e e thank you for my name t you got 63 e good evening and welcome to tonight's meeting of the zoning Board of adjustment of the township of Union which is being help pursuant to the open
public meeting law c231 laws of New Jersey dated 1975 notice of this meeting was advertised in the local Source the newspaper of record and notice has been posted on the bulletin board in the municipal building ajon to the municipal
clerk's office roll call Mr Wy here miss Martins is absent Mr Benta present Miss Scott is absent Mr Johnson here Mr mcneel present Mr Graves present
M rickets is absent Mr Champion here there being a quorum present this meeting is now declared open at this time are there any Communications oh I'm sorry there's no Communications Mr chairman rece proceeding with tonight's meeting our
first order of business this evening would be calendar number 3438 Jeb Foods LLC located at 332 Indiana Street block 588 Lots 52 and 54 applicant seeks a one-year extension
yes Mr chairman Rob pansula the board attorney uh I received and the board should have in its packet there was a communication from ja bomb work gath I believe council's here tonight for Mr hail's office just for the record state your name Chad dun Chad is here welcome
uh we uh received the communication I worked in conjunction with the zoning office and uh there's an extension needed to perfect the subdivision that was previously proved there's rather stringent time constraints under the municipal luse law of 190 days it hasn't
expired yet but to air on the side of caution it makes sense to extend it they have a couple of particulars that they were working with their professionals so what I did in in anticip ation of that being a rather routine request of which there does not appear to be a legal
reason to object to uh we did present the resolution in your packet tonight uh unless anybody has a question of the applicant's attorney or myself uh I would recommend that the board uh passed the resolution simply extending the time
for which the he the javer bomb office can file the subdivision deed there's no other change or no other substance changed to the approval that you previously did for Jeb foods are there any board members that would like to question the
applicant are there any members of the public that would like to question the applicant hearing none board members you've all had a chance to read the resolution as it has been written at this time are there any board members that would like to comment make changes
or modifications to the resolution hearing none may I have a motion and a second to adopt the resolution Mr chairman I move to this board adopt the resolution as written and is accurately memorializing the preious findings of the board second a
motion roll call Mr Wy yes Mr bent the Vaga yes Mr Johnson yes Mr mcneel yes and Mr champy yes thank you Council we'll arrange for the execution of the deeds and resolution proceeding with tonight's
meeting our next order of business is calendar number 34552 CX Tower leasing LLC location will be 1750 Mars Avenue block 2802 Lot 4 applicant wishes to install a wireless
telecommu telecommunications facility good evening for the record my name is David Kenny I'm an attorney with Snider and Snider here tonight to represent the applicants CX towers and T-Mobile Northeast LLC um the application is to replace or to replace
the structure that's currently supporting the Telecommunications equipment that's located at the water sphere site at 1750 Morris Avenue Um T-Mobile AT&T and Verizon all have anten is on the water sphere um we've been received a letter from American water
that says that that water sphere is coming down um so CX Towers is building a monopole structure to support the antennas for T-Mobile AT&T and variz so that there isn't a loss in service from those in the surrounding area that are
currently receiving Services um from these carriers um the antennas are going to be located over at the same rad Center Height which is the same antenna Center Line height uh that they are now so there's no increase in height for any of the uh carriers the tower is shorter
than the water sphere but uh they are going over at the same rad Center Height so there should be a seamless transition and coverage should have the same coverage I have with me tonight uh the project engineer who can go through the site plan layout to show you exactly where the tower is located uh on the
property in relation to the existing water sphere I also have with me tonight um an RF engineer from T-Mobile who's going to go through the RF justification the coverage maps to show you the seamless transition to make sure that we're filling in any gaps that would be created if the water sphere came down
without a replacement site and I also have with us the project planner um to go through the New Jersey Municipal land use law planning reasons for uh the application um without further Ado uh unless the board has questions for me I'd like to bring up the board engineer to go through the site plan are there
any board members that would like the question councel hearing none just for the record Council I did Mark the application with the supporting materials A1 for the record the board has those materials I marked A2 the site plan as it was presented by Tonic uh consisting of 10
