board of township zoning board of adjustment to order. Thank you for your patience. We are coordinating a lot of moving parts, so I appreciate you being patient as we get to the order of business this evening. I'm going to start as I always do and I
think I'm too loud now. The open public meeting announcement. Adequate notice of this meeting was provided in accordance with the Open Public Meetings Act NJSA 104-6. Specifically, on January 28th, 2026,
proper notice was sent to the electronic news sources of record, filed with the municipal clerk at the township of Bridgewater, and posted on the municipal bulletin board. Please be aware of the zoning board of adjustment policy for public hearings. No new applications
will be heard after 9:30 p.m. and no new testimony will be taken after 10 p.m. With that, if you are able, I'd like you to rise and join me in saluting the flag. 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. Thank you. And Nancy, may we have a roll call, please? >> Kubak
>> here. >> Mr. Woodelli, >> here. >> Mrs. Amin, >> Mr. Frank, >> here. >> Mr. Fresco, Miss Henderson Rose, >> Mr.
here. >> Miss Wiseman, Mr. Vesio, Mr. Kawuchcci >> here, >> Mr. Mcnella >> here, >> Richer, board >> here, >> William Burr, board engineer
>> here, >> Sarm >> here, >> and we also have Bruce Eisenstein our radio frequency CX. Well, welcome to everyone and just a a
quick comment if I may. This meeting will be broadcast on YouTube live. It's also available for your viewing pleasure when the meeting is completed. However, it imposes on us certain obligations that we have to the public and that has
to do with using the microphone to speak into. So, we apologize in advance if we're correcting your uh microphone etiquette, but without your speaking into a mic. What happens when you're watching is home, they look like you
went silent and nobody knows why. So, if we correct you, please uh take my apology in advance. With that, I'd open I'd like to open the meeting to the public for members of the public who want to address this board on any matter that's not on the agenda for this
evening. So, something independent. And seeing none, I'm going to close that portion of the meeting. Now, we have some minutes that are up for adoption. Are there any comments to the minutes from February 10th, 2026 or
February 24th, 2026? Can I have a motion? Mrs. >> Zin have any com. >> Do you have any comments, Mrs. Amin? >> 20 the two sets of minutes. >> Do you have any comments on those minutes? >> There was one little comment that I
think she made the correction. >> Okay. and it was it was a just a typographical error or something that's not substantive. In other words, it doesn't change the the context or any or the understanding
of that statement. Okay. So, can I have a motion then to approve the minutes as amended? I >> move. >> Second. >> I'll second. All in favor? Oh, you want to do a roll call? Sorry.
>> Roll called separately, Mr. >> Oh, each one. Okay. So, shall we do the February 10th first? >> I move on that. And >> and we have a second on that. >> I'll second. >> Chairman Kak. >> Yes. >> Mr. Wedelli.
>> Yes. >> Mr. Zamin. >> Mr. Franco. >> Yes. >> Miss Rose. >> Yes. >> Mr. Gi. Yes, >> Mr. Kawuchcci. >> Yes, >> Mr. McNell.
>> Yes. >> Thank you. So, similarly, I'd like a motion to approve the minutes from February 24th, 2026. Mr. Widelli makes the motion. Do we have a second? >> I'll second again. >> Is that Mr. Franco? >> Yes.
>> Very well. And Nancy. >> Chairman Kulak? >> Yes. >> Mr. Wedelli? >> Yes. >> Mr. Zamine? >> Yes. >> Mr. Franco? Yes, >> Miss Rose. >> Yes, >> Mr. Gayeski. >> Yes, >> Mr. Kuchi. >> Yes. >> And Mr. McNullah?
>> Yes. >> Thank you. We had a resolution listed on the agenda and unfortunately we are unable to get that resolution uh distributed in time for everyone to review. So, we're going to postpone the um approval of that
resolution until the following meeting. Now with respect to land development applications, we have two this evening. One is for Garden Oak Specialties Incorporated and the second is for CX Tower Leasing. We're going to try and
split the meeting as equally as we can and then depending upon the progress we make in each of the cases where in the first case we may have to extend slightly, but we'll see how things move forward and um what the timeline looks like. So, with that, we'd like to
proceed with application number 25-016ZB, Garden Oak Specialties Company, Inc. And do you have an attorney present who'll be making your case? And we do. >> Yes. Good evening. >> Good evening. John Sullivan. I'm an
attorney with the offices of Dasola and Sullivan and I'm representing the applicant. Uh the applicant is a corporation engaged in the oper operation of this particular property. Um and they use it for um what I call
the sale of yard implements. >> I'll go with this. Okay. Um, yeah. So, it's for the sale of what I call yard implements. Um, it's uh storage sheds. Um, designer type of sheds, uh, lawn chairs, gazeos, um, uh,
like ponds and fountains. Um, pretty much all of those items are included with what um, we display on site and we make the retail sales of those on site as well. Uh the property is located at 1921 Route 22 West here in Bridgewater.
Uh we are lot 16 in block 81 or I'm sorry 821 and the property is located in the C3 zoning district. Um I'm sure you're all familiar with it. This particular uh property has been used for this as I
understand it since the uh early 1970s. Uh we are on the westbound side of Route 22. Uh the property is um it's fully improved at this point. It has a number of buildings on it. Um it has a gravel parking area. Uh it's got an older well
and septic system on there and um in in a lot of area of the property is used for the display of the yard implements. Our proposal before you tonight is to continue that use and significantly upgrade and improve the site. Um, we're
going to do that by replacing uh several of the buildings on the site. Uh, we're adding site improvements such as storm water management, site lighting, a brand new well and septic system, uh, walkway, and a paved parking area. Uh, we do
require um preliminary and final major site plan approval. In addition, uh, we are here for either a D1 andor D2 uh, variance. uh D1 being a use variance and a D2 being an expansion of um a
pre-existing non-conforming use. And um after we uh start with some of our proofs, I'm going to ask Mr. Smad to weigh in on that um and we can decide whether we're going to do a D1, a D2, or both. Uh we do have some additional um
bulk variance nonconformities, and we'll be prepared to discuss those as well. Uh in terms of what we have submitted, we submitted a site plan dated April 14th of 2025 prepared by the Reynolds Group Inc. and that was last
revised December 10th of 2025. We submitted the survey dated March 1st of 2024 prepare also prepared by the Reynolds group. We submitted architectural plans which are dated July 15 of 2025 prepared by Engle Architects
and Engineers. We submitted a stormwater impact report also prepared by the Reynolds Group dated April of 2025. And then we submitted some outside agency documents. Uh we submitted the
March 25th, 2025 NJ do letter of no impact. uh the soil conservation district approval from May of 2025 and the health department approval for the septic system uh dated December 26th
of 2024. Our witnesses tonight um we're going to start with Maline WS. She is actually the property owner. She's going to describe to you the historical use of the property. Um in terms of operations for the applicant, we have Jason
Anashak. He's the vice president of the applicant. Uh, we have our architect Elvis Engel or Elvin Engel, our engineer Mitchell Ardman, and our planner Kevin O'Brien. I also have our traffic engineer Doug Polliniac present. He's
available to answer any questions um given the fact that we did get the um NJ do letter of no impact. Uh we haven't had him submit a report, but he can certainly answer any questions that you may have. And if I may, I would begin
with uh Miss WS. So ma'am, would you remain standing and raise your right hand, please? You know, let me get our professionals at the same time. You would stand and raise your right hands, everyone, please. Um do you solemnly swear that the testimony you will give to this board will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but
the truth? So help you God. And and for the our just for the record purposes, would you give me your name first, please? >> And can you spell your last name? >> Okay. Thank you. And would you each identify yourselves for the record as
well? >> Thank you. Thank you. Um, Miss WS, you are the owner of this property. Is that correct? >> Correct. >> And you've owned it since June of 1983. >> Correct. >> And before that, you leased the property. >> Yes.
>> And can you explain to the board when you began leasing it? >> That was that was uh we were using it in 1974. We started our business and we uh rented it from uh TripleM Garden Center. >> Okay. Okay. And before you um before you
began renting it, um what was TripleM using the property for? >> It was a garden center. >> And by garden center, would that be the sale of storage sheds and yard implements like I described earlier? >> Not sheds, but garden garden uh flowers,
uh all kinds of things like that. >> Okay. >> Statues. >> All right. And then when you started using the property in 1974, um what type of business did you conduct on the property? >> We did the sheds mostly. And then uh
when we bought it, took over the garden center. He he still owned the garden center when we uh rented it. >> I know this microphone's a little tricky, so you almost have to hold it in front of your mouth on a slight angle. No, you want to get closer, but not and
then just turn it a little bit. There you go. Perfect. >> I know it drives everybody nuts, but trust me, it's okay. >> Okay. And um you had looked for some documentation um to establish that use. Uh is that
correct? >> Correct. >> And you were able to find a multiple listing sheet. >> Yes. >> From November 14th of 1973. >> Yes. And that did describe the use on the property as the garden center business.
>> Correct. >> And it also showed a photo of the property. >> Correct. >> And I'm going to show you what's been marked as A1 with today's date. >> Is that the multiple listing sheet that you were able to come up with? >> Yes. >> And I know the picture is uh not the
greatest. Uh can you describe to the um to the board, you know, what you feel that that picture shows us? Well, it was one story u garden center and he had flowers all over and statues and and things like that.
>> Thank you. >> And I'm sorry, but what year was that from? >> November 14th of 197. Thanks. And Miss Wentz, um, can you describe your full use of the property since
>> Okay. We sell sheds, uh, pond plants, um, flowers, uh, ornament, uh, statues. Um then we sell gazeos, things like that. >> And has that use been continuous uh
since 1974 on the property? >> Correct. >> Okay. Um I have no further questions for Miss WS. So before we let you go, are there any members of the board that would like to pose any question to Miss Wentz about
her testimony so far? You're off the hook for now. Thank you. So at this point, just having given that historical testimony, I'll just ask Miss Surm for her opinion in terms of whether we should be presenting this as a D1, a
D2, or both. >> Um, thank you, Mr. Chairman. Um, Mr. Mr. Sullivan, one question I would ask is, has this um property ever been the subject since 1973 or 74 of a devariance application?
>> According to our Oprah request, um the answer would be no. We did not come up with any records in connection with that. I do know that at about the time that uh Ms. WS decided to buy the property in the early 1980s. Uh they had
come in, they had had a conversation with zoning at that time and they were assured that the use was proper and it could be continued, but they have not been able to produce any paperwork on that nor is the town. And I do believe
um what Miss WS told me was that uh they were told they really didn't need any paperwork and you know they were uh they were comfortable with what they were told. When you say proper, do you mean pre-existing or permitted by the ordinance? I'm just to clarify. >> Uh, I believe it's pre-existing. I think
the ordinance was adopted in 1978, give or take. >> Um, so >> 76 >> 76 I stand corrected. >> But you're saying that the business predated that adoption.
>> Correct. Yes. >> And Mr. Er, I'm sure has an opinion as well because we're stuck somewhere in the middle. >> Yes. And I think I would appreciate Mr. Eer's opinion as well. >> Well, I think if if that's an accurate date in 1976 for the ordinance for this
parcel, right, then the testimony and exhibit A1 would seem to demonstrate that it pre-existed the ordinance. >> Yes. >> Right. I do have copies of zoning maps. Um, but I don't
believe they go back as far as that date. So, or they they go pretty far back, but I can't find one that applies to this property that's legible. Um, but that's neither here nor there. I just wanted to note that I looked into that. But I think as far as the evidence
provided, it it seems to predate the ordinance. um which means it does it would have never been permitted. Right. Right. >> Um and then it's not very often that over the course of a a D2 application as a proof, you have the actual listing listing and a photo of the property
showing what was used um what it was used for. So, um yeah, in my opinion, I believe that it is pre-existing um and that it can be this application this evening can be captured under a D2. >> Right. I mean, it it would seem and you did a really good job of finding this
piece of paper. It's a pretty important piece. So, um, it would it would seem that that I think clearly establishes that it predated the 1976 ordinance and so it's a pre-existing non-conforming use, right? >> So, then it's a D2.
>> Okay. Thank you very much. >> Um, our next witness will be Jason Anishak and he's going to probably correct me on the pronunciation. So would you also remain standing? Raise your right hand. Do you solemnly swear that the testimony you will give to this
board will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. So help you God. And your name for the record, >> Jason O. >> Okay. Thank you. Uh what is your position with the applicant? >> I am the vice president of Garden Oak
Specialties Co. Inc. >> And how long have you been in that position? >> Uh this position has been the last five years. I've been with the company for almost 15. >> And during that entire time, um you've been assigned to this particular site.
>> Yes. >> And the use as I described it earlier um is the use that's been continuous since you started there. Correct. >> And um I know I uh Miss WS described it a bit. Can you describe it a bit further in terms of what that use is?
>> So we sell a variety of outdoor structures, sheds, gazeos, swing sets. Um that is one of the main things. Uh we also have a pond department that we sell all the water plants in. Um which is now the time of the year for them. Um we
also sell pond fish and then our fountains. We have um outdoor mailboxes. Um just a lot of different outdoor um accessories >> and um you do display a number of those
items outside. >> Yes, we do. >> And you also do have um some buildings on site. >> Yes. >> And uh we are proposing as part of this to replace a number of those buildings. >> Correct. >> And um could you describe the condition
of those buildings? So there are outdoor structures that we hold our equipment in. So extra nails, screws, hardware, um parts for repairs for customers sheds. Um all of our furniture are even in the
winter time when the inventory has to go away. Um we have buildings that things have to go away of course and some of these buildings need to go. >> They're not in very good condition. Is that fair to say? they've they're showing their age
>> and uh so as part of this we do um propose to demolish I believe four buildings. Is that correct? >> Yes. >> And um we're going to replace those with a brand new um office and showroom building as well as a new garage. >> Correct.
>> And we're also proposing to make some significant site improvements as I described earlier on. >> Correct. Now overall in your experience uh with this particular site is the proposed si size size and layout of the site um adequate for the use?
