A key point of contention was the stormwater management associated with the redevelopment efforts on the former Hoffman La Roche campus. During the meeting, representatives from Nutley Lumber and other community members voiced strong objections to the redevelopment ordinances, emphasizing the historical and ongoing issues with stormwater runoff contributing to flooding in the area. They argued that the redevelopment plans failed to adequately address these concerns, relying on outdated stormwater management standards that do not reflect current conditions or the increased impervious surfaces proposed in the development.

Representatives from Nutley Lumber noted that the 119-acre RO campus contributes to the Third River watershed, accounting for approximately 23% of the drainage, raising alarms about increased flooding risks. They criticized the plans for relying on 2012 stormwater management standards, which they argued were insufficient given the current and projected conditions. The company has a history of litigation against Prism, the site’s developer, and the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) over these issues, although previous claims were dismissed by the court.

The board heard from critics who insisted that the stormwater management plans were misleading, with assertions that stormwater from the east side of the property, traditionally directed to the Pic Valley Sewage Commission (PVSC) sanitary sewer, would now exacerbate local flooding when rerouted to an outfall near St. Paul’s Brook. They argued that the redevelopment process was being expedited without sufficient consideration of these environmental impacts, urging the board to reconsider the implications of their decisions on the community.

The redevelopment plan, which supersedes existing zoning regulations, has been scrutinized for potentially relaxing stormwater protections. Critics asserted that the plan contradicts Nutley’s master plan and state regulations, arguing that it could lead to increased flooding risks for properties like Nutley Lumber and other nearby areas. Concerns were also raised about procedural issues, such as the adequacy of notification to residents within 200 feet of the property and the implications of a protest petition by local property owners, which could necessitate a supermajority vote for the plan’s approval.

Despite these concerns, representatives from Prism and their legal counsel defended their compliance with environmental regulations. They emphasized that stormwater management would be reviewed during the site plan application process, with professionals presenting documentation for planning board evaluation. They pointed out that the DEP had authorized Prism’s discharges, and any stormwater management concerns would be addressed in the appropriate regulatory context.

Further fueling the debate were comments from Gene Diaz, who argued that the redevelopment plan had incorrectly apportioned blame for flooding issues. Diaz contested claims that the campus represented a major contributor to local stormwater runoff, pointing instead to residential areas in neighboring municipalities as significant factors. He insisted that their group’s compliance with stormwater regulations was adequate and suggested that legal channels, rather than municipal discussions, should resolve any disputes regarding flooding.

While the stormwater and flooding concerns dominated the discussion, the meeting also included the introduction and approval of several other ordinances and resolutions, which passed without noted dissent. These included financial resolutions such as the approval of a $1,211,000 urban parks grant for upgrades to the girls’ softball field at Father Glattsback Park, a change order for professional services on a public open space project, and various budgetary adjustments related to grants and community programs.

Additionally, the board discussed the acquisition of proprietary software for the Nutley Police Department to enhance hiring processes, the renewal of liquor licenses, and the approval of a legal firm’s services for the ON3 redevelopment area. The meeting concluded with a motion to enter an executive session to discuss attorney-client privileged matters, setting the next meeting for July 15 at 7 p.m.