Back to Main Table of Contents
Back to Homepage
Back to PB Transcripts TOC

NOVEMBER 4, 1999
PAGES 111 TO 166

Jeffrey Lanza, Engineer, Direct Testimony
Michael Friedman Environmental Witness, Cross-Examination by James Segreto

Below is the transcript from the Weehawken Planning Board Hearing on
ovember 4th, 1999.  This html document follows the format of the official transcript. The transcript format has 25 lines per page. Each page is numbered. Because the transcript is so long, the file has been broken down into 4 different web pages.

Jump to 11/04/99 pages 1  to 55
Jump to 11/04/99 pages 56 to 110
Jump to 11/04/99 pages 167  to 213 (end of transcript)

Go to Page 140

1 That data is then put -- catalogued as you
2 saw it yesterday by different lots and blocks for
3 detailed analysis. That detailed analysis and
4 tabulation and corresponding narrative have not
5 been completed, but just general knowledge as to
6 the types of information that have come back from
7 the laboratory.
8 Q Now, you have said most of it has
9 not been completed. That carries what we call a
10 negative predicate. It carries an implication
11 that some of it has been analyzed.
12 Now, if that is so, why did you not produce
13 for me yesterday in a room full of documentation
14 any document which reflects an analysis of any of
15 the laboratory reports that were in the 18 boxes?
16 Why didn't you bring my attention to them?
17 A I believe I did, and I believe they
18 are contained on the floor next to you.
19 Q All right. Can you tell me which
20 particular document contains an analysis or
21 comments concerning the laboratory reports?
22 A Each of the reports that are labeled
23 "Lot B" as in "by."
24 Q All right. That's one part of the
25 project. Right?
Friedman - Cross - Segreto
1 A That's right.
2 Q And none of them had to do with the
3 vast part of the project other than the B portion.
4 Right?
5 A B is a component of the project,
6 certainly not representative of the majority of
7 the lands.
8 Q Now, would it be correct to say that
9 your Environmental Impact Statement report with a
10 date of August 16, 1999, that any conclusions
11 expressed herein are not based upon any of the
12 datum in the laboratory reports in those boxes,
13 the vast majority of which were not reviewed or
14 analyzed by your office?
15 A That would be correct.
16 Q So if we want to know what those
17 laboratory analysis show, we are not going to be
18 able to find it in the Environmental Impact
19 Statement that has been dated August 16, '99 and
20 submitted to the board, would we?
21 A That's correct.
22 Q Is it your intention, when your
23 office and yourself get around to reviewing the
24 vast majority of those laboratory reports, that
25 you intend to issue a supplemental Environmental
Friedman - Cross - Segreto
1 Impact Statement for the consideration of the
2 board and the public?
3 A I believe I testified at the last
4 meeting.
5 Q Forget about that.
6 Please, I have got a time limit. Just
7 respond to the question. Indulge me.
8 Do you intend to submit a supplemental
9 report when you --
10 MR. KIENZ: Mr. Chairman, I
11 object.
12 He is trying to answer the question.
13 He is trying to answer it forthright.
14 This is a hearing where it's a
15 quasi-judicial board. Mr. Friedman is
16 trying to answer.
17 The rules of evidence don't strictly
18 apply. This is not a courtroom setting.
19 Mr. Friedman should be able to answer the
20 question.
21 Q The question was, do you intend,
22 when you have analyzed the reports, to submit a
23 supplemental Environmental Impact Statement?
24 Simple question. "Yes," "no," or "I don't know."
25 A No.
Friedman - Cross - Segreto
1 Q So that means that from your
2 perspective this board will never know in these
3 proceedings what those laboratory reports show,
4 which were not reflected in the present EIS.
5 Right?
6 MR. KIENZ: I am going to object.
7 I am going to direct that he not
8 answer the question.
9 MR. SEGRETO: He can't direct him
10 not to answer the question. He can object.
11 The board will rule.
12 MR. KIENZ: I am going to object.
13 We spent a great deal of time
14 explaining the process. We spent a great
15 deal of time pointing out that this
16 information is provided for the information
17 of the board, that there is a state agency
18 that's going to be reviewing it, that you,
19 in fact, hired two professional
20 environmental consultants to review it, and
21 for Mr. Segreto to suggest what he just has
22 is inappropriate.
23 MR. DUNN: I lost track of the
24 question.
25 This board -- this board has certain
Friedman - Cross - Segreto
1 criteria which it has to find under its
2 ordinance, and it's required to have an
3 Environmental Impact Statement submitted to
4 it under the ordinance, which it has an
5 Environmental Impact Statement.
6 It has to make a determination based
7 upon the evidence as to whether there are
8 any adverse environmental impacts. This
9 board is not concerned with the means to
10 remediate that are controlled by the DEP.
11 This board is concerned with whether
12 there will be any adverse impacts of this
13 project with respect to the environment.
14 That's what our ordinance says.
15 So do you want to rephrase the
16 question, Mr. Segreto?
17 We note your objection. Let him
18 rephrase the question.
19 Q The question to the witness is, if
20 you do not intend when you have analyzed the
21 reports to bring your analysis for the laboratory
22 reports to the attention of the board by way of a
23 supplement to the Environmental Impact Statement,
24 how will the board ever know what the laboratory
25 reports tell us about the extant contaminants?
Friedman - Cross - Segreto
1 A Mr. Segreto, I have answered that
2 question for you. I will answer it again.
3 I addressed the board, I addressed the
4 public at the last two meetings, and I indicated
5 extensively the specific names of the reports that
6 will be prepared in accordance with the Memorandum
7 of Agreement, which you entered into evidence at
8 the last meeting.
9 The exhibit number I fail to remember. It
10 was given to Mr. Dunn this evening.
11 There are a number of reports, including a
12 Remedial Investigation Report, Remedial Action
13 Workplan, and there is at least one more report,
14 the name escapes me.
15 That document -- those documents had been
16 submitted to the DEP, copies of which will
17 certainly be submitted to Weehawken and,
18 additionally, copies will be submitted to
19 whomever, whichever experts I am directed to send
20 them to, certainly including the experts that have
21 been retained by Weehawken, counsel and
22 environmental expert to review the work performed
23 by our firm, so I am repeating, because I think
24 it's an important response, the documents, the
25 information that you are querying me on will be
Friedman - Cross - Segreto
1 narrated, will be contained in documents to be
2 submitted to the department, to be submitted to
3 the municipality, and to be submitted to the
4 consultants of the municipality, but not under the
5 name of an Environmental Impact Statement
6 addendum, under a different name.