sheets so as it was submitted it's it's A2 in A3 I did the survey uh which was dated March 27th of 2023 so we have A1 through A3 to start the record thank you Council and all the documents that we showing on electronic are all the same exact documents that were filed in hard
copy so noted if that devh just let us know and we'll mark it separately hi good evening my name is Edward ameli professional engineer in the state of New Jersey I'm with tectonic engineering Tec t o n i can I
ask the witnesses swear or affirm that the testimony you provide this evening is the truth and the whole truth I do and if you would just State and spell your name one more time for the record sure it's Edward e d w a r d I'm aeli i a m i c e l
i thank you so I guess on the screen here we're showing just for everyone's knowledge it's a sheet z03 um so this is just an overall site plan and um just to kind of get the
references so to the north um which is on top of the page basically that's excuse me Mr Elli would you just go over your credentials before you proceed sure yep um as I mentioned I'm a professional engineer um graduated
from Syracuse University been an engineer since 2012 um testified amongst many other board the board will accept is a is credentials thank you sure no problem um so just to
to talk about the site plan so to the north which is basically the top of the page that's essentially the Garden State Parkway um as you guys are aware the the sphere the water structure is is visible there um so what the proposed is the
150t tall monopole um which is that I don't know if I have a pointer actually does this oh you can see that perfect okay uh which is basically North east of the of the current water structure here um there's base equipment which is not
being changed so for Verizon AT&T ntmobile there's already uh ground equipment there so the idea is the cablin will just get rerouted from the water structure to this monopole underground and everything would be um routed up the tower inside the pole so
it's all concealed and then then the antennas will be attached to the monopole at that point the compound which is going to be proposed Ed around the monopole is just going to have a 6 tall chain link fence with Barb Wire and it's about 50x 40 in size um just for uh
security reasons and it would just be gravel so um all perious uh material there and then there's going to be just some other uh miscellaneous equipment within the compound um American water does have a small little yagi antenna currently on
the water structure so that would also be transferred to the monopole and I'll just show you a quick elevation so you guys could see so this is sheet
z05 within the plan set and this is kind of a side by side so just to put it in perspective so the the water structure to the new monopo is about 98 ft apart um and it it keeps it far enough to perform the construction activities and as David mentioned all the antenna
elevations are to remain identical to what you currently see on the water structure so that will not change so everything will basically be transferred from one structure to the other um and all the cabling comes inside the pole which connects all the the antennas for
the RF frequency um that's really it it's kind of a simple um install from a the Telecommunications perspective all the other equipment remains as is as you see on the ground here um so all the building structures and and everything
will remain um during construction activity I believe there was a question I don't know if we want to touch base on those um we will have uh typically that the process is a pre-construction meeting that occurs with the contractor
we go through the site um review any safety measures that are needed there'll be safety signs and and warning signs coming in and out it'll be a live construction site like you normally would see um anything that needs to be protected will be so all the buildings
any water lines or anything um underground will be detected and then protected as well um the monopole itself will be fully designed so you know the the the steel structure and Foundation would be
fully designed to carry the load based on New New Jersey's building code um and typically uh there's a telecommunication telecommunication standard the Tia which is Rev H um those
the monopole structur to follow that code always has to get inspected every 5 years or so um and just make sure it's in good standing and there's there's no structural Integrity seen and that's uh that's about it if you have any questions are there any board members
that relate to question Mr ell's testimony uh yes um Mr President Mr President Mr chairman um and noticed that only T-Mobile uh submitted a a letter communicating support what about
Verizon and AT and T um have there been any discussions with them so that's actually a question for me um so um yes Verizon we know has an intention to locate over but they're still Gathering their stuff together but they didn't
have it in time ready for this application um and we also know that there's conversations with A&T to come over since they're both existing here and the situation is that the water sphere is coming down we think it's just a matter of time before they get together and come over the idea would be
is right now we're going through a zoning application for the structure and t-mold being the top carrier the anchor tenant that kind is what's justifying the height for the structure um uh Verizon and AT&T they could come over with a separate application usually that's at the building department level
