BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MEETING
BOROUGH OF WANAQUE
MINUTES
March 7, 2007
As transcribed:
1 BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
BOROUGH OF
WANAQUE
2
________________________
3 IN THE MATTER OF: : TRANSCRIPT
CASE#:
19-06
4 SMSA Limited Partnership: PROCEEDINGS
d/b/a
Verizon Wireless :
Block 999,
6 ________________________
7
Wednesday, March 7, 2007
8
9
Commencing at 8:25 p.m.
10
B O A R D M E M B E R
S P R E S E N T:
11
JACK DUNNING, Chairman
12 WILLIAM GRYGUS, Vice-Chairman
FRANK COVELLI
13 PETER HOFFMAN
ED
LEONARD
14 ART KONING
ERIC WILLSE
15 MICHAEL O'HANLON
16 GERRI MAROTTA, Board Secretary
WILLIAM GREGOR, Board Engineer
17
A P P E A R A N C E S:
18
RALPH FAASSE, ESQ.
19 Attorney for the Board
20
HIERING, DUPIGNAC, STANZIONE & DUNN, ESQ.
BY: LYNNE DUNN, ESQ.
21 Attorney for the Applicant
22 IRIS LaROSA, C.S.R, RPR
23
PRECISION REPORTING SERVICE
24 Certified Shorthand Reporters
25
(908)
685-2227
PRECISION REPORTING
SERVICE
(908)
685-2227
2
1
I N D E X
2
3 WITNESS DIRECT CROSS
REDIRECT RECROSS
4
Frank Colasurdo 67
5 William Masters 29
6
7 PUBLIC SPEAKERS PAGE
8 David DaSilva............................25/47
9
10
11
12
E X H I B I
T S
13
14 NUMBER DESCRIPTION PAGE
15
A-7 Site plan Sheet Z-1
through Z-6 28
16
A-8 Photo board 36
17
A-9 Photo board 38
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
3
1 CHAIRMAN DUNNING: We're ready
for 19-06 New
2 York SMSA Limited Partnership, d/b/a Verizon Wireless,
4 use variances.
5 MS. DUNN: Good evening.
6 CHAIRMAN DUNNING: Good evening.
7 MS. DUNN: As you probably suspect I'm not
8 Warren Stilwell.
9 MR. FAASSE: It was hard to
tell.
10 MS. DUNN: My name is Lynne Dunn. I'm with
11 the firm of Hiering, Dupignac, Stanzione & Dunn. I'm
12 pinch hitting for Mr. Stilwell this
evening. And I
13 would like to re-call Mr. Frank Colasurdo who is the
14 architect who has previously testified on
this matter.
15 MR. FAASSE: Counsel, can we
have the full
16 spelling of your name
and everything?
17 MS. DUNN: Certainly.
18 MR. FAASSE: If we can have a
card.
19 MS. DUNN: L-y-n-n-e D-u-n-n.
20 MR. FAASE: That was the easy
one, the Lynne
21 with an "e" was the hard one.
Thank you.
22 MR. WILLSE: Could you just swing it to
that
23 side? Because there's more people in the audience
on
24 this side this way they can see it, and I
can test my
25 vision.
4
1 BOARD MEMBER COVELLI: I think that's the
2 bride's side, that's the groom's side.
3 MR. FAASSE: You are re-calling
this
4 gentleman?
5 MS. DUNN: Frank Colasurdo.
6 MR. FAASSE: He was previously
sworn, wasn't
7 he?
8 MS. DUNN: Yes.
9 MR. FAASSE: Sir, you understand
your oath
10 continues when it was previously
administered, which I
11 believe it was January?
12 THE WITNESS: Yes.
13 BOARD MEMBER COVELLI: If you'd like to
14 lift that microphone.
15 MR. FAASSE: Oh, we need your
name again for
16 the record.
17 F R A N K C O L A S U R D O, having been
previously
18 sworn testified as follows:
19 MR. COLASURDO: Good
evening. I guess
20 tonight I'm here to explain some of the
revisions to
21 the site plans that were sent in a little
while ago.
22 Mr. Gregor has
also supplied a report based on those
23 revisions, and I
concur with that report, what was
24 written. Up on my easel I have Sheet Z-3. I have
25 Sheet Z-3, which was last dated January
30th, '07.
5
1 This sheet depicts some of the revisions to
the site
2 plans. The first and probably the most major
revision
3 is this sheet is reflecting the resent lot
line
4 adjustment that
was adopted by your counsel.
5 The second revision you should
be aware of
6 is the circulation patterns or the traffic
patterns,
7 essentially reversed from what we first proposed.
8 Talking to Mr. Gregor
we felt that reversing the
9 patterns and creating a one-way exit only
at the
10 existing curb cut next to the recycling
center made
11 more sense.
I've added some parking calculations as
12 requested.
As you know we are proposing to remove some
13 parking spaces to install this facility,
but we are
14 also providing new
parking spaces to replace them.
We
15 do need some variances with respect to
those parking
16 spaces. One of those is, we have a 24-foot dimension
17 between, or as an aisleway where 25 feet is required.
18 Also, we are proposing a 10 by 19 parking
space is the
19 size, and 10 by 20 is required, so, a foot
on width and
20 depth.
21 I want to flip to Sheet Z-4 of
site plans,
22 again, this is last dated in the lower
left-hand corner
23 January 30th, '07. This is another sheet that has
24 received some revisions. Most important on the sheet
25 is the light detail that we're asked to
provide. It's
6
1 in the lower middle of
the page. And, basically, what
2 that light is a bucket that you sink in the
ground.
3 Has a light fixture in it. In this case I would
4 propose a 150-watt bulb. If that's not bright enough
5 we can always adjust it, but it is a light
fixture. It
6 sits inside a bucket that's below grade and
it's got a
7 gimble inside
that you can focus the beam or the light
8 directly at the flag. And that's the changes that were
9 made.
10 BOARD MEMBER GRYGUS: Counselor, how many
11 parking spaces are you proposing at 10 by
19, is it
12 just those seven that
were numbered?
13 THE WITNESS: That's correct.
14 BOARD MEMBER GRYGUS: I'm sorry?
15 BOARD MEMBER COVELLI: Engineering count.
16 THE WITNESS: Architect.
17 BOARD MEMBER GRYGUS: Bill, in the
18 conversations I know there was one thing
that I had
19 brought up at last meeting before when they
were in.
20 Was any consideration at all, since your
one way, angle
21 the parking so that you could minimize that
24-foot
22 aisle?
23 THE WITNESS: We discussed that, me and Mr.
24 Gregor. We didn't feel it was a good idea because of
25 how much you have to stretch out that
parking. For the
7
1 one foot difference I didn't think it was a
terrible --
2 MR. FAASSE: You just indicated
you and Mr.
3 Gregor. You were
indicating Mr. Gregor's report, that
4 was the March 6th, 2007 report.
5 THE WITNESS: That's correct.
6 BOARD MEMBER GRYGUS: The parking
7 calculations, Bill, were driven solely by
the Golden
8 Agers?
9 MR. GREGOR: That's correct.
10 BOARD MEMBER GRYGUS: We're not putting any
11 parking calculations in
for them.
12 MR. GREGOR: No. You do need one parking
13 space for use by them. And they have excess parking
14 spaces for the Golden Agers. So I
didn't even mention
15 anything specifically about that since they
did have
16 more than adequate
parking for both uses. I might
17 point out at this time there are two
variances which
18 did not make it into my report
which are listed.
19 BOARD MEMBER GRYGUS: On the
parking.
20 MR. GREGOR: On the drawings. And they are
21 the aisle width which is 24 feet where 25
is required,
22 and the parking space size which is 10 by
19 versus 10
23 by 24. That was omitted from my report. I do
24 apologize for that. I guess I got so wrapped up in
25 trying to get everything else in there that
I missed
8
1 those two.
2 BOARD MEMBER COVELLI: Is there any -- I
3 notice the proposed new grass island, which
is across
4 from the tower site. Is there any other landscaping
5 improvements?
6 THE WITNESS: Yes, there is. We are
7 proposing some landscape trees or shrubs
around the
8 existing compound. You can see that a little bit more
9 clearly on sheet Z-4. We're proposing nine new
10 Spruce, 8-feet high at time of planting.
11 BOARD MEMBER COVELLI: I'm sorry.
He's
12 flipping a page. I can't hear you.
13 THE WITNESS: We are proposing nine new
14 Norway Spruce at 8 feet at time of planting,
and ten
15
16 BOARD MEMBER COVELLI: That's around the --
17 THE WITNESS: The proposed compound.
18 BOARD MEMBER COVELLI: Nothing else on the
19 property?
20 THE WITNESS: That's correct.
21 MR. GREGOR: You're adding a grass island
22 where there was pavement before?
23 THE WITNESS: That's correct.
24 BOARD MEMBER COVELLI: Is there any repair
25 to any of the -- I don't remember exactly
the
9
1 condition. Is there any repair to any of the curbing
2 or anything in that
area?
3 THE WITNESS: In the area of the new
4 compound?
5 BOARD MEMBER COVELLI: Just in general on
6 the site.
7 THE WITNESS: Not that I noticed. I pretty
8 much concentrated on the area of my
improvements.
9 CHAIRMAN DUNNING: Question:
Your newly
10 created parking slot one, cars backing out,
is that a
11 line-of-sight problem with the way you have
the trees
12 around the enclosure since that would be
one way coming
13 in?
14 THE WITNESS:
That's correct. It's one way
15 coming in. You know, I guess it really depends on the
16 driver. I mean, what I can do is I can relocate that
17 parking lot number one to the other side of
the
18
proposed parking lot number seven, parking stall number
19 seven, and we can just kind of crosshatch
number one
20 and say no parking.
21 CHAIRMAN DUNNING: We'll leave that for the
22 repair person's truck?
23 THE WITNESS: Yes.
24 BOARD MEMBER COVELLI: There you go, one
25 personnel only.
10
1 MR. GREGOR: Or you can indicate that as
2 reserved spot for servicing the facility
since there
3 are additional parking spaces.
4 THE WITNESS: There you go.
5 BOARD MEMBER COVELLI: Now, at the north
6 side of the property, I know you said
previously you
7 testified that basically the improvements
have been
8 pretty much close at hand to the -- to your
landscaping
9 improvements or any kind of site
improvements to the
10 compound area. Is there anything proposed at the north
11 side of the property?
12 THE WITNESS: By the --
13 BOARD MEMBER COVELLI: For example, it's
14 marked on here as a gravel area that I
don't know if
15 you want to call it the rear exit or the
unofficial
16 rear exit of the property that goes onto,
and I can't
17 think of the name of it.