7 Q In any event, those reports we will
8 expect will be submitted by you to the board for
9 its consideration. Right?
10 MR. DUNN: To the extent that
11 they are relevant to anything that this
12 board has to decide, they will be
13 submitted.
14 There are many things in submissions
15 to the State of New Jersey that are not
16 relevant to things that this board has the
17 jurisdiction to decide.
18 MR. SEGRETO: Only by way of brief
19 -- they have submitted an Environmental
20 Impact Statement, which is required to be
21 submitted, and they have referenced the
22 future reports that will be submitted in
23 support of the remediation plan, and it
24 would seem to me that if they do submit
25 additional reports concerning the extant
Friedman - Cross - Segreto
1 conditions and how they intend to remediate
2 them, that I will have an inevitable right
3 to examine the author of that report,
4 because if I disagree with any of the
5 conclusions contained in it, I will want my
6 opportunity.
7 MR. DUNN: You are correct, Mr.
8 Segreto, if they submit any further reports
9 to us you will have the opportunity to
10 cross-examine.
11 MR. GOULD: Can we -- hold on,
12 Mr. Segreto. The court reporter needs to
13 change his paper.
14 Let's take a very brief break.
15 MR. GOULD: Okay. Mr. Segreto,
16 please continue.
17 Q Now, isn't it true that as to Lot B
18 where you have indicated that you have analyzed
19 and you prepared reports as to the existing
20 conditions, isn't it true that on Lot B a park is
21 proposed? Isn't that so?
22 A Yes, it is.
23 Q And isn't it true that the reports
24 reflect that on Lot B where the park is proposed,
25 you have found more than 20 contaminants that
Friedman - Cross - Segreto
1 exceed the NJDEP residential soil direct cleanup
2 criteria?
3 A I didn't count them, but that's
4 probably a reasonable representation.
5 Q And doesn't that include chromium
6 and hexavalent chromium?
7 A If you were to read the report on
8 Lot B, you would find that the way the park was
9 configured when the report was prepared, that the
10 chromium, that the hexavalent chromium was not to
11 be found within the components of the tennis
12 courts and the park configuration at that time.
13 Q My question to you is, I thought you
14 said chromium -- hexavalent chromium was found,
15 doesn't it?
16 A I said it was found in Lot B.
17 Be very explicit so I understand.
18 Q That's what I am talking about, Lot
19 B.
20 MR. KIENZ: Mr. Chairman, he is
21 not letting him answer the question.
22 Let's not interrupt, Mr. Kienz.
23 MR. KIENZ: I am trying not to,
24 but I would like my witness to be able to
25 answer a question before --
Friedman - Cross - Segreto
1 MR. DUNN: I heard him answer
2 the question.
3 Let's move on.
4 THE WITNESS: If we would look at
5 Lot B, we would find in the documents that
6 the area in Lot B far exceed the area
7 proposed for the park, so there is
8 chromium, hexavalent chromium to be found
9 in Lot B but not within the components of
10 the park as they were proposed during the
11 course of that document preparation.
12 Q And the chromium and the hexavalent
13 chromium, which has been found, doesn't it exceed
14 the NJDEP residential soil direct cleanup
15 criteria?
16 A There are portions of Lot B, not all
17 portions, there are portions within Lot B which
18 do, in fact, exceed residential.
19 Q Isn't it true chromium and
20 hexavalent chromium are found to be -- to cause
21 cancer, lung disease, asthma attacks,
22 dermatological disorders, ulcers, kidney and liver
23 damage in human beings?
24 A I am not a medical expert, but
25 certainly --
Friedman - Cross - Segreto
1 Q I am sorry.
2 A I am not a medical expert, but
3 certainly hexavalent chromium is known to be a
4 carcinogen.
5 Q And isn't it true that, for example,
6 since you propose to use the building foundations
7 as part of the cap, isn't it true that concrete
8 sometimes acts as a wick to draw chromium up from
9 the ground? Is that true?
10 A Mr. Segreto, I will answer the
11 question.
12 However, you are mischaracterizing prior
13 testimony of mine.
14 Q I am not interested in your prior
15 testimony.
16 I am -- I am asking you to please listen to
17 the question, and if you can answer it, say "yes"
18 or "no" with an explanation, but don't tell me
19 about your prior testimony, please. I have got a
20 limited amount of time.
21 MR. DUNN: The witness
22 misconstrued.
23 He asked the witness if it's -- and
24 I heard some testimony last time about this
25 man being a biologist, but the question was
Friedman - Cross - Segreto
1 whether concrete sometimes acts as a wick.
2 Q Does it?
3 A Yes.
4 The explanation, though, is that where we
5 have concrete we would have an impermeable, and
6 where we have hexavalent chromium we would have an
7 impermeable layer between the two, so at no time
8 will concrete or asphalt sit on top of raw
9 hexavalent chromium.
10 Q Now, isn't it true that your reports
11 reflect that on Lot B, where the park is proposed,
12 that concentrations of arsenic have been found
13 which exceed the residential cleanup criteria of
15 A We have already discussed that.
16 Q Please don't tell me about those
17 things. Just answer my questions.
18 Isn't that true?
19 Out of fundamental courtesy, you know I
20 have got a certain amount of time. I have asked
21 you -- I have asked you a question.
22 MR. KIENZ: Mr. Chairman, he is
23 lecturing my witness.
24 MR. DUNN: Mr. Segreto, you just
25 used up more time with that statement than
Friedman - Cross - Segreto
1 you would have if you let the witness
2 answer the question the way he proposed to
3 do it.
4 If you are going to object to the
5 way he answers your questions, it's counted
6 against your time.
7 MR. SEGRETO: I want him to answer
8 the question, not circulocation.
9 Q Go ahead.
10 A I believe it's a reasonable
11 presumption that arsenic exists over residential
12 criteria without a document in front of me. I
13 don't have a recollection on each of the 20
14 parameters that you had mentioned earlier.
15 Q Isn't it true that arsenic is a
16 carcinogenic and it can be fatal at 60 parts per
17 million?
18 A It's true that arsenic is a
19 carcinogenic. Whether it can be fatal or not, I
20 don't have any wherewithal to answer.
21 Q Isn't it true that at lower levels
22 than 60 parts per million it can cause
23 neurological digestive and respiratory disorders,
24 as well as nausea, vomiting and diarrhea, and
25 heart disease?
Friedman - Cross - Segreto
1 A I don't know the answer to that
2 question.
3 Q Isn't it true that arsenic dissolves
4 in water?
5 A Arsenic can dissolve in water, yes.
6 Q Now, isn't it true that your reports
7 reflect that beryilium was found in excess of the
8 residential standards, concentration?