>> Yes, it works perfectly for us. >> And up to this point, have you had any issues on site regarding site circulation, parking, things of that nature? >> No, everything on the property seems to run very uh smoothly.
>> And what is the average number of employees that you have on site? And I guess in this case we'll talk about both your peak season and your off season. >> So in our peak season we have a total of 10 employees. Um on our off season
there's usually only two or three of us because we are a seasonal business. >> And during the uh the peak season are all 10 there at the same time or are they on shifts? >> No, they're on um they're staggered depending on the weekday verse the weekend.
So, how many might be there, you know, maximum at any given time? >> There's about six of us there at all times. >> And uh let's talk about hours of operation. Again, both uh peak and off- peak. >> So, during the peak season, we are open
7 days a week. It is Monday through Friday from 9:00 to 5:00. Um Saturday and Sunday are 10:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. Uh off season, we do close for a couple weeks between Christmas and New Year's. Um and then of course if it snows we are
closed. Um we do not open on Sunday during the se uh during the winter and everything else is 9 to5 and 10 to 4 on Sunday or Saturday sorry >> and um during the the peak season again no issues with parking. You always have plenty of parking.
>> No, there's always plenty of room. >> And you do receive um deliveries to the site and you do do deliver um product from the site to customers. Correct. Correct. >> And what type of vehicle makes the deliveries to the site? >> So, we have a um F550, which is a
smaller single cab pickup truck with a trailer that they pull pull behind. We have two of them that go out and run and do our shed deliveries. So, they're not big vehicles because they need to access the backyard for deliveries. >> And uh what about the vehicles that are
delivering product to the site? So to our site, we have a 52 foot tractor trailer that comes in usually he's in in the morning um first thing in the morning 3 to 4 days a week and he comes
right in and we have a designated uh drop off area in the center between um between our gates and our back section that we have. And this way he can pull right in, he can drop off and then he pulls right out and we don't see him till the next day.
And uh they're not required to back in or back out of the site, are they? >> No. >> So they can circulate the site. >> Yes. >> Um all in safety. >> Correct. >> Um where will the garbage be stored? >> So we have an area inside of the back
gate uh that the garbage dumpsters are in. So they are in a locked and stored gate. >> And um how's the garbage pickup? Is that done by private hauler? >> Correct. >> And how often do they pick up the garbage? I actually just changed us. Sorry. Um,
Sunday uh or um Monday is our cardboard dumpster and then our um garbage dumpster is Wednesday. So they usually come in in the morning and they pick that up. >> Um in terms of the uh assuming that this
application can be approved um the main building that we are proposing uh what what are we going to do inside that building? So, this is going to be to house all of our office space um outdoor product that's been outside in sheds. Um
the way that the layout was uh before Okay. Um before we had uh moved building um the outdoor product was in uh exterior buildings that uh people would go into. you know, we leave them open
during the day. Um, and it's just very tight for people to get into. Um, as well as our pond department. All of our pond supplies are going to be inside of this new building. Um, and then all of our office space, of course, where we do all of our sales from will be also on
the show uh showroom floor. >> And in terms of the garage, what's that going to be used for? So that is going to be used to as we take down the older buildings, it's going to be used for more of that storage. So it opens up more space on the property.
>> And I believe there was also mention of an employee break room >> that is in the office itself. >> That'll be in the main building. >> Correct. >> Uh let's talk about the outdoor display that you have now. Um you've described the type of items. Can you give the
board an idea um of the number of items and I guess you know uh really focus on the larger items like the sheds and the gazeos. >> So on average we have roughly about 75 items inventory but that changes
constantly due to people can come in and see something they like and buy it off of the lot. Uh that is one of our big things. But um I as of right now there's five gazeos on the property. There's four pavilions um for display and then a
number amount of sheds. Um there's a horse bar a small horse barn display as well. >> And if this application's approved, do we um anticipate a change in the number of those outdoor display items? >> No. The the amount of product that's out
there is suitable for us. >> Thank you. That's all I have for Mr. on your shack. >> Uh, can I ask you a question, please? Um, the sheds that you and the swings that you you have on display, do you sell those or are they just samples? >> Oh, no. We sell them. If you came in,
you could buy >> buy that actual one there. >> Yes. Not Yes. You can't do cash and carry because we have to deliver them. But yes, if you pick out if you say, "I want that one," it gets marked and tagged and then delivered to you. >> Or you can special order one. >> Or you could special order. I think I
bought about go 20 something years now. Bought down there and then I ordered it and the guy came and delivered and put it in. >> Yes. >> Okay. So, you have both options. >> So, you have both options. If you're in a rush, you can get something next week or if you want to order, you can wait the four weeks and you can get what you
want. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Any of the other board members have any questions about Mr. Anishak's testimony this evening? >> I have a question. >> Mr. Does that mean >> you know this new building uh has like a
display area. What would you display in that area? >> So inside of the building >> we have our our first is our space for our sales counters. Um but then also uh the backside is going to be our pond all of
our pond supplies. So we we sell all the koi ponds, the fish, the food, all of that. So that's going to be in there. And then also all of the the yard extras. So that like I said, that's the mailboxes, the um the poly
flowers that we sell, all the the handmade crafts are going to be in there, as well as lawn furniture. Um so we do poly tables, poly outdoor dining tables and all. And so those are also going to be as well in there.
Okay. Any other board members have any questions for Mr. Hones about his testimony? I just have a quick one for you. You were talking about the garage earlier and is it your intention to get consolidate your vehicles into that
garage in addition to having um some storage space or how is that going to be used? >> So, our vehicles are a little too big sometimes for that. It's It's more of a smaller It's not a massive garage to put, you know,
>> in. >> You're talking. You're good. >> Sorry. So, that's the one thing is it's more or less that if a trailer needs to go in for uh the big time is the winter. We like to keep that stuff inside in the winter. The trucks stay out, but it's more of our our trailers are what we
need to use all summer to keep the business going. And when they sit outside for the winter time, the hydraulics, everything like that just, you know, it really puts a big toll. So, we do need some area to put them in for the winter as well as put some of the extra parts in and just our day-to-day
operations. >> Okay. Thank you. Word members, anybody at this moment? >> I was just Mr. Franco, >> as far as the garage, is that something you could reposition because I know it's real tight on the property line. >> Yeah. Is that more of a question for
civil I think our engineer could be able to address that. >> Okay. All right. Thank you. >> You know, I have one more question. You know, one of the drawings shows that uh at least maybe six or seven or eight sheds will be moved out to make room for
your uh parking and whatever else. So, you will have less number of sheds on on the property. Then >> they'll kind of get shifted. >> Everything will just get shifted. So it'll be a little crowded on the one side, but they'll just more get shifted down so that they flow a little better.
>> Okay. >> Board professionals, questions for Mr. Hines about his testimony. >> Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Um, one question that I raised in my review that maybe um, you could respond to is that from looking at the site plan um, and in
reviewing kind of the aerial data um, and historical imagery to understand how the property has existed over the years. I noticed that to the to the west um, the adjacent property there's a little bit of encroachment onto that property.
>> Yes. Um, and I I guess I'm I'm going to recommend to the board and to to the applicant that that be eliminated. Uh, for one reason being that I believe it would require additional Dvarian relief. I believe it's under ownership, common
ownership with this property, but regardless, it it didn't pre-exist this zone. It it is a recent phenomenon. So, I would um one recommend that that be corrected. Okay. um otherwise D1 variance would be required for relief on
that property because the use is not permitted. Um but also in the future how that could be controlled. Is there going a could a fence be put up there or could it just be something that is monitored you know or or a condition of approval? >> Right. Yeah, we just we can keep that
monitored um and just pull that stuff a little bit further back so that it's not on that line over on that side. >> Okay. Okay. And that won't create any issues for display or circulation anyway. >> No. >> Okay. Thank you very much. >> Welcome,
>> Mr. Burr. Any questions for Mr. Heshack? >> A few. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Um Jason, you had mentioned u when you get deliveries three or four times a week. They're via a 52 foot trailer. >> Correct. >> And just just clarify for me, when it
enters the site, it comes in off of 22 into one of the existing driveway openings. >> Correct. And then it it it traverses to the middle of the site. Does it then exit to the north on the private road driveway behind your property? >> Yes. It comes around.
>> Okay. It's lab labeled as Easter a >> so it exits onto Easter >> and then right onto the highway. So it's seamlessly it's just a nice seamless loop. and in in your time overseeing the operations and having that truck deliver
no problems with access or Easter a itself. It's >> never it functions efficiently. >> It it's per it's perfect. >> Okay. And just describe for us. So, um there I guess there's a fenced in area. There's a fence line that runs across
the middle of the site. >> Correct. >> Is that closed >> in off hours when the business is closed? But it's open during the day. During the day it's open. Yes. >> Do you have display products in that fenced in area like >> a few a few items? >> Okay. >> But not generally.
>> Public typically doesn't >> Right. >> Okay. >> And >> um but that >> right. >> Okay. And that fence is in good shape. >> Yes. >> And there's no no plans to improve or replace that fence where it is now? >> No.
>> Okay. Um, you had mentioned a break room or I think maybe the break room operations and and I thought I heard you say that it was going to be taking place within the new building. It was Did I misar? >> Yes, there's a small break room in the
new building >> cuz there's also a small building labeled as I think proposed break room. Is that correct or >> Oh. Oh, is that what >> are you going off of that?
>> So, that's what's pre that's pre-existing. That's there. So, one of the sheds to the rear functions now as a break room. >> Yeah. It's not a shed. It's it's the original. Yeah. It's It's been on the property.
>> Okay. >> So, that >> multiunctional space. >> Yeah. And and that's where so like um there's so that has just a microwave and refrigerator in there. >> Okay. >> So that's where usually the outside so our outside crew go when they don't want
to get the office dirty >> and sit at somebody's desk right now. >> Is that going to remain? Yes. That's one of the buildings to remain. >> Yes. >> Okay. >> And that has electric service and all that stuff. >> And the use is going to stay pretty consistent with how it operates now. >> Yes. >> Okay. All right. Now I understand. um
the the the shed display areas where you had mentioned you have maybe 75 pieces of shed, gazebo, right, >> whatever it is scattered around the property. Do the locations of those products ever change or you know if some
if a customer comes in and buys a shed from that location >> when you replace it does the new display shed generally go right there. >> Sometimes something doesn't get put back >> just because of our lead time and things like that. So there might be a blank
space um until it gets restocked. Like in the winter time it gets empty that there's you know 10 sheds out there compared to 30 on that that area. So it just it all depends on what's coming in, what's going out.
>> Okay. All right. Um and then we heard testimony about number of employees on site, um hours of operation. anything changing from the way the business operates today to if this was to be approved how it would function or
everything you testifi testified to how it operates now and how it will continue that's the plan >> okay very good thank you >> thank you >> thank you Mr. Chairman >> sorry Mrs. Does that mean you have another question? Did you have a question?
>> Okay. You know, I have a question regarding your uh site at present has like a septic system and a well. Why are you planning to put a new septic system and not connect the township sewer line?
>> Unfortunately, we do not have sewer on that part of Route 22. >> Don't have sewer line in that area? >> No. Oh, >> we are the unfortunate part of Route 22. >> Okay. And how about water line? >> Same thing. That's why we have a new well going in.
>> Oh, >> and I'm sure you'll have your engineer testify to this as well or not true. >> Okay. Thank you. >> All right. >> Yeah. I wish we did, but we don't. >> With that, let me just pause for a moment and see if there are any
questions from the public for any of the testimony that Mr. Sheek has made this evening. And seeing none, we'll close that portion. Any final questions from the board members? So, Mr. Sullivan, where do we go from
here? >> Our next witness will be our architect, Mr. Wangle. >> Thank you. We have to swear him in too. We have to swear him in. Okay. It looks like we'll give you a minute or
two to set up your visual aids. You're going to need to set that up so our board professionals can see that as well. Looks like we have both analog and digital coming. Okay. Then would you raise your right
hand, please? I'll swear you. Do you solemnly swear that the testimony you will give to this board will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. So help you, God. And would you state your full name for the record, please? You can use the mic right at the podium there if you'd like.
>> My name is Elvin Angel uh from Angle Architects in Lancaster, Pennsylvania. >> Can you spell that please? >> E N G L >> and your first name? >> Elvin. E L V I N.
>> Mr. Engel, welcome. I think you already swore you're you've been No. Yes, you please consider yourself to be under the oath. Would you just review um your professional background and education with the board, please? >> Okay. Yeah, I'm uh goes back a few
years. I'm a graduate of Drexel University with a bachelor of architecture. Uh I've worked for I started my I started Angle Architects in 1990. So, been at it for a few years before that. I got my internship in at an architectural firm in Lancaster prior
to that. So, I'm registered in a few states. I started out registered in Pennsylvania. Uh, I'm registered registered architect in New in New Jersey, New York, and a few other states. >> And your license in New Jersey is current.
>> Yes, it is. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Thank you. Um, now, Mr. Wangle, uh, you had prepared the architectural plans that we have submitted to the board. >> Yes, I did. And could you explain to the
board um what we are proposing in terms of the structures? >> Okay. It's a uh it's a very simple building. It's uh >> I'm sorry, but before you start pointing to those boards, do we have those already or is that new? >> Yeah. So, Mr. Engel, these are um just
duplicates of what we've previously submitted to the board. Correct. >> Yeah, they I took some of the I took some of the clutter off, some of the notes so that it's a little easier to read. other than that. >> Okay. So, we're going to mark it then. Let's let's mark the one on my left to
A2. All right. And then I'm going to ask you to describe what A2 is and then we'll go to the next one. >> Okay. A2 is is uh the second floor plan. There's a second floor in part of the
building. Um the middle part the building is um >> I know this is going to be difficult for you because I see you trying to talk into the mic and point to the if you want to give him the handheld while he's pointing and >> it may work.