18 BOARD MEMBER GRYGUS:
19 BOARD MEMBER COVELLI: No.
20 CHAIRMAN DUNNING: By the recycling area?
21 BOARD MEMBER COVELLI: No, the other street
22 comming
by the bridge. That's Colfax.
23 BOARD MEMBER HOFFMAN: That might be
24 Colfax.
25 BOARD MEMBER COVELLI: Okay.
Everybody
11
1 knows what I'm talking about.
2 MR. FAASSE: But I don't know if
the
3 engineer does, that's the problem.
4 THE WITNESS: The north side of the
5 property.
6 BOARD MEMBER COVELLI: Follow your exit
7 arrows and instead of going to the left to
Villa, count
8 three arrows back and you'll see where
there's a cut
9 and it says "gravel."
10 THE WITNESS: Yes, I see that.
11 BOARD MEMBER COVELLI: That's a
12 deteriorated area of the parking lot?
13 THE WITNESS: Yeah.
14 BOARD MEMBER COVELLI: Is that considered
15 an official exit, Bill? Because we're changing the
16 flow of the parking lot. Are we recognizing it as an
17 exit?
Are we leaving it as an official exit?
Are we
18 closing it?
19 MR. GREGOR: I'm not following you. Try
20 that one more time.
21 BOARD MEMBER KONING: There's a dirt road
22 that comes out through
that property.
23 THE WITNESS: I think I can help, him, Mr.
24 Gregor. Right here to the rear of the property
there's
25 somewhat of a semi unpaved gravel road.
12
1 BOARD MEMBER COVELLI: Grove.
2 THE WITNESS: I believe that's used for the
3 power line company
to maintain their lines back there.
4 BOARD MEMBER COVELLI: It's Grove.
5 THE WITNESS: There's only about four feet
6 of that gravel that is actually on our
property, on the
7 subject property. So beyond that we would be improving
8 someone else's property.
9 MR. GREGOR: What was your question?
10 MR. FAASSE: Is it an exit?
11 BOARD MEMBER COVELLI: Well, I'm not
12 talking about improving
someone else's property. The
13 way the property
is delineated on Z-3, at that
14 delineation there
is a deteriated area there. Is that
15 considered an exit to the property?
16 THE WITNESS: No, that's not considered an
17 exit.
18 BOARD MEMBER COVELLI: That's just an
19 access because of power lines?
20 THE WITNESS: I believe that's just a
21 gravel, a gravel access road for maintenance
of those
22 power lines that are back there. If you were to drive
23 into that gravel road and go about 15 feet
you'd fall
24 down a cliff. It's all wooded behind there.
25 BOARD MEMBER COVELLI: No.
13
1 THE WITNESS: Yeah, it is.
2 BOARD MEMBER COVELLI: We're not talking
3 about the same spot.
4 BOARD MEMBER KONING: The brook is right
5 behind that.
6 BOARD MEMBER COVELLI: Where the bridge is,
7 as you said, but what I'm saying is, it
goes beyond
8 Mullen or Grove.
9 BOARD MEMBER KONING: East Grove.
10 CHAIRMAN DUNNING: But it's not a street?
11 BOARD MEMBER COVELLI: No, but
according to
12 this it's pieces that are on his property.
13 CHAIRMAN DUNNING: The north path?
14 THE WITNESS: Do you want us to repave that
15 up to the property
line?
16 BOARD MEMBER COVELLI: Yeah.
I'd like to
17 see that cleaned up somehow.
18 THE WITNESS: I think we can do that.
19 BOARD MEMBER COVELLI: I think that would
20
be a good thing. Bill, don't you
think?
21 MR. GREGOR: It would certainly be an
22 improvement.
23 BOARD MEMBER HOFFMAN: Cleaned up as a road
24 or cleaned up as landscaping?
25 BOARD MEMBER COVELLI: Well, I think we're
14
1 restricted from a landscaping perspective
if it's used
2 as an access.
3 BOARD MEMBER HOFFMAN: But you still have
4 access from
5 BOARD MEMBER COVELLI: Right.
But he's
6 testifying tonight, and I have no reason to
doubt, that
7 that's used as an access
of utility road of some sort.
8 THE WITNESS: That's the only thing I can
9 see it being used for.
10 CHAIRMAN DUNNING: The fencing on the
11 recycling area shows a double-swing gate
facing the
12 seniors' parking lot. How will vehicles access that?
13 They'd have to come through the whole lot?
14 MR. GREGOR: How would they access the
15 recycling area?
16 CHAIRMAN DUNNING: Right.
They'd have to
17 come through the whole parking lot to get
there.
18 MR. GREGOR: They'd have to come through
19 the parking lot at the midpoint, yes. At the northerly
20 parking lot
they'd have to enter from the southerly
21 exit.
My understanding is that recycling area is
22 currently not active.
23 BOARD MEMBER COVELLI: Or they come in
24 through the access point.
25 BOARD MEMBER GRYGUS: One of the questions
15
1 that I had raised is I was asked -- I had
asked some
2 months ago if by chance you had an
elevation of this
3 site versus the site where the antenna is
here next to
4 the building. Were you able to ascertain that at all?
5 THE WITNESS: Elevation.
6 BOARD MEMBER HOFFMAN: The height of this
7 pole out front.
8 MR. GRYGUS: Not the height of the pole.
9 We know what the height of the pole
is. What is the
10 ground elevation out here, as opposed to
the ground
11 elevation at the
proposed site?
12 THE WITNESS: I don't have that gentlemen,
13 I'm sorry.
14 BOARD MEMBER GRYGUS: Because obviously
15 what I was trying to ascertain is the need
for the
16 difference for a much taller pole at that
location as
17 opposed to this one, that's why I had asked
what the
18 actual ground elevation
was.
19 THE WITNESS: I don't recall that, I
20 apologize. I don't have the information.
21 BOARD MEMBER GRYGUS: Is completely
22 different.
23 BOARD MEMBER WILLSE: Refresh my
memory.
24 How tall is the pole out here now?
25 BOARD MEMBER COVELLI: 110.
16
1 BOARD MEMBER WILLSE: The one
here at Town
2 Hall?
3 MS. DUNN: Outside?
4 THE WITNESS: I'm going to say it's
5 80 feet, 80, 90 feet.
6 BOARD MEMBER GRYGUS: It's less than a
7 hundred, I think.
8 CHAIRMAN DUNNING: There's another sketch
9 behind that. Is it marked?
10 BOARD MEMBER LEONARD: You can
lift the
11 acetate up.
12 BOARD MEMBER KONING: We have got no street
13 access on those streets. The streets aren't labeled.
14 BOARD MEMBER WILLSE: Tell you
what, looking
15 at the contours on this it doesn't look
like it's a
16 different contour.
17 THE WITNESS: I think that pole
outside is
18 actually 105.
19 BOARD MEMBER COVELLI: I thought you said
20 somewhere between 105
and 110.
21 BOARD MEMBER WILLSE: There's
one contour
22 line that's
going from Town Hall out to
23 So it looks like it's
close.
24 BOARD MEMBER COVELLI: This might be a
25 minor point, but I'm just trying to think
of the
17
1 consistency of the
property. And would you consider
--
2 is it part of your plan to -- you're
aligning the new
3 parking spaces,
delineating new parking spaces. You're
4 delineating arrows to mark the flow of the
site with
5 respect to traffic and parking?
6 THE WITNESS: Actually those arrows were
7 just for the Board's
benefit. Back to Sheet Z-3, what
8 we're proposing to do is to install two
signs at that
9 existing curb cut by the recycling
center. This sign
10 is going to say
"exit only."
11 BOARD MEMBER COVELLI: Okay.
And you would
12 on the south side put "enter
only?"
13 THE WITNESS: No, that's stating exit and
14 enter.
15 BOARD MEMBER COVELLI: Oh, that's a
16 two-way?
17 THE WITNESS: That's correct.
18 CHAIRMAN DUNNING: The question is, how to
19 keep it one way in here.
20 BOARD MEMBER GRYGUS: Yes. I
think you'd
21 have to have some kind of a sign on either
side of the
22 berm here facing the other way "do not enter."
23 CHAIRMAN DUNNING: From the closure that's
24 where you need some
directional signal.
25 THE WITNESS: I can work that out with Mr.
18
1 Gregor.
2 BOARD MEMBER COVELLI: And your enclosure
3 the same "do not
enter" for somebody. But I
would
4 think, Bill, clearly we want just a couple
of arrows on
5 the ground indicating
traffic flow.
6 MR. GREGOR:
What I would recommend is --
7 BOARD MEMBER COVELLI: Not as many arrows
8 as he has on the drawing.
9 MR. GREGOR: Arrows on the ground are great
10 for the first year or
two. And then what I would
11 recommend is where you have the exit-only
sign in the
12 back of that do-not-enter sign, and have a
sign right
13 near the exit showing a one way which would
show people
14 that that's the way out
for that entrance. That one
15 way would be
perpendicular to
16 BOARD MEMBER GRYGUS: But the problem is,
17 Bill, because the south entrance is in and
out what's
18 to stop somebody from coming in and park in
space two,
19 back it out and proceed south and going
out, unless you
20 have some kind of signage there where that
necks down
21 to 15 feet.
22 MR. GREGOR: All right. There you would
23 have the do-not-enter sign or one-way sign
or both.
24 BOARD MEMBER GRYGUS: Something.
It could
25 be "one way" on one side, and
"do not enter" on the
19
1 other.
2 MR. GREGOR: That would be a very good
3 idea. So in that location we should have a one-way
4 sign with a do-not-enter sign on that
island.
5 BOARD MEMBER GRYGUS: Right.
6 BOARD MEMBER COVELLI: Is there any
7 proposal to change
any of the lighting on the site
8 other than the lights that you talked about
with
9 respect to the pole, the flag on the pole?
10 THE WITNESS: There's only one other light
11 and that's located on the equipment
shelter. It's a
12 typical flood light that you would find
above your
13 garage door. It's on a photocell motion sensor and
14 it's there if the technician has to come
out there at
15 night, light goies
on as you're standing on the stoop
16 so he can open up the lock and get into the
equipment
17 room.
18 BOARD MEMBER WILLSE: But it's
on a motion
19 sensor?
20 THE WITNESS: That's correct. And
21 photocell.
22 BOARD MEMBER WILLSE: But it
would only come
23 on at night in motion?
24 THE WITNESS: Correct.
25 BOARD MEMBER COVELLI: Frank, I ask the
20
1 question, because that's a very dark area
back there.