9 A Yes.
10 Q And isn't that also a suspected
11 carcinogen?
12 A Yes, as are many other heavy metals.
13 Q Isn't it true that it can cause
14 pneumonia, rashes, ulcers, lung damage?
15 A That might be. As I mentioned
16 before, I am not an expert on medical matters.
17 Q And how about cadmium, has that been
18 found on Lot B in excess of the residential
19 standards?
20 A If you are reading my report I will
21 agree. I don't have the report in front of me,
22 and I don't have an absolute recollection on each
23 of the parameters, but many heavy metals were
24 found in excess of residential standards.
25 Q And isn't cadmium one of the
Friedman - Cross - Segreto
1 recognized carcinogens, and it has the capacity at
2 low-level exposure to cause kidney disease, lung
3 damage and bone loss, as well as neurological and
4 cardiovascular disease?
5 A I will repeat my answer to your last
6 question.
7 I am not a medical expert. It may not.
8 Q Isn't it true cadmium dissolves in
9 water and is bioaccumulate in the environment?
10 A As heavy metals, they can.
11 Q Including cadmium?
12 A Cadmium and the other metals you
13 mentioned are all components of historic fill.
14 Q Doesn't the lead concentration on
15 Lot B exceed the residential standards of NJDEP?
16 A It very well might. If I have the
17 document in front of me I can be absolute.
18 Q Isn't it especially dangerous to
19 children and can cause neurological disease,
20 mental retardation, reduced growth, memory loss
21 and anemia? Isn't that true?
22 A I will repeat my last answer. It
23 may very well be true. I am not a medical expert.
24 Q And in addition to some of the heavy
25 metals that we talked to you about, isn't it true
Friedman - Cross - Segreto
1 nickle, thallium, and vanadium also have been
2 found on Lot B to be in excess of the residential
3 concentration standards?
4 A Yes.
5 Q And that they have the same
6 capacities that visit upon people the same kinds
7 of diseases that I have innumerated, as well as
8 the heavy metals?
9 A I don't know the answer to that
10 question.
11 Q Now, what are Ph -- no -- PAHSs,
12 polyaromatic hydrocarbons. Right?
13 A That's correct.
14 Q And have they been found in
15 concentrations on Lot B which exceed the DEP
16 standards for residential standards?
17 A That's correct.
18 Q By the way, what is going to be put
19 on Lot B, what is your client's plan to build
20 there?
21 A A portion of the park, a portion of
22 open land, parking areas.
23 MR. DUNN: Wasn't your testimony
24 -- excuse me -- wasn't it your testimony
25 these things were found off the area that's
Friedman - Cross - Segreto
1 proposed to be the park?
2 THE WITNESS: That's correct. If
3 you were to look -- yes, but I was now --
4 MR. DUNN: Thank you.
5 Q Tell us what part of Lot B these
6 concentrations were found.
7 You said it's going to be used as
8 playground, as a park area, open space, where,
9 presumably, people will be permitted to go. Is
10 that so?
11 A The parking area is located to the
12 easterly portion of the lot.
13 The tennis courts are located to the
14 northerly portion of the lot, and without
15 referring to the plans, I am not conversant with
16 the balance of the lot.
17 Q Well, some of these heavy metals you
18 have indicated are going to be on the open space
19 area. Right?
20 A That's correct.
21 Q Ergo, they are not going to have an
22 impervious cap. Right?
23 A That's correct.
24 Q So we are not going to have anyone
25 who goes in in any of these open areas, not even
Friedman - Cross - Segreto
1 the protection against all of these carcinogenic
2 contaminants of a cap, an intervening cap. Right?
3 A That's absolute -- absolutely
4 fallacious and incorrect.
5 Q Incorrect?
6 A Absolutely. You are absolutely
7 mischaracterizing, misstating and misrepresenting
8 everything that I have said for the last two
9 hours.
10 Q Well, I will try once again.
11 Tell me where these heavy metal
12 concentrations that you have acknowledged --
13 MR. KIENZ: Mr. Chairman, he has
14 answered this question. He has testified
15 to it.
16 This is just an absolutely --
17 MR. DUNN: Mr. Kienz, the
18 purpose of the time limitation is to follow
19 a statute that says the board Chair can
20 eliminate repetitious questioning.
21 We will take that into account when
22 Mr. Segreto asks, if he does ask, for an
23 extension of time.
24 If he intends to use his time with
25 repetitious questioning, the board Chair
Friedman - Cross - Segreto
1 will make the ruling with respect to any
2 extensions of time.
3 Q This particular question -- I will
4 make a proffer -- seeks to elicit from the witness
5 testimony by him as to where -- what part of B
6 these carcinogenic contaminants, which exceed the
7 permissible standards, are located, and I want to
8 know at those places what is going to be on the
9 ground.
10 Is there going to be a cap covering all of
11 these carcinogenic contaminants?
12 A Let me make my answer very clear and
13 very simple, Mr. Segreto.
14 The entire site -- the entire site had been
15 covered with a cap.
16 I will -- let me continue to make things
17 simple.
18 Most of Lot B, clearly, we haven't sampled
19 all of it, but all the areas have representative
20 heavy metals. Those are constituents of historic
21 fill.
22 As I indicated at the last hearing,
23 specifically, there is a presumption in the
24 legislation in New Jersey that the remedy for
25 historic fill containing the constituent, some of
Friedman - Cross - Segreto
1 which you cited this evening, can be capped.
2 The presumptive remedy is capping. That is
3 what we propose for Lot B, and that is what we
4 propose for the entirety of the Port Imperial
5 South, LLC, property. The components of the cap
6 will vary as a function of the constituents in the
7 historic fill.
8 Q What percentage of Lot B is going to
9 be open space on which no structure is going to be
10 constructed?
11 By that I mean a building --
12 A I don't know.
13 Q -- or a parking lot.
14 MR. KIENZ: I am going to object.
15 He asked that the last time. I note
16 Mr. Dunn's comments, too.
17 MR. KIENZ: The witness can
18 answer.
19 A I don't know the answer to that
20 question, Mr. Segreto.
21 Q Now, on the open space area,
22 whatever portion it might be, tell us what kind of
23 a cap you are going to put on open space.
24 A Where -- where there are accedences
25 of hexavalent chromium over all milligrams, 100
Friedman - Cross - Segreto
1 parts per million, there will be what I will call
2 a chromium cap. I will refer to it as a primary
3 cap. I will refer to it as a cap which contains
4 multiple layers, one of which is an impermeable
5 membrane, a membrane that doesn't allow transfer
6 of water vertically through it.
