All right, you're on record. >> I was stand. >> Good evening and welcome to the special meeting of the Township of Parcanany Troy Hills Board of Adjustment. It is Wednesday, October 29th, 2025 and it is 7:02 p.m.
Roll call. Mr. Burkowitz >> here. >> Mr. Maserella >> here. >> Mr. Petty >> here. >> Mr. Quinn >> here. >> Mr. Ready? >> Present. Chairwoman Grani, >> present. >> We have our board planner, Mr. Chadwick. Our board engineer, Mr. Lammanoitz, here
>> and our board attorney, Mr. Johnson, >> would you please stand with us? Say the pledge of alle allegiance. >> I aliance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under
God, indivisible, liberty, justice for all. Mr. Chair, can you raise your right hand please? Do you swear or affirm that any testimony that you give tonight should be the truth, the whole truth, or nothing but the truth? >> Yes. >> Mr. Woman, do you swear or affirm that any testimony that you give tonight should be the truth, the whole truth, or
nothing but the truth? >> Yes, I do. Thank you. >> Is there anyone in the public that has anything to say other than what is on our agenda for this evening? >> I see none. >> Okay. Announcement is made that adequate notice of this meeting has been given and that it is being conducted in
accordance with NJSA 10 col4-6 atte 1280 roof 46 block 712 lots 43.1 zone B2 minor site plan with the C/B variance to construct a permanent
wireless facility. This application was carried from October the 8th, 2025. [Music] >> Good evening. >> Good evening, Madam Chair, ladies and gentlemen of the board.
>> It sounds like it's on. You just have to get really close to it. >> Is it okay if I sit? >> Yeah, of course. Good evening, madam chair, ladies and gentlemen of the board. Jennifer Caner from Price Shelman and Dr. Armano on behalf of the applicant T-Mobile. Um
just to refresh the board's memory from the October 8th meeting, T-Mobile filed an application um to your board for site approval with associated use at bulk variance relief and we are proposing to deploy a permanent [Music]
>> pause. Sorry, >> it's okay. To deploy a permanent facility at block 729, lot 6.01, known as 1280 US, Route 46 East. This proposed wireless facility is the replacement site for the wireless installation that
was located at 26 Route 46 East and currently has a temporary wireless uh facility located there until we um can, you know, hopefully get approval for a permanent site. Specifically, we're proposing to deploy a permanent wireless facility consisting of nine panel
antennas on the roof of the existing three-story building with a center line of 36 ft. We also are proposing a 14t x 7t equipment cabinet to be located on the ground in the rear of the property behind the building and that will contain a total of two equipment cabinets with associated wireless
equipment. There's also a proposed rooftop access ladder. The rooftop access from the equipment compound proposed when we were here last before the board back on October 8th. There was a recommendation made by the board to reduce the visibility of the antenna
rate sector in the rear of the building. In order to do so, we moved the antennas back 10 ft from its current location at the edge of the building. And in doing so, we needed to raise the height of the antennas by 2 feet in order to clear the roof of the building. I have with me this evening my engineer
who will testify to the new location of the antennas on the on the rooftop of the building. I have also my RF consultant who will confirm that the new locations of the antennas will still enable T-Mobile to provide reliable coverage. And lastly, my planner who will testify to the reduction in visibility of the antennas due to their
relocation. And he'll also present an example of the reflective film that we discussed that will be that may be utilized um if the board were inclined um if to grant approval so that they blend into the surroundings based on the reflective film that would be proposed.
Um we did receive a board planners report uh post October 8th meeting from Mr. Chadwick um with three minor comments. Um, other than that, I don't think there's anything else. Any other reports? Norah? >> No other.
>> All right. Thank you. >> I apologize. >> That's okay. Thank you very much. Um, if no further housekeeping I can put up my first witness, please. >> Just as a clarification, did we get new documents? Cuz I didn't I don't have a report cuz I never got new didn't get any new documents. >> Yes.
>> Okay. Thank you. >> Can you raise your right hand, please? Do you swear we're from the testimony that you're about to give should be the truth, the whole truth, and the truth. >> I do. >> So, just state your name again for the record. >> I sure it's Joshua Katrrol, CO T R E L French and Prello Associates.
>> And he's been previously. >> So, I brought with me a revised uh plan. Um, this was not submitted to the board. >> So, I I think there was an A1 the last time. So, we're up to a >> A2. Uh, today's date is the 29th.
>> What's the date, Josh? >> So, the the plan is um titled elevation sheet A-03 with the latest revision date of October 20th, 2025. >> Turn it that way a little bit see all
the way through just a little bit. What was the date of that plan? I'm sorry. >> Uh it it has the uh last revision date of October 20th, 2025. >> Thank you. So A2 is an elevation view that was
revised simply to show that the proposed antennas at the rear of the building are going to be set back from the face of the building uh 10 ft from the side and from the rear of the building. Um by doing that it's also has to be raised 2
feet um to clear the rooftop. Um, so now instead of this sector having a a T-Mobile uh an antenna top elevation of 40 ft above grade, it's going to be 42 ft above grade.
>> Does that need a variance? >> Yes. >> You already over 93, >> correct? Who would explain the clearing of a rooftop and what
potential clients would if you moved it further back at the same height would you lose? I guess this technology is line of sight. Correct. >> Yeah, that would be the RF consult.
And I'm just wondering to service immediately across the street. You have to raise this thing 2 feet to reach that one user. How far
the line of sight line? Do you have a diagram on that? I don't have a diagram of that. No. >> Does everybody understand what I'm saying? It It's a straight line of sight. So, if the
antenna is hitting the power pin on this building, there's not much of a parapit. >> The users closest to the buildings are the ones that they're trying to serve. And I'm wondering
if they're served now at all or if I thought we were trying to get to another area that is north of >> right >> of this site >> that sector servicing a larger area. I think the radio frequency engineer is
better to answer that question for you. >> His mind's with us. >> Okay. Why don't we go to him? >> Go to him. >> Is there anything else in the engine? >> No, that's just I was just presenting the revised plan. >> It's 10 ft from the edge of the building. >> Correct.
>> Thank you. >> This is this is a view from the rear of the of the building. Yes. >> Just hold on. So if questions, there'll be a chance for that. >> Do you have any more questions of him? >> I do not. >> Okay. Do you want to open it up to questions of the public? >> Is there anyone public that would like to speak on the testimony only of this
witness? There will be questions for this witness on the testimony that he's given. >> Sir, if you have a question, needed to come up, identify, use the microphone, identify yourself, and then ask your question. >> If you have a question, just speak. Just first identify yourself.
>> Steve Pasha, >> where you live? >> 182 Hawkins. >> Great. And do you have a question of this witness? >> Yeah. When you were saying you were moving the towers back, does that mean towards the back of the building or towards the center roof? to towards the center of the roof.
>> That's it. >> Anyone else in the audience have questions, please? Mr. Gomez, >> Ray Gomez, 185 Hawkins. >> Good evening, everyone. >> Quick question. >> Yes, I can hear you. >> We need you. >> I need you to be on the record. Make
sure you use the microphone. >> I thought my mouth was loud enough that you could hear me. So says my wife. Uh just curious if the the antennas could be moved closer to towards Route 46 and still have the same amount of impact from a cell perspective.
>> But the radio frequency engineer will testify to that. >> Okay. So I'll reserve my questions for the next person. >> Thank you. >> Are there any questions from the board of this uh witness and his testimony? I see none. Please.
[Music] >> Can you raise your right hand, please? Do you swear or affirm that the testimony that you're about to give should be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? >> I do. >> You can sit down. >> He was previously smart.
Daniel Czech CZ Paragon Solutions. >> Dan, if based on the uh relocation of the antennas, could you just describe the impact if any it would have on the coverage um especially with regards to the um planners question?
>> Correct. So, uh we were asked to push the antennas back 10 ft and we were asked how high in elevation we would need to clear the rooftop. So we came to the conclusion that we need to raise those antennas 2 ft additionally across
the roof above the roof line from the existing 1 foot to clear the antenna pattern to allow for that beam to form without being obstructed by the structure being that destructor that building that could interfere with uh
the the roof. So it covers the same in building as well as um resident. >> Correct. The the coverage would still be retained with uh moving the antennas back but also raising the antenna center line. >> What happens if you don't raise the
antenna another two feet? >> The antenna pattern becomes obstructed. And not only does that affect uh close users, but it also affects the pattern in the long term as well. So you're not only affecting the close proximity of coverage, you're u you're having an
effect over the entire uh beam pattern. So if you don't uh raise the roof or sorry raise the antenna center line, then you're in a sense uh compromising the antenna pattern which it's not as effective in a sense.
Okay. >> Is is this area the I got the gist of this is that you're trying to get enough power to have in building service. >> Correct. >> And that's what's lacking at this point. >> Yes. That's the design criteria for
T-Mobile. >> Uniformly or just in certain areas. >> Uh uniformly. >> Okay. So if you let the building block this line
of sight, the buildings, the users closest to the buildings will be the one that are affected for inbuilding service. Well, the purpose of clearing the roof in general with the uh the the beam of
the antenna is to preserve the entire beam over uh the projected uh length. So, let's just say we didn't raise the antennas and we pushed it back 10 ft. You're obstructing the antenna pattern
uh in over the course of the entire uh uh coverage that it's providing. It's not just affecting local coverage like I see where you're saying where you your concern is close uh coverage in a sense. >> Well, I'm just wondering how many people
are actually going to be affected by having the antennas uh not the maximum strength to the to their homes. You got the dentist across the street not really anything behind you for a while.
>> Yeah. Well, uh, like I said, you're in a sense obstructing the antenna pattern throughout the the entire antenna pattern. So, you're obstructing in a sense, you're ineffectively using that that power. >> If you obstruct the antenna pattern in
close proximity, you're affecting the entire um, beam of the antenna. So let's just say >> let's just say like you have a light bulb let's just say and now a signal is being reflected from the surface below
it. It is also affecting the entire output of the light in a sense. >> Okay. >> Is there a way to tilt it back and not not compromise the bottom of that being above the line anyway? So it wouldn't be
straight up. you you would >> tilt it back and you wouldn't get this >> in a sense be creating up tilt. Well, that once again affects the the coverage of the antenna. So, >> but there wouldn't be anything obstructing it at that point though. >> Correct. But that would have
potentially interference issues caused to other sites that are even farther, right? Because now you're directing the power upwards instead of down at the ground where all the users are. So you're not intending on servicing users that are in the air in a sense. You're
primarily focusing on the ground. So you want to direct most of that energy towards the ground. You wouldn't direct a light bulb at the ceiling if you're trying to cover uh you know. >> All right. So I'm like a mile away and I don't get T-Mobile service in my basement. Will I get it now?