2 And since we're changing the traffic flow
of the lot
3 people not familiar or people just not
familiar or
4 looking for direction it's a very dark lot.
5 BOARD MEMBER GRYGUS: Just for the security
6 of the structure.
7 BOARD MEMBER WILLSE: Security
of the
8 structure,
they've got a chain-link fence around it.
9 Yeah, but you start throwing
too much light
10 down there and the neighbors are going to
be up at
11 night from the
light on the street.
12 BOARD MEMBER COVELLI: Well, perhaps the
13 lighting can be put on switches or timers
such that
14 when the facility is being used for a
function, in
15 other words that's when there's a lot of
traffic and a
16 lot of activity in the lot, people are
walking through
17 the lot, people are pulling in and out of
spots, people
18 are trying to figure out what direction to
go in when
19 they pull out of the spot. So there's a different flow
20 of the lot. I'm not concerned about the lot.
21 BOARD MEMBER WILLSE: Oh, so
vandals are
22 okay?
23 BOARD MEMBER COVELLI: Well, that's Bruce's
24 issue.
Bruce is looking for the vandals, I'm looking
25 for people being safe
in a facility.
21
1 MR. GREGOR: What your concern is that now
2 that the parking spaces for the facility
are put
3 further away from the facility you want
additional
4 lighting for the safety
of the facility.
5 BOARD MEMBER COVELLI: That, and
we have an
6 islands now. We have a change in traffic. We have got
7 a lot going on on
that lot that wasn't there
8 previously.
9 MR. GREGOR: Would it be possible to add a
10 one pole lighting in that area to
illuminate the
11 parking area?
12 THE WITNESS: If you'd like we can take
13 advantage of
that grass island and put a light on that.
14 It will illuminate the new one-way-,
do-not-enter sign,
15 as well as the new
parking spaces.
16 MR. GREGOR: Face the light away from the
17 residences towards the
rear.
18 THE WITNESS: Correct.
I can work that all
19 out with Mr. Gregor.
20 BOARD MEMBER GRYGUS: That would be
21 helpful.
22 BOARD MEMBER COVELLI: One last thing and
23
then I'll be quiet. I reserve my
right, Counsel,
24 but -- and that would be since we're doing
this, this
25 one's a little bit more of an aesthetic
issue, but
22
1 since we are striping new parking spaces I
guess we're
2 restriping some
existing spots that are to the west of
3 the compound?
4 BOARD MEMBER GRYGUS: Destriping.
5 BOARD MEMBER COVELLI: Or destriping.
6 Would you consent to restriping
all of the parking
7 places within the lot
for uniformity?
8 THE WITNESS: Yes, I can do that for you.
9 BOARD MEMBER COVELLI: I have no further
10 questions.
11 THE WITNESS: And that is going to be on
12 the northern parking lot, on the northern
side of the
13 building where all
activities are?
14 BOARD MEMBER COVELLI: Yeah, I was
15 referring to that. Unless you were offering a
16 benevolent thing
by bringing up the south.
17 THE WITNESS: I was referring to the north
18 and south.
19 BOARD MEMBER COVELLI: I was just asking
20 for clarification.
21 MS. DUNN: You've got your last one.
22 MR. FAASSE: Oh, she's tough.
23 CHAIRMAN DUNNING: We have got reference
24 number five, consideration for construction
fence along
25 river right-of-way which is above the -- to
the west of
23
1 the recycling center.
2 THE WITNESS: Can you repeat that again,
3 please?
4 CHAIRMAN DUNNING: You've got a note on
5 your drawing.
6 MR. FAASSE: Upper portion.
7 CHAIRMAN DUNNING: Includes consideration
8 for construction of a fence along the
easterly boundary
9 of
10 for the prevention of access by children to
the tract
11 of the Erie Railroad
Company.
12 THE WITNESS: Yes, sir.
That's a reference
13 to the site survey that
was prepared. That was
14 actually found in one of the deeds. And the
site
15 surveyor who
prepared it, the site plan, site survey
16 for me, as well as the counsel with the lot
line
17 adjustment noted
that on his plan as part of his work.
18 CHAIRMAN DUNNING: Okay.
So that fence is
19 existing?
20 THE WITNESS: There is a fence around the
21 recycling center.
22 CHAIRMAN DUNNING: I don't think your
23 arrow's pointing
to that, is it?
24 THE WITNESS: No, there's a fence around
25 the recycling center. It references for consideration,
24
1 it's a consideration for the construction
of a fence
2 along the eastern boundary of
3 access by children. I guess at one time maybe the
4 recycling center was larger or smaller, but
it's just
5 part of the old deeds. It just keeps getting
6 transferred and transferred at the time of
the survey.
7 MR. GREGOR: I believe the fence, it was
8 there when it was an active railroad site.
9 BOARD MEMBER GRYGUS: Bill, on your report,
10 Item 14, wouldn't that be a bulk?
11 THE WITNESS: No, the height.
12 MR. GREGOR: No, the height exceeds ten
13 percent of the
submitted height.
14 BOARD MEMBER GRYGUS: So it's two use
15 variances.
16 MR. GREGOR: Yes. They're
permitted under
17 a bulk variance under
ten percent or some feet.
18 MR. FAASSE: But as soon as you
exceed the
19 ten percent then it goes to a use.
20 MR. GREGOR: Then it goes to a use.
21 MR. FAASSE: That was the
ordinance. They
22 didn't know they needed a height
variance. It wasn't
23 enough to make a use variance, so they were
brought
24 here.
25 Hey, I'm just telling you what
the rule is.
25
1 I'm not saying I agree with it.
2 CHAIRMAN DUNNING: I got you.
3 Any other questions, gentlemen?
4 MS. DUNN: We have Mr. Masters, the
5 planner, to
testify.
6 MR. FAASSE: Of course. So open up.
7 CHAIRMAN DUNNING: Let's open it up to the
8 public. Does anyone have any questions regarding the
9 engineer?
10 MR. FAASSE: He's an engineer?
11 MR. GREGOR: Architect.
12 CHAIRMAN DUNNING: Wasn't he the architect?
13 I'm sorry.
You're the architect.
14 THE WITNESS: I'm an architect.
15 MR. FAASSE: Wait. Where am I?
16 CHAIRMAN DUNNING: It says architect. Your
17 name?
18 MR. DaSILVA:
Dave DaSilva, 108 Monroe
19 Street.
How far is the tower and the building from the
20 closest house?
21 THE WITNESS: From the closest house? The
22 closest residence
to the center of the proposed
23 compound is 148
feet 6 inches. So roughly around
24 there. Is there any concern from your standpoint about
25 noise from the generator, the AC or any
other equipment
26
1 interfering with those
residences?
2 THE WITNESS: Interfering with those
3 residences? No. My
client will comply with all New
4 Jersey Department of Environmental
Protection noise
5 standards. If there's a problem we have ways of
6 concealing the noise with special acoustic
baffles over
7 the intake, and exhaust vents of the
shelter. We're
8 also putting up a board-on-board fence that
should
9 block some of the sounds from escaping the
property.
10 MR. DaSILVA: I'm a little concerned about
11 the lighting you're proposing for the
flag. 150 watts
12 doesn't seem like it's going to reach up
135 feet. Did
13 you do any research for other facilities or
places that
14 have lighting? I know the Statute of Liberty is about
15 16 feet taller. Somehow I believe thery're
not using
16 one 150-foot light to
be able to see that. Do you have
17 any concerns about not lighting the flag
properly? We
18 just had a problem with this pole out here
being
19 smaller not being lit
properly.
20 THE WITNESS: No.
Actually, I'd like to
21 start with 150. If that doesn't work we can bump that
22 up. But the minimum standard I have to meet is
you
23 have to be able to make a distinction
between the stars
24 and stripes, that's it. If you wanted this to be lit
25 like a monumental-type of pole and flag,
well, I would
27
1 probably go with a
higher pole, maybe a 500-watt. But
2 I'd like to start at 150, see if I can meet
the Federal
3 standards, and if not I'll go to maybe 250
and keep
4 experimenting.
5 MR. DaSILVA:
In reference to the flag, the
6 rope or however you're proposing holding
the flag up
7 there to lower it and raise it, did you do
any research
8 about how that's not going to blow around
in the wind
9 135 feet in the air?
10 THE WITNESS: First, they have a lanyard on
11
top that keeps the flag position so that doesn't wrap
12 around. And it's tethered at the bottom so they tie
it
13 down tight.
14 MR. DaSILVA:
Because after the last meeting
15 I went out to this pole here and it was
windy at night
16 and it was banging around like crazy.
17 THE WITNESS: Was it tethered down?
18 MR. DaSILVA:
I believe so. We can go look
19 when we get outside,
but it was making a lot of noise.
20 THE WITNESS: On a windy day you might hear
21 the rope wrapping a little bit. It's a flagpole.
22 MR. DaSILVA:
Okay. Thanks.
23 CHAIRMAN DUNNING: Anyone else in the
24 public have any questions of the
architect? Seeing
25 none or hearing none. We'll close the public portion.
28
1 MS. DUNN: Thank you.
William F. Masters,
2 Jr., Professional Planner, is our next
witness.
3 Do you wish me to mark these
exhibits?
4 MR. FAASSE: Yes. I guess that's new,
5 right?
6 MS. DUNN: I assume you did not want Mr.
7 Colasurdo's
revised plans marked, is that correct?
8 MR. FAASSE: The Chairman was
just saying we
9 should.
10 BOARD MEMBER GRYGUS: They're
the same as we
11 had submitted.
12 MR. FAASSE: It's the same ones.
13 BOARD MEMBER GRYGUS: As we have.
14 MS. DUNN: I will mark as a joint exhibit
15 then this evening as
A-7.
16 MR. FAASSE: How many pages is
that?
17 MS. DUNN: This is Sheet Z-1 through six.
18 (Whereupon, A-7, site plan
Sheet Z-1
19 through Z-6, was received and marked in
evidence.)
20 MR. GREGOR: The revision dates will come
21 out.
22 MR. FAASSE: Yes.
23 MS. DUNN: Mr. Masters.
Oh, I'm sorry, you
24 haven't been sworn.
25 MR. MASTERS: No, I have not.
29
1 MR. FAASSE: Are you ready to
start with
2 him?
3 MS. DUNN: Sure.
4 MR. FAASSE: Give us your
business address.
5 W I L L I A M F. M A S T E R S, J. R., P.P., 19
7 duly sworn testifies
as follows:
8 DIRECT EXAMINATION BY MS. DUNN:
9 Q.
Could you give the Board the benefit of
10 your educational
and professional background, please?