they would submit plans to locate on the structure once it's constructed or once it's approved they would submit plans to locate their equipment on the structure and then they would have to submit their own structural reports at that time and everything like that Mr Kenny is is it safe to say that
the the monopole that's being presented tonight is in kind to what exists on the water tower it's just at a different location is that the capabilities that we're dealing with exactly okay CU that'll be that helps me as well I mean it's a technical and I know Mr Richie
will probably explain this better than me it's a technical expansion probably because of the movement and the adjustment but basically the capabilities on the site are being moved from the water tower to this monopo exactly that so that that's what Mr IM am's testimony was is that there's
ground equipment that powers the antennas so that ground equipment is still in the same locations it's just the support structure for the antennas is coming down so we need a new support structure to make sure that they get the elevations that they need to propagate the service can it even be stated and
maybe the engineer can answer this that the uh monopole will show improvements in technology and some other things as it were from what exists on the water tower which I'm sure was developed some many years ago so I'm I'm sure he can I'll just in my experience that is the
case so the water sphere is designed for a different purpose right it's designed for the Water Company's purposes so there are some limitations as far as structure there are some limitations as far as the mounts that you can put on that a monopole is designed for exactly this purpose so you can get greater
amount of equipment on the tower you can also get what they say is is a greater asmith capability so that means the direction that you can point the antennas you just have a better uh a better structure to support the services great now I think that's helpful it's helpful for me I hope it's helpful for
the board members and and Zoning because in the past when you had add-ons to existing approvals a lot of times they'd come back here and it would happen when especially 15 20 years ago and it was a different mode of communication it was rather new um you're and I just want it
to be clear that AT&T and Verizon this approval tonight is with the intention that they're going to be there so absolutely that step then would perhaps be administrative when the time comes unless it's going to be changed or expanded to a degree that would require return right if there was any substantial change to the structure that
absolutely would require an application before this board to prove any of those changes um the reason why we made T-Mobile was part of the applications again as being the top carrier that is what's kind of dictating the height of the facility um but I do know that the the applicant uh CX Towers is in
discussions with Verizon that they do have intention to coming over to the tower um and I believe AT&T is just falling behind thank you that was helpful the one other question I have is is access to the tow is that's still going to come off of mors Avenue yep
yeah so the access hasn't changed it still comes off mors and then accesses through y so that's and the towel will be Construction in segments you know not one monolithic 150 correct yeah they come in um in in sections and then they they
basically slip on top of each other and get bolted through yep are there any other board questions I have a question Mr chairman sure um just wondering what type of maintenance is required for this uh proposed
facility uh so it's pretty minimal um usually you'll have a technician come about once a month or so just to kind of check on their equipment a lot of it's remote now um from like a civil structural point of view honestly there would be not much unless you have some overgrown vegetation um that would be
picked up and just cleaned up but other than that you know it's it's pretty much self-maintained are there any other questions for Mr am s Hearing none thank you thank you counselor your next Witness and then just to the dove tail on what
uh in response to your comment so when the carriers do upgrades for like swapping out antennas that usually happen every two or three years or so like new antenna comes out they have to upgrade it at that time when they're installing the new equipment they would submit a new structural report at a time
and do a full sight inspection so with a multiple carriers on it's probably going to be every year or two or so that there's going to be a full inspection of the tower while they're checking to make sure it would be you know suitable for the next upgrade of equipment um so it's fairly frequently but as the engineer
stated once a month is usually when someone goes to the site to just make sure it's in good working condition uh my next uh uh my next expert will be uh Daniel from uh Pon um so he is our RF engineer he's T-Mobile's RF engineer so he'll be going through the radio
frequency justification report that was submitted with the application yes let me pull it up I'm sorry good evening can I ask the witness to swear or affirm that the testimony you provide this evening is the truth and the whole truth I do and for the record State and spell your name with your
affiliation Daniel Chuck D a n i e l last name CZ c um my qualifications are as I have a bachelor's degree in engineering from NJIT and I have an emphasis on communication systems with that degree