>> You can switch off. See if that works for you. >> Okay. Um yeah, on sheet A2, uh there's a building is 40 foot by 80 foot and both sides, both 80 foot
lengths have a 10-ft uh concrete uh a roof covered porch. So when you include that roof covered porch on both sides, then that would be 60 overall 60 foot by 80 foot. So, there's
4,800 square feet under roof. And like I said, it's considered a two-story building. This is actually the second floor plan. It's um there's a 20 20 foot section at both ends that has a
second floor. On the left side are two offices on the second floor. On the right side is mechanical area and some storage. And that's it for the for the second floor.
The the middle the middle section is all open to the roof. It's just a one-story building open to the roof. Then if we go to the other drawing >> or you go to that drawing, we're going to mark that A3. >> A3. >> Okay. >> I think Mr. Sullivan can help you out
there. >> And John, just put today's date, too. I can't see the first one you marked, but just so that we have today's date on it. Yeah, I have it on. >> Okay, thank you. >> Okay, the uh and the first floor
>> I'm sorry. So, just give us a description of what A3 is. Is that the first floor? >> Okay. On on sheet A3? >> Yes. >> The first floor is the whole center part is just uh an open area for a showroom.
And the 20 foot on each end. Now the 20 uh underneath the second floor, the 20 foot on the left side, there's uh three offices there. A large a large uh it's
sort of an open office area plus two clo two enclosed offices. on the right hand side is uh it's a utility room and two two restrooms and in the back right corner
is a break room for employees and other than that it's uh pretty much open for product display in this big open area in the in the middle >> and that space in the middle is open right to the roof >> goes the whole way to the roof. >> Thank you. Now, this this building uh
it's a woodframe building and it um it has uh pre-engineered roof trusses and it's we call it a post and beam building. It's uh years ago people
called them pull barns because they were used a lot on farms for for uh farm buildings. So it's uh they have there's a post every eight foot and then between the posts are 2 by8 studs 24 in on
center and it's of course it's insulated walls insulated ceiling and I have um and those those that are not familiar with um a pool building or
a post and beam building it. Now, this is actually a foundation plan. This would be A4, I guess. >> A4 Okay, these these circles you'll see on this sheet A4, they're the foundations that underneath
each one of the posts. And what they do, they come in with an augur and the size of those are based the diameter of those are based on they're engineered based on the amount of weight coming down that post and it's based on 3,000 square foot bearing capacity of the soil and that
type of thing. So each one of these circles has a concrete 12 in thick and most of them are like 26 inch diameter. So they dig them with an augur. They put uh 12 in of concrete down there, set the
wood post in there, and then fill it up with dirt. And then uh and then later after the concrete's poured, then they come in and build the stud wall between the posts. Um,
and a building if you took if you took this building shown on a a A3 well or A or A2, but if you took a knife and just slice this building and then
what you would see then we have a section showing how that building is constructed. I guess this is A5. >> A5. Yes. >> A5 is uh three details. One of them is a building section. If you just cut the
building in half, this is what it would look like on the lower left corner. It's um it has an eight in that center part that's open the whole way to the roof. It would be 18 foot from the concrete
floor to the bottom to the second floor ceiling. And like I said, the the roof is framed with pre-engineered roof trusses at 24 in on center. And then we'd have the it' be a drywall
ceiling with insulation on top of the drywall. And the attic area, what we call the attic area up there is is vented. We have a continuous ridge vent and uh vented sophet so it gets circulation up there to deal with
condensation. The walls then are insulated with uh fiberglass uh fiberglass insulation and uh then the concrete floor has crushed stone under it. The um
sec the section on the >> actually let me let me just stop. I think you've given enough detail on the construction. >> Okay. >> Okay. Yeah, I have um elevations
what the building will look like. And then we do have a another drawing then with the colors. >> The elevations will be >> that' be A6. And here's another one that would be A7.
>> Excuse me if you could put the uh rendering on the screen please. Thank you. So sheet A6 shows a front elevation and you can see this uh front porch roof and then we have a reverse gable over top of
the entrance. The um the siding is board and batten siding but it's a metal board and batten and then the the the roof is also a metal roof. Then we have these three cupulas up here. Now the height of the building from
from floor level to the very peak is just shy of 26 feet. Then the cupulas or to the very tip of the cupulus the very top is another six foot. From there up to the point of the roof in the cupulus.
>> Uh then >> and that height is is permitted in the ordinance. Correct. >> Pardon? at height is permitted in the ordinance, right? >> Yeah. >> Yes, it is. >> Then drawing A7 is the the rear elevation and
it's basically the same there. Again, it has that 10-ft porch covered porch. And at the bottom, the draw drawing on the bottom shows the end uh of the building shows the porch on both sides. And it's what what would show up as uh on the end
of the left side. Now the right side has a double door up here with a protective guard on the outside of the door there. And that's to get u any equipment or whatever up there that needs it replaced or whatever. >> Is that a window or something that that
you're showing on the left side? Yeah, >> it's from the second floor, right? It's on the second floor, right? What is it exactly? >> Is it a window or >> Yeah, it's it's a double door that u if
they need to get some equipment up there, uh it's a utility room up there. So if they need to get some equipment up there or whatever, they can open double doors and then this this uh guard is here that
if that door is open sometime uh and they're not taking anything in and out, that guard protects people from going out there. >> The floor plan you show the window opens up inside in the building, not outside. >> Yeah. Th those doors will swing in and
those doors will swing in and then this will be on the outside as a protective guard. >> Okay. Okay. It's a window. Okay. Okay. >> Yeah, we put that. Now, as far as the colors of the
building, um, there'll be a stone base. >> So, we're going to just mark that first. Okay, John. That's A8. >> That'd be A8. Yeah. >> Yeah, that's the front facade with the colors that were selected. There's um there's a beige the uh siding will be
sort of a beige color siding with a darker darker post on the outer edge of the porch. And we'll have stone up to the window sill height and uh a charcoal colored metal roof
on the on the um lean tube roofs out over the concrete and out over the porch and also the roof of the main building. So that's that's kind of the colors that we think it uh we'd like to use on the building.
>> Can I ask you a question? What's the um height of the building from the bottom all the way to the top of those three >> up to here? >> Yeah. >> Okay. Is 26T to here and another 6 foot there. So it's uh 32 feet.
>> Okay. >> To the very tip the top of the cup. >> I have a question if I may. Um there's no handicapped access to the second floor. >> No, there's not. Um the whole first floor is handicapped. What's on the
second floor? There's office two offices up there. There's also offices uh on the lower level. So according to the code, you can have something up there. For instance, a break room. Suppose we had a break room up there. That's the only break room in the building.
>> That would have to be you'd have to be able to get to the second floor. So >> right, >> this partic the way this is set up um there will be no handicapped individuals on the second floor. >> That's that is correct. >> Thank you. >> Any board members have any additional
questions for Mr. Engel? >> Yeah, I do. Uh what is anticipated to be displayed in that 18 foot ceiling area? >> That big in that big center area. I'll let Jason handle that. What's going to be what's going your display in that
central showroom area? >> No, no, no. You come up here. If you're going to answer that with a microphone, please. >> Sorry about that. So, in that center display area, uh the plan is to put a pergola on the inside. Um also display
um one of our fish ponds on the center. Uh we'd like to have a above raised pond in the center, but it's more or less just for the you know, the height of the height of the building is going to be what was spec on that plan. Um but we do
want a little bit of height so it's not like you're walking into a cramped tight space. So, we want it to be nice and airy um so that it's like walking outside. >> Great. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Let's um ask our board professionals if
they have any questions for Mr. Angel and his testimony this evening. >> I just have one question. Is is there any lighting being proposed on the exterior of the building on any of the facades? for sight lighting. I think you're I
think that'll be discussed, but that's >> But no building mounted lighting is is my question. >> Yeah, there there were wall packs in the uh in the package. >> All right, we'll wait to hear from your engineer. >> Yeah, thank you. >> Um I just had a question. Was there any
intent on putting any signage on this building? >> Any signage? There was >> just just the main pylon sign out in in the open area. Okay. All right. I mean, I like the fact that you're consolidating everything. You're kind of
cleaning up the whole site. Um, gives it a much more professional and I I do really appreciate the architecture. So, I think it's very good. >> Thank you. Appreciate that, >> Mr. Engel. Thank you. I'm going to ask the public if there are any questions
for you at this time. And seeing none, we're going to close that portion of the meeting. Thank you, sir. >> Our next witness will be our project engineer, Mitchell Ardman. >> So, I'm sorry. Would you repeat what you
said? I was distracted for a moment. >> Oh, our next witness is our project engineer, Mitchell Ardman. >> Thank you. >> Would you raise your right hand, please? Do you solemnly swear that the testimony you will give to this board will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? >> Yes, I do. >> And again, your name for the record, please.
>> First initial F. Mitchell Ardman, A R D M. >> Thank you. >> And Mr. Ardman, would you state your qualifications for the board? >> Certainly. I'm a licensed professional engineer, state of New Jersey for over 30 years. I've been testifying before
boards uh throughout the state over that time for site plan subdivisions and I've testified in Bridgewater for over those 30 years. It's been a little while before I've been before this board, but I have been here in the past and also had the opportunity to work with your engineering department in town for a
good part of those 30 years. >> And your license remains in good standing. >> Yes, it does. >> Mr. Thank you. >> So, accept it? >> Yes. Thank you. Yeah, we accept your credentials. Thank you. >> Thank you, Mr. Chairman. >> Um why don't we start perhaps describe
the site as it currently exists and then we can go into the um you can uh and as part of that, you know, just address whether there's any steep slopes, environmental constraints, and then we can get into the uh demolition and the improvements. >> Certainly. Now, I'm going to work from
the screen here and if you see up on on your screens as well. So, uh this is our dimension plan. Uh these were submitted about uh 10 days ahead. The renderings here, sheet three, dimension plan. Um uh
>> is this any different than what we have? >> Colorized. >> It's a colorized version. >> Okay. So, we're going to mark that A9. >> Yes. >> Which is just a rendered site plan, right? >> That's correct. Sheet three with the revision date of the 121025.
Come on. Sorry about that. Okay, so as you heard, we're along Route 22 on the westbound lane and so north is is up on this plan and again lots lot 16
block 821. Uh we have the rendered area BA which basically outlines the site is approx just under 3 acres 2.955 acres. Um as noted, you've heard testimony, it's been um operating as a uh a garden
uh supply shed location for for going on 40 plus years uh with the similar operation. Uh this is showing the uh proposed condition. Um I probably for some perspective also should go to the existing condition also.
Um and there we go. So this is a colored rendering uh or not a color rendering. This is a color version of an aerial map Google aerial image. >> Okay. So John, we're going to mark that one A10. Right. The aerial map or an
aerial Google photo. Right. >> Right. blow this up a little bit. Once again, you've heard the testimony. Route 22 on the bottom of the site again, north up. Uh so you come into the site presently on this right entrance
drive and the exit uh to the left a little bit to the west of the property. Again, you can see where the existing main building was on the property. uh the parking area. You heard Jason testify that it it does work okay now,
but you'll see as part of our site plan. A lot of my testimony will be a focus along with the building that you saw, which was a major upgrade and consolidation. We're trying to do that for the site as well. Um you can see the areas of the sheds which are stored on
the property. discussion earlier involved kind of the front portion of the site which I'm circling here which is kind of the the public portion the fencing that Mr. Burr had asked about uh goes you know towards the center of the property or so and that's where that
kind of demarcates between the public and then the back of house if you will the storage in this area. Um, so, um, that's what you see on the site. To the west of the property, you heard is in common ownership. That is a wooded lot.
Uh, there's access to the properties to the east and the north. This is basically a uh, a private easement or drive on the right side and goes up to the northern end, the easter, which is on the top or northern a of or northern
side of the site here. And that's a private rightway in that location. Uh but again, as uh was described, the trucks uh pull right into the site and have an area for drop off and then they can exit right onto Easter a pull back
out and have very good circulation in and around the property. And as I'll show on the proposed site plan, they'll continue to have that. again the C3 commercial zone and there's some uh residential properties to the
north and some commercial properties uh to the right or to the east. Uh there no environmental constraints on the property, no wetlands, no stream areas. Uh also there no steep slopes on the property, maybe 3 to 5% general slope on
the property. Uh so no steep slopes uh on the lot. Uh, regarding any easements, our survey didn't on the property itself turn up any easements either, and we're not proposing any with this plan.
That switches back. There we go. Okay, we're now >> Mr. Ardman, before you leave A10, can you just bring A10 back up? So, just for clarification on something that was mentioned um earlier by our planners, you're looking at the left side property line. There's some of those I guess shed
buildings off the property. That >> That's correct. >> Right. >> And so the proposal here is to do what with those buildings? I >> think Mr. Anishek had generally agreed that those would be brought easterly so that they would not encroach on that on that property line
>> and and the kind of the the most encroachment is not further up there. It's when you're looking at that the bottom left corner. So yeah, into the property line left of there. Um that's really you can't see it on this aerial on the image there, but you can see it
very distinctly on the survey. Um showing, you know, maybe 10 sheds. They're obscured by the by the trees in that aerial photo, but that's probably that's more what I was looking at because that that's not an inch or two. That's, you know, 20 ft. So, all of the
all of the buildings that are off the property line are going to be removed from that property and either relocated onto this property or just disposed of. Correct. >> Okay. >> Correct. Okay.
Okay. Back over to the um the next exhibit which was nine I believe. So, this is the again the color rendering of the site. And again, we're going to continue to have the same locations of the entrance
drive and the exit drive along Route 22. Uh this is the location of the 3200 square foot new building that you saw the nice rendering of on the site. The garage, the second building in question is on the westerly side of the property
here. And to Mr. Franco's question, it is set at at 10 feet off the property line. Um, you know, we we felt that was given the locations, the other developments, and that it's common ownership there, we felt that was still
an appropriate spot on the on the site for it, especially with the other functions that go on in that area. But we can talk more about that as as we go forward. Um the um so the site as I said you'll come into
here the parking lot and again in the theme of we're trying to clean things up on the site. This will be a new paved parking area. So you can see the spaces will be well delineated. The space right in front will be an ADA accessible space with access right into the building.