>> Depends on scenario. >> That's the goal. Are we going to talk about these? What were they called? The she the >> reflective. Yeah, my planner. I'll touch upon that. >> Oh, okay. >> Any other questions?
>> I assume you cannot mount these antenna parallel to the ground. They have to be vertical. >> No, they're designed to uh be mounted uh vertically the way that they are positioned. Obviously, you're saying rotate the antennas 90° in a sense.
>> Okay. Uh, no. That that would completely eliminate the the power that it has >> to reach the farther. >> I've never seen any that way. So, that was easy. >> They're kind of designed with the intentions of being installed in that orientation.
>> How about if it was mounted on the side of the building? Is that a possibility? Or that way it's not up top. It's on the side of the building. You wouldn't be obstructed period at that point. Yes, that obviously that is possible, but usually that's applied on a building of higher elevation. If you, you know,
we're dealing with a pretty low elevation building as is. So, you know, if you mount the antenna so low to the ground, then you're greatly affecting >> the top of the top of the building, right? You're giving what six feet
difference. Is that going to that is a drastic difference just due to the >> Yeah, just building >> due to how close this >> Okay, how about if you put half of it above the building and the other half like No, I'm saying mount it from the the middle. The top would be over the top of the building. I'm just looking out for the the
>> still going to affect the coverage no matter where you put it on on the building because of the lower elevation unfortunately. >> Okay. >> Any questions of the board? Yeah, I I don't know if you're the right person to ask this, but is anybody else but T-Mobile going to be using these antennas?
[Music] >> I believe >> every T-Mobile user who has if you have T-Mobile as another another >> carrier >> carrier >> uh well if you have Optimum, they pay off of the T-Mobile towers too. Optimum
mobile um By granting you, if you we do grant you permission to use this, so we open up the door for other carriers to want to put their antennas on this building. >> There would be interest from them. >> Yeah. I mean I I can't speak for the
other carriers >> exclusive views to you. >> I'm here for representation of T-Mobile. So I can't speak for the other carriers whether they want to colllocate on this on this rooftop. >> I think you there was some testimony at the last meeting about you're not you
don't have any plans to colllocate at this time. >> That's correct. >> I'm not here representing anybody but team. >> Understood. Where did we get with the putting the antenna on the side of the village?
>> You answered the question, but you didn't. >> Yeah. Uh, well, Jennifer correctly answered that. You know, obviously you're losing a lot of elevation as to how high the antennas are from the ground. So, you're losing in a sense coverage by doing so.
>> Is it really matter? >> Uh, yes. I would say it's rather critical at such a low elevation. Yeah, our antenna center lines are are not >> we're talking a difference of uh 8 ft. >> Yeah.
>> On a 36t building. >> Yeah, that that's a pretty drastic change from a coverage perspective. Every every height, every uh foot off the ground, it gets you better coverage. >> Any other questions from the board?
Are there any questions from the audience of the testimony that has been given by this gentleman? >> You have to come up, please. >> Yeah, just identify yourself. >> Just identify yourself again, please. >> Steve Pachrick, 182 Hawkins Avenue. >> Um, with all this stuff, what's the
potential? Is there any health potential health risks and any risks to um, you know, health devices? You know, if somebody has a pacemaker or a >> I'm going to let the question stand. If this if this witness can answer the
question, you can answer the question. If you can't, then just say, I can't answer that question. >> Correct. Uh, so we prepared an FCC analysis for this site to make sure that it is compliant with FCC regulations and we found that it is compliant with all FCC regulations as well as state
regulations. >> Do you have another question? He didn't answer the question. >> Well, he he answered your question. You may not like the answer to the question, but he answered it. >> He's looking for more. >> Yeah. So, the FCC sets guidelines to make sure that obviously admissions are
are safe. So, we have to abide by those guidelines. We have to make sure that the site is within set guidelines and we do our analysis to confirm that it is uh well below those standards and we confirm that this site will be below those standards. or at least submitted
um if you have any interest we submitted a compliance report u with our application that's on file secretary specifics as to how that's all calculated and >> do you have any other questions >> do you have any other questions?
>> No. >> Okay. >> Well, can you just come up to make sure that just identify yourself again just for the right >> Ray Gomez 185 Hawkins Avenue. >> Thank you. A quick question for you. Now that the there's elevation with the new
cell antenna, can it be moved towards the front of the building towards Route 46? Because you are replacing I know last time we we spoke um we were here a few weeks ago. You're replacing the one that was nearest to Route 80, correct? That antenna. So this is replacing this.
So in in can we move this antenna as close to Route 46 and out back as possible just for the purposes of of it just it's going to look really bad from my backyard. I'm just curious if that's one option and I would also like to explore the the side option that we were
talking about as well the antenna on the side of the building and if there are any cases of applications like that in this particular case. Well, um so in respect to pushing the antennas even farther back to uh 46,
that will be a possibility. But of course, the farther back that we move from the edge of the roof, we will of course have to accommodate with uh an increase in height elevation. So as we saw, we moved 10 ft back from the the roof ledge. So we have to go an
additional 2 ft up in elevation of the antenna center lines. So obviously if we go back even let's just say another 10 feet we'll have to go yet another two feet up in elevation. So now instead of there being a difference of uh 3 ft now
it'll be 5 ft. >> And the second part of the question are there other instances where there was a side mounting that's maybe not as as obtrusive as this particular case would be? >> Well yes you can install the antennas on
the side of a building. that is a possibility uh and it would not have any effect on the like local obstructions that we're trying to avoid here to the antenna pattern but of course that'll have a drastic uh reduction in coverage provided from this site. So, uh, you
know, uh, we're looking to optimize the coverage to the best of our ability and usually installing, uh, the antennas at on the top of the the roof provides the best coverage, especially in this case where our elevation is already pretty limited. >> So, basically, your answer would be
different if we were talking about a building that was a total height of 60 ft or 70 ft or more, >> but it still is an option, right? Just want to make sure. I >> I I can't >> explore that. >> Okay. [Music] Do >> you have any other questions, Mr. Gomez?
>> Okay. Okay. >> Got it. Thank you. >> Any other questions from the audience? >> Yes. >> Just identify yourself, please. >> Patrick, 182 Hawkins Avenue. I just got a question for the lady here. >> Well, she's she's not the witness. She's an attorney.
>> Do you have any questions of the witness? >> I think the question went to him, too. >> Okay. >> Is if um >> I'm not sure, though. T-Mobile will allow other companies to come in and add on to these antennas, >> but other companies would have to make a
similar application. Just because this board, if this board were to grant this application, that doesn't mean that another carrier automatically gets that same approval. >> Okay. So, they do do have to come before you before anymore can be added. Yes.
>> Thank you. >> Okay. Guess one more. >> Hi, Steve Patcha. Um, >> with this whole thing with the height, did you guys look at the the light towers over at the PAL building? Those things are pretty tall.
>> Did you explore other locations? >> Yes, this was the only viable option that we came up with. I I believe that was your testimony at the last hearing as to why this was the only viable option in the area. Correct. >> Okay. The the question was, could you
tie put these antennas on those poles that are going up with the golf? >> Now the pound has all those high towers >> for those fields to like the field. >> Oh, okay.
>> Smithfield. >> Smithfield we did look into. It's green acres. There was no ability to put it on. >> How about the uh what was it called? golf. >> Uh we actually >> they kicked you off the propert
>> I think I think there was testimony about why you had to leave Top Golf as why you're going through this. >> We try to locate on on top golf as well. >> Okay. Both the building and the and the uh the poles. >> Okay. >> Do we have any other questions from the
audience? >> Does my board have any other questions? >> Yeah. Sorry. So, it has to be right in that area, this antenna, because as a former president of Little League, we had tons of uh antennas on the water tower that's right by the Little League,
and that's much higher up. And I don't know if this has to be in that particular area, but another option would be they just actually replaced them all. So, I I've seen them put new ones up there. ider style. >> Yeah, usually uh when we're dealing with
coverage from sites, we would like to stay with um as close to the existing site as possible in order to retain that same coverage footprint that is currently being provided by that site that is currently located at top golf. So yeah, obviously staying as close as
pos as close as we can to the original site location is is ideal. So what's a general scope of distance from there that would jeopardize the integrity of the signal? >> Would a mile be a big issue?
>> Uh no. A mile would be a very drastic issue that that would completely miss the coverage objective from this for this site. >> Okay. >> Yeah. Any other questions? Board. We have another witness. My last
witness. Please >> raise your right hand, please. Do you swear or affirm that the testimony that you're about to give should be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? >> I do. Great. Say your name, please. >> Timothy M. Kron. K R O N K. >> And you were qualified the last time.
>> Yes. Correct. Um I think I'll there was since there was just some questions about the the search area um where this uh site could be replaced. I'd like to recall exhibit uh this was A1 which had the October 8th
date of for this meeting. these other dates and exhibits where I mentioned this was a uh um a planning board exhibit when we were doing the uh the temporary installation over on the top golf property. Um and the reason I was uh just wanted to put up this exhibit
was because the area that we were uh uh looking for to replace the original uh rooftop installation on 1259 Route 46 only went about halfway down the shopping mall. Um because there is another T-Mobile rooftop just over here
just to the east. Um and then it was up to it was up to Smithfield and a little bit over farther on 46. So it was not a mile because there's several sites uh that T-Mobile has within a mile. So it was very very close to the uh the original spot. And I mentioned we did
try to lease a property over on the other side of 46 which would have been a permitted location. Uh this lease did not uh this lease fell through and that is the only reason we just moved across um into the B2 zone on the other side of
Route 46 to maintain close proximity to that site that is being replaced. Uh this was also an exhibit at the last hearing but this uh exhibit wasn't marked because it matched uh the photo ex the aerial that was in the photo
package. I have subsequently modified it to put two more photo dots on here. So I do believe we need to mark this now. Y >> So that will be A3. [Music] Um, exhibit A3 is a the uh a Google Earth image. It's the same one that was
in the um visual analysis package that was submitted to the board. Um, the two dots uh there was five five yellow dots on here prior. There was now two white dots, number six and number seven. These are new photo locations that were taken
subsequent to the last meeting. There was some questions about the visibility along Summit and Hawkins uh due to the dense vegetation uh along Summit Street and between Summit Street and the parking lot. those two. Um,
[Music] uh, this photo board here has, um, photos number six and number seven. Uh, these were taken on October, uh, October 10th. And uh photo number six represents a
location in the dentist's parking lot uh right in front of the residential property that faces on Hawkins 185. This is looking towards the compound area uh where the proposed equipment is on the ground. And this does show the large um evergreen vegetated buffer along Summit
A between Summit and the parking lot. Photo number seven represented by white dot 7. This is the intersection of Summon Street and Hawkins. Same thing looking back from that location towards the uh equipment area at the base of the
building. And once again, uh heavy dense uh evergreen buffer along this area and with no visibility. Well, there's the existing dumpster there and then the proposed T-Mobile equipment compound would be located next to it. So based upon these photos that I do not believe
there would be any visibility from the uh street there of into the uh proposed compound. >> Could we just mark that A4 please? >> Oh sorry moved closer. >> Just show doesn't show the location of the
just shows the it doesn't appear from the street. It doesn't include a representation of [Music] tennis over here a little bit but not
much. So, out of curiosity on picture six here, where would the antenna be located at that point on that building, but whereabouts? >> Probably right about the highest point of those trees. >> And that's going to be that's where it's
going to be moved to that location. >> Yes. Well, I'll have other I'll have the other photos, but that was primarily to show the vegetative buffer that there was no visibility uh from that area to the proposed compound. Uh, next exhibit is exhibit A5. This is
a photo that was um um we were discussing the um reflective film. Um this first photo is actually an existing conditions photo that was provided to me by uh one of the sales reps for the film company. This is a rooftop in Montlair.