I'm experienced in running propagation analysis uh for wireless carriers and have bort accept his credentials thank you okay so from T-Mobile's perspective
uh as an RF um I guess we could start with first what T-Mobile is licensed for and T-Mobile is licensed by the FCC to provide service in the 600 700 850 1900
2100 2500 megahertz frequency bands and it provides these services to all TMobile customers in the form of 4G and 5G Services uh and can I just ask is that what you have on the screen is that the radio frequency justification report
that was separately submitted to the board you know I have the justification report that's what you're going to testify to I might as well Mark that separately since it's a separate document I'll mark that A4 for the record yeah yeah I'll be talking about the justification report
okay um okay so in the justification report uh we have a detailed site map which I'll just skip to um we in the report it's marked exhibit a uh it's titled T-Mobile's existing
macro sites within Union and one mile beyond the Township's border uh this was provided as one of their uh requirements for the board uh as you can see in this uh exhibit Township's border is shown
with uh yellow border and uh if we zoom in uh um we can see that running along the Garden State Parkway and uh us22 where they intersect uh we could see site NJ
0526 which is the basis for this application and this site is currently at 147 uh feet antenna Center Line and um I have also prepared propagation maps for from this site as well as the
existing s uh sites that are on air within Union so if we move it on to exhibit B we have T-Mobile's existing midband 1900 megahertz LTE coverage and in this map
we can see um that the existing sites are actually marked with uh dark blue circles uh and these are all active on air macro sites and then we also have purple squares which are Legacy Das
nodes assisting in coverage and capacity to these macro sites and in the center of the map we have NJ 5206 H and it is currently propagating and coverage can be seen with uh colors of green and
yellow uh green depicts in building uh residential coverage and yellow uh depicts in vehicle coverage so um on this map the water tower site is currently active in propag ating and if
we move to the next map where uh T-mobile so it's marked Exhibit C and it's titled T-Mobile's existing midband 1900 megahertz LTE coverage without water tank uh site NJ 052 06h and we can
see that now in the center of the map with that site removed we lose a lot of coverage um most notably on uh uh on the street it's uh Grand View a
uh Adams AV Harding a parts of kage Av and that's coming from the Northwest and then from the south we could see that coverage is lost uh along golf teren uh Robinson uh Terren and Andress Terrace
and Olive Terrace and also in this area is uh what is it it's uh there's a middle school and that would also lose coverage but um
if we move now on to the new propagation from the propos site this is marked exhibit D this is T-Mobile's existing midband 1900 megahertz LTE coverage without the water tank site but with the proposed site at 147 ft this is the same
antenna Center Line and we could see that coverage is once again restored um as it was previously on the water tank and uh is there any questions are there any board members
that would like to question the testimony the witness has provided um Mr chairman I have a question um the Aesthetics uh the Aesthetics is opposed
from the you know the water tower to uh the regular 150 foot pole is that going to be you know that just you know uh so we have another expert to go over the Aesthetics we have the planner will go through this this is more just on the RF coverage test just want to make sure and
just to generalize your testimony and layman's terms if you take away the water tower with the capabilities it currently has the monopole that you're here to get the approval for will replace that void it's necessary to replace that void if not even make it
better but at least replace it correct yes that is correct the goal with this site is to replenish the coverage that would be lost if the in the event that the water tower is removed and there no replacement site is put on in replacement are there any board members
that would like to question the the witness's testimony hearing none are there any members of the public that would like to come forward and question the witness's testimony Harry nun counselor thank you
Daniel so my uh next expert is our professional planner Paul Ricky um and he'll go through his uh planners report that was submitted as well as the photo simulations good evening Mr Ricky can I ask you to swear or affirm that the testimony you provide this evening is the truth and the whole truth I do and
for the record if you could State and spell your name with your affiliation it's Paul Ricky R ICI with Ricky planning for the record I will Mark a five I think we're up to your planner's report and we'll mark A6 the supplemental photo
simulations that you provided so the board has them in their packets and if there's anything else added to that we can go from there A5 and A6 yes uh thank you um I'm a licensed professional planner in the state of New Jersey I've been licensed since the year 2000 I'm