There'll be a total of 17 spaces on the site. uh which as you heard Jason say may have a handful of uh staff working there and eight to 10 um visitors or clients would be more than uh uh busy
for a peak season. So the 17 spaces are are more than enough for this site. And again, as you heard, um, and we ran the turning templates, uh, but I think you heard from operationally that 30 years of of business is as good as a
turning template to be honest with you, that they have good access through the site. It's not any backup on 22 and they can pull through the property, have good circulation throughout the property. Um there was a question about loading I
think in the the planning report. So there's no need for a loading dock per se, but the offloading area is as you come into the property. Uh and so we can designate if is desired, but I think just in general, you heard the testimony of where loading occurs and it's out of
the kind of public area and out of the parking area. Regarding signage, uh there's that existing sign that's been there for forever along uh Route 22 and that's just going to be reconstructed. Basically, the top
portion, the sheds will be 25 square feet and there's a a pond sign and that's a detail sheet on on our uh in our set of plans that'll be 10 square feet and it'll be 15 feet high to match what's out there now. and the setback
will be the same as it is now right along the frontage here of the property. In general, in regards to the site uh drainage and sloping uh and improvements, it generally slopes from
the north the rear out to Route 22. Uh those drainage patterns will remain unchanged with this new plan. Uh but we are providing a series of inlets throughout the site to pick up that drainage and control it better than just kind of sheet flowing out the drive.
There is drainage along Route 22 and an existing pipe that goes through our site. So we're going to tie our new drainage on site into that new pipe. Again, a benefit of kind of the cleaning up the site is the reduction in imperous
area. All that hard pack stone that you see out there now, uh, coverage will be reduced from 77.9% to just about 70.9%. So, a 7% reduction over close to three
acres is is reduction for the site and that'll help improve, you know, be part of the storm water management that we're providing is by virtue of that reduced impermanence area. Uh, another upgrade is is landscape and lighting.
Right now, we're going to be providing street trees along uh, Route 22. Uh, there are none existing as uh, Mrs. Martin in her report noted uh, that, but we are providing per the ordinance the required number and spacing along Route
22. So, that's an upgrade from what was out there. There'll be nice plantings around the foundation of the building and the parking area, shrub plantings along as well as along this side of the parking area. And that will help shield some of the cars uh in the parking area
from Route 22, that hedge road that we're going to plant um basically on the bottom or the south section of that driveway or yeah, that driveway loop. As far as lighting goes, there will be some wallpack mounted lights on on either
side of the building. And then there will be a couple poles in the low at at 14 foot height. There'll be LED lights. So, they'll get um good downward throw. There'll be good cut off. So, those won't
>> go >> You're doing okay with the mic. Is really how you hold it. If you put it in front of your mouth, it picks it up pretty well. >> Very good. Okay. Um uh as far as Mr. Burr had a comment about on our lighting plan, we did show
some higher foot candles along Route 22. Those are actually because we because we went out um and modeled the lights there. They're the um the highway cobraheads that are actually out there and that's what throws off the extra light. It's not the proposed lights. So
that's really just what there is along Route 22. But what we're proposing are on our site again low-level LED lights with good cut offs there. So that's an upgrade for the site as well. Uh question was raised by Ms. Aam about uh
well and septic unfortunately and over the years I've done a few properties along this stretch on 22 and search as we can. It's if you go across the highway to the south, way south of the properties back there are the first um
sanitary lines that Bridgewater has there. There's nothing in this stretch of 22. So in in the rear part of the property, we did a passing soils test and we did a full design which was submitted as you heard. Uh we have approval from the township board of
health and that that note has been submitted. So that's approved and we'll go in this rear section and again that was a lot of gravel area. So that's one of the areas that'll be changed over to lawn and then a new well will be put in the front kind of corner of the building
here to service it to replace the old well. Um so that's pretty much it from the site. you'll I don't want to have a lot of duplicate testimony. Just a couple um that was site improvements um for the
building. The existing uh front yard setback is just at 46.2 ft and as we're moving the the building back on the site, it'll it'll improve to 84 feet. Still a variance situation, but a big improvement from where it is. Again, the
sideyard setback is now 38.3 feet. That'll be improved to 50 feet. And as I said, the lot coverage, although over, will be a 7% reduction from near 78% to just under 71%.
And um the other improvements, the uh floor area ratio, uh we're well below uh the permitted is three in this zone, and we're just over 0.04. 04. Um, just for clarification, we we're counting the
kind of usable uh buildings on the site, which would be the shaded ones, the that that break room or or other space in the back, the garage, and the new the new building. We're not counting the sheds in that F, but all
the sheds are counted and impervious because they're generally on top of of stone in those areas. So, I think in general that hits, you know, the site improvements that we'll be doing and as I said, we see this as a chance to upgrade a site that hasn't had
an upgrade in many years. Um, if there's any questions or I can go through uh engineering and planning um reports as well. Before we continue, let me just ask the board members if there are any questions
for Mr. Ardman relative to his testimony so far. >> I have a question about there was indication there's no uh easements anywhere on the property. I believe the the residence to the north was the original owner, Mr. Russell, who's
listed on the on the listing sheet. I've been in that residence. Is that a uh but you were indicating that there's a rightaway sort of along the uh eastern edge of the property. Is that dedicated
to the current residents of that home? So the to the to the right, correct? Just to the east that paved way there is and we have the the call out on our plan here that it is see if I can blow that up.
Yeah, that it's a basically a a right ofway running north from Highway Route 22 to Easter Avenue, reserving the rights and benefits thereof basically to to lot. So, it give those benefits to the the owners of
those properties for use up there. We're not it's not that's why I said no easements, but it is an easement adjacent to our property. >> Okay. It's adjacent. Okay. as well as the uh is Easter Avenue a rightway or is that a dedicated street?
>> It is not. >> Thank you. >> Mrs. Amin, do you have a question? >> Yeah. You know, uh going back to your um drawing that you have there in front of the new building, there will be a
parking lot, right? Is that going to be asphalt paving? Uh >> yes it will. It'll be asphalt >> and the other parts of the uh lot there won't be any asphalt only that area. >> That's correct. The lighter gray will remain the gravel that's there now. So
kind of the to the public those areas will be now be paved and kind of the storage area will remain gravel. >> Okay. With that, let me take a moment and ask our board professionals if they have questions. Now, we're we're kind of in
the middle of our timing issue here. So, uh let me ask first, um Mr. Sullivan, I'm sure that Mr. Ardman can come back as required. >> Uh >> because I don't think we're going to get through this and we have a split meeting
time that we're trying to adhere to. >> What is our cut off time? >> We we're already at it technically. So that's why I'm trying to manage the the time appropriately. >> Right. So I mean I'm close. I unless there are many questions. I I would like
to finish only because >> No, and I would like you to finish. I just want to get a gauge of our time and how we can manage it. >> Well, I'm done on on direct for sure and okay >> and see. >> So board professionals, what do you
think timewise? Are we good? I have a few questions, but I don't think the question >> Okay, let's do it. >> Take a ton of time. I don't know about Katherine. >> Yeah, let's let's at least try and get done with your testimony and questions that people may have for you.
>> Most my answers will be comply. >> I understand. Mr. Burr, you want to start? >> In that case, I don't know if I have any questions. >> Most >> no. Um Mitch, so a lot of testimony about lot coverage on the property and
um how this project is proposing to reduce the coverage from close to 80% down to 70 still over what's allowed in the zone. But one of the one of the requests I made in my report was um to provide uh I guess a calculation a table
showing the calculations of the existing and proposed coverage as well as just better defining on the plan uh what exists what's going to be removed and what's proposed as far as coverage. You'll comply with that? >> Yes, we will. >> I think it's just important to have a good baseline of of information here if
this application's approved. >> Sure. from a drainage perspective. And again, I know it it it it kind of goes handinhand with the coverage, but one of the comments I had in my report was understanding that you're reducing the coverage and you are putting a few
inlets in. One of the requests I had was, is there a way to capture the runoff from the new showroom building on site instead of discharging it directly to the state's storm system? You know, I I had mentioned in my report possibly a dry well. It doesn't need to be a dry
well. It could be a rain garden. It could frankly be incorporated as a some type of land landscape feature that might go hand inand with the business. Is that something that the applicant would be willing to work on? >> Certainly. I think a a positive was our reduction of impervious, but I think I
recall the last time I was at the board, we had a similar discussion on a project and I understand the board's desire to reduce storm water. So, the short answer is yes. We can work together to come up with a plan. >> Okay, great. Um, we heard testimony about the well and septic. There was a a
memo from the township fire official. Ordinarily, that that memo is something that gets carried through an approval and then an applicant would have to address that through site plan compliance. Um, to the best of your ability, you'll comply with the fire
officials comments. I know he had a few requests in there that might be difficult to address, but but you guys will will iron all those issues out to the extent possible. >> Yes, that was our plan to work out with the fire official on those comments. Yep. >> Okay. And then um we heard from Mr.
Sullivan earlier that there was a letter of no interest issued by the state by uh Department of Transportation. In their letter though, they referenced a furniture store and I raised that in my report. Um do do you have any information on that? But I know you have a traffic engineer here, but I didn't
want to I didn't want to bother him with just that one question. >> Sure. And we can cut to that because we worked with Mr. Peniac's office on putting that information together. So you've heard about the IT materials. There's no category per se for gardener
shed sales. So you you submit it, you tell them what they're doing, but then you pick a category that you believe fits the best and DOT has to agree and acknowledge that. So they basically agreed and acknowledged that was the closest category because it's, you know,
they're big items. You don't go out and buy a shed every day. You don't go out and buy uh uh dining room furniture every day. So it was a similar category. That's why it was designated. >> That's what I thought. I just wanted to make sure I was clear. Two two more quick ones. Um site lighting.
I appreciate you saying that the existing lights along Route 22, the cobra heads are what's kind of pushing you guys over your your foot candles over the the property line, but did I hear correctly that any of the new lighting will be shielded or cut off so as not to provide glare to any adjacent
properties or the highway? >> Correct. They're all downward lights. No, there will be no glare. Yes. >> And then I did have some other general comments in my report asking for some minor revisions. Uh, I take it that you have no problem with addressing those. >> We'll comply with all those questions.
>> Very good. Thank you. >> Thanks, Mr. >> Thank you, Mr. Chairman. >> Thank you. And with respect to your suggestions about storm water management and some of the solution you proposed, is that something that the two engineers will work out or would you like that as a condition of approval? Well, I I think
if if the board agrees that the applicant should should try to do a little bit more with drainage given the nature of the relief that's requested, I think it should be incorporated as a condition, but the specifics can certainly I would be comfortable working it out with the applicants engineer if
the board is okay with that. >> Yes. And the the applicant's engineer is okay with that. >> Certainly. Yes. >> Great. Thank you. Mr. Oler, are you okay with that? >> Have it. Yes. >> Okay. Miss Arman, did you have questions? I the question I did have was uh asked and answered through Mr. Burr.
So I have no further questions. That's okay. >> Okay. With that, are there any members of the public that would care to pose some questions to Mr. Ardman about his testimony this evening? And seeing none,
uh we'll close the questions portion. And does that conclude your testimony, Mr. Ardman? >> Yes, it does. >> Okay. Mr. Sullivan. Um, I'd like to sort of end your presentation at this time, but not without asking you, are you comfortable where we stand? And because
we're going to have to come back and conclude your your case on another meeting. >> Uh, yeah. Our only remaining witness is our professional planner. >> Yes. >> So, out of curiosity, um, I've never quite uh done it this way before a
board. Um, is that how you're going to proceed in the future? is um you going to split time between the applicants? >> To answer your question directly, yes, we have an a unreasonably packed schedule and oftent times we're
scheduling two applicants per meeting with the understanding that they'll split the time depending upon the nature of the application. Sometimes we're able to get through one um and other times we're not. So, we ask that in both instances, the applicants come back and
it has to do with our ability to meet the time to act portion um once an application is deemed complete, getting them on the schedule and at least getting started. So, I hope that's acceptable to you in this instance. >> Um yeah, certainly. I just was curious
whether this was a one-time thing or that's how you're going to proceed in the future. Nancy, I I'll defer to you as well, but I think I did an adequate job of explaining it, but you tell me. >> I I agree. You explained it perfectly. We have u worked out some arrangement so
that it doesn't have to go to August the continuence. >> Yes. >> So, >> so to answer your question, yes, we're kind of in this mode where we have to split meetings, get testimony started, and then ask that you return. Understood.
>> And we apologize for the inconvenience it may cause to the applicants, but it's the best solution we have at this time. >> Mr. Oler, do you have any further comments or something to address Mr. Sullivan? >> No, no. I I do want to check with Nancy
though on time. Where are we on do we need an extension? >> And thank you, Mr. Rodman. >> And well, let me start with the let me back up a question. When what dates do we have available? available but >> next available
>> extension of time I mean time to act is 616 >> 616 um and we're looking at 69 so it would go to June 9th that I heard
Yes. >> Okay. >> The planner is not available that evening and he's the remaining witness. >> Yeah, our planner uh indicates he would not be available. Um, you know, the best
I can do right at the moment is, you know, ask for the board's indulgence to allow him to provide his testimony this evening. >> Well, here's why we can't do that. So, the next application is a cell tower application, and you know, we have a
shot clock with that application. So, we need to get it going, and I want to give them sufficient time. So, so we're we can put you to uh a different date other than June 9th. Um, I think I'd ask at this point to carry us to June 9th. Of
course, we'd ask that there be no further notice. Um, even if it's a placeholder at this point and we're going to see what we can figure out in between. >> Understood. We'll do that. And although we have a week or two after that for uh time, I'd like to get an extension of
time through our July meeting just in case something happens and that meeting gets cancelled like you know we can get out to uh July whatever 31st. >> Yeah, absolutely. No problem there. >> 28th >> July 28th would be the meeting in
>> the July meeting. All right. So we'll have an extension of time through July 28th and that's fine. >> So with everybody being in agreement, Mr. Sullivan, thank you for your indulgence. I know it's difficult, but we appreciate the consideration given what we're dealing with as a board. Uh
Mr. Oler, we're good to go. >> Well, so just for the public, uh this matter is being adjourned. It is being at this point it is being carried to the June 9th meeting at 7 PM in this room with no further notices from the applicant. Now we are good to go.