Uh what they had done was they had uh painted antennas on this rooftop and in the middle they took one of the antennas and put the um mirrored film on the antenna. So this photograph here is just a representation of how the um mirrored
film that we discussed last time looks next to the painted antenna. And then the next batch I'll go back to the original photo simulations and show you it to you with the mirrored film on it. I'm not sure
we got the picture showing you pretty [Music] So that's in your film. >> That's the show. >> It does really cut down. >> It does. Yes, it does.
>> Okay. The next um the next uh five exhibits I have these are the same photo locations uh as was presented to you or submitted in the application patch package and um submitted at the last
hearing. Um the five photos on the left are the same existing conditions. on the right hand side the computer simulation. In the computer simulations, uh the location of the antennas has now been moved back 10 feet to match the engineering drawings and that one
antenna, the tallest antenna has been raised uh 2 feet. These photos also uh do have the reflective film simulated on them. Uh the first one here, it's hard to see the film because it's a side view of the antennas, but uh the other ones you'll clearly see the film on the
antennas. The only ones you've moved are the ones in the front. >> Yes, the rear. Yes, the rear sector that was discussed by the board last time. Moving it back from the edge. Uh the front we did not move. So it's just the just the rear sector that was moved back. >> So that's A6.
>> Um Oh, I guess I got to mark these two. >> So this film would cover the face of all the antennas in the back. >> What's that? >> This film would cover the face of all the antennas. I put the film on all the antennas on the whole building. Everything.
>> The first photograph you passed down, we had four antenna. >> Yes, that was that was >> the one that did. >> Correct. Yes. That was just for that. They had the manufacturer had prepared that just for comparison purposes. >> You might want to when we have a chance
that over to the audience to see if they >> Oh, certainly. Certainly. Okay. So, exhibit A5 is the uh A6. >> A6 A5 >> fixed A6 is the photo 1A 1B in your package. um
that was now been modified. Do you have that >> board lasting around? >> I think it was the first one or >> was the last one that we had. [Music] >> Yeah.
>> That's Yes. [Music] Yes. >> While you're filling out the uh identification of that exhibit, that p that exhibit that was handed out to the
audience, there's one antenna. That's the one that's and all the rest of my disguised. >> This is them all disguised. >> Okay. Exhibit A7 corresponds to uh 2 A2B from the package. Uh this is this
location has the uh the two sectors um from the uh the front of the building um that are visible. This is a photo location from Route 46. And these I did simulate with the film as well since we were discussing it. I
did all the antennas uh with the film so the board could see it. Mhm. Uh, exhibit A8 corresponds to 3A3B from the package. Uh, this is also the photo location from Route 46. Um, this is
right in front of the top golf driveway looking back towards the subject property with the uh the antennas uh simulated with the the film on there as well. [Music]
Uh, exhibit A9 corresponds to photos 4 A4B in your original package. existing conditions photo um from Hawkins AV on the left and the right computer simulation. In this computer simulation, you'll see the antennas have been moved
back in the alpha sector, the rear of the building as depicted on the engineering drawings described by the engineer tonight. These photos also have been simulated with the mirror film um on them. And I certainly think you will see there's a big difference between the original submitt and what we are
proposing now. [Music] You don't see [Music] [Music] that part of the stairs.
and exhibit A10. A10 corresponds to photo 5A 5B in your original package. This is the photo that's actually taken on site in the parking lot. It's you know beyond just beyond the u the uh
evergreen screen along Summit Street. So this the view that you have here is purely from the uh what would be in the parking lot and uh with the existing conditions photo on the left, the computer simulation on the right and here the antennas have been moved back
uh 10 ft as described by the engineer with the largest antenna uh having its rad center raised uh 2 ft to clear the edge of the roof. And the as the board members and professionals were saying, you know, uh normally mounting on a building facade would be an option. If
this building was just tall enough to get to the the rad center of these antennas, that would have been an option. But the building just has to be tall enough to meet the radio frequency uh objectives. And unfortunately, this building's not. And when the building uh 1259 across the street where the
original site was, that building was only two and a half stories like this one. That's why those antennas were installed on the roof in a similar manner. The building just was not tall enough to uh uh locate the antennas on the facade. So, uh as you'll see in this
one, the compound is still uh shown as the same as before. It will have slats. It was kind of filtered out so you could see the equipment in there. Um we have the a proposed ladder uh locked cage ladder on the back cable tray and then the alpha sector which has been moved
back 10 ft and the mirror film has been uh shown on the antennas in that sector as well. >> Is there a requirement to have the ladder there? I mean is it >> Yes, there's no access to the the rooftop here. >> I mean how often are people going up there to work on the antennas? I just
out of curiosity. >> Uh there's no access at all. So, >> I mean, if they had a regular ladder, like >> No, that that's too. You can't climb up that that ladder. It's definitely has to have a It has to have a a ladder there,
>> but it's got a cage and it'll be locked, so nobody else will will have it accessed. Uh there was a question before about um uh T-Mobile, other carriers coming here. T-Mobile does not own this building. They just they've only leased this little bit of space for the for these antennas and the ground. It's a
private property owner. So, um you know, we have no control over that. This application is just for T-Mobile and any future dealings would be it's actually a small rooftop. If you know, depending on the carrier, they could have problems finding locations um because with the
required separations and asmus that would be needed on this rooftop. So, don't even know if it would work for somebody else. But T-Mobile does not control the rooftop. Are there any questions, >> sir? I'm sorry. Have you completed your testimony, sir?
>> Well, um I mean the board had a lot of questions about redesigns. Uh are I mean, are there still is there still other things that the board members would like to see? >> I will ask them right now. >> Let's then let let's ask them and see
what they say. >> Are there any questions from the board of the testimony given? I've got some I think uh the all this equipment that's on could be on this roof. Any idea what how how much of the
roof it's going to take it's using what percentage? Um >> 10% 20% I don't know >> our engineer I mean you have this >> that be for the engineer >> just yeah he would have to come up with a number >> you >> he's asking the percentage of the roof
that the the sleds would be covered >> but that that it occupies >> oh um I can look at it and probably give you an estimate just a couple minutes just give them a minute. Yeah, I I understand that.
>> And does also the roof have to be have extra supported for these antenna? >> So for the um front two um sectors that we're proposing along Route 46,
we're proposing them to be on um ballast frames, which which is essentially a sled that sits on the roof and then you add weight to it, which which stabilizes the antennas. um the sector at the rear since we're moving it back towards the center of the
roof. That's going to be a little bit different because um of the height of the antennas. Um so we're going to actually attach a frame to the building elements on that sector >> and the frame is made of >> steel.
>> So it's going to be steel. >> It's just going to be different than we we had at the original application because we moved it back and then we couldn't use that the same type of sled insulation. So, it'll be tied it'll be tied into the building framing. >> So, that was the modification that we had to make by moving it back.
>> Is there anything else on that roof? >> Uh, there's mechanical equipment on the roof. >> And And what is that used for? >> That's that's just to service the building itself. Air conditioning, heating. >> And how is that serviced? >> Was that must have access to the roof.
>> Uh, you know, I I don't know. Uh, there's no interior access. There's no exterior access. I don't know. >> So there's no access to service once there. >> Correct. Right. >> There has to be some sort of way to get up there to access it without having that hole. >> There's you if you go to the second
floor, you climb out a window, you can put a ladder there from the short roof up to the top roof, which does not meet OSHA requirements. >> Well, could you put a ladder from the ground to the short roof and the ladder from the short roof? >> That does not meet there's doesn't meet OSHA standards. So, should that building
be shut down because they can't get to the air conditioning units? >> There's more maintenance requirements for a wireless telecommunications installation than there there is for, you know, an HBAC unit. So, >> any other questions from the board,
Ernie? >> No, I just curious as to the percentage of coverage. >> Okay. >> I mean, the the sleds are I would say are probably 10 foot by So, they're 200 square feet each. So 400 square f feet. Um the other sector it's probably 100
square feet um if that. So probably you know it's probably 20% of the roof. >> I mean I don't have the exact dimensions on that roof >> to 20%. >> So we couldn't have anybody else come in.
>> Well they'd have to come before us as well. >> Yes. Well, once we've done it once, why not do it twice unless we put some restrictions. >> Okay. There any other questions of the board? >> Any questions in the audience of the
testimony given? Mr. Gomez. >> Yes. Whatever. >> Ray Gomez, 185 Hawkins. >> So, if it's okay if I may stand and just ask a quick question. >> Sure. So, between line of sight number six and number seven on A3,
um I also have a a photograph to show if that's okay. Can I do I present as an as an exhibit? >> Why don't you present it? Okay. Are you going to speak either in support of or in opposition? >> In opposition. Not necessarily in opposition, but I just want to make a a a statement. >> You can introduce that the photograph at
that time. >> Okay. So, w with this photograph uh I would like to present right between right now at the end. Okay, got it. The ask him question. >> Got it. Got it. Okay. So, in between 6 and 7, there is a buffer here. Can you point out exactly where that power
station is? Forgive me, I don't have the right name for the power station that's going to be over here. >> There's the power station that you are referring to. I believe you're talking the equipment compound that is proposed to be on the ground. >> Yes. >> It's right in the middle of the building on the back adjacent to the two
dumpsters. >> Okay. So, middle of the building, there's a red, see that red box on the ground there? >> Yep. >> That's about the location of it behind >> those two dumpsters and the fence dumpster enclosure. >> Wonderful. >> Uh, another question. Would there be
interruption from cell service if this tower was on the outback side of the building? So, I'm presenting uh A10 where you can >> ask your question. >> Yeah. >> Get asked your question. Okay, got it. >> Answer that question. That depends. >> So would there be an impact in cell
service if you see where those towers are on the left hand side? If they were on the antennas. >> Yeah, the antennas. Antennas. Yeah, the antennas. >> If they were placed on the outback side now, they would not be in our line of sight as much as they are here. So just flip them. >> No. What happened?
