declining due to root disturbance with in the critical root zone of that tree. It would have an unfavorable
response. >> So, it's not something that we could just say that's just a nick. Don't worry about it. The tree will be fine. >> No, I don't believe so. >> And that's your opinion for each of these 17 trees? >> Yes.
>> Do you recall if the township's bars disagreed as to whether any trees need to be removed. >> Yes, there was one I believe that was slated to be kept on the property or
preserved. >> And looking at the inventory table on number nine, is is that tree number eight? >> Correct. >> Can you just please read that comment all the way on the most uh right hand column there? says within three feet of parking and curb replacement to be
retained on request by Tom Patel and Rich Wallowitz. >> And is it your understanding that the applicant is no longer asking permission to remove that tree? >> That is correct. >> It's your understanding that the applicant has accepted the forester's recommendation to keep that tree. >> Yes, it is.
>> Okay. And just to finalize everything, it's it's your opinion that these trees need to be removed as opposed to just left in place if if there is any harm to them. >> Yes. >> Thank you.
>> So, can you just get into the structural details? So, it's only going to be one side of what this the tree, right? one side there's going to be the removal of the soil and then I'm not familiar with honeyloust root systems but do they tend to be deep are they shallow um are they
symmetrical coming out from from the tree how is it that it's it's sort of predetermined that doing this work is going to irreparably damage the trees we're talking about a curb strip these
trees are within 2 feet Mr. Ler described that the excavation is going to encompass approximately 24 in. So we're probably talking a foot in on each side of the existing curb now for excavation. So we're reaching in an additional
possibly 12 in into the root system of a tree that's already 2 ft from a curb and we're going to be shearing or cutting into these roots. These trees are going to struggle to survive. Um I don't think that they'll be even able to withstand
um you know a mild windstorm. If there if we have any adverse weather I think these trees will be more susceptible to failing if we do construction and we don't remove the trees first. Trees are are are not there's not a specific deep rooted tree or shallow
rooted tree. trees are going to grow in the soils that they're in and they will um the root system will expand. If the nutrients that they're seeking is deep down, they will search down to get it. If they're nutrients are readily available at the surface, they're going to stay shallow rooted at the surface as
well. But we're talking about the anchoring roots within the like in some areas a foot to 2 feet from the actual trunk of a tree. And if the tree, some of these are 20 in, 28 in in diameter. These are large trees. Um, they're just
not going to have a favorable response. This is going to catastrophically harm them. I guess I have one question. Are you also going to give testimony around why there's a difference in calculation between the number of trees the
applicant has calculated and the town has calculated or is that a different >> Our landscape architect who prepared the tree replacement plan will be testifying as to that issue. >> Um Good question. >> Uh, mayor, >> what we're waiting for. Uh,
M. Burgess, you just went through uh on page nine, there's 17 trees listed. So, you're saying that we are no longer removing tree number eight. So, you're removing 16 trees. Now, are we dropping this number? >> I I think and
>> I don't want to speak for the witness. I think there was a a mistake. Table nine lists 18 trees with eight slated for removal. And on page 10 is a table of the trees actually going to be removed which only list 17 omitting tree number eight.
>> There's there's only 16 on page 10. 1 2 3 4 5. >> There is only 16. >> Yeah. Oh, I I I can anecdotally when we were walking the site, um the foresters, both ours and
the townships, noticed the existence of a pine tree that was in very poor condition, um but did not was not impacted by the road project. So, I believe Bartlett was not able to include
the removal of that tree in this table. They wouldn't be able to do that before the September 15th deadline to these >> the tree that's on the south side of the property there like off that wedge to the I mean if you're looking at the plans it's to the left of the circle
>> that pine tree that's I mean it's marked here I think it says 37 in strobus is that the one >> yeah I mean for what it's worth when I visited the site that tree didn't look very healthy so that that tree is not one that is uh going to be disturbed as
a result of this road work But everyone looking cautiously to this tree said that should probably be removed and and just brought to the attention of the planning board during the application. Um that's a discrepancy because it's not included in this table but it is included on uh the tree replacement plan
and our landscape architect can kind of uh delve into that discrepancy as well. But >> so are you saying that because of the health of that tree that you are stipulating that you're not it doesn't fall under the normal replacement plan or that it will fall under the replacement plan?
>> We're stating that the tree does not need to be replaced in connection with the road work, but it needs to be removed because of its poor health. So the tree replacement plan has a um list that tree. I understand that the
ordinance does not require mitigation for dead trees, but I do believe the tree plan, nevertheless has replacement trees for that. Uh that >> Thank you. >> Excuse me.
>> On the root landscape, the the 50 number 50, the pine 37 in is listed in fair condition. It's not listed as dead. It's not listed as hazardous. is listed as fair and that would I believe be an
extraordinary tree >> if it has a 37 >> if it's got 37 inch which means it will have to go actually to the council for approval before it can but it is listed in fair condition not in dead or hazardous or diseased and that's on the
root landscape plan that's here. >> So go ahead. So, >> you were on that log? >> Yes, ma'am. >> Okay. And you're saying that the tree is dead, but it was listed as fair or you did not investigate this tree.
>> I measured the tree the day that we were there because I needed an accurate diameter to be able to propose its removal. It's in decline. It's in uh >> it might be in decline, but it's not there. >> It's marked as fair. So I think we need
to we need to resolve the discrepancy as to is it fair? Is it is it dead? Is it dying? Is it not fair? >> Walk. >> Yes. Yes, I was there. I would classify it as extremely poor.
>> So who who posted that it was listed in fair condition? So who generated that assessment? I believe it's it's you could find it on the uh tree replacement plan labeled that way >> asking who generated the fair
designation. >> No one sitting at this table could give that answer and we can probably answer from our later witness. >> So you did not >> I did not give it a fair rating. >> You did not. >> No, I didn't. Can we just remove it from
the application so we can move along or does it have to still be included? The application certainly can be modified. >> Do you want to remove it and then come back at another time? >> I'd like to also ask our zoning code official what her her opinion is on this
because she is charged with oversight on tree removal applications and permitting. So >> So I would have to go with whatever the township forester >> Okay. testifies the the condition of the tree
is. And then therefore, if the tree has to come down and it is not a healthy mature tree, then we would remove it from the mitigation plan. But there would have to be a separate permit submitted in order to take that
down. And then um Mr. swallow it. If he has already examined that, he would just have to sign off that the tree is in poor condition and does need to come down. So, I would defer trees still have to be mitigated.
>> So, I am going I have to defer to the forester to tell me is it almost dead, is it? I mean, if it's a a mature healthy tree, then that's when we're mitigation. That's unfortunately health hazardous is not within our ordinance
>> and fair and poor are also carry with them a mitigation count. >> So that's >> and actually at 41 time in the last meeting you your team acknowledged that. So, we'll just remove amend our
application to remove the proposed removal of that tree and it's a mood issue. >> But, but okay, you want to remove it from this application, but now we have testimony that the tree is extremely
poor condition, hazardous, dying. I I have to go to what the forester says on that. >> Yeah, but it's it's not relevant this evening. It would be a totally application application, right? >> Right. It's a totally We we thought it might be easier dealing with this all together, but it's
apparent that it's probably a lot simpler dealing with it separately. So, it's not an issue that we intend to ignore. We can bring it up appropriately through a separate application. >> Mr. Mackoy, did you have questions? >> That was it was that one. And if the
number was reduced to 16, >> so the number has been reduced to 16 because number eight is remaining. The number has been reduced to 16 and uh >> eight is only one tree anyway.
One tree mitigation. >> Yeah, it's it's Yeah, it's down to removing 16 trees because we're keeping tree number eight and tree number 50. That pine tree is no longer part of the application. Um
I just had one follow-up question for the witness and maybe two. When you reviewed I'm sorry. When you walked the site, did you observe visible root growth into the curb or roads? >> Yes.
>> So, this isn't an issue where you need to do some kind of invasive testing to see if the roots are actually touching the road in the ground. >> No, that was visible for you. Yeah, there was several trees that had obvious the road was buckling due to the roots
of the trees kind of undermined the curb and the pattern. Okay. Thank you, Mr. Burgess. Um, anybody else from the board that has questions for Mr. Bartlett? Any members of the
Do you have any questions? >> Not at this time. >> Okay. And anyone Alvaro or do you have any questions? Okay. Does any do any members of the public have any questions for uh Mr. Burgess?