>> Great. Thank you very much. With that, we're going to take a 10-minute recess and we'll be back at that time and talk with our next applicant, CX Towers. June June. Um, first we'll start Nancy with a roll
call. >> Yes, I'm here. >> Mr. Wedelli, >> uh, here. >> Mrs. Zamin, >> here. >> Mr. Franco, >> here. >> Miss Rose, >> I came back. >> Mr. Gi, >> here.
Mr. Kawuchcci >> here >> and Mr. Mcnella >> here >> and all of our board professionals are here. >> Great. Thank you very much. So, we're going to continue in the business of this evening with application number
25-020 ZB. This is the initial hearing for CX Tower Leasing and representing the applicant is >> David Kenny, attorney with Snyder and Snyder. uh representing the applicant C Octo leasing. There's also two
co-licants, Verizon and T-Mobile. >> Okay. And please spell your last name. >> Kenny keen ny. >> I'm sorry, I just missed it. >> Ken Ny. >> And how do you pronounce it? >> Kenny. >> Kenny. >> Okay. So, it could be any name, right?
No, I'm kidding. You get that all the time. Thank you. Um, so let's introduce your or if you have an opening statement you'd like to make, certainly entertain that now and then you can introduce us to the people that'll be testifying this evening.
>> Thank you so much. Um, so the application here tonight is for CX Towers, Verizon, and T-Mobile. Um, this is uh a property that has the water tank on it. Um, it's located uh, sorry, located at 719 Route 202. Um, this is
set back behind the residential property that's in front. Um, so it's a postage parcel lot that has the existing water utility on it and there's existing antennas on the the water tower um for the four main operating carriers in the country, T-Mobile, Verizon, AT&T, and
Dish Wireless as well. Um, American Water has uh indicated regionally across the state in the area um that they do not want the carriers on their water tanks anymore. Um when they first were put on the water tanks, there was a lot less equipment, a lot less weight. Um
but these water tanks weren't really designed to be communication towers. Um and there's also been problems with coordinating maintenance. Um they've often needed temporary towers to do refurbishments or paintings of the tanks. Um and that's been kind of hurt,
you know, hurting cats, for lack of a better term, trying to get all of the carriers to relocate on a temporary tower for them to do the maintenance work on the water tank. um you know as as uh some history there has been temporary towers here. The temporary towers were used at about 140 ft. Um
we'll be discussing the site that we're proposing which is 145 ft. So it's really in keeping with um the height that's been used in past for the temporary towers uh whenever the water tank needed to be refurbished. Um there's also an issue with um accessing
the site and making sure that we secure the the water utility use. um you having anybody go on the site and doing the work. You know, sometimes there can be damage to the tank. Um sometimes there can also be um you know, issues with uh you know, having unrest, you know, having someone access the site that we
don't have a record of. Making sure that we have a proper uh record of everybody who's accessed the public water supply and restricting that access is very important. So, uh for all of those reasons, American Water has decided to tell the carriers that they need to vacate the water tank. Um so if we lose
this site um without a replacement site then all of those people that live travel and work in this area that are accustomed to having cellular service they'll have a gap in service if they lose these uh carriers without having a replacement site. So CX Towers has come
in to try to save this situation by providing a support structure that will support all four carriers that are currently operating on the water tower um and that will fill in any gap in service that would be created by the loss of that support structure uh without having a replacement in the
area. Um so essentially you know this is an existing site that those in the area are accustomed to. Um but the support structure uh is no longer able to be used for wireless equipment. So, our applicant is proposing a new wireless support structure to keep the
communications uh networks operating in the in the area that those in the uh those working and traveling and living are accustomed to >> and and with respect to your relationship with New Jersey American Water, uh how would you describe that continuing into the future?
>> Sure. So they they're the property owner and so CX American uh CX Towers has a lease with New Jersey American Water um for the location of the facility on their property. So we will be a tenant to uh New Jersey American Water. So they still want to have the use on their property. Um they just don't want to use
the same infrastructure that they're using for the water supply. >> Right. And with respect to access to the site though because they had expressed some concerns about security and so on and will you be offering testimony maybe
not this evening but will one someone be offering testimony as to how the site will be secure from both your equipment's point of view and New Jersey American waters? >> Absolutely. So the short answer is that we'll be proposing additional fencing to
separate the uses. We will also have security cameras located um so to help with additional uh restricting of the access and monitoring the site, but we we will be able to have testimony on that um later on. Maybe not tonight, but your application
>> and would like to accomplish as much as we can. We know that we appreciate your indulgence. We're working on a short schedule, a timeline that's very tight for everyone and we're doing our best to accommodate um your application knowing that we also have some additional time
constraints. So, what is your plan for this evening then? >> Um so, my plan for this evening is to uh have our two RF engineers discuss the RF testimony for the site. Um, again, because this is an existing site and it's really the answer is the the loss
of coverage resulting from the loss of uh the water tank site without a replacement site is fairly straightforward. This isn't a new gap being filled. Um, so we feel that that testimony could be accomplished tonight. And we note that you do have your radio frequency expert here tonight as well.
>> Yes. And you have two, >> correct? We have three. >> If we had two, would you have three? No, I'm just kidding. It's okay. We we have one for for T-Mobile and and one in general discussing height and RF emissions. So, we would like to call up uh Daniel Czech of Piercon. Uh he is T-Mobile's RF engineer.
>> Very well. Thank you. >> And we're going to ask you, I'm sure, to state your name for the record, and Mr. Roller is going to swear you in. >> Would you raise your right hand, please? Do you solemnly swear that the testimony you will give to this board will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? >> I do. >> And again, your name for the record?
>> Daniel Czech. last name CZ Czech C. >> Yes. >> Got it. >> Uh has he been ac accepted as an expert or >> No, no. Would you just review your um professional background and education,
please? >> Yes. Uh I have a bachelor's degree in engineering from NGIT with an emphasis on communication systems. I'm experienced running propagation analysis for several wireless carriers. I have calculated RF missions for compliance
for on several projects. I have over dozens of uh RF related trainings and certifications. I've been accepted as an RF expert before the board of Piscatoaway Paripony Union and Woodbridge. >> Very well.
>> Thank you. >> We'll accept your credentials. >> Thank you. >> Before we begin, I just want to swear in our um our professionals too. So would our folks please stand, raise your right hand? Do you solemnly swear that the testimony you'll give to this board will be the truth, the whole truth, and
nothing but the truth? >> And again, just for the record, our names, please. >> Thank you everyone. Okay, it's all yours. And then um just on the screen right now, um Daniel, if you could just explain where this is from. This is for
the board's record. This is part of the Piercon radio frequency justification report that was submitted with the application. Uh these are not any new or reproduced documents. They're just from uh the application materials that were submitted. >> Yeah, I understand that. But just for ease of keeping track, I'm going to mark
this as A1. Okay. >> So A1 is just titled T-Mobile existing 700 megahertz LTE coverage, right? >> That is correct. >> Correct. So Daniel, can you just explain uh what this map is showing? >> Yes. So this this map specifically shows
a section of Bridgewater where we have the subject site uh in the center of the map that's NJ08065B and uh this is the site in question that is currently on the water tank and uh currently provides coverage to this
area. Um the see that up. So for my reference, we do have >> Can can I get a clarification? It is this what you have is exhibit A in the report you submitted.
>> That is correct. >> Okay. >> U so in this map we have US highway 202 running left to right centrally located in the map. Then we also have US22 kind of in the upper section of the map.
And then these are both in like a darker shade of green. And then we have I287 in the top right hand corner that's in red. And then on this map specifically and it'll be these follow suit for subsequent maps we have uh coverage
shown uh as neg 94 DBM uh that is to signify inbuilding coverage. It is shown with a lighter green uh color hue on this map. We do have existing onair micro sites
for T-Mobile's network shown with blue markers scattered across the map. Um and specifically in the center we have NJ08065B. And in this map um that site is actively
propagating that T-Mobile's installation on this water tank site is at 85 ft. And um as we can see from this site, it is offering a centralized coverage that sort of
connects um US 202's coverage for in buildings. uh pro provides uh good coverage to the north of uh 202 as well as the south uh to the residential neighborhoods off of there
as well as the uh commercial buildings that span to the west of the site. Um >> Daniel, not not to just cut for timing, um can you just explain the the green is where where people expect to receive coverage or where they're receiving
coverage today? >> Correct. that is what dictates uh it in building coverage. >> You just went blank there for a minute. >> Yeah, he it was just the screen. Hit the mouse. Um >> just want to make sure we're looking at all the same things. >> Thank you. And then um just I think
it'll be helpful if we go through and and show the the gap. So if you could go uh Gan, if you go to exhibit C, the existing 700 without the water tank site. That's the next. >> Yeah. Before you do that, if you just you can leave it where you are now. It's fine. Just a quick question. As you were
showing those other locations of cell towers, um they provide coverage similarly for this area and now you're going to be telling us what gap may occur. Is that fair statement? >> Yes, that is correct. >> So, >> and and then additionally, I would add
that as we're looking at these other uh cell towers, I'll call them. I don't know what they're on buildings or poles or whatever. They don't pick up the entirety of the area that you're now looking at.
>> That that is correct. There are still uh some gaps in coverage, so to speak, >> uh specifically. >> Is that true for both T-Mobile and Verizon? >> I can only apply to T-Mobile's aspect of the project as I'm not aware of their
networks. >> Okay, I'm going to let you continue. I just wanted to make sure I understood. >> All right. So anyway, we're going to mark this map as A2. Okay. >> And again, just for the record, it's entitled T-Mobile existing 700 megahertz
LTE coverage without water tank site. >> Okay. >> And and Daniel, can you just explain um what what this map is showing? >> Yes. and and be advised that we although we have professionals on staff, we are not. So it's helpful if you do this in a
way that I can understand it. >> Of course. Yes. So in this next map uh marked A2 or exhibit C on the initial report, uh the the water tank site has now been um removed from the propagation. So it is no longer propagating. It's no longer providing
coverage. So we can see that a large gap forms in T-Mobile's network due to this u site coming offline. >> And Daniel, just for clarification, the green again is where coverage is and the white would be where coverage is not or
where coverage is not reliable to that threshold level. >> C can we just go back for a minute? >> Sure, please. >> Mr. You said A2 was which exhibit? It wasn't the one >> exhibit C. So A2 is going to be this exhibit C the T-Mobile existing 700
without the water tank we used for A1 was the >> exhibit B in your thing is existing 2100 mega >> correct and we went straight to exhibit C. We're just going to focus on the 700 band even though the 2100 is also in the report. >> Maybe for the benefit of the board you ought to explain just the difference
between 700 and 2100. Yes. It does the maps look totally different. >> That is correct. Yes, you are correct. Um so T-Mobile is licensed to provide service in various bands 600 700 1900 2100 2500 meghertz frequency bands all
these bands they have different characteristics properties as to how they how well they can cover an area. So with lower frequency bands such as the 600 and 700 megahertz bands they tend to cover a lot more as opposed to other
frequency bands like the 9 1900 2100 2500 we can see when uh we transition to maps such as those they don't cover as much but in T-Mobile's networks are equally as important as they provide capacity additional capacity to these
areas. So as the numbers go down, service gets worse. >> No, >> no, that's that's not how that uh that the frequency bands simply have to do with how the coverage is provided to the area. >> So is higher better or lower better?
>> Uh so Daniel um for lower frequency bands like 700, those would typically be used for for phone calls and most of your your telecommunication services. Correct. >> Correct. And then as we go to higher frequency bands, those are higher
throughput um higher capacity channels especially for T-Mobile's uh network. So they can provide um you know a better service in those areas >> and and just so they know what is used on the 2100 um they would be voice over
IP but it would also be more of your data uh kind of collection. So we're talking about streaming videos, email and other uses of your cell phone. Correct. >> That is correct. with the higher band >> for the higher band. So the the testimony um he's stating is is the
higher band is used for more capacity. Um so that's basically used for your higher data packets. So if you're use streaming a video, you're going to use more capacity of the service, but it doesn't propagate as far. The lower frequency bands are more for your your traditional phone calls.
>> So does the lower band then cover more less area than the higher band? >> Because I'm confused. The lower band covers more area whereas the the higher bands cover lesser area. >> The higher band covers lesser area. >> Correct. >> So when you were showing the earlier
exhibit and then you moved into this exhibit, you're not drawing a comparison of equals. You're showing two different things. >> So we haven't shown the 2100. That was a question by that would be what was exhibit B in the report there. Essentially, Daniel, the the 700 maps
would show the most amount of existing coverage. Correct. >> Correct. They would be the most optimistic in this case. >> So this would show the smallest gap in coverage if the site was removed. >> So if these are bad, this one's bad. The other ones are terrible. >> Exactly. We can show on the screen if
you'd like the 2100 maps. It's it's like a dot compared to >> they have the report in front of them. So it's just exhibit B in the report. There's no reason to skip over it. Just you need the explanation of why this looks like much more white area than the previous exhibit. That's because the
2100 does not propagate as far. >> Right. Correct. But Bruce, the reason why we're focusing on the 700 is because you would you would agree if we had >> That's your most optimistic. >> If we had the gap at 700, there would also be a gap at 2100. Correct. >> Much worse. >> Correct.