>> If I were to put these on this side. >> Okay. Well, so every 10 ft you would go back, you would have to be raising them another 2T. So 30 ft across the building. So if you went 30 ft over here, you'd have to raise them another 6 ft.
>> Line of sight technology. You can't hide the antennas. They have to be able >> No, no, nobody wants to hide them. We just want to put them on the other side of the building if possible. That's what I'm suggesting. >> Or sidemount it. So it's on the other side of the building. Then it's not an issue. >> Ask the question.
>> Yeah, that's I should have asked before, so forgive me. >> Maybe you can answer the question. Does it make any difference if you slide the antenna to the other corner? >> As long as the sector is still facing this correct as direction, then it shouldn't have >> Does it make any difference? >> It wouldn't make any
>> Okay. >> As long as it's the appropriate amount. >> Okay. So, it would make a difference to us in our line of sight. That's why I'm asking the question. So, thank you. I appreciate that. And then after radio frequency approves it then it goes to the structural
engineer to determine whether that is an option to even locate it there. >> Perfect. Thank you. >> The other thing is as well I do want to talk about this image. >> I'm so excited about it. >> It does go along with the line of sight. >> Just we
>> we need to keep the record clean. Yes. >> Um do you have any other questions of your witness? >> I do not. >> Do you have any other witnesses? >> I do not. >> Okay. Okay. What do we do now? >> Comments for you have a question of this witness? >> Yeah. >> Okay.
>> Hi, Steve. Attaching 182 Hawkins Avenue. >> Yes. >> Is there any other >> than the one against the back of the building? Is there any other stuff you have to put in >> equipment? Yeah. >> No. No. The uh the equipment is located in that fenced in compound on the
ground. the the the fiber cables go up the back of the building in that in that tray and they go to the end the antennas. There's nothing else required uh for the application. >> Okay. >> Is there anyone in the audience that is
in favor of this application? Please come forward. I see none. Is there anyone in the audience that is in opposition to this application? >> Now you have to be sworn. Okay. So raise your right hand. Yes. >> Do you swear or affirm that the
testimony that you're about to give about to give should be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? >> Yes. >> Reidentify yourself, please. >> Ray Gomez, 185 Hawkins. >> You can put your hand down. >> Thank you. >> You have a photograph? >> I do have a photograph. I would like to see. >> Did you take that photograph? >> Uh, my neighbor Pat did.
>> Okay. Can you tell me what is depicted in the photograph? >> So, this is line of sight between uh what A3 depicts as 6 and 7. >> And you know that because you live right there. I live right there literally. So this is my house right here. >> Okay. Does that photograph fairly and
accurately represent uh that view from that location? >> Uh this one does. Yes or no? >> This one does. Yes. >> Okay, great. So what would you like to tell the board about that photograph? >> Uh this is my view of that parking lot right now. So I just wanted to make sure that everybody sees my line of sight and
Patty's and Steve's line of sight to that um back back area over here. So that that's all I wanted to submit. So, it's just not necessarily saying that you're wrong, per se, but I just had a different perspective of what we see right now from from our yard.
>> We're going to we're going to take that photograph and we're going to mark it >> 01. >> 01. Okay. >> I think it's 02. >> Oh, there was an 01. >> I had one other one a line of sight from my backyard that I submitted last time. >> Okay. Gotcha. So, we're on O2. >> Yeah. O2. >> And that would be O2 with today's date.
at and you're not looking towards >> So I'm looking at summit between 6 and 7 towards the per my purview is is the back parking lot towards outback which is right back there if you're familiar with it. >> So it's not it's not where the equipment >> correct correct at first I thought it was that's why I was bringing it to your
attention. >> Okay. So that view that you're shown in A1 you you can't see the back of the building >> correct >> where the equipment is going to be installed. >> Correct. At first, I thought maybe you were able to, but then when he pointed out that it wasn't, it was closer to the
building. We're probably not going to be able to see it. Patty and Steve might be able to see it from their perspective just because the angle is is this way and it's wide open. There is the trees are beautifully manicured over here, but it stops and there's about a 20 foot 20 foot empty buffer right now. >> Is that where the dumpster is?
>> That's where the Yeah, that's that's part dumpster. There's uh uh snow plows, a barbecue grill back there, a Weber. So, there's all kinds of stuff back there, but that's not the issue for this uh group right now, but just bringing it to your attention. >> Do you have anything else you'd like to say?
>> Uh, no. My my comments from last time still stay. I still object to this, but I'm also willing to compromise. There's three things I'm looking for. So, if we do go forward, I do not want to be able to see these towers if possible. >> Antennas.
>> Antennas. Yes. Antenna towers. >> These antennas because they're now going to be 11 or 12 feet high. Correct. >> No. >> How high are they going to be? >> I can't. >> How high? What's the height? >> Anybody? Somebody?
>> The top of the tallest antenna? >> The top of the tallest antenna >> in reference to what? >> In reference to the top of the building. >> To the top that you're you're looking for a variance that's going to go 3 ft above the current variance. Correct. >> What's the distance between the top of the building and the top of the tallest antenna?
Uh, so from the top of the parapit, the top of the tallest antenna in that back sector is going to be >> 11 ft. >> 11 ft. That's >> that's sizable. So, I just want to make sure that's as far away from my line of sight. I don't think I'm asking for that
much. >> Uh, this issue was addressed. So, yeah, it it is unsightly, of course, as you can see. I would love for it to be moved somewhere else, but if it has to stay there, I understand. But I would love to see this on the o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o oppos o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o opposite side of the building because I wouldn't see it at
all. So I'm trying to be um a good neighbor, but also think about what this would look like from your backyard. That's all I have to say. So I do still object, but I am I'm also in compromise mode because I also
want people to have good cell tower service, but I don't think I'm asking too much for too much here. >> Excuse me. I just have a question. Of course. >> What is this a picture of? Because I don't see the building in there at all. >> Yeah. So, this this picture, >> it's a it's a tough angle. Sorry for knocking down your stuff. So, if I'm
looking from here, you can basically see all this back here. That's where all those snow plows are. >> Okay. So, this is this is just something on this side has nothing to do with the application. >> Not anymore. No. Correct. Correct. Originally, I thought it was something a little bit that the power plant may be back here. So, my mistake on that one.
>> Okay. >> You mean the compound? >> The power plant. Yeah, >> for the record, it's an equipment compound. >> Understood. I I understand. >> Anything else you'd like to say? >> No, that's all. Thank you so much for your time.
>> Madam Chairman, >> yes. >> I the RF expert, I have a question and if you could come back up. >> Just hold on, man. There's a question pending for one of the prior witnesses. If we look at the photograph of uh 5B,
it shows the uh the power equipment >> equipment compound. >> Equipment compound. >> Yep. >> And it shows the three antenna on the left side of the roof. Do you have the picture there? >> It's 5B.
Not sure where. >> Yep. >> Okay. There's the You were talking about I guess the signal having to go over the roof in order to to be proper to be proper and that's why you had to So if
you move it back 10 ft, you had to raise it. >> Correct. >> All right. Now, is that true? if you move it from one corner to the other corner of the building. Also, >> it more so has to do with respect to how much of the roof is exposed directly in front of the antenna, right? so that
you're not obstructing the antenna pattern so close to the >> Well, does the antenna pattern have to go from that left corner of the roof or is it have if it if you move it to the right corner uh closer to the outback side? Uh is
that does that change the the direction of the >> No, as long as the antennas are still facing the same direction. Obviously, there might need to be a height increase of those antennas to uh further clear the roof edge. So moving it from one corner to the other corner might also
require to be higher. >> Correct. >> That's what I wanted to get clear in. >> Is that because the antennas need to be pointed towards that direction? >> They they are directional antennas. So they do need to be pointed where they currently are, right? So that's why they're um they're not in line with the
face of the building. They're angled in a sense. >> But if the roof is the same height on both corners, wouldn't that then There would still be more roof in front of the antennas >> if you moved it straight line across. >> Correct.
>> Because of the way in which the antennas are pointed. >> Correct. Yes. >> So it would still say at still stay at the 11 foot >> uh >> height. It may need to actually be increased slightly in elevation. >> What are we talking about? How many feet?
I could probably roughly say maybe another two feet. >> So you're looking at 13 foot height. >> Correct. >> If it's moved to the outback side of the building. >> Correct. >> That's Yeah, that's >> that was your question. That was my
question. Point of clarification, I guess. I question >> if it's over there. >> Yeah. Because you see where you see the angle these are at. >> Yeah. that that's so so move it over here. >> Do you have any other question roof
>> I I guess I'll follow up on the other uh comment made the ladder. Could that be put on the side of the building by the outback? >> You wouldn't want to. >> I don't know. I'm just
>> That's the entrance. >> No. No. Oh, is it? I don't know. >> Yeah. The side on the outback has the parking area with a very narrow um landscape area between the parking curve >> to the building >> and the building and it also has the
entrance to the main building there. >> Okay. >> Any other questions of the board? Please. >> Please. >> I have a question to uh Mr. Gomez. Gome you're you've been objective because is
this because of uh signal interceptive for internet or telephone or I I kind of just want to learn that uh point from you. >> So for for me it's not about any type of connectivity it's about appearance property value uh uh and blight for me
it's it's it's going to look pretty bad from my perspective. Uh, so those are the main things. Property value, what it looks like. Is it absolutely necessary to be in that particular spot? That's what I'm objecting to. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Thank you for the question.
>> Any other member of the public that has a comment? Mr. Pachu, >> you need to you need to come forward. >> Take the microphone. Raise your right hand. Do you swear or affirm that the testimony that you're about to give should be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? >> I do. What is your comment?
>> Um, I just have another question with the equipment locker. Whatever compound >> equipment compound, how much noise does that thing make? >> Uh, it it does it there's uh fans in
there that expel heat. Um, so it does make a noise. I would say it's comparable to a refrigerator. But either way, we would have to comply with the township noise ordinance standards at the property lines. So, we would make sure that we would be in
compliance with that. >> Yeah. >> Equipment cabinets, right? We're not talking about >> equipment cabinets. They're Yeah, they're equipment cabinets within an equipment compound, right? >> Mr. Pacio, is your answer? Anyone else?
