January 2, 2013

TOWNSHIP OF WEST ORANGE PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JANUARY 2, 2013 The Township of West Orange Planning Board held a regular meeting on January 2, 2013 at 7:30 P.M., in Council Chambers, 66 Main Street. Chairman Bagoff called the meeting to order at approximately 7:30 P.M. It was announced that notification of this meeting was given to the Township Clerk, the West Orange Chronicle and posted on the Township Bulletin Board on December 6, 2012 in accordance with the requirements of the “Open Public Meetings Act”. PRESENT: Chairman Bagoff, Jerome Eben, Tekeste Ghebremicael, Gerald Gurland, Lee Klein, Councilwoman Susan McCartney (7:57 P.M.), Ron Weston ABSENT: Joanne Carlucci, Vice Chairman Ben Heller, Jason Lester, William Wilkes II ALSO PRESENT: Paul Grygiel, AICP, PP, Acting Township Planner Frank Russo, P.E., Omland Engineering Associates, Inc. Patrick Dwyer, Esq., Board Attorney Robin Miller, Board Secretary Debbie Dillon Audio Transcription Service, LLC PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Chairman Bagoff requested all persons in attendance stand for the Pledge of Allegiance. ROLL CALL Chairman Bagoff, Joanne Carlucci, Jerome Eben, Tekeste Ghebremicael, Gerald Gurland, Vice Chairman Ben Heller, Lee Klein, Jason Lester, Councilwoman Susan McCartney, Ron Weston, William Wilkes. ANNOUNCEMENTS The next regular Planning Board meeting will be held on February 6, 2013 in Council Chambers, at 7:30 P.M. NAPLANNING. BRIWPAMINUTES.201311-2-2013 Draft Minutesdoe

ADOPT MINUTES Adopt the minutes of the November 29, 2012 Planning Board special meeting. The Board voted on adopting the minutes of the November 29, 2013 special meeting as follows: Motion: Chairman Bagoff Second: Mr. Klein Carlucci - Eben Y Ghebremicael - Gurland Y Heller - Klein Y Lester - McCartney - Weston Y Wilkes - Bagoff Y Adopt the minutes of the December 5, 2012 meeting. The Board voted on adopting the minutes of the December 5, 2012 meeting as follows: Motion: Chairman Bagoff Second: Mr. Weston Carlucci - Eben - Ghebremicael Y Gurland Abstain Heller - Klein Y Lester - McCartney - Weston Y Wilkes - Bagoff Y SWEARING IN Paul Grygiel, AICP, PP, Phillips Preiss Grygiel LLC, Acting Township Planner. Frank Russo, PE, PP, Omland Engineering, Professional! Planner and Professional Engineer hired by the Township. RESOLUTION(S) PB-12-31T/Bow and Arrow Manor, Incorporated Block: 151; Lot: 17.01; Zone: B-2 111 Prospect Avenue Technical Site Plan for interior renovations and elevator installation. DISCUSSION Chairman Bagoff gave a brief recapitulation of the Application approved at the November 29, 2012 special meeting. Mr. Eben asked if the Applicant was spending more than $100,000.00 on the tenovation. Chairman Bagoff answered in the affirmative. Chairman Bagoff called for a vote on the Resolution. NAPLANNING. BRDWPMINUTES201311-2-2013 Draft Minutes.doe

The Board voted on the Resolution as follows: Motion: Chairman Bagoff Second: Mr. Eben Carlucci - Eben Y Ghebremicael Y Gurland Y Heller - Klein Y Lester - McCartney - Weston Y Wilkes - Bagoff Y APPLICATION(S) PB-12-30/Alcatel Lucent c/o Coral Links Ltd. Block: 84.01; Lot: 22; Zone: B-1 10 Marcella Avenue Conditional Use Site Plan to install two (2) dish antennas on to an existing tower and ancillary equipment beneath tower. EXHIBITS A-1 - Revised Site Plans dated 1/2/13, prepared by Ramaker & Associates, Inc. — eight (8) pages. DISCUSSION Kevin R. Jones, Esq., Law Offices of Alan B. Zublatt, attorney for Applicant, introduced the Application to the Board. Mr. Jones stated the Applicant proposed to install two (2) microwave antenna dish mounts; at heights of 35 feet and 76 feet, respectively, on to an existing tower at 10 Marcella Avenue. Mr. Jones presented revised site plans to be entered as Exhibit A-1, the revisions addressed the comments of the Omland Engineering memorandum dated December 26, 2012. Mr. Jones introduced the Applicant's first witness, Frank Pazden, PE, Maser Consulting P.A. Mr. Pazden was sworn in, stated his credentials, and determined by the Board to be an expert in engineering. Chairman Bagoff inquired as to the accuracy of the Ramaker site plan, (Exhibit A-1). Mr. Weston asked Mr. Pazden if he was familiar with the site. Mr. Pazden advised the Board that he had not prepared the plans but had reviewed both sets of plans, the original and revised, and determined them to be accurate; additionally, he had visited the site. Mr. Jones advised the Board that an expert witness from Ramaker & Associates, Inc. was not available to testify. Mr. Dwyer determined that Mr. Pazden could be permitted to introduce testimony to the Board. Referring to Exhibit A-1 - Sheet A-2, Mr. Pazden said the sheet showed the overall site plan; the existing building structure was under the footprint of the tower. The Applicant’s plan was to construct a seven foot high storage building on to a pre- poured concrete pad to the far south end of the existing building for the antennas supporting aperture. Mr. Pazden said there was currently an existing concrete siab on the site; the new structure would be to the east of the existing slab. The two antennas would be situated on the north west side of the tower; one at a height of NAPLANNING