>> Great. >> Thank you. >> We're trying to keep everything a little more concise. So, >> Exactly. And so then unless there's any more questions about this map, we would like to move forward to I believe it's exhibit E, which would be the proposed coverage at 700 um from the tower that's
being proposed at 145 ft center line. >> And then we can mark this as A3. >> A3. >> Correct. >> Right. >> Can can you flip between the two, the 700 on the water tower and the 700 on the proposed
>> just to get an idea of the comparison? So, so Daniel, I think what what maybe that question for Mr. Franco was going is is with this increased centerline height, there would be an increased amount of coverage from what is existing and maybe some of those areas to the north that wasn't covered by the water
tank site would be covered by this site. >> That is correct. So, previously we were at 85 ft center line where the antennas were 85 ft relative to the ground to the center line of the antennas. on these this new map, we are now at 145 ft above
the ground where T-Mobile's antenna center lines are emitting. And then could you just go over in that area just for the boards, there's some street names on the map. Could you just discuss uh or name a couple of the street names that are in the area that will receive additional coverage that's
not receiving coverage today? >> Correct. Yes. So obviously due to the increased center line we we get ex enhanced coverage to roads such as Vanderv road um
shields lane um there's also um armed I >> think it's jar in place >> jarman place yeah um and then Um
yeah, that's to to the north and then to the south we can see enhanced coverage all the way up to uh Double Street, Artemir uh Drive, uh Maple Street, and then
um Woodmeir >> and it looks like extends just a little south of Old York Road that's there. >> Correct. That would be the major road that runs through uh that lower section of the map. >> So, in your testimony, um if if the uh
water tank site was lost without a replacement site, would there be a significant gap in coverage created? >> Uh sorry, can you repeat that? >> Sure. If if the water tank site was lost without a replacement site for T-Mobile, would there be a significant gap in
coverage created? Yes, there would be a very substantial gap in T-Mobile's network. >> And does the proposed site fill in that gap in coverage and provide additional coverage to the area? >> Yes, it does. >> Um, let's presume for a moment that the
water tower site is no longer available to you and you can't erect the the pole that you're proposing this evening. Are there alternative technologies that you could use to fill in those gaps in cell
coverage? Because I'm fairly certain that in the Bridgewater area um there was something called distributed antenna arrays and they work with the satellite system I guess that exists today. Is that an alternative for
um these big poles such as that which is proposed tonight? >> These are called macro sites. So the dash nodes what you were previously referring to are they don't provide as much coverage as those types of nodes and for the area
that we see today that gap is just far too large for such a for a node to cover uh equal uh or provide equal coverage. So this macro site would def would not be able to be replaced with such technologies.
>> You would have to deploy several those smaller notes, those are similar to the notes that are put on the building, say down in the prominade. Uh I know several years ago I was on the planning board and we had an applicant coming before us. They're discussing the issues of bandwidth that they're trying to fill in
gaps and they were putting them on the roofs of some of the uh retail buildings down on the prominade. That's what you're talking about with regards to a micronode. The the smaller that don't provide a lot of coverage, but they fill gaps. >> Correct. Yes. They're used to prov uh
provide coverage to smaller very like very small coverage gaps, not a very large area like we're dealing with here. >> How how does coverage compared to bandwidth? I know it's it's uh certain areas you've got more people utilizing cellular
phones and taking up capacity >> bandwidth and uh how does this compare to that? How how will this improve that? Um I I don't I'm not sure if I follow the question. >> So I think he's asking is is there a capacity need here for this site and is
there a reason for increased capacity? Uh well there is a high capacity need for this site obviously due to how many users it does provide coverage to although I don't have the cover uh capacity data
for this site to provide and provide testimony as to how many users could potentially be on this network at that time but of course every site does enhance uh the ability or the customers satisfaction on the network but Daniel just for the record >> I think I can help help yeah in this
area capacity is not an issue. >> Okay. Thank you. >> It becomes an issue in very crowded areas like >> right. Yeah. Where there's more >> to the Lincoln Tunnel or maybe um Meadowlands or something like that, you know, then then capacity becomes an issue, but not not around here.
>> And and Daniel, for your just again for the record to clarify what was just stated, so this is a pure coverage site. We are making this uh application based on a a loss of coverage. >> But that is correct. Maybe I misunderstood your question. This is not uh to be a capacity site in a sense.
>> I have a question for you. >> Yes. >> At present >> you have antennas on the water tower, right? >> Correct. >> So the the height is uh with 145 ft pole
the height will be much higher. Right. >> That is correct. >> Will the coverage be much further out uh with the pole? Yes, it's actually being greatly improved due to the elevated antenna center lines. So, the height of
the antennas is actually being uh elevated. So, it's providing more coverage. >> I I believe his prior testimony was he was just went over some streets to the north and south that would re receive coverage um that weren't receiving coverage from the existing site. The the
the next question I have is if the antennas are much higher will the the signal density be stronger or uh not as strong as uh because it's much higher.
>> Uh well the antennas are designed to propagate downwards. They're not propagating well they they propagate outwards as well but most of their energy is radiated towards the ground. So um there can be manipulation done to the antenna pattern to uh
uh with a down tilt and stuff like that to make sure that the energy is being radiated to the appropriate area. >> Not to interject >> the strength strength of the signal that is let's say coming into my cell phone
is it stronger or not is the question. um >> or or video, whatever. Right. >> Daniel, I think her question is, is that the the distance in height for the water tank site versus the distance and height that'll be on the proposed tower? It's a it's a taller tower. Would that affect
the fact that it's a further distance by that height? Would that affect the signal strength? >> Uh no. You would still receive the same level of service if you're, let's just say, in this green area, whereas before maybe this the site was lower. So, and
>> and in your testimony, Daniel, the the difference in height between where it's on the water tower to the 145 center line being approximately 50 60 ft, that's not a a big enough distance to affect uh a signal strength as she's asking >> strength. Correct.
>> Yeah. So, you would still be receiving the same level of service and strength would be similar. I'm not going to say it's exactly the same. there there will be a variance difference in strength but as far as propagations go it would still
satisfy the end user the similarly if they were in the same area >> and then before we get to board questions I had just one more thing on direct uh Daniel not only did you review uh this site but you also reviewed the potential of locating the facility across the street um at at a rooftop
site that would be in the M1 district which is a permitted use and can you just from a technical standpoint um what were your observations on on potential for that site? >> So when we did an analysis on the alternate uh existing rooftop uh we did
notice that with the antennas positioned on the rooftop simulated at 100 ft. Um, due to the height of the roof, we couldn't go, obviously, we can't magically elevate the antennas to a center line, same center line that we're
working with at 145 ft, but we did see that due to the location being more westward, um, we did present a new gap to the east. So, it did not offer the same level of service or coverage that the, uh, the
proposed monopole would offer. And uh Mr. Aller just uh A4 we put up the map he was just discussing which is a coverage map from the alternative site across the street that was reviewed
and we can mark this as A4. So A4 again just for the records entitled is your ex exhibit G from the report but it's entitled uh T-Mobile existing 700 megaware megahertz LTE coverage without water tank site with
alternate at 100 ft and that alternates across the street is that correct is across the street caddy corner and we did have a um an affidavit that was submitted regarding that and that's part of the application. Mhm. >> So, uh we RF testimony tonight is about the technical site. We'll have a later
testimony about property availability. >> Okay. >> Um but after this alternative site, uh that that really is all of we have for direct. >> Okay. So, let's open the the floor to questions from any of the board members first regarding the testimony that
Daniel's presented so far. >> Yeah. So, I have a question. So, What you're doing is not just maintaining the coverage you have, you're actually expanding that coverage by going up to 145 ft.
>> Uh that is correct. >> Could you build a tower at the same height and have and maintain the same coverage? >> We have a a different RF engineer to testify to the height. Um, so we we'll have a discussion on that, but yes, there is an increased coverage for
T-Mobile, but we have another testifier or another witness to testify to the why we're at this height. >> That's really specialized testimony. I'm impressed. >> Very technical. >> So, you do why and he does why. I get it. Okay. So, um, as you look at the map
that we're looking at currently, this is the alternate site, and you're just demonstrating that it wasn't providing you the same level of coverage as the tower that you propose. >> Correct. >> Correct. >> And Daniel, and as what was existing, correct? This this would create a gap in
coverage that wasn't there today. >> Yes, we can specifically see Bluebird Way. So it's it's worse than what exists today and worse than what it could be under your proposal. >> Correct. Daniel, from from your
standpoint, is this a viable alternative um to replace the existing site? >> Uh no, it is not. >> And when you say viable, just so I'm clear, do you mean preferable or viable? when uh a replacement site is erected uh
the carrier likes to or needs to retain the same level of coverage that existed with the pre previous site >> or better. So in this case with the proposed monopole we're actually >> uh better than we were previously but on
the alternate site we would be presenting newer gaps that didn't exist before in areas that previously had coverage. So there might be users that previously had coverage and now would no longer have coverage due to the alternate site. >> So the alternate we're looking at now
100 ft. Was that going to be on the rooftop? >> Is that what you're talking about? >> Yeah, exactly. We have and we'll get to it later. He's reviewing it from a technical standpoint. We have um someone from the applicants team who also reached out to them from a property availability whether they're willing to
lease to us. But yeah, because that's in the M1 zoning district, we looked at the ability to locate on the rooftop there. Um, and see if that would work. All >> right. So, my question is, if you have the 100, you're right now at 85 ft on the water tower. You gave 145 ft is the
optimum solution next to the water tower and then 100 ft across the way on top of a rooftop. what would be wrong with like a 100 ft 110 ft instead of 145 ft tower. >> So, we we'll get to that. But also, there is a ground elevation difference
between the site that we're on and across the street. But we have, like I said, we we have a different RF engineer that discusses the height for the facility and how we got to this height. >> Okay. >> Any other board members questions? If not, we'll go to our board
professionals. And we just happen to have an expert sitting in the house, Mr. Eisenstein. >> So you you may not know the answer to this, but um I will ask it anyway. You're building a tower. How far away
from the existing water tower? >> Approximately. >> We have the next engineer who's going to discuss exactly. >> Just give me a number. 45 ft. >> I believe it's a little bit >> about right. 40 43 >> feet exactly. >> Yeah. So approximately close
approximately that much. >> Yeah. Okay. So >> have you have you modeled >> approximately 39 ft. >> Have you modeled the back scatter from your transmit antennas from this metal structure that's going to be in the path
of the antenna? You're going to get back scatter off of that. Have you modeled that? >> No, I have not. >> Okay. Then the other question is, have you modeled the multipath that you're going to get on your receiving antennas because they're going to be bouncing off
of that that uh water tower? >> We do have another expert to discuss that. That that's going to be Dominic. >> That be Mr. Leco. Yeah. >> Correct. >> All right. Uh the the reason for my question is I have some concern that that sector might not work properly.
the sector that would be facing the water tower >> because of the back scatter off the water tower. Yeah. I mean, I don't know that it's a concern. >> Maybe that's something >> I ask if you modeled it. Yeah. >> Apparently, you have not. Okay.
>> Um and just in terms of rendering an opinion to the board, uh without the water tower, they have a significant gap and and it would be it would have to be um it would have to be filled. Otherwise, they'd have a substantial number of customers that would not only
have service, but they would lose the coverage along 202, which is really um really not permissible. I mean, that would be a disaster. The the other question about the distributed antenna systems that uh those systems would not
work for a highway like 202 where you have rapidly moving traffic. I it just um they they only work primarily in relatively static situations, pedestrians or very slowmoving traffic, you know, 20 miles an hour or so in in
dense areas. Uh the dash systems are are good. They're they're deploying them all over the place now. So you'll see them everywhere. I don't know if they have them in Bridgewater or not, but but they're they're usually in high density areas with low speed traffic, mostly
pedestrian or static traffic. Uh a car going 40, 50 miles an hour on 202 would be going from zone to zone to zone to zone. It would just lose all the signal. Wouldn't work. >> What is back scatter? >> What is back scatter? if you transmit
something from your antenna like to con to to connect the the antenna that they're putting up with a user that's in a car or in their house, they're transmitting a signal and that signal I think is going to hit the metal tower
and bounce back because the metal is a reflector. So that's called back scatter. >> Right. Thank you. >> And I I as I say I I don't know I haven't I don't have a model of it. just um a question I have. I'll raise it again with um Mr. Valco.
>> We can absolutely look into that. But Daniel Czech, could you just in your experience, have you seen other cell towers near metal structures like water tanks? >> Uh yes, I have. >> And you didn't exhibit the some of the concerns that Bruce was talking about in
the ones you've seen? >> Not Not that I believe. >> So I'm sorry. So you have seen back scatter but >> No, I have I have not experienced >> you have not. >> No. >> Yeah. What were is it possible that it exists but you didn't?
>> This this could be a probable case. Yes. >> Okay. >> We we can look into that. Um but absolutely this is common to be located near these water structures. If you look at um off of 287 Burrow of Wanuk, there's a big big water tower that says welcome to Wanuk. There's a cell tower
right next to it. Um it it's fairly common. >> What about the heights of the two? >> Uh we'll have that next >> water tower and you have a the water tower then the cell tower next to it. Are they usually >> that's going to lead us right into the next witness. Well, exactly. He's going
to talk about that. It's a 103 foot water tower. Um so we need we need the carriers to extend above the water tower so they're not >> Yeah. I was you said there's other water towers examples of this. I was just curious what the the heights were in >> uh it is something I drove by so I don't
have the exact heights but it was similar to this whereas the top of the water tower was right below where you have like the lowest carrier and they're approximately like 20 30 feet separated in distance. >> So it's fair to say that where this has
been done where you're aware of they are not the same height. You have never seen them the same height. >> No. almost every single time they're taller than the water tower. Um, and we'll have an expert discuss that about the signal. >> Okay,
great. Any further questions for Mr. Czech? Thank you for your testimony. And we have yet another expert to hear from. >> Thank you, Daniel. >> No, nothing.
This is uh Dominic Valco with VCOM Engineering. >> Would you raise your right hand? Do you solemnly swear that the testimony you'll give to this board will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? >> Yes, I do. So, help me. >> And again, just state your name for the record. Spell your >> Dominic BCO Visen Victor. I L L E CC O.