Seeing none, I'm going to close that portion of testimony and you may proceed. Thank you. The best for comes out at 16. >> Uh, Mr. Meter, given that the the board is treating this as technically a new
application, does Mr. Peller need to be reworn in? >> Yes, he should be resorned. Yes. Can you state your name and address for the record now? >> Benjamin Heler. H E L L E R. >> Mr. Heler, do you swear on a firm the testimony you're about to give is the truth? >> I do.
>> Thank you, Mr. Heler. >> You know what? Can we can we just take a fivem minute break? Sorry. >> Yeah, that sounds good. Thank you. Um, >> forgive me. Was Mr. Heler sworn in again? >> Credentials. >> Uh, good evening, Mr. Heler. Could you
please tell us about your education and professional background, including any professional licenses that you might hold? >> Sure thing. I am a uh >> we we went through this the last time we we had accepted him as an expert in landscape architecture. I understand
that you want to be you know form a complete application but he was here in March for this application. >> That's fine. We can we can forgo the voadier if the board's okay with that. >> Thank you. >> Mr. Mr. Heler, were you hired by uh Wu Gardens in connection with this
application? >> I was. And if I can, I'm going to take everyone through the plans that I've created as a replacement plan, if that's okay. >> Oh, sorry. >> If I can, I'm going to take everyone through the uh the plans that I prepared, the tree replacement plans, uh in conjunction with the application. I
do recognize, I would like to state this. I do recognize that my tree count was incorrect. Um it's my mistake. It's my error. I completely 100% agree with the uh 45 count that was issued in today's letter. It's my mistake. No
excuses. Okay. The copies that you guys all have in front of you were uh submitted as part of the application. On your copies, you have red, which indicates the removal. On mine, I do not. My printer. Um but that said, majority of the trees
that are being removed as we've or proposed to be removed as we've uh talked about are where am I? In this vicinity, I'm just going to start pointing, but uh at the top of your page, they sort of wrap around and then they they come across here. As you can
see on the plan and as we've talked about, many of the trees are very close to the curbs. Um at the bottom of the page, what I think is really kind of important, and I'm not so sure, I believe. Yes. What are you referring to? >> Apologies. This is the existing conditions and tree removal plan as part
of the uh package that you all have. Um, one of the things that I think is important as part of this, which you'll probably see, I believe you see it on the Falcon's plan is topography. Um, at the bottom here of the page, which of course is the highest part of our of our
property, the distance in between the curb and the actual sidewalk, it's a little bit sloped. Um, at one point I believe uh Dr. Gonzalez actually we were talking about potentially even adding a little wall in here because it seemed like it was rather slope. Uh, but I
>> page one >> my page one existing it's called it's called existing conditions entry removal plan. It should have red on it on your copy. >> Yeah. >> Okay. um as you sort of round the corner um the the the slope is a little bit uh
easier I I would say um on the distance in between the sidewalk and the curb. Um so it's not nearly as sloped but it is still rather narrow. That one tree that we discussed uh that we that we decided uh would remain it is shown here as
number eight. If you see it, it says Glidditzia 17in. And and the tree that we have just discussed and said that we would remove from this application is shown right here. It's the 37in pinus strobus. It's uh the the white pine.
>> Your every single tree is 17 in on your mapping. >> 17 17. >> It's I I get information that's given to me on a survey. I cannot change that. that I'm not a licensed surveyor. >> Mr. Heler, is is there different uh
sizes on on the second page in your schedule of >> That's correct. >> And ultimately, you're agreeing and deferring to the town's uh shade tree commission as to the amount of replacement trees. >> That's That's correct. I'm deferring to
both um what we discussed while we were on site, which was with the town's arborist. It was with the towns the the board's arborist and the board's engineer. in addition to the list that was proposed by a licensed tree expert. That's what I have. That's the information that's given to me and I am
then to put that on my plan. I am not a licensed tree expert. I'm not a licensed surveyor. I'm a licensed landscape architect. I take the information that is given to me by those professionals. I have to use those numbers. And as I said, I made a mistake on the calculations. I completely 100% agree
with that and I agree with what um the zoning official uh uh uh had issued today in the form of the letter the 45 trees that is the correct calculation >> because the fact that well differently whether it's 45 trees 450 trees how many
trees can be replanted >> right so I'm going to get to that right now as I turn the page while we were on site with the town's arborist with the town's engineer. We recognized a few things. First and
foremost, there are leaders that go to underground uh drainage systems that then lead into uh the inlets in the in the streets. We believe they lead to the inlets in the street. We cannot confirm that they come from each of these buildings through the lawn. And to our
knowledge, they could go left, they could go right. We're not entirely sure. They're old pipes. They're there. They must be working because we do not have a clog at this moment. That said, if I were to have designed this site, I believe it was probably around 50 years
ago, I do not feel I as a licensed landscape architect can put my license on the on the here saying that that many trees were appropriate and planted in the appropriate locations. There is no way as a licensed landscape architect I
would put a gladitzia or honey a honeyloust this close on a slope to between a curb and a sidewalk. I do not would not be doing that today. That is not something I can reasonably do. As a licensed landscape architect I
I I have certain standards that I must have uphold my license to. Um, I'm responsible for the the the health, safety, and welfare of of people who walk on these properties. That's what my license upholds. I cannot >> um I just want to ask you quickly, when
you were at the site in August, did you see any tree roots disturbing or causing damage to the surrounding curves and roadways? >> Yeah, most certainly. The the roadways were were um as we've talked about, they were not in good condition. um the sidewalks to some extent. Some of the
sidewalks have listed at the joints which is which is signs of the the roots making their way to the surface. >> And when you chose the location to replant the 22 trees, did you take into consideration, you know, any potential adverse impact due to the growth of tree
roots? >> Absolutely. So, not only am I trying to replant and replace trees in a respectful manner, I'm trying to do it for one uh the roadways to make sure we're not doing this again in another 20, 30 years, whatever it may be. For
all I know, 10 years, it could have been. And two, to make sure that I'm not putting shade trees, large deciduous shade trees close to foundations of of properties. That is one of the biggest no- nos that you can make. It will cause the same damage that we are having to
the roads. It causes the same damage to foundations. And I constantly go to properties and I see someone who planted something way too tall, way too close to a tree, to a foundation. And I'm not always concerned I'm not always concerned about branches and and the canopy negatively impacting the home
nearly as much as I am concerned about the roots actually infiltrating and harming uh foundations to to properties. That's one of the things I see constantly in the field. Um, so as I put these trees on the back onto this property, I decided from a design
standpoint as well that the appropriate spacing for these was not no longer in between the sidewalk and the curb, but further back into the lawn, which left me to say, okay, what are the appropriate species for this space that
I have? Again, responsible and reasonable species for these locations. If I were to have designed this brand new today, there's no way I would have put that many shade trees and there's no way I would have put them that close to the streets. >> Excuse me, Mr. Heler. Are you saying that you contemplate replanting trees in
between the sidewalk and the building as opposed to in between the sidewalk and the curbing where they currently are? >> Correct. Yeah. So, I I there are certain locations, of course, I put one one there where we have the appropriate amount of space and the appropriate amount of depth. Um there are a lot of
considerations you need to a lot of factors you need to take consideration when you're actually proposing plants which leads me to the next point which is of course the species of the trees. We discussed this almost at nauseium at uh on site with both the engineer and of course the board's uh arborist and we
all agreed that there is no way that uh a proper call it proper but a large shade tree should be planted that close to a foundation of a of a of a residence. is just not a reasonable or responsible thing that a licensed landscape architect should be doing.