11 A.
Yes. I have a bachelor
of science degree
12 in landscape
architecture from
13 a licensed professional planner in the
state of New
14
15 1981. I was the planning director for the township
of
16 Parsippany Troy Hills
in
17 For the past 13 years I've been involved in
my own
18 private consulting
practice, specializing in wireless
19 telecommunications
applications. I previously
20 testified before numerous Planning Boards
and Zoning
21 Boards of Adjustment throughout the state
of
22 as an expert in the field of land use
planning, again,
23
focusing on applications pertaining to wireless
24 telecommunications
facilities.
25 MR. FAASSE: Do you happen to
know your
30
1 license number with the
state of
2 THE WITNESS: 2363.
3 MR. FAASSE: And that does
continue in good
4 force and effect through
tonight?
5 THE WITNESS:
Correct.
6 MR. FAASSE: I always ask
that. I had a
7 surveyor that
didn't pay the fee.
8 CHAIRMAN DUNNING: Okay.
9 MR. FAASSE: Any questions on
his expertise?
10 Proceed, Counsel.
11 BOARD MEMBER COVELLI: Do you
accept that?
12 MR. GREGOR: I know him.
13 MR. FAASSE: Then you've got to
step down.
14 Go sit down in the audience.
15 BY MS. DUNN:
16 Q.
Mr. Masters, could you please discuss the
17 proposed improvements from a professional
planning
18 standpoint?
19 A.
Yes. The application that's before the
20 Board this evening is for a wireless
telecommunications
21 facility which
features a 135-foot tall flagpole. The
22 subject property which is the subject of
the
23
application is situated in -- is actually situated in a
24 split zone.
A portion of the parcel is in the "B"
25 business district. Another portion of the parcel is in
31
1 the AAH, active adult
housing district. The entire
2 extent of the
proposed wireless telecommunications
3 facility itself
is in the AAH Zone district.
4 We have here an existing
undersized lot.
5 The minimum lot area requirement in the AAH
Zone
6 district is 400
acres. The existing parcel is 1.869
7 acres, with the right-of-way dedication
which is part
8 of the application, the result in lot area
is 1.374
9 acres, difference of approximately a half
an acre.
10 The effect of the right-of-way
dedication
11 also has an impact on some of the existing
setbacks as
12 far as the existing building is concerned,
specifically
13 the front yard setback. As far as the variances
14 pertaining to the wireless
telecommunications facility
15 itself the primary variance relief that's
being sought
16 here this evening would be use variance
relief of the
17 D-1 variety, owing to the fact that the
proposed use is
18 not a permitted use in either the AAH or B
Zone
19 districts.
20 Also, use variance relief of
the D-6
21 variety, which
is actually a height variance, owing to
22
the nature of the height variance relief that's sought
23 here, the fact that the maximum permitted
height in the
24 AAH Zone is 85 feet, the proposed height of
the
25 flagpole is 135
feet, owing to the fact that it exceeds
32
1 the permitted height by more than 10 feet
or 10 percent
2 of the permitted height in the zone
district, the type
3 of the height variance relief that's sought
here is a
4 D-6 height variance.
5 Also, bulk variance relief
relative to the
6 location of the
pole, as well as the equipment building
7
or shelter to the rear property line, the minimum
8 setback requirement
is 100 feet to the rear property
9 line, the
proposed setback of the equipment is 6.6
10 feet. The monopole or flagpole 10.66 feet both
11 triggering rear yard setback
variances. I would note
12 that the portion of the lot after the
right-of-way
13 dedication where
the proposed facility is to be located
14 is -- has a total lot depth of
approximately 80 feet.
15 The parcel, the subject parcel at its
widest depth is
16 approximately 106 feet. So it would be virtually
17 impossible to meet that rear yard setback
requirement
18 anywhere on the subject
property.
19 In terms of the use variance,
the D-1 and
20 D-6 height variance, the applicant's burden
of proof
21 relative to those variances is to satisfy
both the
22 positive criteria or special reasons
criteria, as well
23 as the negative
criteria. The positive criteria
burden
24 that the applicant must satisfy is to show
that the
25 site is a site that is particularly suited
for a
33
1 wireless
telecommunications facility. I
would note
2 that the applicant here, Verizon Wireless,
has secured
3 the requisite license from the Federal
Communications
4 Commission.
The New Jersey Supreme Court has found
5 that generally the issuance of an FCC
license should
6 suffice for a carrier to establish that the
use serves
7 the general welfare. And Verizon Wireless has secured
8 that license from the
FCC.
9 In terms of the particular
suitability
10 criteria I would submit to the Board that
the site,
11 which is the subject of this application is
a site that
12 is particularly suited for a wireless
13 telecommunications facility for several
reasons:
14 First, you've already heard testimony from
the
15 applicant's radio frequency engineer that
the site is
16 ideally situated from a technical
perspective to meet
17 the applicant's coverage objective in terms
of filling
18 the existing gap or defficiency
in the coverage area
19 for Verizon Wireless for this particular
area of the
20 Borough of Wanaque. So the first particular
21 suitability criteria would be that the subject
site
22 meets the
technical objective. It is an ideal
location
23 in terms of its relationship to the
surrounding sites,
24 surrounding Verizon
Wireless sites.
25 Secondly, the subject site is
situated
34
1 proximate to major traffic corridors which
are primary
2 generators of wireless telecommunication
service, in
3 this case specifically
4 Third, we have here an existing
developed
5 site, such that the use can be located
without
6 producing a significant impact upon the
environment,
7 nor posing a
substantial conflict with the existing use
8 of the property. Specifically, there is no increase in
9 the existing impervious
coverage. Actually, as a
10 result of the right-of-way dedication and
the grassed
11 area that's
being proposed here, we're actually ending
12 up here with a slight decrease in the
overall
13 impervious coverage on
the site.
14 The site involves no tree
removal. The
15 application, the
proposed facility will utilize
16 existing access to the proposed
facility. And we have
17 sufficient existing off-street parking to
service the
18 proposed facility. Another characteristic of this site
19 which contributes to its particular
suitability is that
20 we have a willing landlord which provides a revenue
21 source in this particular case to several
nonprofit
22 civic organizations within the Borough of
Wanaque,
23 specifically the Golden Agers,
the American Legion and
24 the VFW. And the fact that we're proposing here an
25 alternate antenna support structure, a
flagpole
35
1 monopole in a location which a flagpole
makes sense
2 from a land use planning perspective where
it's being
3
proposed.
4 So it would be my conclusion
that because
5 of all of those reasons we have here a site
that is
6 particularly suited for a wireless
telecommunications
7 facility. And, again, we have a wireless
8 telecommunications carrier who has secured
the required
9 license from the Federal Communications
Commission.
10 In addition to the positive criteria
or
11 special reasons criteria, it is also the
applicant's
12 burden of proof to satisfy the negative
criteria. And
13 in terms of the negative criteria the
process or
14 procedure which has been established by,
again, by the
15 New Jersey Supreme Court for the negative
criteria
16 analysis for
wireless telecommunications facilities is
17 the Sica
balancing test. And while the Courts
have
18 stopped short of declaring these uses
inherently
19 beneficial they have, however, adopted or
embraced the
20 negative criteria analysis that was
previously utilized
21 for inherently beneficial uses, that being
the Sica
22 balancing test.
23 The four-first step balancing
test, the
24 first step being that the Board should
identify the
25 public interest at
stake, I would submit to the Board
36
1 that the public interest at stake with
regard to
2 wireless telecommunications facilities is significant.
3 The provision of modern state-of-the-art
wireless
4 telecommunications provides a direct
benefit to the
5 general public.
6 Second step in the Sica balancing test is
7 that the Board should identify the
detrimental effect
8 that will ensue from the
grant of the variance relief.
9 I would remind the Board that we're dealing
here with
10 an unmanned, unoccupied facility, one that
is, however,
11 routinely visited once every four to six
weeks for
12 routine maintenance
service, one that is also
13 continuously monitored on a 24-hour-a-day,
14 seven-day-a-week basis from a remote
monitoring
15 facility.
16 The primary focus from a planning
17 perspective with
regard to the potential detrimental
18 effect for these
types of uses is visual impact. And
19 in that regard I have prepared a couple of
exhibits of
20 photo simulations depicting what the
proposed facility
21 would look like from various vantage points
within the
22 municipality.
23 Q.
The first one is A-8?
24 (Whereupon, A-8, photo board,
was received
25 and marked in
evidence.)
37
1 A.
A-8 is a photo Board consisting of eight
2 colored photographs. The photographs on A-8 were taken
3 by myself. The four photographs on the left side of
4 A-8 are photographs of the existing
site. And in each
5 one of the four photographs on the left
side of A-8 you
6
will see a small red circular object generally in the
7 center portion of the photograph. That is a four-foot
8 diameter red helium balloon that was put up
at the
9 height of the proposed
pole, in this case 135 feet.
10 This balloon test was conducted on January
the 18th of
11 this year. It was conducted by myself. It was done at
12 a time when the wind
conditions were very calm. What I
13 do is I monitor the -- actually, monitor
the wind
14 conditions daily before I pick a day to go
out and do
15 such a test. And I also usually do it early in the
16 morning when the
wind conditions are the calmest.
17 The four photographs on the
right side of
18 A-8 are computer enhanced simulated
renderings of a
19 proposed 135-foot flagpole. The first series of
20 photographs at the top of A-8 this is a view
from
21 Mullen Avenue in front of number 17 looking
generally
22 in a southerly
direction. The photograph in the
upper
23 left-hand corner
we see the balloon in the center
24 portion of the photograph. In the corresponding photo
25 simulation in
the upper right-hand corner is the photo
38
1 simulation of the
proposed flagpole.
2 The next series of photographs,
this is a
3 view from
5 westerly direction. The balloon is visible in the
6 center portion of the photograph. I would note that
7 this particular balloon test was conducted
at a time of
8 the
season, of course, where there are no leaves on the
9 trees, which would be a worst-case scenario
in terms of
10 the potential visual
impact. The corresponding photo
11 simulation to the right we see the proposed
flagpole.
12 The third series of photographs
on A-8 this
13 is a view from
14 an easterly direction
taken from number 32 Rhinesmith.
15 The corresonding
photo simulation to the right with the
16 proposed flagpole monopole. And the last series of
17 photographs at the bottom of A-8 is a view
from
19 lower left-hand corner with the balloon,
the photo
20 simulation in
the lower right-hand corner. If the
21 Board wishes I can pass this exhibit up
while I
22 describe the next exhibit.