existing concrete siab on the site; the new structure would be to the east of the existing slab. The two antennas would be situated on the north west side of the tower; one at a height of NAPLANNING BRDWP.MINUTES2013U-2-2013 Draft Minutes.doc

35 feet, the other at 76 feet; both within the footprint of the tower. Mr. Eben asked where the cable tray would be located and at what height; and would excavation be necessary. Mr. Pazden responded the tray would be flush with the ground; the slab would be 4 feet by four feet flush; there would be minor excavation similar to a deck footing. Mr. Weston said he wanted to know how close the existing fence was to the property line; and would the antennas generate noise. Mr. Pazden said the fence was almost adjacent to the property line, noise levels would be within the industry guidelines. Chairman Bagoff noted that the existing fence was ten feet from the property line. Mr. Gurland asked if the Eagle Ridge Complex was within 200 feet of the property. Mr. Jones indicated that Eagle Ridge management had been noticed; all documentation had been submitted to the Board Secretary. Mr. Gurland stated Alcatel did not own the tower; Mr. Jones responded American Tower owned the structure and MCI Telecommunications owned the property. Mr.Gurland responded that at some other towers, maintenance had become an issue; he had not inspected the tower, but was concerned about it rusting. He said that as a condition of approval he would like a letter issued to American Tower indicating the tower must be maintained. Chairman Bagoff interjected that the Township’s Engineering Department did tower inspections. Mr. Dwyer inquired if the Applicant would stipulate that the structure owner (American Tower) would maintain the tower. Mr. Jones answered that Mr. Gurland’s request was very general. Mr. Weston asked if it would be a precedent to condition an Applicant to maintain a structure they leased. Chairman Bagoff proposed the condition would be to have the lessee get a letter from the owner stating the owner would maintain the structure. Mr. Pazden advised the Board that the tower was inspected every three years; the tower was stainless steel; rust was not an issue. Mr. Eben interjected that he remembered that a structural report had been submitted with a previous Application for the site; it was very important to have the structure maintained. Councilwoman McCartney opined it was not incumbent on the Applicant to maintain the property; it was the responsibility of the tower owner. Mr. Klein stated he agreed with Councilwoman McCartney. Mr. Gurland then inquired if the antenna

not incumbent on the Applicant to maintain the property; it was the responsibility of the tower owner. Mr. Klein stated he agreed with Councilwoman McCartney. Mr. Gurland then inquired if the antenna bolts were made of stainless steel. Mr. Pazden said that typically, the bolts were stainless steel; he then advised the Board that pertaining to the structural analysis, an updated structural report would be provided. Mr. Grygiel said there might be and issue with the plan; the revised plans indicated the proposed antenna at a height of 35 feet was beyond the footprint of the tower structure; it would project beyond the base of the tower approximately 2.5 feet. Mr. Jones said the Applicant would amended the plan; the antenna would be raised to a height to keep within the footprint of the structure. Mr. Weston inquired if the Structural Analysis Report dated February 29, 2012 was NSPLANNING. BRD\WAMINUTES\201311-2-2013 Draft Minates.doe ‘