>> Mr. Hiller, are there other shade trees that you've selected though in other places besides uh in between the sidewalk and foundation? >> Uh, absolutely. Yes. So, there are other shade trees that are scattered throughout. Now, uh the trees that are proposed, yes, they are rather upright in in nature, but the intent is that
those root systems are not going to negatively impact both either the sidewalks, uh the foundations of the properties, and there's a third factor here, which I haven't brought up yet. There are a number of leaders that actually lead, like I mentioned prior, from the building out to the street. We
can see them. We can see cleanouts. We do not know where they turn or where they go. I am not going to negatively impact the drainage system just for the sake of putting in large shade trees to replant. As we heard
before, drainage is always a concern and it's something that I have to take into consideration as well when I'm placing trees back onto a property. I cannot put trees over existing drainage. I cannot put them within a certain proximity of that drainage as well. And so once
again, you're limited to what you can actually do from a both a species perspective and a location perspective. The species I've selected are considered shade trees. They might not have the canopy that that that is currently existing today, but they are considered shade trees with the exception of a few
that are also um flowering trees as well. We are completely understood that if those flowering trees are not considered replacement trees, that's fine. We do agree that there needs to be some aesthetic value to this as well. and not having trees in certain locations is certainly not acceptable.
So where we could, we felt it would be appropriate to place flowering trees uh scattered in throughout. This is this is a this is a this is a really um specific type of planting plan. This is somewhere in between designing something for both
a community and a walkway where you have sidewalks, etc. Something more like that you would find out uh uh in a neighborhood and a foundation planting. This is somewhere in between the two. And it's very often, I'm sure you've been to many properties where you see that tree that's an evergreen or
something like that that's been so close to to a foundation and it might look amazing. And usually it's either a holly or a birch that you see and it's very close to a foundation. And how often you probably have asked that homeowner, do you have issues with that foundation? They they wouldn't know. They wouldn't know how to tell you.
So, my tree replacement plan is what I feel is responsible to put trees back onto this property given topography, given the drainage that I I can see, what I can see, what I know, given the proximity to
both the streets, given uh the sidewalks and um and of course the the the residences themselves. Um, I understood there was testimony prior, there was questioning prior um, regarding rain gardens. I'm not going to say I'm a rain garden expert, but I have worked on rain
garden pro projects. More specifically, I worked on the New York City rightaway biosoil project, which is still ongoing. So many years later, which is a large green infrastructure project put on by it was joint between the New York depart New York parks department as well as New York D. Those were what was they
considered rightaway bioales, which is when you would have what we're referring to as a rain garden in between the curb and the sidewalk. We don't have the room to do that type of a detail. We can certainly explore the opportunity to do something in sort of the central area. It is rather sloped. We would have to
analyze the soils. One of the things that I think um we don't talk about too often when we should is when you're designing a rain garden, it's it's it's great to capture water, but is it going to actually go anywhere? Right? the intent is to capture water and to actually put it back into the aquifer
and you need to know that you have proper soils to be able to do that. My understanding is that it might be clay soil and so we might not have the opportunity to do that but it's certainly something we would we would explore and entertain if that's what the board would like to see. The other thing to keep in mind is that this is a rather
sloped hill so we are we do have a lot of water coming off of that. I don't know how much we would be able to capture without it just kind of sort of shooting over. Again, we can look at that from an engineering perspective certainly, but those are really the factors that we need to take a look at. >> Mr. Harris, want to ask you a few
follow-up questions. Um, does your tree replacement plan have any general notes or conditions to help protect the surrounding areas? >> You know, that's a great point. I do not, but I would gladly add. I have general notes, of course. I always have general notes. I can put a tree
protection detail on if that's something that we uh as a condition of approval that's something we need. >> Oh, I believe the tree report is that's in the tree preservation report, the surrounding trees area. I was just wondering in your general note section if you provided any types of general or specific conditions that that might be
relevant. >> Yeah, sure. So, so it it has a a general um you know, general notes that talks about what you're supposed to do throughout the course of construction, but I I I can certainly put a tree protection detail on the plan, which would probably suffice a little bit a little bit better, stand up a little bit
better than the notes. When taking into consideration your plan's mitigation efforts, including the replacement of 22 trees, do you anticipate the removal of these seven trees will cause any negative effects such as soil erosion or
increased dust concentration? >> No, I I I mean the reality of them is that some of these trees are are are pretty uprooted. Um they they are definitely I would say right now probably providing more erosion than anything else. That's generally what
happens when the tree gets way too big. It actually erodess much more than you think it does. And that's something that I would say as a licensed landscape architect. >> Would there be a decrease in soil fertility? >> Decrease in soil fertility. That's
something that you would have to ask the uh the tree expert or the engineer. I can't I can't testify that. Um, do you for do you foresee a delotterious effect on the land's physical condition given the the trees proposed to be removed and your tree replacement plan?
>> No. And and and again, I I I if if it were the the wish of the board, you know, we're trying to incorporate shade trees, but if it's the wish of the board to to beautify this again, we can most certainly add additional flowering trees if that's something we need to see. I just need to pick species that are responsible and correct for the space
that we have. And to your knowledge, does the removal of the 16 trees destroy any buffer between a residential and non-residential use? >> No. >> And would removing the 16 trees create a condition that could endanger the life of someone on the property or the property itself? >> No.
>> Um, at this time, I have no further questions for Mr. Heler. >> Thank you for your comprehensive testimony. Um, and so thank you for addressing the discrepancy. just help me understand if I'm reading the plans correctly. So, the first page has the 17 trees. The second page has a listing of
22 replacements, but we're noting that there should be 45 replaced. >> There should be talk to I mean, look that this property is pretty tight on green space. Can you >> help us at least understand where you think the areas where you'd put the remaining trees would be so that we when
we debate and deliberate on it? Sorry. >> Where where would I put the remaining trees? Correct. >> My understanding is that the the applicant would pay and those would go into a tree fund for whatever we cannot place on the property and the the the township's able to do what they plant them elsewhere within town. That would
make sense unless that's incorrect. That's my understanding of what happens to those funds. >> Did we get sorry um Miss Pierce, did we get testimony about that previously that that was going to happen or did I miss that? >> Get testimony that there will only be 22 tree replacements and the rest will be mitigation.
>> Okay. So, the applicant is stipulating that you're going to replace 22 trees and and contribute the rest via the mitigation funds, the mitigation fees. >> I would be happy to place more flowering trees on the property if they're >> I'm just asking the I guess maybe that's a question for yourself since you're
representing the applicant. >> The the applicant will absolutely contribute towards the um towards the tree uh tree uh fund for any excess trees. Again, our our concern is whether we can responsibly plant the number of trees required by the ordinance. And in
this case, it's Mr. Heler's uh professional opinion that we can only responsibly plant 22. Um >> I guess that wasn't I guess that wasn't clear. And if you if you did say it, then I just missed it and I can just take a step back just for two minutes and just say
>> just I guess repeat and take everybody through what the plan is. So the plan is to plant 22 trees because you feel that's sustainable and the rest is going to be part of the mitigation or whatever the the fees are to be contributed. Is that what the plan is? >> Yes. Well, we we will stipulate and
defer to uh the calculation that was provided today by uh the shade commission and and the zoning official. Um but it's just our position that we can only replant 22 out of those 45 or whatever number it is. and we're committed to paying any any fees in
excess of that because we're not trying to again skirt our obligations here. We just want to make sure we comply with the town and do everything that we're supposed to do. >> And if I may on that >> 17 deciduous five flowering, I can definitely put more flowering if that's something we would want. Typically towns
don't allow flowering to count as a replacement tree. So in reality, the number really is only that 17. But if you would want more flowering trees, >> at our last meeting, I told you or I asked you to please consult our list
>> which included ornamental shade trees as which are flowering as well as major shade trees. That was the last thing that I asked of you to do and now you're saying, well, they don't even count, but they do. When we count when we consulted
with the town's arborist, we were told that it would be better if we could do shade trees and not ornamental trees. >> I didn't say what was better. >> I I take whatever say into a huge account >> and of course I I I would rely on his
testimony if if he thinks it's better. However, those trees listed in a list that you probably maybe didn't see count. They count. Um >> I'm sorry. Are are you speaking about
trees that were removed that trees to be replaced? Sir, >> I'm telling you that at the end of our prior meeting in March, I we pointed out that you had only chosen something like two or three different species. you you
basically had only picked one or two or three species to do the entire site planting with. We said that that was a very bad thing because if one tree goes and catches a disease, they all do. So,
we asked you to please consult our shade our list in our zoning code of recommended tree species. That's all we asked >> and we did and our license. >> We did because you just said our landscape architect has chosen specific types of trees based upon his
professional opinion. But again, if the town wants us to put in whatever type of tree, we'll do it. We don't really care. We just want to get the roads done. >> I can't so long as it's responsible. >> Okay, >> your mic. >> It's all I'm sorry. I said so long as
it's responsible for the site. And in addition to that, we did I did look at your list. Okay. I did look at your list, >> but in addition, I also had a site meeting with the board's professionals, which was also requested of us. And at that meeting, this was what we all
agreed was the best idea. It was not just me. I mean, that I would love to say that's just me. >> You said in my opinion, this is what I feel is responsible. Yes. Only 22 trees. That does not include their opinion. You said in my opinion,
>> well, I'm saying you testified for your own behalf. On your own behalf in my opinion, >> you're not testifying on their behalf. >> I can't correct. I cannot do that. >> And in my opinion, that's correct. >> So I guess >> I guess going back may just finish up.