also a member of the American Institute of certified planners you've appeared here before too has there been any changes in your credentials from your L certified sir has not in my license the bo will AC good thank Mr Ricky how's that for cutting right to thank very good um for for this application like as
you said I I submitted uh um two deliverables a professional planers report I'll I'll try to summarize that and if the board wants me to give additional information I'll I'll provide that and also uh I prepared photo simulation so the board sees what this will look like um we did keep the the
water sphere in there um and that does help to give you a sense of scale as well when you look at the photo Sims compared to what exists today but for this application we conservatively notice for a D1 used variance rather than than a t a D2 used variance an
expansion of non-conforming use I I defer to council the the proofs are are relatively similar if it's a if it's a D2 variance we you know there's there's less of there's because the use already exists right there's less of a ability for it to create new substantial
negative impacts that's one of the major differences in in the testimony but we're speaking the D one or two use variants in the D6 height variants I note that um your ordinance permits Wireless in your CI Zone um in our
Municipal property and that c CI zone is nowhere approximate uh to the subject property and where where Wireless Communications facilities are permitted they are permitted for three carriers up to a height of 150 ft so that's what we're proposing as part of this
application so elsewhere in your ordinance where the township finds it cell tower is appropriate we are at that that same height um for for wireless telecommunications facilities um it's been held in the courts that they they generally support the purpose of of
zoning that's the first part of the positive criteria and also we have to demonstrate that the site is particularly well suited for the use and that's based on two criteria you heard from the radio frequency engineer that there will be a gap in service and coverage for this area if this facility
was removed and that this facility is at the right height and location to fill that Gap um from a land use uh planning standpoint the site is also particularly well suited because it's a site that's historically had Wireless telecommunications facilities um and on
structures or a structure uh than is larger what's being proposed today the site is approximately 23 acres in area uh it's well removed from non-residential land uses again it contains that wireless facility today it
bard ERS Route 22 you know kind of it's it's it's an isolated area of the Township in terms of its proximity to the residential clearly while driving on Route 22 in the parkway there's visibility as well as other areas in the town due to its height but the key being
is it's a non-residential property well removed from from residential um land use so it's it's my finding that we meet the positive criteria uh for that reason for the negative criteria for for Wireless Communications facilities
um rely on a different negative test it's the seek a four-part balancing test which suggests that we should balance the benefits of an application versus its detriments and the benefits outweigh the detriment a board should vote firmly for an application at least the court
suggest that um the first part of the test is to identify the public interest at stake and I think we all understand this um it's family interaction the ability to have uh e911 calls emergency calls uh the ability to have access to
promp Reliable information and and and so on um I'm not going to go into a lot of detail on this but over 80% of emergency calls today come from wireless phones in the like and well over half of the country uses a wireless phone as
their primary form of communication the days of the handheld phone are continued to diminish over the years I still had one but most people don't today um the second part of the test ask us to identify um any negative impacts
associated with the facility and for this purpose uh I prepared the photo simulations because these are passive land uses unlike other use variance applications these don't create a lot of traffic or noise they don't create new population demands on your water and
sewer infrastructure and the like um the only potential for a negative impact is the visibility for these facilities so that the board could properly um review this or or view the potential for negative impacts we submitted these photo simulations which I'm going to try to start on the screen
here um the photo simulations are dated June 24th 2024 uh prepared by myself and before I begin I just want to say that the heights for these uh I flew a drone at the site and then canvas the area so the
heights that you're depicted are based on a a a drone flight which is the most accurate way that that we know uh to to stimulate the uh the height of the Tower so um moving forward we also prepared an aerial photograph that the
numbers on the photograph can everyone see this or can everyone see the numbers um we have a packet here okay so I have additional paper copies to you have your paper copies everyone yes we do does anyone need one anyone need a paper Okay
so the the numbers on the the aerial clearly correspond with the location uh that we we did simulations on um or at and the first one is is location number one this is on Morris Avenue um it's the most proximate U to