correct. Mr. Pazden answered in affirmative; he said that capacity was not an issue. The total square footage of the base of the tower was 1,936 square feet. Mr. Klein asked if raising the antenna would affect the point-to-point microwave path. Mr. Pazden said no, it would not affect the path. Mr. Russo asked Mr. Pazden if he disagreed with any comments from the Omland Engineering memorandum dated December 26, 2012. Mr. Pazden indicated he had ho problems with the memorandum. He advised Mr. Russo that the height of the building would be twenty-six feet, it would not be visible to the public. Chairman Bagoff asked Mr. Russo if the Applicant's request for waiver items was acceptable. Mr. Russo said he had no problem with the waiver requests. Mr. Klein asked about the color of the antenna apparatus; would the color of the materials be uniform. Mr. Pazden said the antennas would be the same color. Mr. Grygiel asked Mr. Pazden to confirm the height of the proposed equipment cabinet. Mr. Pazden said the cabinet would be approximately seven feet tall on a concrete pad flush with the ground. Mr. Grygiel asked if the Applicant was aware of any existing unused antennas on the tower; and if so did the Applicant know if those unused antennas were to be removed. Mr. Pazden replied in the negative. Harvey Grossman, Esq., Public Advocate questioned Mr. Pazden. Referring to Exhibit A-1; Sheet A-4; he asked how much higher would the proposed 35-foot antenna have to be elevated to bring it within the footprint of the existing tower. Additionally, Mr. Grossman inquired as to what steps the Applicant could take to ensure the color of the antennas beuniform with the other antennas on the tower. Chairman Bagoff interjected that the Applicant could not be responsible for other antennas already on the tower, Mr. Pazden said the Applicant's antennas would be uniform in color. Mr. Jones advised the Board that the Applicant did not take antenna color in to consideration because most industry antennas were already of a standard color. Mary Ellen Morrow, 178 Dezenzo Lane, stated she was concerned with the esthetics and proliferation of the antennas; she said she was concerned about the quality of life. She asked how could this be enforced within the Township. Mr. Jones said that the Applicant would comply with all industry standards and other applicable rules. Chairman Bagoff

ut the quality of life. She asked how could this be enforced within the Township. Mr. Jones said that the Applicant would comply with all industry standards and other applicable rules. Chairman Bagoff opined it was a matter of code enforcement. Referring to Exhibit A-1; Sheet A-4, Mr. Klein asked if any of the existing antennas were dormant. Mr. Pazden said that all existing antennas were active. Mr. Eben questioned Mr. Grygiel regarding the items on the Application checklist that had not been marked Complete. Mr. Grygiel said those unchecked items were not applicable to the Application. Mr. Jones called the Applicant's next witness, Ben Shidfar, RF, Alcatel-Lucent; Mr. Shidfar presented his credentials, and was accepted by the Board to be an expert NAPLANNING.BRINWAMINUTES 201511-2-2018 Draft Minntes.doc 3

witness in radio frequency. Mr. Jones asked Mr. Shidfar if the proposed antennas met all industry requirements; additionally, he asked if moving the 35 ft antenna to a greater height would affect the point-to-point transmission. Mr. Shidfar said the proposed antennas did meet industry standards and that moving the antenna would not create a problem regarding the point-to-point transmission. In response to a questions regarding antenna placement and structure capacity posed by Mr. Grygiel and Councilwoman McCartney, Mr. Shidfar said that although too many antennas could create interference, the proposed antennas, even with the new elevation,would stil! work well. Mr. Jones introduced James A. Miller, PP, JA Miller Planning Consultants, LLC. Mr. Miller presented his credentials; he was accepted by the Board to be an expert witness in planning. Mr. Miller testified that the proposed cabinet necessitated a “C2” variance because it would be within the side yard setback of ten feet, it was proposed to be at a distance of approximately six feet. He said the variance should be granted because the proposal advanced two purposes of zoning, MLUL Section 2(a) by encouraging the appropriate use of land in a manner which would promote the public welfare; and 2(c) it would provide adequate light, air and open space. He said the plan was a better alternative to the zone plan because the cabinet needed to be located where proposed, otherwise it would impede access to the existing building. He believed the proposed location was the only place available; it would be between two existing structures and a fence, thus it would have little visual impact to the area. Mr. Miller testified that with regard to negative criteria, the proposed antennas and cabinet would serve the public’s need for telecommunications; and the equipment was passive in nature with little impact to the area. Chairman Bagoff inquired if there would be clustering of antennas. Mr. Miller responded that the existing structure was substantial; the proposed antennas were an innocuous light grey color; and that there were no other antennas at the proposed heights. Mr. Eben stated that the tower was 200 feet tall; he asked if there were aircraft lights on the tower. Mr. Miller said he did not know if lights were on the tower; Mr. Pazden advised that per FAA requirements, an aircraft light was on the tower.

all; he asked if there were aircraft lights on the tower. Mr. Miller said he did not know if lights were on the tower; Mr. Pazden advised that per FAA requirements, an aircraft light was on the tower. Mr. Eben stated that the site was industrial looking, could landscaping pretty-up the site. Chairman Bagoff opined the question was out of the realm for the witness to reply. Councilwoman McCartney said the question of landscaping the site has been addressed in the past. Mr. Weston also inquired if landscaping might enhance the site, or if adding slats to the fence might enhance the area. The Board deliberated on the Application. Chairman Bagoff stated the Board had agreed to grant the “C2” variance to the Applicant. Mr. Gurland requested that the list of conditions be written on the final construction plans. Councilwoman McCartney suggested that a letter be crafted to the building owner; and to have the Zoning Officer report on the inspection of the structure. Mr. Weston opined that it NAPLANNING. BRDWPIMINGTES20111-2.2013 Draft Minutes. doc