So I know we took that pine off the list. >> Correct. That being said, that space would theoretically be opened up, you know, and even taking that pine down, although you are not required to replace >> in the effort to meet us in the middle
somewhat. Could you put a couple of additional trees over there? >> Certainly. It's a little slope, but we can do it. >> That's it. I'm done thinking. So, I I think the point here is I I I'm I'm just going to make a statement real quick about the the honeyloust.
This development was built in 1960 and I grew up in a development in Verona that was built in 1959. A group of people loved that tree back then and they were all over. But this is a perfect example of why we're hearing from our commissions and from our experts that
you should plant a variety because you have the same tree there and they're causing the same problem throughout the entire complex. Uh the street I grew up on, they just redid a couple years ago and they took them all down. I I do agree they they aren't when you're talking about replacing curbs and
sidewalks, they are invasive to them and they break them up. And I know that if you dig closely to them, you could weaken them and they will fall. So, I don't disagree with taking down the trees that you have listed. I just think
looking over this entire uh application and really this south northwest corner, the lower side closer to you, the upper side of that page, uh you have plenty of courtyards there that I think you can
add trees to. uh behind the building there. This I'm going to bring it up again. That area back there, I've watched it during rainstorms. It's a river on a heavy rainstorm. And I'm looking on this plan and I'm seeing trees there. And I'm seeing trees up in
the parking lot off of Rose Terrace that I I don't think they're still there. So, I don't know if they were removed at some point. Uh but going by this 920 24 plan, I I think some additional
trees look like they've been removed. But and this is my point of why I think there should be an effort to put more trees on this property rather than paying into the fund because paying into the fund doesn't decrease the amount of water that's going downhill. Uh I know
you talked about underground drainage and you don't want to hit it. This complex just redid the drainage not too long ago. So, they should have a detailed plan of where the drain piping is. Someone's got to be able to find it or contact the company that did it and go
out mark it and plant trees around it accordingly. So, if if I may interject, is the is the board's concern that they want a particular ver uh species to be used or they just want more variety? I I
think what the board we rely on more trees number one because obviously it would lessen the runoff from the property. I know you're not increasing >> the the pvious pavement or or coverage, but this property has some some severe
runoff during every storm. So any any mitigation of that and I think you have to replace trees. I think now is the time to to mitigate it. You're going to be digging up the property. of a couple more trees. Really? >> How how many trees? Because we have a professional testifying as to the amount he thinks, but if you think a different
amount, tell us. I mean, h how do we get to that resolution? >> I mean, I just gave you some specific areas that maybe should be revisited. If I may, >> Madam Chairman, can I can I just >> I think to to try to >> bifurcate the issues. I've heard people
say that we have no problem with removing the trees. >> Wait. Okay. Okay. Be I I I just want to before we get there because the mitigation is going to change right now because there was a tree that was
removed with >> it was damaged. >> There was a tree >> as uh the DEC had mentioned. Yeah. >> Um where was that tree located? I actually don't have a So during the the construction that took place, there was
a tree that had its roots cut and that tree had to be removed because it it became immediately hazardous. So I actually in my letter added it back in because I I feel that if this project
caused that tree to come down, this project should replace that tree as well. So, where which where is that on your list? >> It's it's uh it was in front of two wedges. >> Is that number eight? The one that's all the way at the bottom? >> No, that's >> No, number eight came back in. So,
that's where we're I'm back to 17 trees because I counted the one that we had to take down in front of two wedgewood because the roots were cut. Um, and I think to um, deputy mayor's point, >> from November 24 through August of this
year, nine trees were removed that were dead. Right? So, they weren't part of this project. They were approved because they were dead. So, if those trees were taken, can't they can't that area where those dead trees, and I believe that's the corner that you're speaking of that are
not there anymore, um, trees be put in that location cuz because nine have been taken down that were determined to be hazardous or dead. >> Well, I I think the the issue goes to can trees be planted there, and if so,
how many? Because again, we're trying to figure out, again, we're agreeing with whatever number the town says. Whatever you say, we're okay with it. >> What we're trying to figure out though is how many trees can be responsibly
planted on this site because the statute or the ordinance explicitly states that if the property cannot physically accommodate, >> then the applicant can out >> can contribute to the tree fund. Now, it's our professional testimony that 22 trees can be can be replaced
responsibly. If anybody has uh suggestions as to where they could be or how many in complication, we'll take you up on that. We're not trying to to play games here. >> Well, with respectfully respectfully, first of all, you can't say on one hand, we'll do whatever the board wants
because you obviously can't do that according to your own professional. Second of all, it's not for us to dictate to you how many more trees. The board is saying we are sympathetic to your position that you need to remove an
excessive number of trees as per the ordinance. What we're trying to get to, and I'm speaking somewhat for the board, so excuse me, what the optimal number of trees is to balance maintaining the environmental balance of the site. >> Yeah. and preventing additional water
issues with this whole town has with just contributing money to a fund which is noble. And so I think now what our question to you is what do we think given the inputs from the board is can we add 5 to 10 more trees in some of these areas without it being detrimental
to the rest of the project. >> Why are you saying no? >> Yeah. And if you look at if you look at the map it seems like there's a lot of areas. >> It it's deceptive if I may. Yeah, that's a that's I'm sorry. >> The the area between that he's specifically referring to is this a lot
of empty space between the backyards of >> not Floyd, Hamilton, and the back of the property uh that backs into those backyards on Hamilton. >> Madam Chair, if I can.
>> Yes, please. The board has not yet decided if the trees that they propose to remove will they will be permitted to remove. Until that is decided, we don't know how many replacement trees are required. So I think respectfully we should go
through the threshold issue of yes they can remove the existing trees or no they can't remove the existing trees and then the board should address how many trees are required and then the plan for those trees. But until the board agrees on how
many can be removed all of this other speak is irrelevant because we don't know the number. So we don't know the number. So it could be 20, it could be 16, it could be 40, but >> an hour. >> I've been trying.
>> But you're you're you're you know, we have to take it a step at a time. >> We should take a vote. >> No, I want Greg to miss the whole next game. >> I'm being serious. You don't speak in a vacuum. >> No, it
he has a point. Um, I just don't like backing into this parking spot and then being told at the end of the whole thing, we're not going to do what you want us to do. And I do believe that there is more room on this property to be able to fit the trees
should the board approve all 16 trees for removal, which would constitute 45 replacements, of which less than half are being accommodated on your site. I don't believe I don't believe that that is acting as
responsibly as is being put forth. I believe that that's being very sh I I I really do think that there's plenty of more room on the site and well, you know, you you're the guy, but I would also like to
>> Yeah, if I if our guys >> if I may. So, are you rejecting the contro uncontroverted testimony? Cuz right now there's nobody else to say that there should be. And I'd be welcome to hear Mr. Wallace as to any trees cuz again, we're trying we're trying to be cooperative. >> Didn't walk the entire site and and
survey the entire site. He looked at the trees that you proposed to take down, >> right? >> Yes. That's why we're here. >> I mean, this isn't an adversarial proceeding. There's no plaintiff. There's no defendant. There's no complaintant. There's no responding.
You're here because the organization, the condo you represent wants to do a repaving project. You're here to get a yes. So, I would encourage you to take it down a little bit, please. >> I mean, no disrespect. I'm just trying to clarify the issues here so we can
speak productively. Does the board feel that we should uh move forward with voting on 16 tree removals or are there any trees that you might have questions about to our export? >> I would like to have >> sure >> questions to the expert, >> please.