>> Thank you. And Dominic, um, as part of your, uh, review of this site, you you reviewed the need for the height for the facility. Could you just discuss, um, how the height for the facility was determined? >> Well, I'm sorry, but before you do that, would you mind reviewing your um,
professional educational background? Thank you. >> Yes. I have a bachelor of science and electrical engineering from Drexal University in Philadelphia. 45 years of experience in the wireless industry, 35 years as an engineering consultant, 10 years as the vice president of engineering and operations for Comcast
Cellular. I've been testify between n in front of numerous boards in the state of New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Michigan, and New York. I've been qualified as an expert at this board in the past and I've been uh testified on
behalf of the Department of Justice and the Federal Communications Commission in uh federal court as well. >> I would say we would definitely accept your call. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. Um >> so Mr. Valco uh you submitted a report
with this application uh regarding the height for the facility and how that height was uh proposed. >> Correct. Uh could you go through um the need for uh the height for the facility and and how that was I guess determined um
basically in connection with the height of the water tower uh next to it. >> Yes, I can. Do you have uh if you can bring up page four of that? >> Absolutely. >> Exhibit. >> While you're bringing that up, the other guy, Mr. Czech, was from T-Mobile. Are
you here as an independent witness or are you affiliated with another company? I'm here as an independent witness on behalf of the client CX Towers. Thank you. And he wants page you want uh page six, figure two, >> page four, figure one.
>> Okay. this and then uh would you like to mark this? >> And we're up to A5. >> Yep. >> But explain to me what A5 is. >> A5 is a page of the VCOM uh minimum
centerline height and needs analysis report that was submitted with the application. Um this is the page of the report that discusses the minimum centerline height analysis and figure one on that page um is showing the down tilting pattern. Um but I'll let Mr.
Veco um explain. >> Okay. And I'm not going to go through every detail in the report. What I'd like to do is if we could focus on figure one. What you'll see in figure one is you'll see these two uh pictures of a tower. What you see is you see this
sort of grayish bluish um amoeba for for lack of a better uh description uh pointing to the right and what you see is you see one of them that points toward the horizon and one that points below the horizon. If you look closely and uh it's probably a little bit difficult to see on the screen there,
but if you look closely there's a red dotted line that goes across the center. You've heard the discussion about the center line of the antennas. All of these antennas emit their signal from the center of the antenna. That's the way the signal comes out. So that's why there's always this reference to the
center line. That that red dotted line there, that is the center line. That's the horizon. So that's important. A lot of questions have come up about the tank and can we be at a certain height? Can we be this? Can we be that? This is a line of sight service. All of these frequency bands that all the carriers
have and this service that you use today, it's what's known as a line of sight service. You've got to have line of sight to a particular area. So when you saw Mr. Czech's plots and if the plots start to run out, what happens is that tower runs out of line of sight. It runs into trees, it runs into buildings,
it can run into terrain, that type of thing. In this particular case, what we have is we have a water tank and it's up on hill or elevation and the signal emits today from this water tank. The proposed application is to
build a new pole next to the water tank. The problem is today the water tank is the support structure. If the proposed application were built, if it was built at the same height, that would be an obstruction. So the same problem that we have where we run into trees, that type of thing out in the field. Now what
happens is we bring it in in the near field and that. So if you think about this, you have your hand in front of your face and I'm blocking my eye. But if I put my hand way out here, it I can see a lot more. That's the problem that we have. So in the near field of these antennas, if we had the proposed height
as the the same as the tank, the tank would basically block it. And so what you can see here is um you see this red dotted line that's the horizon. The horizon's important. The other thing is you see what looks like sort of pointing down toward the horizon. So Mr. Czech what he had said
was he said that the service the customers you know we're up on the pole. The pole's upund and some odd feet 140 ft in this case. Um and it points down because the customers are down at ground level for the most part. And two things happen. One is these antennas. And if
you look at this figure one, you'll see an antenna pattern sort of a elongated football shape. That's the way the signal comes out of the antennas. Um and then the other thing you see is see it down tilted. So what the carriers use on all of these uh all of these sites is
they use these antennas that point on the horizon, but then what they need to do is they need to bring it down a little bit to service the people basically down at the ground level. And that's what you're seeing here. what you're seeing, you're seeing here's here's what we would have if we were on horizon and here's what we'd have where
we typically have the antenna sort of tilted down. The way that these things tilt too is they can tilt them physically, but typically what they have is they have these antennas where they can tilt them electrically. So they don't physically move. What happens is they just realign them electrically and
then that steers the beam down. That's important because when you go through the analysis, if we can switch to page six and the way to perform this analysis was I take into account that that if you remember from that figure
>> I'm sorry you want to move right >> sorry about that >> A6 this is uh page six of the same report figure two minimum center line height analysis. So what you can see on this diagram here is you'll see um a picture that's that
to the left that depicts the tank uh the current water tank at 103 ft. To the right you'll see a straight vertical line. It says 113 ft but that depicts the tower. The 113 is not the tower. I'll get to that in a minute. But that straight vertical line there that
depicts the tower. And so what you have to do is you have to look at where this tank is, where we're proposing to put antennas, and we got to figure out how to clear the tank because the tank is an obstruction. So the purpose of this analysis is to figure out what's the minimum height I need to have for these
antennas to get over this tank and to address some of the questions that Dr. Eisenstein said, back scatter and that type of thing. So, if you look on figure two on page six, um you'll see this green triangle and
there's one uh one of the legs of the triangle follows the horizon and then there's a 12 degree angle that you can see there on the left side of the page and then there's another side of the triangle that just skirts the top of the tank. The reason at 12 degrees was
picked is, and it goes through this in in the report, but these antennas have what they call a vertical beam width. It's sort of like the aperture of a camera lens. So, it's what these antennas see, just like the aperture is what a camera lens sees. So, what I've got here is I've got a 12 degree
vertical beam width, but half of that's above the horizon, half is below the horizon. So, I have six degrees that I've got to work with. And then if you recall in the previous diagram, we had a little bit of down tilt to keep this focused down at the customers. So, so
what we've done is typically it's between six and eight degrees of down tilt that's used. So, we did a nominal six degrees. So, you add six degrees for the half of the beam width. You add six degrees for the down tilt. That's how I come up with 12 degrees. I then put this
geometric um diagram here and you could see at 12 degrees in order for me to clear the very top of the tank at 12 degrees which is basically the focus of the antenna I need to be at 113 ft. And then when you
go through the report what it shows is that typically these are assigned in five foot increments. It has to do with the towers and the tower construction and just the way that the towers are put together. But they're usually in the industry done in 5 foot increments. So
we rounded that up to 115 ft. So basically what happens is we've got the lowest man on that totem pole is at 115 ft. 115 ft will clear the tank. We'll give the coverage actually it'll give the coverage that Mr. Chuck was showing
and then and and the tank and the uh tank won't be in the way at that point. It minimizes as you can see because I've got most of the main beam here. It minimizes the concern that Dr. Eisenstein had which is this back scatter. And the other thing is even if
there is a little bit of back scatter on that lowest one they can electrically the carriers can electrically change that tilt to minimize that back scatter. What they can do is they can get a measurement of it's called inner modulation that's coming back into the
antenna. And with that, then they can just tune it and optimize where it's supposed to be to get that back scatter basically so it disappears. >> Well, I'm at 115. >> I'm out. Time out. So, you said that the lowest man on the totem pole is the guy
at 113 ft. >> Yes. >> Which presumes then there are guys up above on the totem pole. >> That's correct. >> And how do you determine who gets what position on the totem pole? Well, let me talk about the positions first. >> Okay.
>> So, so 115, we just rounded it to 115. Fair enough. >> So, the the industry standard and there's a reason for it. It's 10-ft separations between center lines. And the reason you do that is because all these carriers operate in the same frequency bands >> and that helps minimize interference between. So, if I have 10 foot centers
starting at 115, I've got 115, 125, 135, 145. >> Yeah. So what happens is then the carriers look at um the different heights that they have and then they determine what works best for my network. So T-Mobile determined that 145
as Mr. Czech said would give improved coverage over what they have. It'll give them no less coverage than what they have today and actually improve coverage in some other areas throughout the township. And then it it really comes down to who negotiates which spot first. But all those spots 115
125 135 145 all clear the tank. So all of them provide no less coverage than what's there from the tank today. >> Got it. Thank you. >> You I have a question. >> Yes.
>> Depending upon which location the antennas are located, you have three carriers, right? Well, there's a spot for four carriers on this, >> right? Because there's four there were four national carriers at the time. It's uh Verizon, T-Mobile, AT&T, and Dish.
>> So, each carrier can adjust the antennas based upon their signal how it is. Are they allowed to adjust the antennas or in terms of like angle or whatever? No. Well, what happens is each carrier would be located at one of those heights that
I mentioned and then they they um they can adjust their antenna tilt a little bit. >> Um and the reason they do that is two reasons. One is to provide service to the subscribers on the ground >> because the subscribers aren't at 145
ft. You know, they're down on the ground. But the other thing is um the way that these new networks 5G and 4G networks especially the way they operate is they operate on the same frequency on every single site in the area. So every single site that you saw on Mr. Chuck's
report operates at the same frequencies. So what happens is if it's too high and there's too much signal that splatters further, they start to create self-interference. So what they have to do is they have to basically tailor it and they minimize the interference so
that from a customer perspective because they're always on the same radio channel. I mean it's it's kind of like you know when you're you're driving for those of you that still listen to your FM radio but when you're driving the car and you're listening to your FM radio and you're running out of coverage in one area but you start to hear like
you're heading south on the Parkway you'll start to pick up Philadelphia channels instead of New York channels and they fade in and out. So what the carriers do, it's the same type of thing. They they use this tilting to optimize that so that from a subscriber sub perspective,
it's not there. They don't know that it's there. It's always there, but they basically get it to disappear. >> So between 113 and 145, you will have four different uh carriers
locating the antennas or >> Yes. one. They'll all be 10 ft apart. So, it' be with the centers of the antennas at 115, 125, 135, 145. >> Okay. >> I have a question. >> Yes.
>> Well, like uh I live behind the watch mountain and I can't get New York FM because it's line of sight. >> Correct. >> This is You're saying that these uh uh signals are line of sight also? >> Yes. >> And what I'm seeing here is that There
would be in essence a shadow behind that water tower that wouldn't get coverage. Is that correct? >> Maybe only at the very base of the tower, but that's the property that is controlled by New Jersey American and
it's wooded prop. They're all wooded property next to it. But as you go further into the field, um there's signal that's going to go beyond it. The only place you're going to get a little shadowing is maybe right at the very base of the tank. However,
Dr. Eisenstein talked about multipath. There are some other things that come into play. There will be signal at the base. So, it's not a complete shadowing, but yeah, there is a little less signal is sort of an umbrella effect, but it's still adequate. It still works at the base of the tower.
>> I think one of the other questions, if I can address it too, by one of the board members was about other water tanks. We had designed, we had done this, my firm had done this a couple years ago. We had a water tank in um Kill Devil Hills, North Carolina in the Outer Banks. Uh they're a client of ours for years. They
had antennas on the water tank. Same issue as New Jersey American. They're looking to move the antennas off. We built a monopole next to the water tank. It was about 4550T away. The water tank was 160 feet. The new monopole was 180.
And we only had two carriers at the top. So we, you know, we cleared it at that point, but um it's the same thing. We had to get it up above the tank. And there was a little bit different design on a water tank. This is a cylindrical one here. That one was sort of a bulb with a narrower base. So then what we
did was we had to put we put a carrier below this bulb down lower just to get around that tank. But you have to basically clear this metal structure because it blocks signal. members. >> The height questions, >> sorry. The height that you're doing is
what it has to be, not what you want it to be. >> That's the minimum to clear the tank. Correct. Yeah. Yeah. In fact, I mean, the the tank today serves as a an adequate structure as far as um signal level and and even though T-Mobile's got
an increase, they have it today at the 85 ft. The problem is is that tank then becomes an obstruction which is what I said earlier as opposed to the serving structure. It's an obstructing structure if I said that right. >> Um could I question? You referring to
clearing the tank. Um right now you have the four carriers on the tank. They don't based on where they're located on the tank. They don't have to clear anything on the tank. I'm not I don't follow the question. You
>> keep referring you have to be 145 ft to put the four carriers on to clear the tank. Right now they're on the tank, but they're not on top of each other. They're spread out around the >> correct >> tank, but they don't have any clearance of the tank because of where they're located.
>> I understand the question. Um these antennas are directional antennas. They project outwards. So what happens is if you look at some of the pictures you'll see these antennas are fixed to the outside of the tank and they project outward. So what happens is they have antennas on both sides of the tank. The
tank itself doesn't interfere because they're projecting away from the tank. So now what happens when we put the pole up next to it? They're going to be projecting into the tank and that's why we have to clear the tank. >> Okay. Then my next question would be is they're on the tank. They don't have to
clear it. So now you're only 40 something feet away from the tank, the new tower. What happens if the tower the new was say 500 feet away? 500 feet would be a different 500t we'd
have to take a look and see. Um it depends on um what else was in the area, but 500 feet the tank would likely be less of an issue >> because I mean 145 ft is a tall tower. That's an average tower in the wireless industry.
>> How high could we go based on ordinance? >> Well, let's refer to some of our experts. The question was, how high is appropriate given the ordinance height ordinances that we have or do they not restrict the cell towers?
the the height for the zone for the C for the C7 zone of which this is located in restricts structures to 45 ft. Um the
standards for um wireless communication towers in within the township code elsewhere don't prescribe a specific height for monopoles like an allowance, right? They're still subject to the zone requirements that that they're located
in. Um but there are um you know limitations on setbacks and things like that that are imposed. That means whether it's 100 feet or 175 ft, it falls under the same >> anything over 45
Yeah. 45 ft or whatever devariance would be 10% or uh 10 feet, right? >> Yeah. That's why it's a >> So anything Yeah. Anything over basically 53 54 feet or No, I'm sorry that's for 49 feet would be a height
variance. So whether it's a like you said Jim >> they're not going to build a 49 foot >> tower >> tower >> and the water tower currently exceeds that height restriction as well >> correct >> 113 ft is what we're showing but um the issue is or 103 ft um the issue was I
think the height limitation of the question is there isn't a height limitation set for this type of structure or this type of use because we're in the C7 district and we need a a D1 use variance then we're subject to the underlying uh height requirement for the C7. But if we were in the M1
district, there wouldn't need to be a a height variance because we would be compliant with uh being in a permitted use. Um the the again part of the reason for the height uh is as we just discussed is the need to clear the water tank. But this was an application um
that was previously made and withdrawn and this is being remade. I just wanted to note that the tower has reduced in height since that prior application. We did go back into looking at uh what we could do as a minimum height and so the tower height was reduced from I believe
165 feet down to 145 feet. So we we have worked with the applicant to make sure that this is truly the minimum height necessary to ensure that all four carriers can achieve service. >> So in other words, if there's less than four carriers, it wouldn't have to be that high.