23 CHAIRMAN DUNNING: Please.
24 THE WITNESS: Next photo board, Exhibit
25 A-9.
39
1 (Whereupon, A-9, photo board,
was received
2 and marked in evidence.)
3 THE WITNESS: Same format as Exhibit A-8.
4 Four photographs on the left side of
A-9. We see the
5
balloon in the photograph. The
four photographs on the
6 right side are
photo simulations with the flagpole
7 monopole
superimposed. The first series of
photographs
8 at the top of A-9. This is a view from directly across
9 the street from the subject installation
from
10 Avenue and
11 simulation in
the upper right-hand corner.
12 The next series of photographs
is a view
13 from
14 front of number
15 photo simulation to the right with the
proposed
16 flagpole monopole.
17 The third set of photographs a
view from
18 Ivy Court at the Kenwood Commons complex
looking in a
19 northerly direction. The corresponding photo
20 simulation to the right of the
proposed flagpole
21 monopole. And the last series of photographs at the
22 lower portion of A-9, a view from
24 right-hand corner
with the proposed flagpole monopole.
25 The third step in the Sica balancing test
40
1 is that in some situations the local Board
may reduce
2 the detrimental effect by imposing
reasonable
3 conditions on the use. Several conditions were
4 discussed during Mr. Colasurdo's
testimony which are --
5 which would be reasonable conditions that
the Board
6 might consider imposing on this particular
application.
7 One that has been discussed an ongoing
condition during
8 the course of this application was the
right-of-way
9 dedication, which
my understanding has been
10 accomplished.
11 Secondly, the pavement
improvement that was
12 discussed this evening would be a
reasonable condition
13 that the Board might
impose on the application. The
14 requirement for directional signage and
striping, a
15 reasonable condition. Also, the restriping
of the
16 parking spaces would be a reasonable
condition. And,
17 of course, a requirement that the antenna
support
18 structure in this case be an alternative
structure,
19 namely, the flagpole as a means of reducing
the visual
20 impact of the proposed wireless
telecommunications
21 facility, all reasonable conditions that
the Board
22 might consider imposing on the application.
23 The fourth and final step in the Sica
24 balancing test is that the Board should
then weigh the
25 positive and the negative criteria and
determine
41
1 whether on balance the grant of the
variance relief
2 would cause a substantial detriment to the
public good.
3 I would submit to the Board in considering
the positive
4 benefits of wireless telecommunications,
the fact that
5 the carrier has secured the requisite
license from the
6 Federal Communications Commission, the fact
that the
7 applicant here is
proposing a flagpole monopole in
8 order to conceal the antennas in an
alternate-type
9 structure I believe that this is an
application in
10 which the positive far
outweighs the negative. And as
11 such the scale tips in favor of the
positive and
12 satisfies the Sica balancing test.
13 I would note that during the
course of the
14 radio frequency expert's testimony it was
established
15 that the proposed height was the minimum
height
16 necessary to achieve the coverage objective
for
17 wireless -- for Verizon Wireless relative
to the D-6
18 height variance relief that is sought here
in
19 conjunction with
the use variance. I would submit that
20 Verizon Wireless has submitted compelling
evidence that
21 supports the
conclusion that this is a site that is
22 particularly suited for a wireless
telecommunications
23 facility. The application does not pose substantial
24 detriment to adjacent properties, nor does
the
25 application cause substantial impairment to
the intent
42
1 and purpose of the comprehensive zone plan
and zoning
2 ordinance of the Borough
of Wanaque.
3 MS. DUNN: Any questions of Mr. Masters?
4 MR. FAASSE: Oh, of course.
5 I want to start, because it's a
legal
6 question.
Mr. Masters, you indicated two use variances
7 that are involved. Is there not a third one for
8 allowing two structures
or two uses on a lot? I mean,
9 in a "B" Zone we permit -- excuse
me, in a commercial
10 residential lot,
but this is neither of these. Well,
11 this particular zone, the AAH does not
permit two uses.
12 THE WITNESS: In view of the fact that it's
13 technically a residential zone I would say
that, yes,
14 that we would need a use variance for
maintaining two
15 principal uses on a single lot.
16 MR. FAASSE: And would this
facility also
17 qualify in terms of the land use as a
structure?
18 THE WITNESS: Definitely.
19 MR. FAASSE: Okay. I'm sorry.
20 CHAIRMAN DUNNING: He answered your
21 question.
So there's a third use.
22 BOARD MEMBER HOFFMAN: Can we ask questions
23 now? Are you finished?
24 MR. FAASSE: Yes, I'm done.
25 BOARD MEMBER HOFFMAN: As the location of
43
1 the tower and the support building did you
consider any
2 other locations on the
lot?
3 THE WITNESS: Considered them. It was my
4 understanding that this was the location
that was
5 desired by the landlord. I did look at an alternate
6 location further to the south. However, it would have
7 been closer to the residential building on
the corner
8 of railroad and
9 understanding that that particular location
was not
10 desirable from the landlord's perspective,
so it was
11 pretty much my understanding that this was
the location
12 that was desired by the
landlord.
13 MR. GREGOR: Could you tell us what zone
14 that alternate location
that you just discussed was in?
15 THE WITNESS: It would have actually been
16 split.
The flagpole would have been in the B Zone, and
17 the equipment, the radio equipment, the
compound area
18 would have been in the AAH Zone.
19 MR. GREGOR: Similar to what we have here
20 only in a split zone?
21 THE WITNESS: Correct.
22 MR. GREGOR: Then you --
23 BOARD MEMBER HOFFMAN: Where on-site was
24 that?
25 THE WITNESS: It was in front of the
44
1 existing Golden Agers' building.
2 BOARD MEMBER HOFFMAN: In the front of --
3 THE WITNESS: The flagpole would have been
4 in the front of the building, which would
have actually
5 put it closer to
6 BOARD MEMBER GRYGUS: How did you determine
7 the locations that you did your --
8 MR. FAASSE: Photo shoot?
9 THE WITNESS: Photo simulations? From
10 where the balloon was
most visible. I generally try to
11 get more or less a 360 degree area that I
shoot
12 north-south, east and
west. I also usually will look
13 to see where the visibility is from
residential,
14 off-site residential uses, which is what I
try to
15 achieve here as well.
16 BOARD MEMBER GRYGUS: And you didn't take a
17 look at that at all from any higher
elevations?
18 THE WITNESS: Higher?
No.
19 CHAIRMAN DUNNING: Okay.
Any questions,
20 gentlemen?
21 BOARD MEMBER LEONARD: I have a
question,
22 but it's more for the architect.
23 MR. FAASSE: We'll have to call
him back up,
24 unless there's something you need to
question Mr.
25 Masters.
45
1 BOARD MEMBER LEONARD: Well, the
question
2 was, I think the recycling of the generator
when the
3 technician comes
every six or eight weeks does he cycle
4 the generator at that
time?
5 F R A N K C O L A S U R D O, having been
previously
6 sworn testifies as
follows:
7 THE WITNESS: No.
The technician that
8 comes out once approximately every four to
six weeks is
9 to do general preventive maintenance type
work.
10 BOARD MEMBER LEONARD: Well,
will the
11 generator be
cycled? I'm sure they do the test.
12 THE WITNESS: I believe that's done on a
13 weekly basis or
bi-weekly basis.
14 BOARD MEMBER GRYGUS: They usually
15 self-test and they'll start and run for 5,
10 minutes.
16 BOARD MEMBER LEONARD: That was
the
17 question.
How long will it run?
18 THE WITNESS: That's probably better
19 answered by the architect.
20 MR. FAASSE: Well, no, let's not
go back and
21 forth. Save that.
22 We'll try and keep a
record. Mr. Masters,
23 can you relate for the Board the height of
this
24 particular structure compared to, you know,
something
25 that everyone knows? I mean, I know there's a cell
46
1 tower
antenna right off of 208 that's camouflaged as a
2 tree. I don't know how high that is. We think we said
3 this one was 85 feet.
4 BOARD MEMBER GRYGUS: 105.
5 THE WITNESS: 105.
6 MR. FAASSE: I mean, is there
something else
7 that you can point to that says --
8 THE WITNESS: Not really.
This is probably
9 the best example out
front here. Number one, it's a
10 flagpole which
is, you know, a similar type structure
11 that's being proposed
here. It's not quite as tall,
12 but it's within 30 feet of the height of
this proposed
13 structure.
14 MR. FAASSE: And when you took
your photos
15 and put the balloon up you never invited
any of the
16 public or any of the Borough officials
there to witness
17 it.
18 THE WITNESS: Did not, no.
Again, it's a
19 situation where
it's dependent upon the weather
20 conditions. The difficulty in posting a balloon event
21 for a date certain is --
22 BOARD MEMBER GRYGUS: Quick Chek does it
23 every year.
24 THE WITNESS: Is the lack of, you know,
25 knowledge of what the wind is going to be
on that
47
1 particular day. So I usually find out the day before
2 and I go out early the following morning.
3 MR. FAASSE: Any other questions
for Mr.
4 Masters?
If not, before we open up to the public I
5 think we ought to allow the public to look
at these
6 photos.
7 CHAIRMAN DUNNING: We'll take five minutes.
8 MR. FAASSE: We'll put those
photos out to
9 allow the public to look at them prior to
asking any
10 questions.
11 CHAIRMAN DUNNING: We'll take a five minute
12 break.
13 (Time is 9:10 p.m.)
14 (Back on the record at 9:20
p.m.)
15 CHAIRMAN DUNNING: Let's reflect everyone
16 is present that was present before the
break.
17 MR. FAASSE: Everyone is present
that was
18 here.
19 MR. FAASSE: Anyone from the
public have any
20 questions for Mr.
Masters?
21 MR. DaSILVA:
Dave DaSilva, 108 Monroe
22 Street.
In reference to the positive and negative
23 criteria, what does having an FCC license
have to do
24 with the use of a site?
25 THE WITNESS: The courts in
48
1 stated in the various decisions that
they've rendered
2 pertaineing to
wireless telecommunications facilities
3 that the issuance of an FCC license should
suffice for
4 a carrier to establish the positive
criteria, to serve
5 the general welfare which goes to the issue
of
6 satisfying the positive criteria, special
reasons
7 critieria.
8 MR. DaSILVA:
Okay. So the FCC license and
9 the fact that the location is good for what
Verizon
10 wants to do for coverage in this area are
the two
11 positive criterias?
12 THE WITNESS: The fact that the
FCC license
13 exists, that the carrier has secured the
FCC license
14 contributes towards the satisfaction of the
positive
15 criteria. The fact that the site meets the RF
16 requirements or technical requirements in
terms of
17 meeting the coverage objective is a
specific aspect of
18 the site characteristics that contributes
to the
19 particular suitability
of the site.