>> Yeah. >> So, I keep I keep dwelling on this um the distance of the tree from the curb because just from my survey, I didn't find them all within 2 ft of the curb. some were significantly further and I
don't have exact measurements but I'm know it surely wasn't two feet. So my question is is are there any trees that are sufficiently far away from the curb that wouldn't be impacted
negatively significantly negatively and could be and could be preserved >> of the 16 >> of the 16 >> and that question is for you Rich. >> Good. Thanks for clarifying because I
don't know who it went to. Well, we know that the tree number eight which was saved was three feet away from the curb and we in field inspections we realized that has ample room.
Keep in mind there's two or three trees out of those 17 that were rotted and have cavities. They're included on this table. So >> your table. >> Yes. But yes >> and on the six they're part of the 16.
So this is not all 16 healthy trees. So we have that issue there also. So most of the trees when we saw when you see a tree growing and likes to expand into where it wants to go and hits the
curb it turns and the roots I'm saying when the roots seek the curb hits an abupment turns and everything else. If that's where the excavation is and we're looking at every tree, it might be two feet, it might be less than two feet, but significant damage would be done to
the root system during a construction process. >> So I guess my question is for the trees that are beyond 2 feet. So there's the tree number eight which we say which is which is 3 ft but I'm I'm I'm just from my survey I
thought I saw some trees and maybe I'm wrong but I saw this I thought I saw trees that were beyond the 2T 3 ft or more. Is that really not the case? All of them were within 2 ft. I didn't measure but everything that we measured
when we went out there and Tom was with me and experts were out there were looking at everything in the rooting structures of the trees. It might be 2 feet might be 2 and 1/2 but bottom line it was detraable detrimental amount of excavation damage to the tree. So would
it be fair to say that it's somewhat inconsequential of the actual distance because no matter what the root structure would be adversely affected by the excavation? >> I would say that's correct. And so therefore it's your opinion that you would agree that these 16 trees should
be subject to removal. >> Yes. >> So why can't you do what he just did? That's a nice lawyer right there. >> It's not my witness. >> I'm sorry. >> It wasn't my witness. I was talking about how he was
comporting himself um like a gentleman. So Dave, does that satisfy your question? >> Yeah. >> So is it the board's opinion that we should move forward on voting for the 16 trees?
Uh >> yeah, I would like to make a motion to approve the removal of the 16 trees on the list. You know what? >> There's no contingency. >> Can I ask a question first? >> Yes. >> Of our attorney. >> Yes. >> Uh if we someone makes a motion, we put
this to a vote to remove the 16 trees. Can is can they just get up and walk out and they're done? >> It's conditional upon a >> can we can I finish? Can can we make a motion with conditions? >> Yes. Yes. >> Before we vote on correct >> correct. Okay.
>> I think that's what we're >> Should we work the conditions out first? >> Yes. >> Okay. >> And then modify your motion. >> So I'll table my motion on that. >> If I may, if you'd like a condition that's satisfactory to the board, such as I I'll work with the town's arborist
on site to create an appropriate tree replacement plan if that's something that you guys would like. >> We can't code until >> I know. I know. No, I know. I know we want to try to get to >> the board can if in fact no tree be removed until the arborist agrees
>> with you know on the tree on the on the tree replacement plan. >> What about So I think where we want though is we want some sort of range of how many more trees we think we can get. >> Right. And so this is where Tom um Tom
and Rich kind of come in. I I >> Well, you can do a not less than. >> Well, I mean, we were just asking about this entire swap of property that seems to have some pretty large trees and a
lot of blank space behind the buildings that back into the backyards. Um, and a lot of them are along the fence, but some of them are real close to the foundation. Not not we didn't plant them. You didn't plant them, but
they're there. But there's tons of space and some of these trees are listed on page one as being 24 in round and there are dots on your plan. >> Again, we don't know how many trees need
to be replaced. So now we're diverting back >> but we're making a conditional >> right we're conditioning the 16 trees with the total. Are we not doing that? Isn't that what we just discussed? We got to discuss conditions,
>> right? >> And I guess >> the motions been tabled. We do need to ask the members of the public. >> I was about to say we we I skipped a step. Should we ask the public? >> Yeah. Um Yeah. >> All right. So, for the purposes of our
discussion, it's it's moved right now. U we will be deliberating after public comment. anybody from the public that wants to Well, is this witness finished? We don't even know that this witness is finished. >> No further questions,
>> but we do think that the witness might be able to help answer more questions. >> I'm done with answering the witness. >> Does anyone have any questions? >> Yes. >> Go ahead, ma'am. Do you step to the
microphone? Thank you. I'm gonna call you. >> Thank you. Um, for the species of trees on site again, >> oh, my apologies. Stephanie Brackfeld. For the species of tree that we have on
site, how far away from the trunk do the roots extend? >> There's a if I may, I'm going to show you just over here. Generally speaking, this isn't a great example, but these trees right here, those are the existing
ones that are on site, those are shown by a surveyor that say the actual size. The roots extension, so to speak. The rule of thumb that we like to use is what's called the drip line. So, if you've got the the actual canopy of the tree, it's something like something like
this, right? You're using that end to sort of dictate sort of but that's not a perfect science. So, um, as a followup, I asked that question because I'm curious for the site that's been discussed between the back of building 2 and the backyards of,
uh, Hamilton, is there space to plant trees there without uh, risking running the risk that roots will grow into the foundation? I mean, it depends on the species and and that's why I I'm trying to propose upright trees where I can and and like I
I like to use that word reasonably and responsibly just because I don't like that uh idea that there there can be growth into into into uh into foundations. I just, you know, irresponsible as a landscape architect. Hi uh Carol Thomas um uh Rona and Verona
Tree uh commission. So my list of uh comments has has changed dramatically. Um >> I'm sorry that things have gotten >> Wait, you have to ask questions. >> I have to ask questions. Yes. Okay. When is public comment?
>> It's after we they closed their their >> Got it. So, the species, Mr. Hell, the species you've chosen um run counter to some of the suggestions that we had made. What I'm hearing you say is that you're picking more columnar species
because their drip lines are shorter and their roots don't extend as much. >> Yeah. Yeah. That's that's that's sort of the crux of why I'm doing what I'm doing. That's exactly it. And and given the drainage where the drainage may or may not be from the underground, given the the proximity to both the street,
there's the sidewalk as well and then then the foundations of the homes. It's a really tight space. So, yeah, that's correct. >> That would have been helpful if there had been some responses to to the to the communications that I had sent. Mr. Wallace, do you feel the same way Mr.
Heler does about why we the colar tree should be there? are the narrow upright trees as opposed to shade trees. >> Yes, based on our site visit looking at all the obstructions. I agree. >> So you you're agreeing just so I just so I get this when I'll drop the that
ornamental trees and the upright trees would be better for those areas between the curb and the sidewalk. >> They're not always going between a curb and sidewalk. They're going between the sidewalk and the building. >> So between the sidewalk and the building, >> right? >> I know. I want to make this question.
between the sidewalk and the building, you're still saying that ornamentals and the upright trees are better because there's less. >> So, inre saying that, >> I think it's disingenuous of all of us
to say that there isn't going to be a change in storm water runoff and storm water and rain. those smaller trees just can't possibly absorb the kind of um the volume that the older trees are taking. And we can accept that as long
as we're we're honest about that. Um I will leave the rest of my questions um for comments then. Okay. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Thank you, Carol.
Are there any other questions for this witness from the members of the public? >> See none. >> I just had one more just the size >> closing the public comment. >> Sorry. On the size designations that you have noted that the 24 in that refers to
>> caliber >> the caliper >> of the the the 24 in that are shown. There's twofold. If you look on the act survey, as was stated earlier, the survey doesn't necessarily correctly indicate the actual caliper. You got to go to the
you got to go to this uh tree removals table to actually look at this size and the actual caliper. >> Was that on page? This is page one of my existing conditions. >> We're agreeing that um Mr. Walllets is uh may be slightly more accurate, but we
agree that that is that is the correct caliber of the of the tree. Did I answer your question? I'm sorry it's late. >> I don't >> No. Um I'm sorry. I wasn't clear. >> What I'm I was talking about the replacements. >> Oh, I'm sorry. >> That it can't be the caliber.