Mrs. Pacio, >> just raise your right hand, please. Do you swear or affirm that the testimony that you're about to give should be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? >> I do. >> Just identify yourself again for the record, please. >> Patricia Pata, 182 Hawkins Avenue. >> Thank you. >> Um,
>> what would you like to say? Uh, one thing I wasn't sure of and I'm not sure of is um if they are asking for the um railroad crossings to be removed from
the parking lot. Is that on your agenda at all? >> I don't think they have anything to do with that parking. >> I want to make sure that um secondly I I am against it. Um, I feel that we have a lot of cell towers out there that these could be added on to. I just think
there's better spots where there are no houses. Um, but uh, you know, it is what it is and uh, it's sad. Sorry. Okay.
>> Any other questions from the audience? >> I see none. >> Do you want to sum up at all? >> I do. >> Okay. Thank you very much. >> Do you want Can you when you sum up, can you just identify just for the record exactly what variances you're asking for if you can? >> Sorry. Yeah. Just >> I think I can
>> just so that when some if someone frames a resolution, they know exactly which one. >> I could certainly follow that up with a written documentation of that in case I missed any of it. >> Um I want to thank the board for the for time in the public interest as well on this application. We heard testimony
from several experts throughout the course of the hearing. That's the engineer RF engineering clients and a planner. As shown through the testimony, applicant is requesting approval for nine panel antennas on the roof of the existing threestory building with a center line of 36 ft, a 14 ft x 7 ft
equipment gated equipment compound to be located on the ground in the rear of the property behind the building, which will contain a total of two equipment cabinets. Testimony from our RF engineer confirms the need for the wireless coverage that is replacing the former permanent site that has been decommissioned and that emissions from
the facility proposed here being within all state and federal standards and that the site will operate well within the law of frequency exposure pursuant to FCC guidelines. Courts of New Jersey have found that generally the issuance of an FCC license is suffice for a
carrier to establish that the use of the general welfare and T-Mobile maintains for such licenses with the FCC. You heard testimony from the engineer regarding the site plan and overall design. specifically due to comments raised by the board and the public, we
um took the opportunity um to come back before the board to relocate those antennas. Um and in doing so, by pushing them back 10 ft, we had to raise them by 2 ft in height. Additionally, um we also heard testimony from our planner regarding the benefits of improved
wireless telecommunications and that the site is suited for a wireless facility that will replace the firmware permanent site located at 1269. With respect to the facility, we submit that there was no issue uh with any detriments. There's no traffic. One technician once every four to six weeks.
There's no noise above any standard coming from the facility. No vibration, flare, and smoke. Noxious odors or anything of the such. Um in terms of the variance relief, we are looking at um use variance for the use not being permitted. We also have um minimum
sideyard setback where 24 is required and the equipment compound is proposed at 5.2. Uh we are also requiring variance relief due to alteration of a non-conforming structure as a result of the existing height of the building and I believe in
reference to your engineer report. He also noted that the attendance require uh additional relief because we are extending more than 8 ft above the height of the existing building. We're now proposing 11 ft.
And I believe that covers all the variances. Uh the applicant submits that it has met the statutory criteria for the grant of site plan approval and use variance relief weighing the evidence presented in support of the application and based upon the proof presented to the board. We would respectfully request approval of the application and ask that the
board grants approval for same as testified to you throughout the hearing. Thank you. You didn't mention the light shield that will be put on the antenna. >> Yes, that's a part of the application that was amended as well. Thank you. I
didn't forget to mention appreciate Did you go through the conditions and see what they agreed to? >> Well, one of the conditions was add was the reflective and your client is willing to add the ref >> for all of the antennas on the building.
Correct. >> Um, you already indicated that you've moved the location of the antenna uh from what was originally proposed >> from the edge of the rear of the building 10 ft back. I don't know if the board has any other
comments with respect to any other conditions. >> Does the board have any other comments? >> I think you might say not to exceed 20% of the roof surface. >> Mr. Jud, >> you might want to discuss whether or not
you would agree to hold the antenna to the um outback stake outside and increase the barriers from 11 ft to 13 ft. >> Would your client be willing to agree to
that without having to do the analysis that would determine exactly how high that would be? I'd have to do a sidebar with my with my team with regards to that request. >> Yeah, cuz you don't really know. >> I I without that I would need structural
approval as well as landlord approval as well. >> I don't know how the board feels about that particular >> I I speak the bill was the disguising this as much as possible. >> I I'm hung up on the not being closest
to the outback. So I mean that's I think if we can do anything for them I mean we're putting up the ladder and the other thing and if we can move it towards the outback side look into that. Now that's that's how I feel about it. That's my opinion wave my vote
>> to postpone this so that other members can who know you have a quality of people but but it's a D variance but well she needs five of the six. >> You've got six here. She needs they need fought.
>> They need if that's something that you guys are considering, I'd have to take a sidebar with my my team. >> Me meaning moving them to the out. >> Yeah, like we presented what we thought you guys wanted us to present. So, this is a new >> Well, obviously the last one that wasn't mentioned last time and I didn't say I I
can't just off the cuff give an answer right now. >> Well, could you have an answer as to who's our next meeting? Well, do you want to have a sidebar tonight? >> I'd like to have a sidebar first with my team on whether that's even something that we're going to consider.
>> I'm sorry. >> How are you going to know the landlord? We'll let you >> I want to discuss with my team first before we move forward. >> All right. >> Unless you can call them up. >> Do you want to do that this evening to have your sidebar? >> Yeah, of course. Okay. If we're not
going to move it, then we'll call for a vote. [Music] >> How long do you need? Okay, >> we're just going to take a fivem minute recess, folks. >> Okay, so let's start again. >> Please repeat what just told us so
you're on the record. >> Certainly. I didn't know she wasn't there. >> Yeah, sorry, Nora. >> And Nora is integral to this >> believe me. I know. Um, so based upon the the ask, um, it's too open-ended at this point for us to commit to moving
tonight based on the fact that we would need RF approval, we need structural approval, and we need landlord approval in order to move the antennas again to another location. >> Okay. So, the question that I posed to you was, do you want the opportunity to do that and come back on another night
or do you want the board to vote on it tonight? >> Either way, >> um, seeing as how As you know, you've got six members of the board here and you need five affirmative votes. >> You're going to have >> Does the board want to see that other option?
>> I think there's at least >> Well, now I I know of at least two members of the board that want to see that option. >> That answers the question. >> Okay. So, you want to carry it to another night? >> Yeah. And keeping in mind we we probably need additional variance relief because we're going to have to increase the height of the antenna.
>> Testified to that, I think. No, not if we It's going to go to a D6. >> It's going to go to a D6 variance if we go higher with the antennas. >> You mentioned 13 feet if you move it to the other side of the building. >> That's still a question. That's a question. You're probably going to go
higher >> because you're moving, you're talking us moving it like 30 feet, another 30t to the other side. So every 10 ft you got to go higher another two. >> We're at 11 now. So we move it 30 feet back. That's another six feet up. So we're in we're in D6 territory.
>> So then the board would consider whether that's better or whether it's better the way you've currently proposed it >> at that time once you've investigated whether it's even a possibility >> to move it to that other location >> and it might not be I just but we will have to give you those answers.
>> Okay. So when can we get back before you guys >> February 11th 7:30. >> When does your lease expire? Do you know? >> No. >> Probably Sunday
or Saturday. [Music] >> Okay. >> May I have a motion to approve >> to motion to carry >> carry the application to 211 25 at 7:30 in the evening? >> So moved.
>> Madam Madam Chair, if I just add one thing. Yes, >> I have a note in my uh from the last uh meeting about getting the building height calculated per the ordinance because I believe if the building height which does not include the the uh antennas is nonconforming I think that
introduces another variance for >> I mentioned that >> I mentioned that >> okay but we don't have the building height calculated >> we can get that done before >> well that's what I'm saying you know that's I would get it done before February.
>> Thank you. >> Okay. 11:00 [Music] >> adjournment, please. Motion to adjourn this 7:00 meeting. >> Motion. >> Second. >> All in favor? >> Good night. >> Good night.
[Music] You want to move right into the next one, please? >> Good evening and welcome to the meeting of the Township of Paripany Troy Hills Board of Adjustment. It is Wednesday, October 29th, 2025
and it is 8:23 p.m. Announcement is made that adequate notice of this meeting has been given and that it is being conducted in accordance with NJSA 10 col 4- 10 col 4-6
at effect of the New Jersey Open Public Meetings Act. Roll call. Mr. Burkowitz >> here. >> Mr. Masarella >> here. >> Mr. Petty >> here. >> Mr. Quinn >> here. >> Mr. Renie >> present.
>> Chairwoman Grani >> present. >> We also have our board planner Mr. Chadwick >> present. >> Board engineer Mr. Lmanowitz >> here. >> And our board attorney Mr. Johnson >> here. >> Correspondence please. Nor. We have correspondence received from uh
Sebastian Gay, three uh Duville Drive um requesting his application be carried uh from tonight to January 7th, 2026 without further notice and with an extension of time for the board to make decision on a case through January 14th,
2026. Is there a motion? >> Motion. >> Second. >> Second. >> All in favor? Hi. >> And we also have correspondence uh from Mark Tell, 18 Jefferson Avenue uh requesting his application be carried
to January 14th, 2026 without further notice, but with publication and an extension of time for the board to make decision on the case through January 31st, 2026. Is there a motion? >> Yes. Motion
>> second. >> Second. >> All in favor? I. Which case was that? >> Tell >> Mark tell it's on the agenda. >> Uh the resolutions we were going to do them in four groups. Uh application 2478.
Uh 8 Stafford Terrace. Uh Burkowitz um ready. >> Willins and Grani will not here. Burkowitz ready and Grani can vote. Is there a motion? So moved. >> Second.
>> Second. >> Burkowitz. >> Yes. >> Ready? >> Yes. >> Griani. >> Yes. Okay. The next two. Application 2548. Uh the Benadetto and uh application
2543. Baratheia. Is there a Let me let you know who can vote. Burkowitz. Petty. >> Wait. Hold on a second. I'm sorry. Nora, that one I didn't send you that one, did I? That's the two family that is being
reviewed by the applicant's attorney. >> Is it okay? I apologize. Then it's going to only be 2548 de Benadetto. Burkowitz, Petty Grani. Is there a motion? >> So moved. I I move the motion. >> Second.
>> Petty. >> Burkowitz. Petty Griani. Um, sorry. >> Yes. >> Yes. Yes. Yes. Sorry about that. Um, application 253 MEA application 254
Simmons and application 20. Nope, it's just going to be those two. Burkowitz, Quinn, and Grani can vote. Is there a motion? >> I move it.
>> Second by Quinn. >> Yes. >> Burkowitz. >> Yes. Quinn, >> yes. >> Yes. And the last one, application 2542, Franciscan Sisters. >> Apologize. Burkowitz, Mozzarella, ready.
And Grani can vote. Is there a motion? >> So move. >> Second. >> Burkowitz. >> Yes. >> Mozzarella. >> Yes. >> Ready? >> Yes. >> Griani. >> Yes. That is it. Thank you.