>> Correct. Right now we're for the fourth carrier, but there's four carriers on the water tank today. And historically, the nation has always had four carriers. So, um, you kind of one of the things where we want to make sure that we're building for all of them because if we didn't build for that fourth carrier,
then they would not have a space for service or they would need to go on top and increase the height of the tower. >> And and you really want multiple carriers on the tower so that you reduce the need to have additional towers. And the code calls for that as well. The
code also encourages buyers. Well, we definitely have more than two, but encourages for for all of the carriers would have a space. >> Right. >> But while we're on the issue of height, can we talk about the actual height of the tower? Just so we're clear about that. Right. Because you're at 145 ft is
the center line of the top antenna. Right above that, we have the rest of the antenna and the um >> lightning rod >> and the lightning rod. Right. So, what does that get us to? my my uh engineer who's the civil engineer who would probably be doing it. I don't think we
have time for him tonight, but I will state emphatically um it is 145 ft to the top of the steel. The antennas extend above the tallest point would be that lightning rod which is 5t above which would be 150 ft. So that would be the tallest point on the tower would be 150 ft but we're stopping the steel at
145. >> Okay. And then um one last for Dominic, you did also submit a report regarding RF emissions. You state emphatically that this site if constructed uh would be compliant with the FCC's rules and regulations regarding radio frequency emissions.
>> Yes, as outlined in a report that I submitted on on page one of that report, it's got summary tables and um basically it's it's this is well below the FCC standard um for RF emissions. And the way that the report was prepared, it was
assuming four carriers. It was assuming every carrier has every channel completely uh transmitting, completely lit. And uh so it's maximum configuration, which is a worst case. Typically, what we see is that that's not the case in the field, but maximum configuration, we're still well below
the FCC standards um for RF emissions. >> And then >> let's let's refer to our board professionals. Can I get one one last >> please? Go ahead. >> And then Dominic, can you just also just explain um this is a mature network and the limitations in um relocating further
away from the existing water tank site and the limitations that would be created with that. >> Yeah. So this is this site's been here for around 25 30 years. has been here for a while and as probably some of the board members know there's been applications over that period of time
and the networks have been built out around these especially these older sites like this um they become anchor sites in the networks for these wireless carriers you if you remove a site like that or if we try to relocate the site
as Mr. Czecha pointed out what'll happen is if I slide it too much in one direction it opens up a hole to the right. So then what happens is from a carrier perspective they now have customer complaints customer issues. Your constituents your residents now have issues with service from all the
carriers in this case because they're all located at this tank. So um it these things once they're set the rest of the networks build around them especially these older sites. And then um I know one of the questions was these small cells like at the mall and whatever
those things are built for capacity. They're built and specifically set up to just address hotspots and capacity like a mall where there's a lot of people and again all of these things are built around each other and the network to pull one of these things or to move one
it creates a problem and now we're talking about additional sites in the area to solve the problems that we just created. Gotcha. That'll be it on direct. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> I have a question about the uh the emissions report on on your page one
where it says the occupational exposure levels on the water tank. They're out of compliance. Is that what's existing now or is that what would be the case after you built this um this new antenna? I didn't understand what that 135% was.
>> Good question. That is actually the levels that would be experienced on the tank. So workers that were working on the tank, New Jersey American, >> you're talking about now. >> No, this would be proposed. >> Proposed, >> right? So, so if we if the proposed pole were built and the antennas were put on
there, it's 40ome feet away. What's going to happen is you know Dr. Eisenstein, there's going to be a lot of energy pointed toward the tank. So what happens is on the tank itself, we exceed the occupational standard. And so what we have to do in that case, the same as what we do today, if someone and the New
Jersey American workers are trained to do this, and the carriers know this as well, the two coordinate, we have to reduce power, potentially shut off, shut off some antennas or whatever so that some can go up the water tank, do the work, come down, then they turn it back on. That's what's required by the FCC.
>> What do you do now? I mean, if if they do the same now, >> service the top of the water tank, you have to turn off your antennas. they actually um they actually make them relocate to a temporary tower. So that's part of the reason for the request of this application was that in the past
for a refurbishment or for maintenance work on the water tank, they actually require us to remove all of the antennas, put it on a temporary tower. In the past, um those towers have been 140 ft tall. So we've we've had to do that. >> So just just tell tell me one thing. I
understand about the down tilt. Of course, there's also a a side lobe that points down that's going to be of the antenna that's going to be fairly close at the bottom. How about workers that are at the bottom of the tank that are working there? They're going to be um
right right they're going to be not only in in the path of the down lobe, but they'll also get some reflection off of the tower that's also going to come back on them. I mean, have you modeled that? >> They do. Yes. In fact, when we do the modeling on this, it includes we use the antenna pattern so that it picks up
those side loes that you're talking about. Now, that side lobe from the main lobe is down probably 20 or 30 dBs, which is 100 times the power. So, it's significantly less power, but there is still power in that direction. But yeah, no, at ground level, it's within
compliance. The issue is when they start to climb the tank, that's where it's out of compliance. So, so um Mr. Kenny had said that if there's a major maintenance project on the tank, yes, things have to be removed. If it's a minor maintenance and someone just has to go up there,
required by the FCC, New Jersey America, and works with the carriers, they'll shut down an antenna. If a climber is going by that antenna, and then when they're done, they'll turn it back on. That that's the only way to address that to keep it within compliance for the workers. And and just uh for the record,
uh you're correct that that the um report indicates that the the everything's in compliance, but the numbers are much higher than I see normally. You know, the 43% in the uh almost 44% in the uncontrolled public environment is uh usually higher
than than I've seen most um most applications. >> That's correct. Yeah. So, what we've got is at 115 ft. we've got uh modeled as if AT&T is at 115 ft. And AT&T uses certain Ericson antennas that are multi-beam antennas and they're steerable antennas.
And so we've had to work with Ericson to get these antenna patterns to um and they're proprietary. So I mean we assign all kinds of things to get the antenna pattern, but basically they can send multiple beams into an area. And so we model the worst case as if there were a bunch of people down at the bottom and
they're steering multiple beams. You're modeling it as if the side lobe was the down tilt lobe was as bad as possible >> in their one frequency band. >> One frequency band. Okay. >> Can you plug a gap for me? >> I can just give you a summary opinion. >> Oh, please. >> He's done the study correctly. Emission
study use um OET65 which is an FCC standard for the calculation on emissions and 100% is considered safe. uh they're below 100% for all their um things except for the top of the water
tank and we've just had a discussion about that. They have to to um take safety precautions if someone's going to be working on the water tank and that that would I guess have to be coordinated between American Water and the carriers, all the carriers. Yes. >> Because you'd have to shut down
>> the the site effectively. >> Just an antenna in that direction and it just depends on where they're working. sector. >> It might just be one sector. It might just be It could be that you could power down some of them and not all of them. I mean, it depends on where they're working on the tank. But yes, some
things might have to be turned down or reduced in power. Either or. This is worst case as if everything's running at full power. Um where you >> That is a good point. When they do the modeling, part of that calculation is they assume all the antennas are on 100%
24/7, you know, which never happens. They they they power them down just routinely like at 3 in the morning. There's very little traffic going through the system. So there's no point maintaining full power on them. So they're powered down
throughout the day responsible >> for the perhaps for the edification of the board or the people watching at home. When you talk about RF um and you talk about the standards that are set by the FCC and so on, you're talking about levels at which it may be
dangerous for workers to be exposed to this for some time. So could you give us a basic definition of what this is? >> Yeah. So the the industry had set this up. It was through ILE E which is the Institute of Electrical and Electronic
Engineers and also the ANIE which is the American National Standards Institute and then there is European standards that are similar as well but the industry has come up with calculations on how to determine the signal strength and how to determine these emission
levels and it's dependent upon the frequency because some frequencies are more absor absorbed more at a human in a human body than other frequ frequencies and it has to do with the wavelength. So for example, VHF frequencies are about
150 megahertz. A wavelength if you think of your old sinosoidals from the top to the bottom is about six feet at that frequency. Six feet is like an average human male. Mhm. >> What happens is an average human male walks around and is a perfect radiator
or antenna and absorbs more more signal at that level than at say 800 meghertz like uh some of the frequencies that are here. So it's dependent upon the frequency dependent upon the power. What we do is we follow these um standards
and the calculations that have been put forth by the industry from back in the early 90s and uh and then adopted by the FCC and it's been adopted by the FCC for years and there's been tests and everything and so we follow those standards. We do those calculations and
as Dr. Eisenstein has talked about there's two standards. One is what's called the occupational standard which is a level that is um for people that know that they that are trained to work around an area. So for example, New Jersey, New New Jersey American or the
carriers uh employees, they're used to working around this. They know they wear a monitor. They know certain averaging time, things like that. The second standard, which is five times the uh five times more stringent than the occupational standard, is also known as
the controlled or uncontrolled or general public standard. And that would be for say Joe public. And so what happens is the that's the one we usually focus on when we focus on the occupational standard. It's in a situation like this where you know we
know that on the tank itself at the top of the tank because it's close to these antennas we'll have to work with New Jersey American and their workers. Everywhere else it falls within the general public standard which again is five times more stringent. >> Right? was in the in the early days of
this type of cellular communication, people were concerned about cell towers being erected and that the RF admissions would affect their their health dayto-day. >> And over time, I think we've become so accustomed to cell phones and
communications and whether it's texting or videos or whatever it is that very few people think about that anymore. But it's an important consideration for you when you're making a proposal such as this as it applies to workers
who are in the site and how they are trained to monitor their exposure. And as you've just said, for the public's purposes, the RF admissions are emissions are not a concern because of the the levels at which you ma that you currently maintain. Correct.
>> Fair statement. >> Okay. And Dr. Eisenstein, did I mess that up too badly? >> No, you said it exactly right. That that is correct. The public should not be concerned. >> Great. Thank you. And and you know I just to tag on to that the case law >> is that um the RF is regulated
exclusively by the FCC. >> So you know they are obligated to comply with the FCC you know whatever the compliance requirements. In that vein, what happens? That's the case law. But in that vein, what happens behind the scenes is substantial fines, other issues that they get if they violate
that and the carriers all know that they have to comply with this because if the FCC comes out and they don't keep records like this and they can't demonstrate that the like here I'm showing you that we did a an analysis and that we fall within. But they have to do this for every location
everywhere. They have to keep the records and the FCC wants to know that the carriers have determined that it stays within. If they don't, it's tremendous fines, >> right? >> And ex exclusive jurisdiction. >> I need one more thing from him for the record. >> Uh all the equipment that will be used
is FCC approved equipment. >> It's all FCC type accepted equipment. Correct. >> Okay. Just for the record, >> I have one one small question. You know, you have four different carriers and do they have to work with each other to make sure there's no interference
with the signals with the four carriers or what? What do they have to do? >> The answer is yes. But by design, because we've got them separated 10 ft apart, they work automatically together. So, they don't have to coordinate on
every single thing they do. Um, we've got them separated purposely so that if one wants wants to make a change, it won't impact another one, >> right? >> If that makes sense. >> Yeah. >> How often is the uh test done that we
were talking about before on the RF that they have to stay in compliance with? Is it done once a year? Is it do they check that fre uh frequently? >> The the calculations here are good until they make a change. So, what happens if they make a change? they've got to redo the calculations.
>> So in other words, if they put another antenna or whatever up there, then they have to >> right. So for example, remember we just went through the upgrade to 5G, another 10 years from now, there's going to be an upgrade to 6G. If more frequencies are allocated by the FCC and they add
more frequencies to this, they'll make the change. If no more frequencies, if because what they'll do is they'll reform or repurpose these. So 3Gs will go away. 3G went away already and it's now 4G and 5G. 4G will go away. When 6G
comes out, they'll repurpose those. If it doesn't change, then the report doesn't change because it's the actual channels that are being transmitted. >> Thank you. But uh Mr. Veco, if there's a change in equipment, if they swap antennas or anything like that, more likely than not, um they will be doing a
new RF analysis report. >> That is correct. >> Thank you. Were there additional questions from any of the other board professionals? It's great to have two experts here uh who understand each other and I think
you were able to communicate it to us in a way that we could understand it as well. So I thank you for that. >> Thank you. >> Thank you as well. >> Thank you. >> Very good. >> Great. So let's let's conclude for this evening. Um
Mr. Oler, where do we stand? So Nancy, just to confirm the next available date for this applicant, is it July 14th? >> Yes, confirm. >> Okay. So are you guys available for July 14th? >> Yes, we are available.
>> All right. So for purposes of the public, this hearing is going to adjourn at this point. It will continue on July 14th at 7 p.m. in this room without further notice from the applicant. Okay? And then for the record, uh we extend the shot clock to July 15th. U we can on
the night of the 14th. If there's a need to further extend, we can discuss a further extension at such time. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Great. Thank you. >> Nancy, anything from your end? >> No, Mr. Chairman. >> Okay. Very well. >> Oh, actually I would just one thing. Um
>> please, >> there is just a reminder. There's no meeting on uh May 26th. On May 26, there will be no meeting for the zoning board. >> There's no meeting. >> It's early voting. Is that right?
>> We don't have the room. >> We never scheduled that meeting in the beginning of the year. >> Right. Okay. Any other issues that we need to address? I'd like to have someone make a motion to adjurnn. We have a mo a motion. Second
somebody I'll second it. And all in favor? >> I We're a journey. >> Thank you so much for your time. >> Might be gone. >> Yeah. Comfort.