>> The planting the planting schedule 2 and 12 inch caliber. Yeah, that's like a that's a standard nursery spec for the size of the tree that actually goes in. So 2 and 1/2 in caliber tree, bald and burlaped. Um, you know, there's actually a tool that you can measure, but in the nursery, they measure the actual uh caliber of the tree. Okay. Two and a
half inch is relatively standard. Generally speaking, they're they're the the larger you get, the the more difficult the tree actually has to take. Um, so two and a half is sort of our standard for what we like to plant. >> Thank you. >> Yeah,
>> I have a question for Mr. Wallace. um looking at the plans. I mean it it's the front page or the second page. basically this bottom line between the
edge of a backyard and between where they share a fence. Basically, there are there's two pretty open areas that have absolutely no tree cover. >> Assuming this is accurate,
>> they don't appear to be paved. I'll pull it up on Google Earth. Um, I mean, but it Here's Cherry. It just looks like there's quite a bit of open area there. I mean, you're shaking your head now. >> I know. I'm just saying. Okay.
>> But I don't >> I I think it could be looked at, but I also think from the first time I was out there, I think that's where the primary wire is. So, we got to make sure the species, right, to fit that. I'm not sure >> even if there's even if they're smaller
trees, they don't have to be pin oaks that are going to grow. You know, >> like I said, we go with the site and what the site dictates. >> Um, Deputy Mayor, you had a pointed out a couple of other areas where trees might
be accommodating. Could you be more specific? Yeah. My when I'm looking at this plan and I'm seeing the driveway that goes up up to the uh the southeast. If you look along the street, there's three big trees that you're not taking
down. You have a 20-in, there's a 20-in, and I believe an 18. And you have islands between the I mean, you have definitely have a good apron there between the street and the the sidewalk there. Like, these are areas I think that you can add trees. You're taking
one down. It's actually the second tree you're taking down. >> I'm sorry. Are you referring to this area? >> Tree number two. Yes. >> If that's coming down, look at that entire courtyard right there. And it just seems like that's another area you can add a tree. >> So when you're when you're there, actually, this tree on the corner here
is is really quite large and it creates quite a quite a canopy. So that's the other thing that we have to take in consideration. The the hard part about a tree survey in general or a survey like this, a licensed survey that one that provides, they're not always capturing the canopy. they are capturing capturing the actual caliper or usually capturing
the caliper. You got to take those considerations into into effect as well. So if it's going to be completely shaded the entire time, you know, there might be some species that you can get in, but I mean Rich can certainly opine on that as well. When you're there on site, it
it's a it's a site condition. >> That's I mean that's it. I totally understand. It's got to be a site visit. >> Yeah. uh >> which is which >> I would gladly join you if if needed. >> Uh >> which is why we're happy to do that as a condition if that's something that we need to do to develop the tree
replacement plan in conjunction with the township. We're happy to do that. >> Absolutely. >> Okay. >> I'm going to jump in here and talk about tree replacement plan. If we're talking about adding additional trees for carbon sequestration and water close I understand. Don't get upset.
Um, >> we're trying to figure out how to move forward. >> Public was closed. >> I have a good suggestion, but I'll wait. You tell me what I can comment. >> Public comment comment is still on. >> The final public comment is still available, but >> this public was closed.
>> So, >> well, I have a question. >> I am going to reopen public. >> We never >> for one question from M. >> Your public call is closed. >> I did. I apologize that >> this is a public question.
>> You still have a question? >> I do. >> Please. I I I'm I'm sorry. It's time. >> If we're looking at additional trees for water um management and carbon sequestation, can we look at adding
shrubs along the back of the houses on Cumberland? Along this side here is there's been five trees taken down that haven't been accounted for. Kathleen might have talked about those earlier. These were taken down when the first curving was done in the back there. So
all of these houses back here are just bare open to this driveway. Can you look at some kind of shrub line green fence along Cumberland that will help with some of this carbon sequestration?
>> I'm sorry. Apologies. I guess to answer I was gonna propose answer question if you don't mind >> if you don't mind >> the room >> that's exactly what I was just going to say >> I mean I don't know but I I don't know
that I would add trees necessarily again we're right next I mean shrubs we can add shrubs I guess but I'm not so sure that that's part of the application I guess cuz it's tree replacement if It's a condition that of approval that we need to add shrubs. We can
>> The ordinance doesn't permit shrubs to be used or count towards the tree replacement. And I guess Mr. Heler saying he's not sure whether or not you're saying to add shrubs to count towards tree replacement or just as a >> well as you know could certainly be just
a condition. We can add it as a condition. If if the applicant would be willing to to agree to a condition then >> yes >> the ordinance would not you know we wouldn't have to look specifically to the ordinance >> but Mr. Heler is the room
>> but is the spatial what is the space there >> it's it's nominal I mean it's we're talking we're talking about >> 3 ft at most if you look at the property line at most I mean 2 to 3 ft No room to grow.
>> Yeah. So >> they would just unless they could, you know, you're stealing some of the neighbors backyard, >> right? >> I understand that. >> Can I propose that? >> Well, sorry to Mr. Mera's point. There is no person's backyard. Everything
that's on the outside of the buildings is considered common property that >> No, no, no. It's the the property. >> Oh. Oh, the other I understand. Forgive me. >> Property line. >> So, Mr. Heler has a lot of input from right this community and this board and
you also have our list of of trees right appropriate planting. You have our feedback on that we would like for you to plant additional trees or plants as opposed to contributing to the tree fund. >> So you have all these inputs. Why don't we just make that as a condition that
they come back with um with a plan that we're aligned with that cons has all these considerations as a condition of removal of the tree? >> If I may, do you think we can do that as a condition that we do it in conjunction with the arborist rather than coming back to the board? It's up to you.
>> I I certainly want the arborist's input, but I also think that the landscape but time out. >> Sorry. Sorry. >> Can I We're going to take five for a second. >> No, no, we have to be on the ground. >> Okay. Um,
how do we go about making a determination while still floating a plan that we have yet to approve? Meaning, the tree plant replanting plan is basically in flux because it's not sorry, it's not been
completed according to this board's wishes. It seems that a majority of the board members have been vocal about wishing for more trees on the site than are proposed. So with
that said, how do we move forward to allow the removal of the trees without a solid conditional plan for replanting? that a condition be that the applicant be permitted to remove the identified trees provided that prior to removal the
applicant obtain approval from Richard Walteritz as to the number of trees the species of trees and the total number of trees to be removed >> that completely acceptable to us to be replaced to be to be to be replaced >> that way we can consult with Mr. Wowitz
and the board can defer to his determination rather than going around circles. >> Excuse me. But I do think that the board may also want to partake in that discussion. We do have a landscape committee. >> Well, if that's the case, then there's no reason to give them
>> an approval. >> An approval tonight. What we were >> What if you So, we you mentioned this before. Sorry to interrupt. Just benchmarking it to say no less than five trees because then at least we have a we have an anchor, >> right? That that's what >> it gives them flexibility. Right. No
less than the number, you know, no less than a certain number of trees that they would have to replace. I mean, we we all agree that it's no less than 18 or 27. So, make it 27 and see if he can make
>> way short of >> I understand. I'm trying to balance though. I'm trying. >> He did say he could add some trees. >> My personal opinion is I'm just trying to balance. The question was the question was how is the board still protected >> without coming up with a number. Okay,
if the board the board has to make the determination in my mind of whether it will rely on Richard or not. Okay, if the board is not going to entirely rely on Richard, then I don't suggest that there's any reason to give a conditional
approval quite honestly. Although some people might feel differently and say as long as it's a minimum of 22 or 24 or 26, but I don't know that that really is satisfactory because then you know the board is saying 26 and Richard might say
you know what I only see room for 24. So then what you know then you're kind of taking the Richard's expertise out of the equation. Well, that that's sort of the problem because he hasn't studied the site in order to be able to
determine what he >> Well, that's why you give him the opportunity to do that and leave it to his discretion. >> So, Greg, could we condition this say 2/3 of replacement? So, you'd be at 30 and if you can't hit 30, then you have
to come back to the board. >> No. >> Or no, >> because it's still then you're still making it. They're still in this. >> They're not getting any appro They're They're not getting They're not getting anything out of this night's tonight's evening because they can't promise that they can get 30. The
way the way I'm suggesting it is if you want to move it forward. If you don't want to move it forward, then you know that's the board's discretion. >> Can I make the suggestion that we close witness testimony and take public comment and then deliberate on the rest of this point?