>> Kelly. >> Application. Excuse me. >> Application 25 col 58. Timothy Kelly, 3 Noble Street, block 408, lot 7, zone R3, a C variance to construct an addition
contrary to sections 430-35, columns 10 and 13. Mr. Kelly, please come forward. [Music] >> Can you raise your right hand, please? Do you swear or affirm that the testimony that you're about to give be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing
but the truth? I do. >> State your name and spell your last name, please. >> Kelly K E L L Y 3 Noble Street. >> And please tell the board what it is that you'd like to do. >> I'd love to do an addition of u 36 ft. Uh branch house is roughly 12 ft off the one back corner, 25 ft across. Go to
make it um handicap accessible for my needs as well as the existing hallway bathroom. um take the existing bathroom and the and the bedroom. So, widen the hallway and make that acceptable as well. So,
I'm looking for uh.7% over coverage on um impervious and um 2.2 on lock coverage. >> Building building coverage
>> building coverage. Apologize. Um, have you seen the letter from the township engineer? >> I've seen a letter. There's a letter memo from the township engineer dated September 22nd, 2025. Are you familiar with that letter?
>> The letters I only have to shut. >> Okay. So, you didn't get a letter from the township engineer. >> Okay. I have a letter just saying that I know I when I initially did the application that I had applied for the zoning, >> right?
>> There was a letter a memo that the board has and I'm happy to give you a copy of it from from the township engineer indicating that since you're increasing impervious coverage, >> uh you would have to um add some storm water mitigation measures. >> I never got that.
>> You never got that? Okay. Why don't you take just a minute to look at it? It's not as extensive as ones the board has seen before. >> I never received this. >> Okay. So, the question I would have for you is,
do you want an opportunity to review whether you would have to add storm water mitigation management measures before the board proceeds with the application? because the board's likely to require you to do that. So, you may
want to look into what that might entail before you commit yourself to doing it, >> which would entail going back to the engineer to find exactly what they're requesting. >> Correct. >> Correct. >> Or you could take your chances and ask
the board to approve it subject to the engineer, which is probably not a good thing, >> which is fine, but if it needs to get done, it needs to get done. But we don't but you don't know what the cost would be. That's >> point being it could be a prohibitive cost or not because you don't know it >> could be simple. >> This is this is prohibitive cost. So it
is >> yeah understood. >> Yeah. >> Because at the end of the day if the cost is that outlandish well then I would have to make a smaller addition not to potentially >> you might make decision. Yeah. You might
make that kind of decision or it may be that it's a relatively simple fix. >> Correct. But I mean, my lot is my lot is fairly large for what I'm requesting. So, I'm I'm really not too concerned about really what they're going to be asking me to do. I'm still 65 ft off my back
line with with the addition. >> You got a lot of pavement here and there on the property. >> I currently really don't. >> Survey shows walkways this that the other engineers going to say, but as I said, you can ask the board to vote on it now.
uh subject to the engineers approval or because it's so close to the zoning requirement or go over and find out what you're getting into and come back. >> That's right. With all respect to stock markets booming right now, if I wait another month or two months, I'll look
at >> He also he also indicates in in the paragraph two that there's no grading plan. So, you may have to apply for what's called a soil moving permit. >> Okay. >> Yeah. Let me let me talk to them and then uh we'll readress.
>> So, do you want to you want to the board to consider the application tonight or do you want to talk to him and come back? >> No, we'll talk to them and come back. They said the stock market is booming right now. So, I got to wait a little little bit longer. I'm okay. >> Okay. Nor may we have a uh we're going to carry you to
>> You want to move forward? >> Hold on. Just you check in with the boss. We're going to vote. >> It's not even right now. >> Okay. So then >> what is your opinion? What is your >> Yeah. What do you want to do? [Music]
>> I'll take the vote. >> Okay. So then explain to the board why it is that you need this particular addition. >> Currently in my house right now it's a it's a 1965 ranch. Um the hallway bathroom. Um the door was widened. is roughly um
8 ft by 12 um actually 7 ft x 12. The one half being the vanity sink and and then and then the tub. So the entrance to go in is just wide enough for me to enter. I can't turn. I can't pivot. So it's tough to
get down the toilet as well get into that tub. The master bathroom, if you want to consider the master bathroom in the master bedroom is 4x7. So then you walk in, the toilet's right there, and to the left of the shower. I really can't even get to the shower even though the door is widened. So ultimately, I
want to add the addition so I can then have an accessible bathroom, a large enough bedroom to turn around as well as make the hallway bathroom large enough that's accessible as well. >> Okay. In the future, >> and I don't mean to be disrespectful. I just want the record to reflect you are
in a wheelchair, correct? >> Okay. And those the things that you're requesting are to accommodate your particular situation. Is that right? I just wanted to make sure the record knew that because it >> Okay. >> need. >> You need I need >> Are there any questions from the board?
>> No. >> No questions. >> Any questions from the audience in in regard to the gentleman's testimony tonight? See, is there anyone in the audience that is in favor of this application?
Is there anyone in the audience opposing this application? I see none. Would one of our members like to frame a resolution, please, with the subject to the engineers approval? >> I'll handle it. U obviously this is something that you need. Um and you
know, it's a >> a needed a necessary thing to do. So that's why I'll be voting yes. So the uh application 25 col 58 Timothy Kelly 3 Noble Street block 408 lot 7 zone R3
uh to approve C variance to construct an addition contrary to section 430-35 columns 10 and 13. >> We have to put in there and increase subject to the >> subject to the complant with the recommendations of the engineer.
Okay. >> Seconded. >> Burkowitz? >> Yes. >> Masarella? >> Yes. >> Petty? >> Yes. >> Quinn? >> Yes. >> Ready? >> Yes. >> Yes. Your application is approved. You will be receiving a letter. Uh speak to
the engineering department, please. And uh after that has been taken care of, then you can apply for your purpose. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Good luck. Have a nice day. Application 25 col 20 PWA 359 North Bevwick Road C variance to
construct a one-story foyer addition twotory edition at rear second story addition over existing one-story covered entrance with overhang element to office entrance one-story covered porch to main
dwelling front stairs air conditioning unit on concrete pad and driveway. This is a replacement contrary to section 430-35 columns 10 and 13. This application was carried from July 9th, 2025.
Good evening. >> Good evening. >> Good evening everyone. Joseph O'Neal of Galileo Nigeria here on behalf of the applicant. Uh I was called because of a discussion at the first meeting on this application. that there was some
confusion as to the size of the office being removed. Uh I looked into that. Of course, the size of the office is mirroring something that was done for by my office actually for the original applicant, Lou. Lorenzo, but the
application is presented to you this evening. The office is going to comply with the conditional use standards because of the addition on the second floor. So, that's not going to be an issue. What might be an issue is the lot is undersized has been this whole time.
Uh it is not strictly a condition of the use but I certainly think it can be read as a condition of the conditional use. So we're applying for a Dvariance for that. Um that's really the only variance except for a variance for building
coverage which is actually being reduced per coverage which is being reduced. And I wanted to bring that up because in my client's packet is one of those engineering letters asking about whether or not they should come in and discuss
storm planning. calculations on the engineering letter, not give you credit for existing coverage. It's taken all as a new build and an empty field, which is not the way to do it. So, I would ask right up front that if the board sees fit to approving
this application, we ask that it just be conditioned upon discussions with the engineer, not a strict requirement that it be done before building permit condition forward. I haven't had a chance to talk to the uh
engineering department. That's my fault. I just didn't have an opportunity to do that before the application. We kind of jumping on a moving train. So with that, I'd like to go ahead and get right to the application. All right. >> So the only variance is lot size,
>> which is pre-existing, >> which is pre-existing, right? That's the only actual variance. Then they they >> well the the the exist the impervious coverage is going to be a variable. It's going to be less of a variable than it was but it's still going to be
>> okay. The um the board of adjustment review that the board has from the zoning department has um has the impervious coverage increasing from 38.65 to 38.85. Is that accurate or is
that not accurate? >> Okay. So, we'll get into that. >> We'll get into that. Okay, great. >> Yeah, we we'll correct it. >> Okay, perfect. >> So, let's go ahead. [Music]
>> Oh, yeah. got a packet. We're going to mark this packet as A1 last time. >> Oh, this is the same one as last time. >> I think you had >> I think you had copies of >> Yeah. Right. >> Yeah.
>> A1. >> Yeah, we already have it. Big difference of what's there. >> Y. [Music] >> So why don't you go ahead and describe
We were just talking about the variance condition. Spell that out first. >> Yeah. So we're here to apply for two variances uh building and impervious. Um the existing building coverage per our calculation is
um 14. >> Can you speak into the microphone? >> Sorry. >> The existing building coverage is 14.8%. And what we're proposing is 19.1% for our calculation. Um >> hold on. Say that again. >> The existing is 14.8%.
And the proposed is 19.1%. Our calculations also include the building overhangs which uh last time was discussed to not include them. >> Okay. >> Uh but for this case it's still included
and the existing impervious is 39.95%. And we are reducing it to 39.6%. And we're doing that by pretty much reducing the existing um oversized driveway and parking lot. So we're taking away impervious coverage from
that. [Music] >> Okay. >> So the proposal is basically what the board sees in front of it which is this completely redone home. >> Yeah. >> With the third.
>> Okay. So the existing house is a uh ble home. The lower level has an existing twocar garage, a family room, a full bathroom, and on the left side of the house is the existing physical therapy office. Uh on the upper level, you have your living, kitchen, dining, and the
bedroom suites on the right side. Uh for the proposed improvements, we're proposing a two-story addition in the rear of the house and a addition to the front foyer. Um, and the rear of the house on the bottom level, we're adding
a game game area, lounge, and a small bedroom. Um, the entry area from the garage also gets a little larger, so they they're going to have a more welcoming area. Uh, on the upper level, the kitchen gets larger. It gets shifted in the front. And over the existing uh
physical therapy office, we're adding a addition uh two a single story addition above which is going to have their bedrooms uh three bedrooms overall on the left side of the house. The exterior is also getting a complete facelift with
new siding and uh new roof. The new roof will be using a hip configuration to minimize the uh build >> up a little louder. >> Sorry. the the new roof will have a hip uh configuration to minimize the overall height and ensure that it blends in
within the surrounding neighborhood. Um and overall we don't see any um detriment to the public uh with this proposal. Uh the the exterior aesthetic is to enhance the uh streetscape of um
South Eric Road uh North Eric Road. Sorry. The last time you were here, there was a discussion about the percentage of the physical therapy space, right, >> compared to the percentage of the Moore area as a whole, >> right? >> And a discussion about whether a
variance for that conditional use was required. >> I believe your testimony was that you felt that a variance was not needed for that because you met the condition, >> right? So the requirement was 30%, the existing is 49.2% 2% and with the
addition we're bringing that percentage down to 25.8%. >> Which means you don't need a variance for that. >> For that. Yeah. Okay. >> Thank you. No further questions for this. >> Members of the board, do you have any questions of the testimony given by this
gentleman? I see none. >> So, if I understand the request that Mr. O'Neal is making. You're requesting that the resolution of the storm water management measures be a condition of the issuance of a building permit as
opposed to a zoning permit. >> Absolutely. >> Is that what you're asking? >> That is correct. >> Is there anyone in the audience that would like to speak on the testimony given this evening by this gentleman?