7 In those portions of Lot B that do not
8 contain chromium but contain other constituents of
9 historic fill, such as we have been discussing
10 this evening, we will have a cap that contains
11 multiple layers.
12 However, that will contain impermeable one
13 -- a permeable membrane one that allows vertical
14 transverse of water.
15 Q One of these permeable and
16 impermeable membranes are going to be what, 18
17 inches below the surface?
18 A They will vary, but it depends on
19 the amount of fill to be put on various spots.
20 As you may or may not know, the elevations
21 on various portions of this property have to be
22 reset for the anticipated construction, so it's
23 conceivable and probable that where we have
24 substantial fill coming in the cap will be placed
25 in chromium areas at the existing grade, and
Friedman - Cross - Segreto
1 sufficient -- significantly more in many cases
2 than 18 inches will be placed above it, in some
3 cases as much as five or six feet.
4 Q I thought your testimony on direct
5 last time was that most of the impermeable and
6 permeable cover membrane was going to be 18
7 inches?
8 A I believe the specific testimony
9 that I gave, on top of a membrane layer, that will
10 be 18 inches of clean fill.
11 Whether that material is put down over the
12 existing grade or whether it is the final cap is
13 yet to be determined.
14 Q Let us assume that you have an
15 impermeable membrane 18 inches below the finished
16 grade, what happens if you build trees there, what
17 will the root growth of the trees do to the
18 18-inch impermeable membrane?
19 MR. KIENZ: Mr. Chairman, I am
20 going to just state I am going to note
21 that's redundant, because those questions
22 were asked by another member of the public
23 at the last meeting.
24 MR. DUNN: This witness -- this
25 cross-examiner has the right to ask it
Friedman - Cross - Segreto
1 whether somebody else asked it.
2 MR. KIENZ: The exact same
3 question, it's on the record.
4 MR. DUNN: I understand.
5 Q What will happen to the membrane
6 from the free growth of the trees that you plant
7 above the membrane?
8 A Would you like me to answer your
9 hypothetical question or would you like me to give
10 you the real world condition of what will happen?
11 MR. DUNN: Just answer the
12 question.
13 Q Just answer the question. I only
14 ask the questions. You give us the answers.
15 A If you planted a tree with a --
16 within 18 inchs, the root ball of that tree,
17 forgetting what will happen after it was planted,
18 the root ball of the tree will penetrate beyond 18
19 inches. Typically, you are dealing with something
20 24-plus inches of a root ball for a tree.
21 Q And that would mean?
22 A There is not sufficient room in your
23 example -- in your example to even plant that
24 tree.
25 Q And does that mean that everyplace
Friedman - Cross - Segreto
1 where the impermeable membrane is 18 inches, that
2 means that there will be no trees planted?
3 A I am responding to your questions as
4 you have instructed me. These are improbable
5 circumstances, so the answer to your theoretical
6 question is yes.
7 Q And thus, if that happens and the
8 root growth penetrates the impermeable membrane,
9 it no longer is impermeable. Is that so?
10 A That's so.
11 However, one of my jobs and one of the jobs
12 of the landscaping contractor or landscaping
13 consultant, and one of the jobs of the
14 professional engineer is to insure that the
15 conditions that you are suggesting do not happen.
16 Q And, for example, the utility lines
17 are located under the impermeable membrane, and
18 there is a break and workmen have to get down into
19 the ground to fix that utility line, what happens
20 to the impermeable membrane? Do they roll it up
21 and put it aside and then roll it back?
22 A A detail review of the utility plans
23 that was identified as an exhibit and are to the
24 right of me, will indicate that utility lines from
25 areas with impermeable membranes will be placed
Friedman - Cross - Segreto
1 above the membrane, not below it.
2 Q And if that's the case -- by the
3 way, do you know how deep the sanitary sewer line
4 is?
5 MR. KIENZ: I am going to object.
6 He didn't testify to any of that.
7 MR. DUNN: He just said the
8 utility lines had been placed above the
9 membrane, if he can answer the question.
10 A I do not know.
11 Q Now, with regard to -- and I want to
12 sort of telescope this -- if I were to ask you the
13 same kind of questions in terms of concentrations
14 for the three different pesticides that were found
15 in excess of the standards, would you agree that
16 all of those pesticides have the capacity to cause
17 and induce a neurological and physical disorder
18 that I attributed to other carcinogenic and other
19 heavy metals?
20 A Mr. Segreto, I will give you the
21 same answer as I gave you before, and I am not a
22 medical expert.
23 Q So you don't know one way or the
24 other.
25 Does that mean that your report doesn't
Friedman - Cross - Segreto
1 take into account the capacity of some of these
2 contaminants to cause physical, mental and
3 neurological disorders?
4 A No, that is not correct.
5 Q Well, did somebody else write the
6 section that talks about the capacity -- the
7 negative environmental impact of having
8 contaminants that have the capacity to be
9 carcinogenic?
10 A Mr. Segreto, there is a presumption
11 that I keep talking about that the legislature
12 talks about and that the ensuing regulations talk
13 about.
14 The presumption is that there are
15 constituents in historic fill that exceed
16 residential standards in the State of New Jersey,
17 and the presumptive solution to that is capping of
18 one of a number of ways, which we have talked
19 about at length.
20 The presumption is that these constituents
21 above residential standards will stay in the
22 ground, but they will be capped, and, therefore,
23 sufficient protection will be afforded to the
24 citizenry of New Jersey.
25 That's what I am testifying in front of the
Friedman - Cross - Segreto
1 citizenry of Weehawken this evening, and that's
2 what I have done for the last evenings.
3 Q In addition to all of the other
4 contaminants which exceed the residential
5 concentration standards of the NJDEP, aren't there
6 volatile organics, such as benzene, vinyl chloride
7 and 1, 2 dichloroethane?
8 A I don't believe we found volatile
9 organics in the areas. We tested for them. I
10 don't believe we found them.
11 Q I am sorry.
12 A We tested for volatile organics. I
13 do not believe that we found volatile organics in
14 the analytical data.
15 Q And hydrocarbons, did you find any
16 hydrocarbons that exceed --
17 A Yes.
18 Q -- the concentration standards?
19 A Yes, we did.
20 Q And isn't it true that hydrocarbons
21 precipitate more aberrant medical and neurological
22 phenomenon in children than in adults?
23 A I don't know the answer to that.
24 Q Now, hydrocarbons, are they mobile
25 contaminants? Do you know what that expression,
Friedman - Cross - Segreto
1 "mobile contaminants," means?
2 A Yes, I do.
3 Q Is it your contention that
4 hydrocarbons are not mobile contaminants?