>> Okay. Yeah, that's a great suggestion. Thank you. Um, yes, we are closing the witness testimony. I open to public comment right now. So, anybody who wants to share a public comment on this application, please go
to the lecture and the mic and and uh state your name one more time, Professor. And thank you. >> Good evening, Stephanie Brafeld. Um, I would just like to offer the comment that when the site is walked to
determine the replacement plan, um, that the, uh, sewage lines, a map of that should be made available. It occurs to me that that strip of land that we've been discussing where there's not that many trees, that might be the reason why. >> Thank you very much. Anybody else have
any public comment? I think that mic works. >> Hi, Carol Thomas again. Verona U Sha Tree Commission. First of all, let me apologize before I didn't understand that um public question period had ended so I
apologize. Um, I I understand that the applicant really didn't doesn't see the value in asking to take down the trees when they're doing this major project. At least that's the impression I'm getting. That may not be the case. It's the impression I'm getting. Um, but that
is the procedure we have done here in uh, Verona. Just I want to um, hit some points that the Sha Commission has been uh, our our meetings we've talked about. We sent a resolution to the planning board um this last week and in essence
it said um that the Verona Shade Tree Commission uh resolution to the planning board stating that the plans include set removing 17 or more trees from the site well we know it's about 16 17 trees from the site that at least three varieties of trees were recommended by uh roots landscape architect that are colar style
only and one variety is a beach and two suggestions were small shade trees those upper Bright and ornamental trees provide in our opinion inadequate shade and minimal leaf canopy and the beach trees at present are succumbing to beach leaf disease. Um be it therefore now
resolved that the rural shade tree commission does uh urge roots landscape architects and wedgwood development incorporated to utilize full-size decision with shade trees such as white or uh pin oak uh red or sugar maple beach hickory etc. We've had that
discussion. I understand a little better why those aren't being recommended. I still will defer to Mr. Wallit's expert opinion on that. Um the inconsistency in the numbers of replacements have changed
since last February. I'm glad to hear that now we're looking at you're agreeing or the the the applicant is agreeing whatever number you come up with and they're just going to throw money at they're going to go at the 22 or whatever they can get in and throw money at replacing them. Maybe we
can use that money to look at something else around the complex. We obviously we have other places in town we can plant, but we're losing wildlife habitat in the area. We're losing air filtration in the area. We can work with the shait
commission and the environmental commission and in town your landscape commission committee and try and use whatever money they're paying into to replace what we can there. Um >> that would be private I'm sorry not my turn to speak
>> I still we have said from the beginning the shade tree commission has asked for a full assessment of all the trees on site. Um, we're very happy to to see that that one eastern pine, the plan was to take that down. I'm sorry that that got derailed today, that is a dangerous
tree. It just made sense that when you're taking down 17 other large trees and you have your tree company there that you take that down at the same time. Hopefully, we can work that one out. Um to address the storm water management issues, we encourage the uh
landscape arctica and uh Wedgewood to really consider some rain gardens or bio swells in the area. Uh there will be additional runoff. I know that the the testimony was that there is no room for that. Mr. Heler, I know you're busy, but maybe we can take uh take a look at
that. Um, and yeah, I had a short note that we changed after all this. Okay, that should do it for me. Thank you very much. >> Thank you, Carol. It's It's funny. Carol
had just said just um we could maybe take some of those funds and put some more trees on their site. And I'm like, that's we just want them to do that without exchanging funds. We just want them to add more trees to the site. Um,
if there's any way to do that. So, I don't know. Um, would you like to close your case? >> Uh, yes. Thank you, Madam Chairperson. >> Um, yeah. Public comment is closed at this time.
>> Did any did I close prematurely? Did anyone want to sing? You good? Okay. Public comment is closed. Thank you ladies and gentlemen for taking the considerable amount of time tonight to hear this application.
Through the testimony of our professionals, we demonstrated that the association is undertaking a road repavement project that is done with the purpose of complying with state law. And that work necessarily and inherently
involves causing damage to trees. The association cannot do that without violating the town's prohibition on tree mutilation. The ordinance sets forth certain criteria which the applicant must demonstrate will not be negatively
impacted by the removal of trees. Through our testimony and even through uh Dr. Gonzalez, there is nothing to indicate that there was be an impaired drainage conditions, although we're committed to working with the township and board uh to address any concerns
that they do have. Uh there would be no increase of dust concentration. It wouldn't be a delterious effect on a land's physical condition when you consider the treatment place. Well, I know that's a an open issue right now. It would not destroy a buffer between residential and residential uses, non-residential uses, and it would not
endanger life or property within the property. And even if that criteria has not been satisfied, the applicant submits that it is appropriate to grant relief under the hardship exception because we are stuck in a rock in a hard place. We have to do this paving project
to comply with state law, but we cannot remove the trees without violating the town's ordinance. We are committed to working with the board, the town, and its professionals to reach an appropriate middle ground. We've relied on our uh landscape architects as to the
amount of trees that can be responsibly replanted. Uh we know the planning board feels like there could be more. uh which is why we're asking to have the conditional approval to remove the 16 trees provided that the Feronus tree forester agrees with the tree
replacement plan because I I guess what I'm trying to say is if our landscape architect agrees on a particular number in species and the township's forester also agrees on a particular number in species that should be adequate. I it's I don't want the
board to feel like we are purposely, you know, choosing fewer trees to replant. That's not our intention and to remedy that. We again, we are committed to working with the forester um to determine and and stipulate to the amount of trees that need to be replaced. Uh so we would respectfully
ask the board to give us that conditional approval. >> Thank you. [Music] Let me make my I guess we open for deliberations. >> We certainly are. >> So I don't think there's any real
disagreement here. I mean both the town officials and the applicant agree that these trees need to be removed in order to successfully complete the paving project. I think what we still would like to see is additional trees replaced and I know that the site is challenging
to get all the way there, but that's why our tree ordinance allows for relief. Visa v the funding. Um I would be in favor of approving the removal of the trees with the condition that we have a minimum of let's call it 30 to 32 trees. Um in addition with you know consulting
with our forester to see if we can get more. May I amend that 30? If it's going to be say 32 trees, the other 13, the other 13 must be paid into the tree fund.