I see Okay. >> Do you have any other witnesses? Mr. O'Neal? >> I do not. >> The board doesn't have any other questions. >> Anyone in the audience?
>> Is in favor of this application? Please come forward. Is there anyone in the audience that is opposed to this application? Please come forward. Please last meeting did we have
testimony the properties adjoining units were all developed you couldn't secure the other side >> uh I don't remember that testimony specifically but it >> my notes could be on this one I don't know why >> I don't think so because I actually did
listen watch it today because I wanted to refresh my recollection about the zoning issue um I don't think he actually had testimony about that so if you want I'll put that testimony in. That's fine. >> I can bring the property owner up and he'll testify that the neighborhood's welldeveloped around it.
>> Well, I think I think the plans were submitted show that. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. >> So, I think all he has to do is bear probably what I just said. >> Could you repeat that, please? Mr. >> Majority properties are developed.
>> Yeah, they're ready to develop. Would one of the members like to frame a resolution, please? [Music] >> Approve this application. Excuse me. Somebody would like to recommend recommendation to approve the application.
>> So, we're approving it subject to the engineer. You're approving it subject to the um storm water management measures be resolved to the satisfaction of the township engineer prior to the issuance of a building permit.
>> Okay, we Mr. O'Neal has made that request in a previous application and it seemed to work just fine. One of our members please. >> Application 25 col 20.
Jigar Pitwa 359 North D road block 484 lot one zone R-3 to issue a grant a variance to construct a one-story fire addition twotory addition at trail
second story addition over the existing onetory covered entrance with overhang element to office entrance one-story covered post to main dwelling Rent stairs air condition unit on
concrete pack and driveway replacement contrary to section 430-35 column 10 and 13 uh in compliance with the storm water management to the engineing department
compliance. >> Right. And in addition the the the variance for the size of the lot as well. Correct. uh variance of the undersized lot lot coverage >> which is still under size. Yes. >> Too much. Is it enough or you want me to say more?
>> Nope. I think that's it. Okay. >> I think you got it. >> Second. >> Burkowitz? >> Yes. >> Yes. >> Teddy? >> Yes. >> Quinn? >> Yes. >> Ready? >> Yes. >> Briani? >> Yes. >> Thank you everybody. Have a great night. >> Thank you.
>> Thank you so much Mark. >> Be notified. Thank you. Application 25 col 39 Muhammad Hassan 3 Graham Court block 199 lot 8 zone R3 a C variance to legalize driveway expansions
contrary to 430 sections 430-275 by and sections 430-35 col 136 Um >> 10 numeral 10. Can you raise your right
hand, please? Do you swear or affirm that the testimony that you're about to give should be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? >> You can sit down, please. Can you state your name and spell your last name? >> My name is Mohammad Hassan 3 Graham Road, Pasani.
>> Okay. Now, I understand that you have um expanded your driveway. >> Yes. >> Okay. And um it seems that you might have not requested permission to expand your driveway before you did it. Is that right? >> Yes. Actually, I didn't know. I thought
it's my driveway. I can expand. So, >> can you speak up, please? >> Speak into the microphone. >> Yeah. I thought uh like it is a driveway and the contractor he told me that he will take the permission but he didn't the permission then I got the notice. So, that's was the reason.
>> Right. So, you got a notice of violation. Is that right? Yeah, I got the notice. Then I requested that is already built and I need this. >> Okay. So, so you you're asking for two different variances. One for driveway setback and one for imperous coverage.
Okay. You understand that? >> Uh like uh I expanded the driveway. >> Okay. You expanded the driveway. Yes. >> But you made the driveway too close to the property line. >> Yeah. Yes. the three seat right
>> because uh I need the parking for at least for four cars. So that was the reason because if I it would be shorter then it didn't make any purpose. That was the reason. >> So that was going to be my question. Why does the driveway need to be 2 ft from the property line instead of the
required 5 ft from the property? uh like uh I think uh on the other side I made around uh I can say because I have the paper like four five ft and on the other side is a two fits. So it make
like that was the reason because uh I I want the two fit on the uh I can say right hand side >> the property line towards the property line >> uh yeah towards the main door like uh it's too close to the property line from
there it's one fit from the property line and the other one is the uh like two fits like >> well your your the driveway that you built Mhm. >> is 2 ft from the property line. Correct. >> Yes. >> It's supposed to be 5 ft from the
property line. >> That I didn't know. >> You didn't know, right? Yes. >> Now you do. >> Yes. And now I know. >> And so is it 2 ft from the property line because you need to park four cars in the driveway. Is that why you built it that way? >> Yes.
>> Okay. Now, have you seen the memo from the municipal engineer? >> No. I got only the letter like I have to come to the office and see the uh like the code the code officer.
>> You got a letter from the court? >> Yeah. >> Code the >> This is an extra copy. >> Why don't you take that? [Music] >> Okay. [Music]
Okay. So, the municipal engineer is indicating in the memo that you may have to install some storm water mitigation measures. >> Do you understand that? Okay. >> In order to prevent storm water from running onto your neighboring property.
>> Okay. >> Okay. The board usually requires applicants to comply with those before they grant variances such as the ones you're requesting. >> Okay. >> Do you want the opportunity to speak to the municipal engineer about what that
might require before the board imposes that as a condition of approval? Or do you want or or are you comfortable that you'll comply with that requirement? You understand what I'm asking you? >> Yes. Do you want time to think about it
and figure out exactly what you're going to be required to do before you agree to it >> and the cost of what it what it would be entailed? >> Yeah. The best way is I have to talk to the engineer like >> Okay. So, you want an opportunity to
talk to the engineer and then find out what he's going to require before the board makes you do that. Is that right? So you want to come back a different night after you talk to the engineer. >> Yeah, sure. Because because I don't know what I have to do. I have to talk to the engineer regarding
>> that. That's a wise decision. >> Yeah. >> So you want the board to carry your application to another night to give you a chance to do that, right? >> Okay. Sure. >> Okay, >> Jolie, please. I can uh put you on February 4th.
>> So, you're going to probably need to tell Do you have a lawyer representing you in municipal court? >> No. >> Okay. So, make sure you tell the court that you're on for February 4th. >> Yes, I I >> Okay, >> I will do the onion. >> Yes. >> Motion, please.
>> Motion, please. Second. >> Yeah. No further notice and all extensions. Correct. >> Thank you. >> So move. >> Second. >> All in favor. >> All right. >> We'd like to see you back on February
the 4th at 7:30. >> Okay. Thank you. Wow. >> Application 25 col 45. Luis Adana, 118 Brington Drive, block 294, lot 12.1,
zone R4, a C variance to legalize a rear covered patio attached to the dwelling, rear covered structure, a shed, rear pavers, patio pavers behind the
driveway, concrete area, around rear shed contrary to section 430-10 C shed side and rear yards section 430-35
column 8 rear covered structure rear patios pavers and concrete area around shed sections 430-35 column 9 rear pavers patio and concrete
area around the shed. Section 430-35, columns 10 and 13. >> Can you raise your right hand, please? Are you both going to testify? >> Uh, I'm just going to translate for him. >> Hold on a second. >> No, he understands. I'm just going to
>> Okay, you need an interpreter. >> No, no, no. He understands. I'm just going to talk with him, too. >> Okay. Yeah. >> So, that creates an issue. Okay. So, let's see if we can do it in English. >> Okay. >> And if we we may have to come back
anyways because of what we're about to talk about, but let's see how we do. >> Okay. Can you raise your right hand, please? Do you swear or affirm that the testimony that you're about to give should be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? >> Okay. You could sit down, please. Okay.
Um, and can you just identify yourself for the record? >> Uh, Tanya Salazar, 118 Britton Drive. >> Okay. And what's your relationship to Mr. Mr. Aldana. >> Um, my father. >> Okay. Do you also reside at the residence? >> Yes. >> Okay. All right. Mr. Aldana, it appears as
though you did a lot of work on the exterior of the house without receiving any permits. Correct. Correct. Okay. Um, and the um what exactly did you do in
terms of improvements to the to the exterior of the house? What what what projects did you do? >> Um, so we did a a hangover in the back. It's a I'm not >> So I need to swear you in. >> Yeah, that's >> Can you raise your right hand, please? You swear to affirm the testimony you're
about to give should be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. >> You can sit down. >> Are you familiar with the property? >> Yes. >> You live there, correct? Yes. >> What's your relationship to Mr. through >> my father. >> Okay. So, can you explain to the board what improvements your father did to the property before getting permits?
>> Um, yes. We did a hangover in the back. Uh, there was already an existing shed, but it was deterior deteriorating, so we replaced it. Um, we also did um like walkways in the in the backyard um from the front to the back.
>> Can you speak a little bit louder? >> Yeah, I'm sorry. Uh we did walkways from the front yard to the back uh just to do a little walk to the back with the hangover. And um we put like um I'm not sure how to say it. It's um a concrete
wall. Not a concrete wall, a wall um in the driveway like a to signal where the driveway ends. >> Okay. Did you get building permits? >> No. >> Did you get zoning permits? >> No. >> Okay. Okay. So, you didn't get any
permits, right? >> No. >> We weren't aware um the people that we did it with. It was like just friends or other people that could help us do it. And so, none of us knew cuz we just thought that since it was already there, we could just expand there or add on to
it to enhance it. We didn't know we needed the permits to do so. >> Okay. Now, the municipal engineer issued a memo dated August 12th, 2025. Has your father seen that memo? >> No, we haven't seen it at all. >> Okay. You might want to take a look at
it and you can keep that copy. So what the municipal engineer is suggesting is that there was a substantial increase in the
imperous coverage by all the work that your father did on the property and that has caused concerns with respect to storm water runoff. >> Yeah, of course. and the municipal engineer is suggesting and requiring in
fact that your father as a condition of approval of what he's done >> um address that storm water management issue of course. >> Okay. So the the first question I want to ask you and your father is does your
father want the opportunity to talk to the municipal engineer about what might be required and whether he might want to remove some of the things that were constructed. Okay, before asking the board to approve this application.