5 A It's my contention that PAHs, the
6 polyaroinatic hydrocarbons, common constituent
7 historic fill are typically not mobile
8 contaminants, and are found all over New Jersey,
9 specifically associated with coal, ash, cinders,
10 railroad rights-of-way.
11 Q Isn't it true that your own testing
12 demonstrated and concluded that total petroleum
13 hydrocarbons in the groundwater were found
14 indicating leakage of contaminants? Doesn't your
15 own report say that?
16 A We are mixing different
17 constituents.
18 Total petroleum hydrocarbons were found
19 associated with tank leakage on various and sundry
20 portions of the project, yes, or the report talks
21 to that.
22 Q So that means they are mobile.
23 Right?
24 A Talking about different
25 constituents.
Friedman - Cross - Segreto
1 What we were talking about earlier, what I
2 was talking about earlier are known as PAHs,
3 polyardinatic hydrocarbons, as compared or opposed
4 to total petroleum hydrocarbons.
5 Q Now, have you completed all of your
6 samplings on the entire site?
7 A We have completed all of our
8 samplings in accordance with the approved Remedial
9 Investigation and Workplan. It's conceivable --
10 it's conceivable that additional sampling had been
11 required after the analysis is completed.
12 Q My question again, and I repeat it
13 with infinite patience --
14 MR. DUNN: I thought he answered
15 the question.
16 Q -- isn't it true that you have not
17 done sampling on the entire site?
18 A To the best of my knowledge, we have
19 completed the sampling that was required and
20 approved in the Remedial Investigation Workplan
21 for the entire property.
22 It's conceivable that additional testing
23 will be required by the State of New Jersey after
24 the review is completed -- after our view is
25 completed of all the analytical data that you and
Friedman - Cross - Segreto
1 I looked at in the 18 boxes, plus the data that
2 has not even yet appeared in my office.
3 Q On this entire 90 plus or minus acre
4 site of this application, how many soil samples
5 were taken?
6 MR. KIENZ: Mr. Chairman, he
7 answered that question. He talked about
8 it. He is just going at it a different
9 way.
10 This is an absolute waste of time.
11 It's not relevant to these hearings.
12 MR. DUNN: Let's let the witness
13 answer the question again.
14 THE WITNESS: I believe the answer
15 that I gave was on the order of 550 samples
16 conducted by EcolSciences. That is in
17 addition to the sampling that we have
18 results for that were taken by previous
19 consultants.
20 Q Are there any identifiable areas of
21 this site upon which the development is proposed
22 where no samples were taken?
23 A When we are dealing with 90 acres
24 and 1,000, 1,500 samples, it's certainly
25 conceivable there are areas in which sampling has
Friedman - Cross - Segreto
1 not occurred.
2 However, and most importantly, there is a
3 logical process by which sampling occurs. We
4 identified the areas of concern. You and I talked
5 at great length about 14 areas of concern.
6 We talked about bias sample. We talked
7 about random sample. We talked about the
8 different sample protocols that were imposed on
9 the property, without overlaying the proposed
10 property, as you have indicated in your
11 questioning, upon the sample locations, I --
12 MR. GOULD: Hold on.
13 Please continue.
14 THE WITNESS: I would have
15 difficulty giving you an absolute answer.
16 Q Did you do any testing on the site
17 where the banana building improvements are
18 proposed?
19 A Yes, we did.
20 Q And did you do any tests where the
21 ferry maintenance building is?
22 A I believe we did.
23 Q Are they part of Lot B?
24 A The banana building is not, and, I
25 believe, the ferry maintenance building is part of
Friedman - Cross - Segreto
1 Lot A.
2 Q Have you done any samples of soils
3 from the ground surface?
4 A Yes.
5 Q Isn't it true that the DEP notified
6 you in writing that you had not taken samples of
7 soils from ground surface and that it was
8 required? Did you get such a letter from the DEP?
9 A We have gotten many letters from the
10 DEP.
11 Q Did you get the kind of letter that
12 I just identified?
13 A I don't know.
14 Why don't you give me a copy of the letter.
15 MR. KIENZ: Excuse me.
16 If he is referring to a letter, he
17 should show it to the witness.
18 MR. DUNN: I agree, Mr. Segreto.
19 MR. KIENZ: This is not cat and
20 mouse.
21 MR. DUNN: If you have a letter,
22 let's not play games, give him the letter
23 and let him see it.
24 MR. SEGRETO: There will be a time
25 when I will present my evidence. That's
Friedman - Cross - Segreto
1 when I put my experts on the stand.
2 MR. SEGRETO: I want to know from
3 this witness if he is aware that the NJDEP
4 notified them in writing that they had not
5 taken samples of soils from the ground
6 surface and it was required.
7 Q Do you recall such a letter?
8 If you don't recall, just say "I don't
9 know."
10 A Mr. Segreto, we received many
11 letters from the DEP. We have had substantial
12 discourse.
13 There has been, ultimately, as I testified,
14 an agreement and approved Remedial Investigation
15 Workplan which has been implemented.
16 Q Have you done any groundwater
17 investigations on the site?
18 A Yes, we have.
19 Q Have you submitted them to the
21 A No, we have not.
22 Q Those groundwater investigations,
23 tell me what of the documents that you produced
24 for my inspection yesterday, contained those
25 groundwater samplings.
Friedman - Cross - Segreto
1 A They were in one of the 18 boxes of
2 data that has not been yet submitted to the
3 department.
4 Q So to the extent that you have done
5 the samplings, you don't know what the results
6 were?
7 A I do know what the results are.
8 Q Even though you didn't examine them?
9 A They were examined by my staff.
10 Q And were the results of those
11 examinations memorialized in any notes that are in
12 the file anywhere?
13 A No.
14 Q In other words, they just kept it in
15 their head, no notes about groundwater sampling?
16 A I would have to refer to the
17 documentation on Lot B to be absolutely certain
18 that we did not submit them to the department, but
19 my recollection is that the groundwater wells were
20 put in subsequent to -- subsequent to the
21 collection of soil samples.
22 Q Now, you know that part of this
23 property is owned by the Arthur Imperatore
24 Company. Right?
25 A Yes, I do.
Friedman - Cross - Segreto
1 Q Did you do any groundwater, any
2 ground testing at all on any of the property owned
3 by Arthur Imperatore, which is part of this
4 application?
5 A We have tested all the 90 acres, and
6 so I would imagine the parts that are owned by Mr.
7 Imperatore have been tested, as have the other
8 parts?
9 Q I am not interested in what you
10 imagine.