the site uh on the left you can see the existing water spear on the right you can see the the the proposed Tower again um the mass of the tower is less than the existing water sphere and it's at a lower height in the water sphere that's at approximately 210 ft compared to uh
150 ft the reason that the the the tower even looks um close to being the same height is because it's the the tower is closer to your perspective in in this picture um picture number two is taken
approximately 875 ft away uh Northwest of the subject property this is also on morav on the on the other side of the parkway um looking across the parkway here um here you can see uh to the left you can see the location of the monopol
and the water sphere to the right again uh looking significantly lower in height and in scale and then picture number three you find that now picture number three is is taken
770 feet Northwest of the site and as you can see as we move further away uh the mass of that Tower uh diminishes uh significantly in the lands gate and because the water sphere is located closer than where the tower is it looks
significantly larger as well from this Vantage Point um picture number four like to go down residential streets as well um and in part of the analysis is that you know there's visibility of this Tower but it's not visible from everywhere uh in
the community and there was no visibility from 1820 ft Southwest of the site uh at the Terminus of of Grand View Avenue um and you know this is my hope I don't mean to joke but this is my money shot cuz this is not an easy shot to
take here getting on uh to Route 22 I think anyone appreciates that from the area um um this is uh simulated view number five again um here I'm I'm merging on the Route 22 I I wanted to show it um the the visibility from the
highway um and and here again the water sphere is located much closer and then to the back right you can see from this vantage point it looks significantly smaller uh than the the existing built condition of the water sphere uh and then picture number um six
is a simulated view approximately 1760 ft uh Southwest of the site I I can't pronounce the name of the street kwami kwami thank you small colder sack and you can see if you really zoom in you're looking at the in the center of the
photograph The Ridge of the house just to the left of the ridge of the house you can begin to see the tower and I had to look pretty hard to find this to to be able to get this Photograph you can show that the scale is is significantly less from this Vantage Point um and then
the photograph number 7 um that's just just to the south of a photograph number six um that's 1930 ft Southwest of the site where there was there was no visibility because of the existing trees there um same for um photograph number
eight and now we're jumping all the way going back towards Morris Avenue but up into a residential subdivision at the Terminus of Cranbrook Drive um and because of the tree line there there was no visibility and
finally um at location number nine again coming back uh to Morris Avenue um kind of a kind of across the street from the entrance to the suburban golf course there because of the tree line there was there was no visibility so it it was my
conclusion that as a result of the the application that there'll be less uh visibility than than it than exists today um and that there will be no substantial detriment to the character of the area uh as a result of the application uh the third part of the test asks us whether there any
mitigation that is needed or required and we always listen to the board in that regard and then the fourth part of the test is the balance the benefits versus the detriments uh and and here we believe that the benefits outweigh the detriment and and in regarding the
height um Wireless telecommunications facilities are different than other types of land uses without the effect of height uh there is no uh use so the radio frequency engineer demonstrated that we need the height for this use to to work uh and that's a special reason
in itself based on past case law and the fact of the matter practically speaking since we're the overall height of the site is going to reduce and the mass is going to reduce we believe that um there'll be no substantial detriment to this particular area as well so I hope I'm not overly
long- winded here but I'm trying to get the correct proofs on the record and we believe it's a very good application it meets the burden of proof are there any board members that would like to question Mr Ricky's testimony hearing none to be clear Mr Richie I mean and and you mentioned the
legality and I I think you you hit the uh the proofs and for the board's benefit in the public the D1 aspect you covered it so it is kind of tricky it's not bright line because you're definitely removing as far as you know the water company is moving or removing
that water tower after this transition right I mean that's that's sorry understand that's part of the is that a a fat to come ple that's for sure is there Tim taes involved with that once this move occurs do you know if you know or Mr Kenny knows so the the Tim taes are kind of dependent on when we can get
the carriers over to the new tower um my understanding is once all the new carriers are over to the new tower that's when they're going to finalize plans for the decommissioning of the water sphere but the letter that was submitted with our application does from American water does explicitly state