>> Yes, we would like to. >> Okay. Um, I don't know if the board has any comments about the amount of work that Mr. Aldana did um to his backyard as to how the board feels about whether
um I don't know whether Mr. Aldana and his daughter would benefit from any comment that the board might have about this particular issue. >> I I guess >> we sent him on his way. I don't I don't know. I don't want to speak for any of the poor obviously. >> I guess I'll throw it out there. I mean, obviously, you're going to see how much it's going to cost to take care of the
storm water management. Um, with everything you put onto the property, it might be cheaper to take a lot of it off. Just use that. Keep that in your mind when you go talk to the engineer. Um, I'm sure it looks great, but you have to get a permit for, you know, this much work. I think we've legalized stuff
before, but this is a lot. And for us to consider legalizing it, uh, it's going to take a lot. >> Yeah. impervious coverage is significantly higher almost 14,500 square ft. So it is a expensive one.
Yes, you might consider something to reducing it and after doing that also you have to talk to the engineer department and u minimize. >> Okay. So, you want to come back? Yes, of course.
>> After you figure out whether you want to remove some of it, whether you want to add some storm water measures. Is that correct? >> Correct. >> Okay. >> Is that correct, Mr. Alana? Okay. Great. >> February 11th, 7:30.
>> Yep. And uh no further notice in your granal extensions, correct? And you may want to >> Yeah. I mean, I don't know if you want to talk to an engineer to figure out what the best thing to do to resolve this issue is I'll leave that up to you.
>> Motion, please. >> Motion. >> Second. >> I'm sorry. Before I leave, do we have to fill anything out or do we just come back on February 11th? >> Well, come back. You're going to go see the town engineer,
>> find out what he's going to suggest, >> then follow maybe the advice of Bill and that you may need an engineer to get involved with it. >> Your own engineer. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> And you might want to, as was suggested
by two board members, you might want to consider removing some of the impervious coverage. >> Yes. >> Okay. Thank you so much. >> Take note of what is over on the neighbor's property. >> Yeah, there is in fact
work with >> it. Appears as though >> at least one of the things that you built is actually on your neighbor's property. >> Yeah, we saw that on the um plan. I'm not sure why it's there. It's not at all anywhere near the neighbor's property.
>> We may have to get the survey redone then. >> Yeah, you may have to have a surveyor out there and an engineer out there to actually look at it. >> Okay. You understand? >> Yep. Thank you. >> Did you vote on that?
>> We can do all in favor. >> Yeah. >> You need I think you need you need a vote on carry, right? >> Yes. >> You have a first and a second. >> Okay. Sorry about that. >> All right. Thank you. >> You didn't do a favor.
>> Yeah. All right. Yes. >> So just pick up. >> Okay. The survey was done. John has mentioned the survey was done 45. >> Oh yes. February 11th. >> February 11th.
>> So you can take that there were other people here on that application. >> Oh yes. >> Were there members of the public on that application? >> Yes. >> Did you understand it was carried to February 11th? >> Okay. >> All right. Application 2544 Dollar Tree
2900 Route 10 lock 18 lots 8 zone O-T a C variance for installation installation of a second wall sign. [Music] >> Okay. Can you put your parents on the record please? >> Yes.
>> Good evening board members. Uh my name is Rhino O Sullivan. I'm from the firm Fox Royal Child and I'm here on behalf of the applicant Dollar Tree Stores, Inc. Um, Dollar Tree Stores are uh seeking an approval from you today.
>> Sorry. Go ahead. You're fine. uh for a uh a C2 variance in connection with the installation of a back lit sign on the facade of the building it leases located at 2920 state uh Route 10, Morris Plains, New Jersey in block 18, lot 8.
Uh Dollar Tree already has a storefront sign that is located on the facade of the building which faces the parking lot. Uh tonight's application concerns a second sign on the storefront that Dollar Tree wishes to place on the facade that faces NJ Route uh 10. The
sign is essentially a uh or in the same place of uh a sign that the former tenant uh drug fair had that uh was facing uh NJ Route uh 10. Um notice has been provided in accordance with the township's uh zoning ordinance and the
uh New Jersey's municipal land use law. Um the applicant is also seeking any other waiverss, approvals, and or variances as may be required upon analysis and testimony regarding the plans and other application materials. Uh approval of a C2 variance is
appropriate here as the installation of the second sign would advance certain purposes of the MLUL specifically purpose A and I and the zoning ordinance uh and can be granted without substantial detriment to public good or
or really any detriment um and would provide benefits that would outweigh any detriment caused by the deviation and would not substantially impair the intended purposes of the ML. UL and zoning ordinance. Uh, additionally that
the sign would allow for safe safer navigation to the site as the sign would allow Dollar Tree customers to easily identify it from uh, Route 10 and uh, create a a desirable visual environment with an aesthetically pleasing modern
signage at the endcap of the shopping center. Um to further comment on the specifics of the signage, I'm accompanied by uh Brian Robinson of Ankor Sign, Inc. with me to my right. Um Ankor Signs prepared the plans that are
before you tonight. Um and Mr. Robinson will prepare uh will present any testimony regarding the technical aspects of the signage uh and answer any questions the board may have. Uh, additionally, I also have with me Melissa Mileleti who's uh, sitting on
the bench right there. Um, she is a district manager at Dollarat Tree and she can answer any operational business related uh, questions the board may have. >> So, the is the only variance the fact that it's a second wall sign?
>> Correct. Yeah, just the second uh, uh, storefront signage where only one is permitted. >> Okay. And does the sign comply in terms of of size requirements with the zoning ordinance? >> My understanding is yes, but >> Okay. So, >> okay. Can you raise your right hand,
please? Do you swear or affirm that the testimony that you're about to give should be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? >> Yes. >> State your name. Spell your last name. >> Uh Brian Robinson. R O B I N S O N. Okay. >> And Mr. Robinson, just quick background. Um what's your position at uh Ankor
Signs? a field service technician. >> Okay. And how long have you been in that role? >> 15 years. >> Okay. And um uh did you pro prepare the plans tonight for the board? >> I did not prepare the plans that takes place in our office. We have an entire
permitting department. >> But you're familiar with them, right? I have them right here. I do. >> Okay. Okay. Great. Uh so Mr. Robinson, the sign the signs that we presented to the board tonight, do they comply with the technical requirements of the
township sides and sign? >> Yes. >> Okay. >> Regardless, you're not asking for a variance for sides, correct? >> We are not. No, >> you're just asking a v for a variance for the second sign. >> Yes. Correct. The second sign. >> What's the plan on illumination?
>> Uh well, they're internally illuminated LEDs. hours of operation. How hours? Is it 24 hours elimination or >> the sign on 24 hours? >> No, they usually turn off about they're on a time clock. They usually turn off
30 to 45 minutes after the store closes. >> So that'll just depend on store hours. >> Business hours. >> Business hours. Correct. >> You say usually. Is that going to be the fact? >> Yeah. Well, there's a time clock set on the inside of the store. It can be
changed. It's a, you know, an actual clock. So, usually it's, >> you know, whether it's a half hour, 45 minutes, >> depends on >> my recommendation was you shut it off non- business hours. >> Yeah, >> that's what you plan to do. >> Yes. They usually usually the signs stay
on for the when the parking lot lights go off or that time frame, >> they usually leave them on. Like I said, most Dollar Trees I've been to is 30 minutes after >> store is closed. They turn off automatically. Well, you have someone here who's going to testify about that, right?
>> Right. Yes. Uh, Miss Myleti can uh come and answer in terms of the the hours. I understand. I'm not going to testify. >> So, so this says that it there used to be a sign there for the old uh renter or the old business. >> Correct. Yeah, there was a um there was
a s there was signage on that the exact portion of the the facade um for the prior tenant which was drug fair. >> And do you know if they had one in the front as well? Did they have two signs or
>> I I believe so. Yes. And there's a sign um sign C that is existing on Route 10 to the entrance. >> There's two monument signs, >> right? Correct. Yeah, there's two monument signs and yeah, dollar trees on both those
monument signs. >> That's not Those are already there, right? >> Right. Those are already existing. They're >> existing. >> Anything else from this witness? No. >> No. >> Any member of the board have any questions of this witness on his testimony? >> No. >> And for the record, there are no members
of the public present. >> Correct. >> Okay. >> All right. Then listen, I'll just call you just to go over hours of operation. >> Raise your right hand, please. Do you swear or affirm that the testimony that you're about to give should be the
truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? >> Yes. >> Have a seat. >> State your name. Despite your last name, please. Melissa Mileleti. Last name is M A I A L E T I. >> Okay. Melissa, um, what's your what's your role at at Dollar Tree?
>> District manager. >> And And how long have you been district manager? >> For 12 years. >> Okay. And And how long and have you been at Dollar Tree? >> 26 years. >> Okay. And are you familiar with the
store at uh 2920 State Route 10 Plains? very >> okay. Um, and I understand the board has a question about the hours of operation related to the the uh lighting of the signage. Um, could you give us an idea
of what the hours are generally like at Dollar Tree in terms of the business operation? So, right now they're 7 days a week, 9 to 9, and the lights come usually go off, um, as the sign guy said, um, usually like 30 minutes after
we close, just until our associates leave the parking lot. Usually goes off, but there's a timer in the building that's adjusted based on what we want it to do. >> Okay. And and that's and that's currently right now that that is that are the hours. But I understand that
they they might fluctuate depending on busy season versus >> Yes. >> So in December there's a few days before Christmas that the hours will go to 8:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. >> Okay. Okay. >> And you can adjust the timer within the building.
>> Yes. >> So you'd be agreeable to shut them off 30 minutes after or 45 minutes. 30 minutes after we close. [Music] >> Any questions of the board this
testimony given this evening? There's no one in the audience. Would one of the members like to frame? Resolution, please. Application 25 col 44 dollar tree
2900 route 10 block 18 lots 8 zone 4-T to grant a seance to install installation of the second wall sign >> on the condition that >> with the condition that the lights uh turned off 30 minutes after the business
uh hours. >> Okay. >> Okay. Do you turn them on at 8:00 in the morning or if it's dark out or >> um I to be honest with you, I'm not 100% sure. I've never >> All right, so we'll just deal with the after usually a photo cell on the side.
[Music] >> Got it. Don't have to worry about that. >> Sorry. Is there a second? >> Second. >> Sorry, I interrupted. Burgit, >> yes. >> Mozzarella, >> yes. >> Petty, >> yes. >> Quinn, >> yes. >> Ready?
>> Yes. >> Yes. Applications approved. We'll be receiving a notice and at that time you can apply for your >> may I have a motion to adjourn, please? >> Motion. >> Motion. Second. Thank you. >> Do we have to thank the engineer for assure me? >> Yes.
>> All in favor? >> I I don't think anybody's opposed to leaving. Why don't they Why are they still getting there? engineers.