11 Do you know whether any soil testing was
12 done on any part of this site, which is owned by
13 the Arthur Imperatore and proprietary interests?
14 A Yes.
15 Q Tell me which of the Imperatore
16 property had the groundwater testing and tell me
17 if there is any document which you produced for me
18 which references the sampling on any of the Arthur
19 Imperatore property.
20 A I indicated that.
21 There were three groundwater wells that
22 were put in by Ecol Sciences, all put in on Lot B.
23 I cannot tell you who the ownership
24 interest of Lot B is.
25 Q Can you tell me whether or not
Friedman - Cross - Segreto
1 Imperatore refused to give any permission to have
2 any soil testing on property owned by him?
3 A I can tell you that no one, no one
4 has refused EcolSciences to conduct any type of
5 testing, any type of testing that we had to
6 undertake in accordance with the Memorandum of
7 Agreement, in accordance with the approved
8 workplan has been implemented.
9 Q Did Mr. Imperatore sign that
10 agreement?
11 A No, he didn't.
12 Q If you want to do soil testing on
13 property owned by someone who is not a signatory
14 to the agreement, don't you need the consent of
15 the property owner?
16 A Yes, we do.
17 MR. KIENZ: I object.
18 Mr. Friedman doesn't know all the
19 information.
20 MR. DUNN: He just answered it.
21 He answered.
22 Q Did you ever ask Mr. Imperatore for
23 permission to have soil tests done on his
24 property?
25 A I have a contract with Mr.
Friedman - Cross - Segreto
1 Imperatore, so implicitly the answer is yes.
2 Q Did you ask him for permission to do
3 soil testing?
4 MR. KIENZ: Mr. Chairman, come
5 on.
6 MR. SEGRETO: I didn't hear his
7 answer. I am sorry.
8 A I never met Mr. Imperatore, Sr.
9 I asked his agents.
10 Q You could have asked in a letter?
11 A I asked his agents, who I understand
12 his agents are.
13 Q Did you ask him for permission to do
14 soil testing?
15 MR. KIENZ: Mr. Chairman, he
16 answered the question.
17 He said he has a contract with him.
18 Where is this going?
19 This is irrelevant.
20 MR. SEGRETO: I know about Arthur
21 Imperatore.
22 Q Did you talk to some represenative of
23 Imperatore?
24 MR. KIENZ: I object to the
25 question. I object. This is irrelevant.
Friedman - Cross - Segreto
1 This is a land use hearing. This
2 has to deal with limited testimony under
3 your ordinance.
4 MR. KIENZ: Your objection to
5 relevancy is noted. It will be taken into
6 account.
7 MR. KIENZ: Thank you, Mr.
8 Chairman.
9 Q Do you know whether or not any of
10 the Imperatore interests are co-applicants?
11 A Yes.
12 Q So he is an applicant here, right,
13 one of the applicants?
14 A It's my understanding. I don't know
15 that absolutely. I don't know the legal nature of
16 the signators on the land.
17 Frankly, I dond't even understand the
18 nature of your question to me.
19 Q Are you aware that there was a time
20 when New York University contemplated locating an
21 athletic stadium on a portion of this property,
22 which is now contemplated for a public park? Do
23 you know that?
24 A I am aware of that, yes, sir.
25 Q Do you know if they did any
Friedman - Cross - Segreto
1 environmental studies?
2 A I do.
3 Q Do you know whether or not they
4 pulled out of the option because of the
5 environmental conditions on the property and
6 determined that it would be inappropriate to have
7 people come to a stadium at sporting events?
8 MR. KIENZ: Mr. Chairman, I
9 object.
10 Q Do you know whether or not that's
11 true?
12 MR. DUNN: That's an
13 inappropriate question.
14 I will sustain the objection on
15 that.
16 MR. SEGRETO: What if he knows the
17 answer to it?
18 MR. DUNN: You are asking him as
19 to the state of mind and the knowledge of
20 some other party. That's not an
21 appropriate question.
22 MR. SEGRETO: I am not asking him
23 to delve into the unarticulated state of
24 mind.
25 I am asking him, do you know if the
Friedman - Cross - Segreto
1 reason they pulled out was because of
2 environmental concerns.
3 His answer may simply be "I don't
4 know" and we move on.
5 MR. KIENZ: We won't speculate
6 about his answer. The question is
7 inappropriate.
8 MR. SEGRETO: Uh-huh.
9 Q Now, in eight inches of soil, the
10 soil that you propose to put in, is that going to
11 go over the Port Authority property?
12 MR. DUNN: We didn't hear. We
13 didn't hear.
14 Is it appropriate to let the court
15 reporter have a break?
16 MR. SEGRETO: I have no problem
17 with that.
18 MR. GOULD: Okay. We are back.
19 Can the clerk please call the roll
20 again.
21 THE SECRETARY: Richard Barsa.
22 MR. BARSA: Here.
23 THE SECRETARY: Mr. Turner.
24 MR. TURNER: Yes, here.
25 THE SECRETARY: Mr. Cabrera.
Friedman - Cross - Segreto
1 MR. CABRERA: Here.
3 MR. GOULD: Here.
4 THE SECRETARY: Ms. Kravitz.
5 MS. KRAVITZ: Here.
6 MR. KIENZ: The record should
7 reflect we adjourned at 10:20, which was 60
8 minutes after the cross-examination began.
9 There are 55 minutes remaining.
10 MR. SEGRETO: How many?
11 MR. DUNN: 55.
12 MR. GOULD: 55.
13 MR. DUNN: Which will instantly
14 bring us to 11:30, if you use it all.
15 MR. SEGRETO: I am marking some
16 exhibits. That is not cross-examination,
17 but I am going to do that at the conclusion
18 of my cross-examination. I want some
19 things marked as exhibits.
20 Q Mr. Friedman, so we can do this as
21 expeditiously as possible, I have a copy -- do you
22 have a copy of your August 16, '99 EIS? Do you
23 have it there?
24 A Yes.
25 MR. DUNN: That's Exhibit A-8,
Friedman - Cross - Segreto
1 A-8.
2 MR. SEGRETO: Is that A-8?
3 MR. DUNN: Yes.
4 Q When I am going to be referring to
5 particular pages. Let's go on Page 1.
6 In the third paragraph down you indicate
7 that you have to submit a Remedial Action Workplan
8 for the consideration of the DEP. Isn't that so?
9 A That's correct.
10 Q Have you submitted one yet?
11 A Only for Lot B.
12 Q Has it been approved?
13 A No, it has not.
14 Yes, it has -- excuse me -- it has been
15 approved.