that they've directed The carriers and CX Towers to to move over to this new monopole um because they say that the water sphere is no longer in use it's going to be decommissioned and there's no ability to repair it so yeah I saw it was about a year ago it was May of 2024
I already but it's now the intent for T-Mobile at least now after if you get approved tonight you're going to start to transition and do this monop you're looking to get it done sooner rather than later absolutely terms of time so the goal is if if we were so lucky to
receive an approval tonight um then we would work with CX towers and T-Mobile to file building permit applications for construction approval and then they would build the Tower once the tower is built then Teemo would swap over its equipment we hope by that time Verizon
and AT&T would already have their plans U may maybe the actual approval and the fact that the tower is being constructed that might motivate them to finalize their plans um but then at that time they would file their own construction permit applications to locate their equipment on the tower once all of the new equipment was located on the
monopole on the new structure and there's no longer any Communications equipment on the water sphere then American Water would uh devise its plans or finalize its plans to remove the water sphere okay that that's helpful I think for the zoning officer because he's going to be dealing with the permits as well and that's where the D1
D2 I think Mr chairman and board and the public uh becom somewhat of a gray area I'll call it because if the water tower remains with the new monopole uh technically then you have an expanded site I mean you're going to have two units on one Water Tower and one on a
monopo to be constructed eventually you're going to get the water tower out of there and it's just going to be the monopo so agreed it's kind of a unique legal approach I guess I think Mr Richie did a good job by the way hitting on the key elements
Mr chairman so unless anybody has any further questions any board members like to question Mr Ricky's testimony hearing none are there any members of the public that would like to question Mr Ricky's ter testimony hearing none are there any
members of the public that would like to comment on this application thank you hearing none counselor would you like to sum up again uh just in summation that this was a situation that's being kind of
forced upon the carriers uh New Jersey American water has told us that you know they're going to take down the existing structure that supports their equipment um so we're trying to construct this Tower to make sure that the those residents and the people working and living in the area that are accustomed
to these Services don't lose the services um so we respectfully request that this board Grant the variances that have been applied for um and we hope that we can construct the tower as soon as possible to make sure that there is no loss in service thank you Mr Kenny at this time I believe we can conference
this Mr mcneel would you like to begin tonight yes thank you uh Mr chairman uh first I would like to thank the presenters for the completeness of their testimony um and I do believe that the negative impacts are
minuscule um compared to the benefits and that this site is uh well suited uh for this installation and I do intend to vote Yes Mr Wy yes uh Mr chairman I agree with Mr McNeil I think the site is
well suited with this project and the benefits do outweigh any negative or detrimental impacts so I'm going to vote Yes as well Mr Graves I will be voting yes uh it's a clear application the
benefit it's far outweigh any negatives so it's a great project you're going to vote Yes right oh yes Mr Johnson thank you Mr chairman I agree with my colleagues um the experts
did a good job far outweighing the U positives versus a negatives the only thing I'm going to hate to see that Tower come down haven't been Bor and raised in Union it's been there a long time we knew that that was probably the the number one question we were going to get it does it
have to come down well that's why I made the the statements I made you know because uh the Justin Case element because you know what who knows I do Mr chairman will vote Yes and Mr bent vegna thank you Mr
chairman uh based on the testimony heard this evening um especially the photos and Views that Mr uh Ricky presented tonight I feel the variant is Justified and the property is well suited for the proposed use so I'll be voting yes myself as for myself uh based on
tonight's testimony the applicant proved and Justified both the negative and positive criteria so I too will be voting yes and the witnesses did do an excellent job can I have us uh a motion in a second Mr Mr chairman I move that the
board Grant the variance applicable to this application and that council is directed to prepare a resolution consistent with the board's decision second a motion roll call Mr Wy yes Mr Bena yes Mr Johnson yes Mr mcneel yes Mr
Graves yes Mr champy yes April 23rd is a regular meeting night of the board I'll have the resolution uh presented for the adoption on that tonight I'll send you draft ahead of thank you so much and thank you for your time can I have a motion in a second to adjourn Mr chairman there
being no further business coming before this board this evening I move we adjourn second all in favor I opposed so moved