20 Q.
Can you discuss the effects on the
21 character of the neighborhood in reference
to putting
22
up a 135-foot pole that's nearly the size of the Statue
23 of
24 A.
Well, it obviously has a visual impact,
25 which is why in this particular application
the
49
1 applicant has chosen to do a flagpole
because it is at
2 a quasi-public type facility in which a
flagpole would
3 normally be found, granted it's taller than
most
4 flagpoles. There is some visual impact. I don't
5 believe that the visual impact outweighs
the positive
6 benefits, just as this flagpole next to
this building
7 which is next to a residential building on
the south
8 side of the flagpole which is in much
closer proximity
9 to that flagpole than the closest
residences to this
10 particular flagpole. Certainly, again, the primary
11 focus from a
planning perspective is the visual impact
12 which is the purpose of the visual
analysis, and I
13 believe that the result is that the
positive benefits
14 outweigh the detriment caused by the visual
impact.
15 MR. DaSILVA:
You're not comparing this
16 neighborhood to
this pole? That's a completely
17 different neighborhood,
that's a main street in town.
18 THE WITNESS: Well, they're two different
19 neighborhoods, but the fact of the matter
is that
20 there's a house about seven or eight feet
away on
21 Ringwood Avenue from this existing
flagpole. It's
22 still a house.
23 MR. DaSILVA:
Okay. One of the goals of our
24 zoning ordinance is to maintain the
property values of
25 the homes in the area
and in the entire town. Can you
50
1 discuss the effect or the possible effects
of putting a
2 cell phone tower in a neighborhood that
they could have
3 on home values?
4 THE WITNESS: I could not discuss home
5 values. I'm not a real estate appraiser. The
6 ordinance, the comprehensive zoning
ordinance for the
7 Borough of Wanaque does not permit these
particular
8 uses anywhere in the
municipality. So it's a use
9 variance regardless of
what zone district we were to go
10 in. And this particular site happens to, in our
11 opinion, meet the particular suitability
criteria.
12 MR. DaSILVA: But also in order to grant
13 the variance the Board has to weigh the
positive and
14 negatives that we're discussing, and one of
those
15 things that they have to look at is how
variances
16 listed in our zoning ordinance affect the
decision.
17 One of those things is the property values.
18 THE WITNESS: But, again, the zoning
19 ordinance does not provide for this use
anywhere in the
20 municipality in any zone district
residential or
21 nonresidential. So regardless of where we went in the
22 municipality we
would still require a use variance.
23 It's not a question of well instead of
going here can
24 you go into another zone district? We still need the
25 same type of variance relief.
51
1 And virtually anywhere -- this
is primarily
2 with the exception of the corridor along
Ringwood
3 Avenue Wanaque is primarily a residential
municipality.
4 So practically anywhere, I think, that you
were to put
5 this particular facility in Wanaque it
would be visible
6 from residential
properties.
7 MR. DaSILVA:
I know that the RF expert
8 identified 135 feet as being ideal for
Verizon
9 Wireless.
Did you look at any of the other scenarios
10 with lowering the pole in reference to
simulations or
11 anything like that,
what it looked like from different
12 neighborhoods if the pole was lower?
13 THE WITNESS: No, because again the
14 testimony from the radio frequency expert
was that the
15 135 feet was the minimum height necessary
to achieve
16 the coverage objective.
So, therefore, that was the
17 height that was
used for the visual analysis.
18 MR. DaSILVA: Okay.
Thanks.
19 CHAIRMAN DUNNING: Anyone else from the
20 public have any questions for this witness?
21 MR. FAASSE: Open it to the
Board.
22 CHAIRMAN DUNNING: Anything else from the
23 Board?
Okay. Close the public portion.
24 MR. FAASSE: Next witness?
25 MS. DUNN: You're looking at our last
52
1 witness. How's that.
2 MR. FAASSE: Okay. Then we need the
3 architect.
4 MS. DUNN: The generator question.
5 MR. COLASURDO: The generators
are on a
6 timer. They will be triggered during the day once a
7 week.
They'll be exercised approximately 30 to
8 45 minutes a day, once a
week.
9 MR. FAASSE: Once a day, or once
a week?
10 MR. COLASURDO: That day. I think it's a
11 Tuesday.
Every Tuesday during the day they're
12 exercised.
13 BOARD MEMBER WILLSE: During
daylight hours?
14 MR. COLASURDO: That's correct.
15 BOARD MEMBER LEONARD: Did we
have any
16 decibel numbers like at the generator at
say a hundred
17 feet from the
generator?
18 MR. COLASURDO: Generators on the side that
19 is closest to the
property. Some of the testing that
20 I've done on existing sites you've got to
run about
21 80 decibels on any
acoustical baffling.
22 BOARD MEMBER LEONARD: That's
without
23 baffling?
24 MR. COLASURDO: That's correct. So we're
25 going to have to put some on there to meet
the noise
53
1 decibels.
2 MR. FAASSE: What's the fuel
source for this
3 generator?
4 MR. COLASURDO: This will be diesal.
5 BOARD MEMBER GRYGUS: It's not
natural gas?
6 MR. COLASURDO: This will be diesal.
7 BOARD MEMBER GRYGUS: Is that tank, is that
8 fuel storage located -- is it contained in
the
9 generator itself?
10 MR. COLASURDO: That's correct. There's a
11 double lined wall gas tank that sits
underneath the
12 generator that's
inside the shelter.
13 BOARD MEMBER LEONARD: That's above
ground?
14 MR. COLASURDO: I'm sorry?
15 BOARD MEMBER LEONARD: That will
be above
16 ground?
17 MR. COLASURDO: That's correct.
18 BOARD MEMBER LEONARD: I know we
had the
19 distance closest residence to the other
side of, you
20 know,
21 guess, would be Grove Street, whatever, on
the backside
22 of this generator?
23 THE WITNESS: I don't believe there are
24 any. I'm being told about 700 feet. The photograph on
25 Exhibit A-8 of
54
1 away from the proposed
compound.
2 BOARD MEMBER COVELLI: Can we go back to
3 the generator for a
minute? On the generator you say
4 it's on an automatic test. But I assume an operation
5 the size of Verizon knows that in
6 requirements under DEP that that test can
the take
7 place when they declare an ozone alert.
8 MR. COLASURDO: I'm sorry, when a what?
9 BOARD MEMBER COVELLI: When the DEP
10
declares an ozone alert.
11 MR. COLASURDO: Yes.
Verizon is very aware
12 of that.
13 BOARD MEMBER COVELLI: So you have a method
14 to alter that testing cycle?
15 MR. COLASURDO: Again, this facility is
16 monitored remotely 24-hours-a-day,
seven-days-a-week.
17 There's a remote switch within inside of
this facility
18 inside the shelter. It's a bunch of bells and
19 whistles. These guys can control just about everything
20 from that remote
switch. If there's an ozone alert
the
21 test ain't done.
22 BOARD MEMBER COVELLI: My point is that
23 frequently ozone alerts what some folks try
to do is
24 they do test extremely early in the morning
or late at
25 night or on a
weekend when an ozone alert is least
55
1 likely to happen. Are you testifying before this Board
2 that should an ozone alert situation occur
that a test
3 is not going to go off at 5 o'clock in the
morning on a
4 Tuesday or a Wednesday, or you can pick any
day you
5 want, I really don't
care. The fact of the matter is
6 that that's how folks get around the ozone
requirement
7 that you're going to operate within some
kind of
8 criteria -- I'm putting up normal business
hours, I'm
9 not saying 9 to 5, but some kind of
reasonable --
10 MS. DUNN: We can accept that as a
11 condition of approval.
12 MR. FAASSE: You can put a
condition in
13 there.
14 BOARD MEMBER LEONARD: That's a
good
15 question.
What if something goes haywire, generator
16 kicks off at midnight, has anything been
established
17 with the landlord to
contact them? What do we have set
18 up for that?
19 MR. COLASURDO: If that happens at night
20 Verizon would be alerted and they would
dispatch our
21 technician
immediately to figure out what the problem
22 is. It shouldn't kick off at night unless there's
an
23 emergency. If there is a power outage that generator
24 will kick off and then it is exempt from
the noise
25 standards.
56
1 BOARD MEMBER LEONARD: Let's say
there's an
2 electrical issue
not a power outage, anything bright,
3 and do we have set up anything? Like if the
4 landlord --
5 MS. DUNN: Remote monitoring.
6 BOARD MEMBER LEONARD: Or if the
landlord
7 witnessed something with the site.
8 MR. COLASURDO: If the landlord doesn't
9 like something or they feel something is
wrong or it's
10 been tampered and Verizon might not know,
my client has
11 a landlord contact. The landlord should have their
12 number if they have a lease with them and
we'll just
13 call them up.
14 MR. GREGOR: But you're also saying this is
15 remotely monitored and Verizon will
immediately know if
16 something happens, is that what you're
saying?
17 MR. COLASURDO: I'll know if somebody
18 tampers -- Verizon will know if anybody
tampers with
19 the doors, there's an intrusion alarm,
smoke alarms,
20 heat alarms if the air-conditioners aren't
working
21 properly and the temperature inside of the
shelter
22 rises they know about it. If there's
anything wrong
23 with the antennas, if the antenna signals
somehow
24 changes, maybe one of the brackets inside
the canter
25 got a little bit loose and it tilt changed
they'll know
57
1 about it. It is monitored 24-hours-a-day,
2 seven-days-a-week.
3 MR. GREGOR: One of those monitors is the
4 emergency generator?
5 MR. COLASURDO: Yes.
6 MR. GREGOR: It's also monitered?
7 MR. COLASURDO: That's correct.
8 MR. GREGOR: That's what I thought I heard
9 you say.
10 MR. FAASSE: Maybe just to hold
up on this
11 question.
Where is this off-site monitoring actually
12 happening?
13 MR. COLASURDO: It's in
14 BOARD MEMBER COVELLI:
15 BOARD MEMBER WILLSE: You want
the zip code
16 too?
17 BOARD MEMBER COVELLI: I don't know if
18 there's a place in Guam named
19 BOARD MEMBER GRYGUS: Something that came
20
to mind when you said that, how is the monopole
21 serviced once it's erected?
22 MR. COLASURDO: Visual inspection first.
23 BOARD MEMBER GRYGUS: But if they had to go
24 up there and do something?