16 Q When?
17 A I believe the date was on or about
18 June 30th of 1998.
19 Q When?
20 A June 30, 1998.
21 Q Was it in letter form?
22 A Yes, it was.
23 Q We have the correspondence file
24 here. I have the three volumes of correspondence,
25 which you indicated to me was all of the
Friedman - Cross - Segreto
1 correspondence on this.
2 Please turn to the letter of approval in
3 1998 for the Remedial Action Workplan.
4 MR. SEGRETO: Counsel, please don't
5 include the time while he is thumbing
6 through to find it.
7 MR. KIENZ: I object.
8 Come on.
9 MR. DUNN: Mr. Segreto, are you
10 suggesting that it's not there or --
11 because if it's there, I think you could
12 have simplified it and marked it for the
13 witness. That would have been a courteous
14 thing to do.
15 If you are suggesting it's not
16 there, then -- it looks like the witness
17 has found it.
18 Q You found it?
19 A Yes, I did.
20 Q May I see it, please.
21 MR. SEGRETO: I would like to have
22 marked for identification the file entitled
23 "Roseland Port Imperial South, 245, 1998
24 correspondence," and in particular
25 contained therein, the August 27, 1998
Friedman - Cross - Segreto
1 letter from EcolSciences, Carroll Chapman
2 to Mr. Marcolina of NJDEP.
3 I turned to the wrong one, haven't
4 I?
5 This is the letter Marcolina, the
6 case manager, sent to Karl Goldberg dated
7 -- does it have a date on it?
8 The letter is undated, but there is
9 a fax transmission of 7/1/98.
10 Q Now, this approval, was it for the
11 whole property?
12 A No, it was not.
13 Q Just for the proposed Lot B. Right?
14 A That is correct.
15 Q Now, since the time in 1998, have
16 there been any changes in the proposed development
17 plan?
18 A To the best of my knowledge, the
19 answer is yes.
20 Q Pardon?
21 A To the best of my knowledge, the
22 answer is yes.
23 Q When you made the modifications in
24 the plan, have you notified the DEP that the
25 conditional approval as to Lot B should be
Friedman - Cross - Segreto
1 reviewed now because there is a new development
2 plan for Lot B?
3 A No, we have not yet.
4 Q And don't they say in Paragraph 2
5 that any comments that the department has
6 regarding the Remedial Investigation Workplan
7 Addendum and Remedial Investigation Report will be
8 incorporated and/or addressed in a Revised
9 Remedial Investigation Report Addendum and Revised
10 Remedial Investigation Report if necessary?
11 A Yes, they do.
12 Q Have you submitted a Revised
13 Remedial Investigation Report Addendum?
14 A Yes, we have.
15 Q When?
16 A The reports are in the boxes to your
17 right.
18 Q When did you do it?
19 A The reports -- I don't know without
20 referring to the reports.
21 Q Now, with regard to the Revised
22 Report, did you deal specifically with hexavalent
23 chromium?
24 A We dealt with all the constituents
25 that were on Lot B.
Friedman - Cross - Segreto
1 Q I will ask you again.
2 Did you deal specifically with hexavalent
3 chromium?
4 A We dealt --
5 Q If you don't know, tell me.
6 A We dealt with it amongst other
7 things.
8 Q I am sorry?
9 A We dealt with hexavalent chromium,
10 as well as other constituents, not exclusively.
11 Q Now, has that revised plan been
12 approved and when?
13 A No.
14 Q So when you had said that you had an
15 approval, that was on the one in 1980 -- or '98 --
16 I am sorry -- which was subject to your submitting
17 a revised one, and you have submitted the revised
18 one, and they haven't approved it. Right?
19 A That's correct.
20 Q Are there any others that you want
21 to tell us have received approval?
22 MR. DUNN: Mr. Segreto, the
23 record should note he didn't testify on his
24 direct testimony -- examination as to the
25 Remedial Action Workplan approval.
Friedman - Cross - Segreto
1 He testified in response to a question that
2 you asked him.
3 MR. SEGRETO: I understand. It's
4 like a decision without a difference.
5 MR. DUNN: No, it goes to the
6 relevancy. He didn't testify on his direct
7 examination as to the approval of a
8 Remedial Action Workplan.
9 MR. SEGRETO: Counsel, I don't want
10 to quibble with you, but the way we sequed
11 into his response that there was an
12 approval was my reference to Page 1 of his
13 Environmental Impact Statement, which is a
14 document which he filed.
15 Now, I didn't just go on a
16 meandering expedition here.
17 MR. DUNN: You say remediation
18 had been conducted under NJDEP approval,
19 Remedial Action Workplan.
20 MR. SEGRETO: My question was, did
21 you get the approval?
22 He said "Yes."
23 "Show me where."
24 He showed it to me.
25 It was an interim approval
Friedman - Cross - Segreto
1 conditioned upon the approval, which is not
2 approved.
3 It is relevant, in my opinion, at
4 any rate.
5 MR. SEGRETO: Now, may we have this
6 particular file marked?
7 MR. DUNN: The whole file?
8 MR. SEGRETO: It's only going to be
9 marked as an exhibit now.
10 When I come on my case I will be
11 moving certain parts of it into evidence,
12 not the entirety.
13 MR. KIENZ: I am going to object
14 to a whole file being moved into evidence
15 on correspondence.
16 MR. DUNN: He is not moving it
17 into evidence. He is marking the whole
18 file for identification. He is not moving
19 it into evidence at this point.
20 We will mark it for identification.
21 MR. KIENZ: What are we marking
22 specifically?
23 MR. SEGRETO: I identified it on
24 the record.
25 MR. KIENZ: I don't understand.
Friedman - Cross - Segreto
1 MR. DUNN: Roseland Port
2 Imperial South HW 97 - 245, 1998
3 correspondence.
4 MR. KIENZ: The 1998
5 correspondence file.
6 Thank you.
7 MR. DUNN: Well, do you have one
8 of your labels, Mr. Kienz?
9 MR. KIENZ: Yes, I will get them
10 for you, Mr. Dunn.
11 MR. DUNN: That exhibit had been
12 Exhibit O-3, is it? I have lost tract.
13 MR. KIENZ: I think it's O-4.
14 I am just checking.
15 MR. SEGRETO: Are we ready?
16 MR. DUNN: Yes. Let's go.
17 Q Mr. Friedman, if you contend that
18 any Remedial Action Workplan under the one that we
19 just went through has ever been approved by the
20 DEP, tell me which other one was approved, give me
21 the date of the workplan and please produce it
22 from the files that we have here, the one that you
23 contend other than the one we already talked about
24 that has been approved.