>> Right. Of course. Meaning I just >> No, to be clear, I agree with that. I'm just stating that it I would like to take the applicant at face value that they tried to maximize a number of trees and our ordinance allows for relief if they can't do that. I'm trying to balance getting more trees
on the property without being, you know, just unworkable. So, I would be in favor of a minimum number. I'm just throwing out a round number of 30. Could be more or less with with, you know, the condition that they continue to work with the forest who come up with the optimal number of trees and the rest
goes into the tree fund as per our ordinance. If you have the only if you have a minimum number that is too high, what happens if rich can't endorse it? >> I guess that's a question for you is how we should structure it. >> Well, that's Well, my
>> I'm just making a number up for debate purposes, but >> Well, I think you'd have to I think you'd have to confer with Rich before you come up with a number that he might not like he the number he might be comfortable with right now is >> is the number that they're at. and then
you know he could ask for more but at least that's the minimum. >> I know but we also have the applicant that throughout we'll we'll we'll we'll agree with whatever you want. So I mean it's clear that we can put some more trees on the property in my opinion. >> Uh so question with regards to the
replanting trees. Um Mr. Misari you kind of touched base on this earlier. If I I think one of the issues with the 22 trees was the size and type of trees. If you set a number at 30 and 35 and the
Mr. Wowitz and Mr. Heler agree that those trees can be accomplished be ornamental trees or smaller trees and shrubbery. Would that satisfy the board's concerns? >> I mean, I prefer to have a viable mix, right? We're in this position somewhat because the homogeneous structure of all
the tree species, right? this the um shade tree commission has made it pretty clear and I know the environmental commission and even this board has made it very clear to other applicants to diversify species as much as possible. So I don't want to fall into the trap of giving a number or the
board giving a number excuse me and then now we have a homogeneous mix. So again I'm trying to balance I'm not tied to a number per se I'm just saying how do we get this approved tonight? Yeah, the I mean to your point, there are a pretty
good amount of different uh ornamental species and some of them get up to 35 ft. They're not these are trees that are 35 ft or less. They're the regular shade trees can go up to 70,
80, you know, 100 maybe even feet. The trees on our ornamental list go up to 35 ft. Are those something that you would recommend for this type of site? I'm asking you, Rich. >> My guess is yes, but I'd like to take a
look. You know, I I don't want to be confident and say yes unless I look at both sides. I want to see what the list is. I want to see what we have in the field, but I it sounds as though it's doable. >> All right. Um,
>> may I make a suggestion? >> You want to write the ordinance? >> Go ahead. >> Um, right. Right now, the applicant's testimony or of Mr. Heler states that 22 trees is what we have. What if we set
that as a baseline provided if Mr. Wildwoods thinks that more trees can be replanted and the species, we will do so. and we'll also diversify. You know, if Mr. Wallace feels there could be better diversity in his communications with Mr. Heler, then we can do that as
well. But this is obviously going to have to be a concerted effort between our professionals and Mr. Wallowitz as to figuring out how many uh trees this property can handle in in the types of those trees, >> right? But I think your baseline is what
we find to be just a wee bit too low. Well, that's why we're proposing the added protection for the board that if Mr. Wallowitz determines that there is a greater number. >> You suggested that condition to bring Mr. Wallowitz in. I think our attorney made that suggestion. Just to let you
know, I think your baseline of 22 is too low. Thank you. We're in deliberation. >> We I'm not saying that you don't think it's low. All I'm saying is is that that number can only go up. >> Too small. So I think here what we're basically
saying the easiest way out of this is for Mr. Wallowitz to the only way to really look at this is for someone to walk the site. >> Yeah. >> And look at what trees are there the canopy of the trees that are there and come up with a plan to add a couple more
trees as many as possible. Try to get all 45 in there for us. But if you can't then hit whatever the highest number is. And and I know it seems like a back and forth and this goes on forever. We every tree soaks up water. I mean, if if you
have a 75-year-old oak tree, it soaks up hundreds of gallons of water. So, every little one counts. I know it sounds like, you know, we're just bickering here, but we're really not cuz there's people downstream and I know them and the families, their houses flood. So, any little bit can help here. I think
what we do is just vote on the number as >> instructed by our attorney and then trust suggested by our attorney and then trust that Mr. Wallowitz will go there and and get us the 45 that we want uh or as
close to that number as we he possibly can. >> We don't want your money. We want we want the trees and >> and we we want to make you happy and that's why we're committed to this collaboration. That was obvious from the moment he walked. >> Sorry. I totally understand and I think
everybody I um when I said before, I'm speaking from experience. These trees, you you're going to cut them, they're going to die. If if you cut through them and you replace these curbs in a year from now, you get a heavy wind, they're going to blow one way. They're they're just that's the way they are. Every one
of the ones scheduled to be taken down besides that big pine, their roots are stacked up on the curb, if not growing over it. So, I don't disagree with taking them down. Uh, because you have to replace the curbs. Uh, so I just think we we should vote and trust that
our expert can help us out. >> So, I think we should go with what I think sort of a dual hybrid >> hybrid of Misara
and the suggestion by Mr. cats app to put a baseline at say 30 or 32 with the understanding that Rich is definitely getting 45 on there.
>> No pressure. >> If I can, I will. >> Um and >> and one other condition. Yeah, >> Madam Chair. uh that the applicant also put uh deer fencing or deer protection around the trees when they plant every single tree. >> Oh, they're going to plant the trees.
>> Yes. Yeah, that's not an issue. >> Um absolutely. I mean that that should be go without saying and I believe that your landscape architect said that he had effectively left that out of the plan, but he didn't mean to. Something to that effect. Um,
so do any of you guys have any other suggestions or any additions to the idea that we're floating right now? >> Were there any uh conditions on shrubbery or >> shrubbery can't be a tree? >> Okay, so this is just trees.
>> Just trees. >> If this was a site plan, we could get into that. >> It's really not. Well, Rich could rich could negotiate for it if you know as long as the number of trees were fine, he could ask for other things as well. I
mean, >> you could trade tree, >> but you have to have a minimum number of trees, >> right? >> M Parker, any suggestions or additions? [Music]
>> Okay. No, good. >> So, what's our baseline? >> Rich, do you have any ideas for a baseline? >> Sorry, I'm thinking I'm putting myself out on a limb here. Bad pun. Um, you
have baseline 22. What we'd like >> 45 bills 33. Okay. question. So if they cannot meet 32,
they would have to come back for a new application as an amendment to a prior approval because if they can't meet the minimum, then they're not going to be in conformance with the resolution. >> They're going to have to meet the minimum otherwise they they will have to
come to an agreement prior to taking down any trees. that's going to have to be in the you know I mean otherwise you take down the trees and you're not in agreement and then what so the agreement would have to be made because it's such
a higher number if it were 22 then we know that they you know that they have that plan in place but because it's a number exceeding what their testimony has been then the the condition will be that nothing be removed until the the final plan is approved
which could be tomorrow or it could be 3 weeks from >> I was going to ask for clarification. Approved by Mr. Wallowitz. >> Yes. Yes. >> And he'll let us know what he came up with too. I mean as a courtesy resolution.
>> Well, the bottom line is you're not going to have a resolution for 30 days anyway, >> right? >> So really we'll have a 30-day period presumably that this can be resolved. So the the the the resolution will stay the same, but there'll be a formality at
that time because once the resolution is passed, presumably you get the chainsaws out the next day. Make a motion. >> So we make motion. >> That's what's happening right now. >> Okay.
>> Can I make a motion then? Yeah. Okay. Um make a motion to approve the removal of 16 trees as identified on the plan submitted. subject to the agreement that
the replacement number of trees is 45 as outlined in the zoning officials um submission. The minimum baseline for replacement on the site is 22 and the applicant you could change the
number. The applicant will use their best efforts to increase the number replaced and the diversity of species based on the list in the township's ordinance by working with the township expert to increase as close as possible
to 45 and we'll include deer fencing on all of them. >> So we wanted to say 33. >> Yeah. So >> we want to have 33 in there. >> We our expert suggested splitting this baby with bath
water. >> So >> change the 22 to 33, >> right? >> Yeah. >> Mhm. >> Basically just going. >> You good with that? as a baseline but to work to increase that and if impossible
to meet then it's paid into the tree fund the balance of trees. >> Can I just ask for a point of clarification maybe from Mr. Mera if after we consult with Mr. Wallowitz and he says, "Hey, I went out on a limb, but I should have said 30 instead of 32 and
we can't meet that number. Do we need to come back here or can the board built in some room?" You know, baseline's 32 unless the town's farester agrees that lesser numbers. >> No, I think that that's what was suggested and >> we got that 32. >> Right. Right. >> Can you can you please give me Excuse
me. Can you please give me a moment to speak with Mr. Heler about that because before I can commit to that, I just want to be able to You asked me if that's okay. the 32 number. >> Since it's a right, we're asking for a condition, right? >> He's giving me the thumbs up. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Thanks.
>> So, the baseline is 33. Is that what we decided? >> That's what I just put down. Yeah. >> I know. >> So, we ask her. >> Okay. Can with the change up to 33. Can I get a second on that?
>> I'll second that. >> Second. >> Mr. Mr. Makavoy got in before me. >> He can have it. >> Seconded. And can we have a a roll call vote, please? >> Mrs. Parker.
>> Motion. >> Yes. >> Mr. Katzv. >> Yes. >> Mr. Lily. >> Yes. Um, Deputy Mayor, >> yes. >> Um, Mr. Freshy,
>> yes. >> Chairperson Pearson, >> yes. >> Motion carries. Do we uh have any new business? We have no new business. >> Does anybody else have any new business?
Motion to adjurnn. Thank you. >> Thank you everyone. >> Definitely thank you to Mr. Patson, his son over there. Sure. >> Well, I certainly didn't want to be here this late, so I imagine he