25 MR. COLASURDO: A bucket truck. A typical
58
1 monopole, the steel galvanized poles you
might have
2 seen has a series of climbing pegs, and
that's how a
3 trained tower climber
would get up there. On this
4 particular monopole if
they had to service the antennas
5 up top they would have to get a bucket
truck to lift
6 them up there.
7 BOARD MEMBER GRYGUS: That would reach 135
8 feet?
9 MR. COLASURDO: Yeah.
10 BOARD MEMBER GRYGUS: How close would that
11 have to be to the pole?
12 MR. COLASURDO: Right in one of the parking
13 spots that we're
proposing.
14 BOARD MEMBER GRYGUS: So it can be outside
15 of that fenced enclosure?
16 BOARD MEMBER COVELLI: Fire departments
17 operate platform trucks that go out 60 to
70 feet to
18 service 130 feet up. They can probably service it from
19 Villa.
20 MR. COLASURDO: They'd probably service it.
21 BOARD MEMBER GRYGUS: And that truck could
22 get into the site given the constraints of
the diameter
23 of the driveway?
24 MR. COLASURDO: Yes.
25 BOARD MEMBER KONING: Question.
On the
59
1 generator the diesel fuel how is that
refilled, a truck
2 going to come in?
3 MR. COLASURDO: Yes.
4 BOARD MEMBER KONING: A truck like a gas
5 truck?
6 MR. COLASURDO: Yes, just like an oil
7 truck.
8 MR. FAASSE: What's the galonage of the
9 tank?
10 MR. COLASURDO: Some sites will have -- it
11 depends on the run
time. These generators will burn
12 about five gallons per
hour. My client likes 48 hours
13 of run time. So that's 240 gallons.
14 BOARD MEMBER HOFFMAN: That's contained
15 under the generator?
16 MR. COLASURDO: Yeah, there's a
17 double-walled gas tank
underneath the generator.
18 BOARD MEMBER HOFFMAN: Generator in a
19 contained area?
20 MR. COLASURDO: Inside a room. The room is
21 a containment area
itself.
22 MR. FAASSE: You know, we might
have covered
23 this given the advanced
age here. Did we specify what
24 the color was of this pole was going to be?
25 MR. COLASURDO: We testified it was going
60
1 to be white.
2 MR. FAASSE: Not galvanized?
3 MR. COLASURDO: No, baked on enamel, white.
4 MR. FAASSE: There are other
options,
5 though?
6 MR. COLASURDO: Sure.
7 MR. FAASSE: Soft earth tones?
8 MR. COLASURDO: If you want this to be pink
9 I'll paint it pink for you. Whatever color you want I
10 can paint it.
11 MR. FAASSE: We just don't want it
12 galvanized so the sun reflects off of
it. People
13 riding on
14 their vision.
15 CHAIRMAN DUNNING: If there's a service
16 problem how far
away is something dispatched? How fast
17 will they get here to service the problem?
18 MR. COLASURDO: Either Wayne or branchberg
19 will be the closest. No more than an hour away.
20 MR. GREGOR: Mr. Colasurdo, one
question I
21 had.
I'm a bit confused. The emergency
generator is
22 it located in the equipment shelter?
23 THE WITNESS: Inside the equipment shelter.
24 MR. GREGOR: It is?
25 THE WITNESS: Yes.
61
1 MR. GREGOR: Okay. Because I notice you did
2 have baffling on the equipment shelter, and
I thought
3 you mentioned that the generator was not
baffled.
4 MR. COLASURDO: No. I
would recommend
5 putting a shroud over the louvers and
that's how I'm
6 going to reduce the
decibel levels.
7 MR. GREGOR: Add additional --
8 MR. COLASURDO: A hospital grade
critical
9 silencer, that's
one of the techniques that we use to
10 reduce the sound. And over the louvers that you see on
11 Sheet Z-5 we put a sheet metal shroud that
has acoustic
12 installation inside, directs the noise down
and absorbs
13 the noise. That's how we treat the reduction of the
14 decibels that we need.
15 BOARD MEMBER LEONARD: What do
you feel
16 you'll be able to reduce it to?
17 MR. COLASURDO: State limits, which I
18 recommend would be 65. Since the test is going on
19
during the day I have to meet 65 decibels on that
20 property line. Again, at night this thing is running.
21 The only reason it should be running is
under an
22 emergency situation. It's exempt when it's being run
23 on an emergency
situation.
24 MR. FAASSE: Any other
questions?
25 MR. GREGOR: You'll add a note to the
62
1 drawing to cover that
change?
2 MR. COLASURDO: Yes.
3 MR. FAASSE: You'd better make a
note of
4 that.
5 CHAIRMAN DUNNING: Any other questions,
6 gentlemen?
7 BOARD MEMBER GRYGUS: I'm sorry.
I have a
8 question.
I'm going to address it to the attorney,
9 because I don't know who
else to ask it to.
10 MS. DUNN: Fair enough.
11 BOARD MEMBER GRYGUS: Does your lease with
12 the landlord hold -- provide for an
adequate hold
13 harmless cause
for liability if anything were to happen
14 in, on, or around the --
15 MS. DUNN: That's typical language, yes.
16 BOARD MEMBER GRYGUS: So there is an
17 adequate hold harmless clause?
18 MR. FAASSE: And I would assume
that you
19 would have to provide some kind of
insurance?
20 MS. DUNN: Sure.
21 MR. FAASSE: Yes, no?
22 MS. DUNN: Sure.
23 BOARD MEMBER GRYGUS: So if I put that as a
24 condition, if that was put as a condition
--
25 MS. DUNN: I can represent to you that
63
1 Verizon Wireless has determined the
adequate hold
2 harmless and adequate
insurance coverage. What we have
3 to tend to shy away from is each local
governmental
4 entity tweaking the corporate mandates as
to what's
5 required.
I can tell you the landlord here has
6 determined that it's sufficient, as has
Verizon
7 Wireless.
8 BOARD MEMBER GRYGUS: Does your lease also
9 contain a restoration clause? And the reason I say
10 that is if in the event 15 years from now
the use of
11 that monopole is abandoned for wireless
communication
12 will it be restored to its original state,
including
13 the removal of the
accessory structure?
14 MS. DUNN: Absolutely.
15 MR. FAASSE: Would there be any
problem with
16 sharing with the Board
that lease?
17 MS. DUNN: Yes.
18 MR. FAASSE: There would be?
19 MS. DUNN: Yes.
20 BOARD MEMBER GRYGUS: Are you going to say
21 it's proprietary?
22 MS. DUNN: Bingo.
23 BOARD MEMBER HOFFMAN: Yeah, I
can.
24 MR. FAASSE: These are
questions,
25 restoration and all
that. I mean, we don't want to
set
64
1 the levels of insurance, but we want to
make sure that
2 you do have some kind of insurance.
3 MS. DUNN: If this can help apease
you with
4 your concerns I'm advised that the Borough
solicitor
5 represented the landlord in these
negotiations.
6 BOARD MEMBER GRYGUS: The
Borough who?
7 MS. DUNN: The Borough solicitor, the
8 attorney.
9 MR. FAASSE: That's the English
version for
10 an attorney at law, you have the barristers
and
11 solicitors. She may have come over here from Merry Old
12
13 BOARD MEMBER HOFFMAN: And they'll provide
14 a certificate to the town of the insurance
that they
15 have it?
16 BOARD MEMBER GRYGUS: Well, if the Borough
17 Attorney agreed to it. But as far as the restoration
18 clause that is
in there also to --
19 MS. DUNN: Sure.
We understand we can't --
20 BOARD MEMBER GRYGUS: Just abandon.
21 MS. DUNN: Walk away and leave that there.
22 BOARD MEMBER GRYGUS: And you do maintain
23 the pole throughout the whole time of its
existence if
24 it should have to be painted?
25 MS. DUNN: Certainly.
65
1 CHAIRMAN DUNNING: Okay.
Anything else,
2 gentlemen?
3 BOARD MEMBER HOFFMAN: Do you maintain the
4 flag also?
5 MS. DUNN: The flag? As requested by the
6 property owner, the landlord or the
property owner will
7 do so.
8 BOARD MEMBER HOFFMAN: The landlord will
9 provide and maintain the flag?
10 MS. DUNN: Yes.
11 MR. FAASSE: It's going to be an
American
12 Flag?
We weren't sure the last time.
13 THE WITNESS: Yes.
14 MS. DUNN: That's another condition of
15 approval that
they would all be willing to agree to.
16 I'm assuming that's what the property owner
has
17 envisioned, and that's certainly who's --
18 MR. FAASSE: We haven't seen the
lease.
19 MS. DUNN: That's certainly whose flag is
20 in the photo
simulation.
21 BOARD MEMBER GRYGUS: So if the
flag has to
22 be replaced the landlord is going to be
responsible?
23 BOARD MEMBER WILLSE: Well, no,
it's a
24 lanyard.
25 BOARD MEMBER GRYGUS: It's a lanyard.
66
1 Because the one out here I believe is too.
2 BOARD MEMBER WILLSE: No. If the Golden
3 Agers have to do
it it's going to be a problem.
4 MR. FAASSE: Why don't we get a
flag like
5 the ones that are flown
over the capital?
6 MR. FAASSE: Okay. Anything else,
7 Counselor?
You rest?
8 MS. DUNN: Just from a minor technical or
9 procedural standpoint, I do believe it's
necessary that
10 we reopen to the public in light of Mr. Colasurdo's
11 very previous
additional testimony.
12 MR. FAASSE: No, no. We have to have public
13 statements too.
14 MS. DUNN: For our --
15 MR. FAASSE: Get your
cross-examination
16 skills ready.
17 MS. DUNN: For our purposes, yes, I do
18
rest. I thank you for your time,
attention, your
19 suggestions this
evening, and go at it.
20 CHAIRMAN DUNNING: I open it to the public.
21 MR. FAASSE: Anyone who wants to
make a
22 statement come
up and be sworn.
23 MR. FAASSE: Okay. Do you have this
24 gentleman's name?
25 D A V I D D a S I L V
A, having been duly sworn,
67
1 testifies as follows:
2 MR. DaSILVA:
I have a big concern about
3 whether or not Verizon Wireless has given
us enough
4
evidence that this new antennae pole is necessary. I
5 did some research independantly
and found that in other
6 locations Verizon Wireless actually does
test with
7 phones as opposed with meters analyzing whether
or not
8 those phones receive a proper signal, drop
the call, et
9 cetera. When I questioned the RF expert two months
ago
10 he indicated that he did not know what the
maximum
11 decibel loss of each of their hand-held
unit was. And
12 I still don't know if we know that today.
13 All the information I've
requested about
14 dropped calls, loss of service on each hand-held
unit
15 was said to be proprietary. So I believe that Verizon
16 has not demonstrated a need for this
facility, and I
17 think that is the most important aspect,
regardless of
18 what it looks like, how tall it is, and the
effects
19 that it has on the residents which I think
are
20 significant. I don't know if it's necessary, and
21 that's a major concern
of mine. That's all I have.