25 A I don't contend nor have I ever
Friedman - Cross - Segreto
1 contended that any other document has been
2 approved, Remedial Action Workplan.
3 Q Now, on the top of Page 2 of your
4 EIS, in the first paragraph, you say: "By way of
5 net conclusion and net opinion, the planned
6 development is consistent with the township's PB
7 option and consistent with the township's land use
8 planning for this waterfront."
9 You will agree that's a planning
10 conclusion. Isn't that right?
11 A Yes.
12 Q You are not a planner, are you?
13 A No, I am not.
14 Q Does this constitute your opinion or
15 the opinion of someone else?
16 A It is an opinion of the author who
17 wrote that specific paragraph looking at the maps
18 that were available.
19 Q Who was the author of that
20 paragraph?
21 A That particular paragraph, probably
22 Dr. David Behl.
23 Q Is he a professional planner?
24 A No.
25 Q All right. Do you customarily have
Friedman - Cross - Segreto
1 people on your staff who are not professional
2 planners express planning opinions and
3 conclusions?
4 A We customarilly have people on our
5 staff write narratives in Environmental Impact
6 Statements that cover a myriad of environmental
7 and other types of subjects.
8 Q Will you allow and concede that this
9 particular paragraph, which expresses planning
10 opinions, does not constitute the opinion of any
11 professional planner?
12 A Certainly.
13 Q Do you even know whether or not the
14 person who authored this paragraph reviewed the
15 site plan and the zoning ordinance as it applies
16 to this kind of development?
17 A I believe and it's my understanding
18 that he did.
19 Q When you say "he," how do you know
20 it's a "he" rather than a "she"?
21 A In the prior question you asked me
22 who wrote that paragraph, I indicated Dr. David
23 Behl. He is a male.
24 Q Dr. who -- David?
25 A Bell.
Friedman - Cross - Segreto
1 Q B-e-l-l?
2 A B-e-l-l.
3 MR. DUNN: Mr. Segreto, the
4 board will stipulate it is not relying on
5 Mr. Friedman's planning testimony in this
6 matter.
7 MR. SEGRETO: I appreciate it.
8 MR. DUNN: It will save you some
9 questions.
10 MR. SEGRETO: Thank you so much.
11 MR. DUNN: Give you additional
12 time.
13 Q Now, did you do any analysis of
14 loadings of combustion products or anyone of your
15 staff do an analysis of loadings of combustion
16 products in the air?
17 A We did not do any analytical testing
18 of air quality particulates, if that's your
19 question.
20 Q Yes.
21 MR. DUNN: It was stipulated at
22 the last hearing, air quality testimony
23 will be produced after the traffic. That
24 was what Mr. Kienz said.
25 If you would like to reserve your
Friedman - Cross - Segreto
1 air quality questions until that time, you
2 might have a further opportunity to
3 cross-examine him.
4 MR. SEGRETO: When I have an
5 opinion expressed in the EIS, and the EIS
6 is the product of this witness's firm,
7 since they do in the third paragraph on
8 Page 2 express a net opinion, I merely want
9 to find out if anybody in their shop did
10 the analysis, which is the predicate for
11 that expression of that net opinion.
12 MR. KIENZ: I am going to object
13 to that question.
14 I made it very, very clear that this
15 case is being presented to this board in a
16 very order and rational way, and we are not
17 getting into air quality testimony right
18 now. We are doing it for a very specific
19 reason.
20 This is beyond the scope of the
21 direct, and it's an inappropriate question
22 at this time.
23 MR. SEGRETO: I have no problem
24 with not asking another question about this
25 subject as long as the attorney for the
Friedman - Cross - Segreto
1 board will be kind enough to again indicate
2 that to the extent that the report says on
3 the page with loading and combustion
4 products to the air will be nonincreased
5 although those loadings are not anticipated
6 to significantly affect breach and air
7 quality that the board will not give any
8 evidential value to those conclusions.
9 MR. DUNN: No. I am not going
10 to stipulate to that at this time because
11 the counsel -- counsel indicated the last
12 time, and the witness said last time, that
13 he was not -- his direct testimony was not
14 related to air quality. We have had no
15 testimony about air quality.
16 If we have appropriate testimony
17 about air quality, the board may, in fact,
18 rely upon that, but we have had none, and a
19 question about air quality, in my opinion,
20 is irrelevant at this time.
21 Q Do you have anybody in your company
22 who has any expertise in air quality?
23 MR. KIENZ: Mr. Chairman, I am
24 going to object.
25 This is redundant.
Friedman - Cross - Segreto
1 MR. SEGRETO: I am trying to
2 establish at the time when this document
3 will presumably be offered into evidence,
4 that it contains expert opinions that were
5 not supported by any analysis done by an
6 expert of the firm that submitted it.
7 MR. DUNN: If you can make the
8 point again when the air quality testimony
9 is presented.
10 At this time air quality questions
11 are beyond the scope of the direct
12 examination.
13 MR. SEGRETO: I take my exception,
14 and I will move on.
15 Q Now, in regard to the environmental
16 impact of additional vehicles, did anybody in your
17 company --
18 MR. KIENZ: Objection.
19 Q -- do any analysis of that kind of
20 an impact concerning vehicles?
21 MR. KIENZ: Objection.
22 The same -- that is beyond the scope
23 of the direct examination at this time.
24 MR. SEGRETO: But it is contained
25 on Page 2 in the Environmental Impact
Friedman - Cross - Segreto
1 Statement in which they express net
2 conclusions that there will be no effect by
3 the additional vehicles.
4 MR. DUNN: After we had -- when
5 we have the air quality testimony, you will
6 have plenty of opportunity to cross-examine
7 on that subject.
8 MR. SEGRETO: Then what will I be
9 compelled to do, bring this witness back?
10 MR. KIENZ: We already said --
11 MR. DUNN: The witness will be
12 back for direct examination on air quality.
13 Q Now, on Page 6, Paragraph B, which
14 has to do again with zoning, if I were to ask you
15 the same questions that I did about zoning, would
16 your answers be the same; namely, no planner in
17 your office did this analysis?
18 MR. KIENZ: Objection.
19 MR. DUNN: The board will take
20 notice of its own zoning ordinance and will
21 not rely on the conclusions stated in this
22 report.
23 MR. SEGRETO: Thank you.
24 Q Now, on Page 6 you opine about "The
25 estimated generation of sanitary wastewater for
Friedman - Cross - Segreto

Jump to 11/04/99 pages 167  to 212 (end of transcript)
Jump to 11/04/99 pages 1  to 55
Jump to 11/04/99 pages 56 to 110

Go to Page 140
Go to Top of Page