The settlement terms were discussed intensely, with the board considering whether the proposal sufficiently addressed community concerns while also meeting legal requirements. The settlement would limit development potential compared to what might be permissible under different circumstances. This resolution process, known as a Whispering Woods hearing, allowed the public to comment on the settlement specifics, without revisiting the original application details. The board clarified the voting process for the settlement, stating that five affirmative votes from eligible members would be required for approval.

Public input during the meeting was robust, with residents voicing concerns over traffic safety, environmental impacts, and the integrity of zoning rules. Many residents, particularly those living on Plainfield Avenue, highlighted the potential for increased traffic hazards and the removal of mature trees, which they feared would alter the neighborhood’s character and exacerbate water runoff issues. The proposed development’s implications for traffic patterns were a concern, with residents citing outdated traffic studies and emphasizing the need for updated assessments to reflect current conditions.

The board also considered the environmental implications of the development, with residents urging them to enforce conditions on tree replacement and stormwater management. The proposed water management plan included five infiltration and bio-retention basins, a measure intended to manage both lot-specific and road-related runoff. These basins would be maintained by the township.

In response to the concerns raised, the board discussed potential modifications to the settlement agreement, including traffic management measures like restricting left turns during peak hours. However, they acknowledged that broader traffic issues fell outside the zoning board’s jurisdiction and should be addressed by other governmental agencies.

The meeting revealed a community deeply concerned about the balance between development and preserving neighborhood safety and environmental integrity. Despite the board’s legal obligation to consider municipal land use laws, residents expressed frustration over perceived prioritization of developer interests over community well-being. The board emphasized that their decisions must be grounded in established legal frameworks, with members acknowledging the complexities involved in navigating such contentious issues.