Central to the meeting was Planning Board Application 2025-021, which had been ongoing over several prior meetings. The board heard from representatives of the Wedgewood Gardens Condominium Association, who were seeking approval for the removal of trees necessary for the repaving of roads that had reached the end of their useful life. The trees were positioned dangerously close to the curbs, and their removal was argued as essential to meet statutory maintenance obligations. Daniel Hankle, representing the association, emphasized that the removal was not a matter of preference but a legal necessity, with the intention to replace the trees under a plan compatible with local ordinances.

The board reviewed evidence and testimony concerning the reserve study that mandated these repairs, including a capital reserve replacement fund analysis highlighting the urgency of the project. Mr. Danieli, a property director, underscored the importance of compliance with New Jersey law, which necessitated immediate action. However, board members expressed skepticism about the claim of urgency, given the delays in the application process since March. The delays were attributed to the need for extensive coordination and tree removal plans, which had to align with local regulations.

Attention was given to the environmental impact of the tree removal. An independent company had conducted core sampling of the asphalt, determining that a complete replacement was necessary, which would involve excavation damaging to the tree roots. During the meeting, it was affirmed that the project could not proceed without harming the trees, despite prior paving work being conducted without removals. Concerns were raised about the discrepancies between the initial and current proposals, which had reduced the number of trees slated for removal from a higher number to 16.

The board was keen on ensuring that the project’s environmental impact was minimized, debating the need for a robust tree replacement plan. The applicant proposed replacing the removed trees with 22 new ones and contributing to the township’s tree replacement fund for any shortfall. This proposal was met with calls for an increase in the number of replacement trees. The board stressed the importance of a diverse mix of species to avoid monocultures, as recommended by the Verona Shade Tree Commission.

Further discussions touched upon the technical aspects of the proposed roadwork, including drainage improvements to address existing stormwater issues. The installation of additional catch basins was planned to manage runoff effectively, separate from the tree removal concerns. The nuances of implementing rain gardens or bioswales to further mitigate stormwater impacts were also considered, although these were limited by the site’s topography and soil conditions.

The meeting concluded with a motion to approve the tree removal, conditional upon a minimum replanting of 33 trees, with the applicant working alongside the township forester to assess the site and maximize tree diversity. The board agreed that any shortfall in replacement would require financial contributions to the tree fund. The motion was passed unanimously, with the understanding that no tree removal would occur until a final, approved plan was in place.