22 MR. FAASSE: Counsel, do you have any
23 questions of Mr. DaSilva?
24 MS. DUNN: No, thank you. Sorry to
25 disappoint you.
68
1 MR. FAASSE: No, no
disappointments. It's
2 your option.
3 CHAIRMAN DUNNING: Anyone else from the
4 public have any statements to make? Okay.
Close the
5 public portion.
6 MR. FAASSE: Okay. Unless the Board sees
7 fit that you want some other evidence or
information
8 prior to making a
determination.
9 BOARD MEMBER COVELLI: Would Counsel like
10 her RF specialist to comment on that on the
statement
11 made?
12 MS. DUNN: I don't believe it's necessary
13 to respond to that
characterization. Thank you.
14 MR. FAASSE: Okay, Tommy?
15 CHAIRMAN DUNNING: All right.
We need a
16 motion.
17 MR. FAASSE: Well, you need a
motion to
18 approve or to deny, or you need a request
for further
19 additional information
to carry it. One of those
20 three.
21 BOARD MEMBER GRYGUS: I make the motion to
22 approve the application for three use
variances:
23 First, will be the use to
construct a cell
24 tower in the AAH Zone; the second use
variance will be
25 for a variance of 50 feet in height where
the applicant
69
1 is proposing 135 feet, and 85 feet is
allowed; the
2 third use would
be for two uses on one site.
3 They will also require the following
bulk
4 variances:
A lot variance of 398.626 acres, where the
5 applicant is proposing 1.374 acres, where
400 acres is
6 required by ordinance. A variance for a front yard
7 setback of 72.75
feet, where the applicant is providing
8 27.25 feet, where 100
feet is required by ordinance.
9 A variance for a rear yard
setback for the
10 accessory structure of 93.4 feet, where the
applicant
11
is providing 6.6 feet, where 100 feet is required by
12 ordinance. A requirement for a rear yard setback of
13 the monopole of 89.34 feet, where the
applicant is
14 providing 10.66 feet, where 100 feet is
required by
15 ordinance. A variance on the parking aisles, the
16 applicant is
providing one foot, where the applicant is
17 providing 24 feet, where 25 feet is
required by
18 ordinance.
19 And additional parking variance
for seven
20 parking spaces on the northeast side of the
lot which
21 are -- which the applicant is providing a
22 10-foot-by-19-foot space, where the
ordinance requires
23 a 10-by-20-foot space.
24 I would also have the following
conditions
25 as part of the motion: Number one, to provide the
70
1 additional site signage as per testimony
this evening,
2 which would be coordinated with the Board
engineer.
3 Number two would be to improve
the gravel
4 area, existing gravel area in the northeast
location of
5 the site which was
discussed tonight.
6 Number three would be to move
the parking
7 space number one to the north side of the
site, and to
8 restrict parking of that area just north of
the
9 accessory structure.
10 Next one would be to provide an
exterior
11 pole light in the newly constructed grass
area.
12 Next would be, as per prior
testimony, I
13 believe, in January that the pole will be
made
14 available for emergency service usage. And that would
15 be it for my conditions.
16 MR. FAASSE: It's going to be a
17 BOARD MEMBER GRYGUS: It's going
to be a
18 flag.
19 MR. FAASSE: Do you want the
color? White
20 is fine?
21 BOARD MEMBER GRYGUS: White is fine with
22 me.
23 BOARD MEMBER WILLSE: Do you
want to say a
24 timer or photocell on that light pole or
light that's
25 in the grassed area?
71
1 BOARD MEMBER COVELLI: I will second the
2 motion if the motion maker amends his
motion to include
3 the fact that under testimony the applicant
agreed that
4 any testing on the generator will be done,
if I said 7
5 a.m. to 7 p.m. is that acceptable?
6 BOARD MEMBER GRYGUS: One thing I had
7 written here also that the applicant under
testimony
8 tonight did agree to restripe
the entire north end of
9 the parking lot as an additional condition.
10 MR. GREGOR: And additional noise baffling.
11 BOARD MEMBER WILLSE: Well, he
has to meet
12 the code anyway.
13 BOARD MEMBER LEONARD: But it's
supposed to
14 be in the drawing too.
15 BOARD MEMBER COVELLI: I second the
16 amendments to his
motion.
17 MR. FAASSE: What about your whole
18 conversation
about the maintenance?
19 BOARD MEMBER GRYGUS: They
testified that
20 it's in there in the lease.
21 BOARD MEMBER COVELLI: The solicitor for
22 the Borough?
23 BOARD MEMBER GRYGUS: I mean, I don't know
24 that we can put that in as a --
25 BOARD MEMBER COVELLI: The solicitor for
72
1 the Borough is responsible for that?
2 MS. DUNN: If I can just --
3 (Whereupon, Mrs. Dunn's client knods in the
4 affirmative.)
5 MR. FAASSE: Well, the
restoration I have no
6 difficulties with the
liability. I don't think this
7 Board should sit there and say how much
coverage is
8 sufficient, but I think we can probably say
that there
9 has to be a whole agreement and insurance
provided that
10 would meet the approval of the landlord's
attorney, in
11 this situation it happens to be the Borough
Attorney.
12 Do you have any problem with a condition
like that? I
13 mean, apparantly
they agreed to it already. We just
14 want to make sure that it's there.
15 MS. DUNN: That's fine.
Again, it's in the
16 lease already. I just want to answer your question,
17 sir, the 7 a.m.
to 7 p.m. I think you asked me that
18 question, yes. But --
19 BOARD MEMBER COVELLI: Well, actually, I
20 saw the people behind you knodding their heads yes.
21 MR. FAASSE: It's Monday through
Friday.
22 MS. DUNN: Understood.
Business hours.
23 BOARD MEMBER GRYGUS: So do you
want to put
24 that condition?
25 MR. FAASSE: Yes. That it would be a hold
73
1 harmless agreement and
restoration clause.
2 BOARD MEMBER GRYGUS: To be satisfied.
3 MS. DUNN: To the satisfaction of the
4 leasor's
attorney, again.
5 MR. FAASSE: The leasor's attorney.
6 BOARD MEMBER WILLSE: Signers of
the lease.
7 BOARD MEMBER GRYGUS: Hold harmless
8 agreement and restoration clause to be
reviewed by the
9 Borough Solicitor.
10 MS. DUNN: My only other request for
11 clarification, Sir, the paving requirement
and
12 restriping that's
only on the property, our portion of
13 the property?
14 BOARD MEMBER GRYGUS: Correct.
And your're
15 not going to improve
property that's not yours.
16 MS. DUNN: Thank you.
17 BOARD MEMBER COVELLI: When we say "your
18 side" from where the roadway narrows
north? You're
19 nodding back there?
20 MS. DUNN: If they aren't they should be at
21 this point.
22 CHAIRMAN DUNNING: Did we miss anything in
23 the report?
24 MR. FAASSE: Just so that it's
clear when
25 you talk about that light that's on the
grass strip
74
1 it's not the light on this monopole.
2 MR. GREGOR: No.
3 BOARD MEMBER GRYGUS: No, a new light. A
4 new parking light.
5 MR. FAASSE: Which the details
will be added
6 to the site plan to be approved.
7 BOARD MEMBER GRYGUS: To be coordinated
8 with the Board engineer to ensure that it
does not
9 infringe upon the neighbors.
10 MR. FAASSE: Okay. Does anybody have
11 anything else to add to
the motion? Now, do you second
12 that, Frank?
13 BOARD MEMBER COVELLI: I second it with the
14 amendments stated.
15 CHAIRMAN DUNNING: Roll call.
16 SECRETARY MAROTTA: Jack
Dunning?
17 CHAIRMAN DUNNING: Yes.
18 SECRETARY MAROTTA: Bill Grygus?
19 BOARD MEMBER GRYGUS: Yes.
20 SECRETARY MAROTTA: Frank
Covelli?
21 BOARD MEMBER COVELLI: Yes.
22 SECRETARY MAROTTA: Peter
Hoffman?
23 BOARD MEMBER HOFFMAN: No.
24 SECRETARY MAROTTA: Ed Leonard?
25 BOARD MEMBER LEONARD: Yes.
75
1 SECRETARY MAROTTA: Art Koning?
2 BOARD MEMBER KONING: Yes.
3 SECRETARY MAROTTA: Eric Willse?
4 BOARD MEMBER WILLSE: Yes.
5 SECRETARY MAROTTA: Mike
O'Hanlon?
6 BOARD MEMBER O'HANLON: Yes.
7 MS. DUNN: Thank you very much. As a
8 matter of housekeeping do you wish me to
take all the
9 exhibits?
10 MR. FAASSE: No. Not until the time for
11 appeal has left.
12 MS. DUNN: Okay. Fair enough.
13 MR. FAASSE: Sorry. Sorry about that. You
14 can have them after that.
15 MS. DUNN: I just want to clarify, the
16 Exhibit A-7 that was the joint site plans.
17 MR. FAASSE: Yes, that was just the
18 amendments that were
filed.
19 MS. DUNN: Right.
With the exception --
20 MR. FAASSE: We'll have our
stenographer
21 prepare the Exhibit list.
22 MS. DUNN: The only difference is in A-7
23 Sheets Z-3 and Z-4 bear the revision date
of 2/2/07.
24 MR. FAASSE: We notice different
ones and
25
there's space in Mr. Gregor's report.
76
1 MR. GREGOR: Dated as specified in my
2 report.
3 (Whereupon, the hearing on this
application
4 adjourns at 9:50
a.m.)
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
77
1 C E R T I F I C A T E
2
3 I, IRIS LA ROSA, a Notary Public
and Certified
4 Shorthand Reporter of the State of
5 hereby certify that the foregoing is a true
and
6 accurate transcript of the testimony as
taken
7 stenographically
by and before me at the time, place,
8 and on the date
hereinbefore set forth.
9 I DO FURTHER CERTIFY that I am
neither a
10 relative nor employee nor attorney nor
counsel of any
11 of the parties to this action, and that I
am neither a
12 relative nor employee of such attorney or
counsel, and
13 that I am not
financially interested in the action.
14
15
IRIS LA
ROSA, CSR, RPR
16 Certificate No. XI 01628
17 Dated: March 19, 2007
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25