April 20, 2017

MINUTES TOWNSHIP OF WEST ORANGE ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT REGULAR MEETING April 20, 2017 The West Orange Zoning Board of Adjustment held a regular meeting on April 20, 2017 commencing 8:00 PM at 66 Main Street, West Orange, N.J. in Council Chambers. Chairman Neuer called the meeting to order at approximately 8:00 P.M. It was announced that notification of this meeting was given to the Township Clerk, the West Orange Chronicle and the Star Ledger and posted on the Township Bulletin Board in accordance with the “Senator Byron M. Baer Open Public Meetings Act.” Chairman Neuer announced that a digital tape recording system is being utilized to record the proceedings of the meeting and instructed the general public on how the audio of the proceedings may be reviewed or obtained. Chairman Neuer asked everyone to stand for the Pledge of Allegiance. Alice Beirne, Esq., Board Attorney, read the Opening Statement. PRESENT: D. Gabry, D. Nash, P. Neuer, B. Quentzel, F. Sanders, I. Schwarzbaum, W. Steinhart, M. Sussman ABSENT: B. Buechler (excused) M. Straker (excused) A. Weiss (excused) ALSO PRESENT: Paul Grygiel, Acting Planning Director for the Township Eric Keller, Consulting Engineer for the Township Alice Beirne, Esq., Board Attorney Rose DeSena, Board Secretary H. Grossman, Esq., Public Advocate

ANNOUNCEMENTS Future Meetings: May 18, 2017 (regular meeting) June 15, 2017 (regular meeting) July 20, 2017 (regular meeting) MINUTES March 16, 2017 (regular meeting) Chairman Neuer stated that the draft minutes from the March 16, 2017 were circulated to all of the Board Members. Chairman Neuer said that he submitted his comments for these minutes and asked if any Board Member had any additional comments; there were none. Mr. Sussman made a motion to approve the minutes of the March 16, 2017 meeting; Mr. Quentzel seconded the motion and all were in favor. It was noted for the record that Ms. Gabry was not present at the March 16" meeting and did not vote on these minutes. SWEARING IN Paul Grygiel, acting Planning Director for the Township and Eric Keller, consulting Engineer for the Township were sworn under oath. DISCUSSION First item on the agenda for discussion: Robert Williams, attorney for ZB-17-01/Redwood, LLC application, approached the podium. Mr. Williams stated that his client is seeking preliminary and final site plan approval with “d” and “c” variances to construct a four story dwelling with 128 luxury rental units. He said that he 2

would like to request a special Zoning Board meeting on June 1, 2017 and hopefully complete the hearing in one night. Mr. Schwarzbaum stated that he cannot attend the June 1“ meeting; all of other Board Members present said that they could attend the June 1*‘ meeting. Chairman Neuer asked Mr. Williams if he will have a court reporter at the meeting; he replied yes. Chairman Neuer stated that if the application is not completed on June 1, 2017 and has to be carried over then Mr. Williams will have to provide a transcript for the Board Members who were not in attendance. Chairman Neuer asked if all of the Board Members were in favor of having a special meeting for ZB-17-01/Redwood, LLC on June 1, 2017; all were in favor. Second item on the agenda for discussion: Chairman Neuer stated that the Township’s Zoning Official requested that the Zoning Board interpret whether a laundromat falls within any of the permitted uses in a B-1 zone and asked if all of the members of the Board had reviewed this request; the Board Members replied yes. Mr. Grygiel stated that the Township ordinance was amended in 2012 which included a definition of a personal service. He said that he provided the Board with a hand out from the definitions section of a recognized authority on the subject, The Complete Illustrated Book of Development and a laundromat was included in the definition of a personal service. Chairman Neuer stated that it is his opinion that a laundromat is a permitted use in the B-1 zone. Mr. Schwarzbaum stated that a laundromat can also be interpreted as a retail use which is also permitted. Chairman Neuer made a motion that the Zoning Board issue an interpretation that a laundromat is a permitted use in a B-1 zone; Ms. Gabry seconded the motion.

The vote was as follows: Buechler - Schwarzbaum: Yes Gabry: Yes Steinhart: Yes D. Nash: - Straker: - Quentzel: Yes Sussman: Yes Sanders: Yes Weiss: - Chairman Neuer: Yes Chairman Neuer welcomed the special visitors from the Seton Hall Law School. RESOLUTIONS 1. ZB-16-06/Zamora Denied on 3/16/17 Block: 113.01; Lot: 69 & 70; Zone: R-T 43 Park Terrace “c” variances for rear and side yard setbacks Chairman Neuer stated that this resolution was circulated to all of the Board Members and asked if any Board Member had any comments; there were none. Chairman Neuer made a motion to adopt the resolution as submitted and Ms. Nash seconded the motion.

The vote was as follows: Buechler - Schwarzbaum: - Gabry: - Steinhart: - D. Nash: Yes Straker: - Quentzel: - Sussman: - Sanders: - Weiss: - Chairman Neuer: Yes 2. ZB-16-14/Sumrak Approved on 3/16/17 Block: 159.09; Lot: 33.03; Zone: OB-1 421 Northfield Avenue “c” variance to install a 6” privacy fence Chairman Neuer stated that this resolution was circulated to all of the Board Members and asked if any Board Member had any comments; there were none. Chairman Neuer made a motion to adopt the resolution as submitted and Mr. Steinhart seconded the motion.

The vote was as follows: Buechler - Schwarzbaum: - Gabry: - Steinhart: Yes D. Nash: - Straker: - Quentzel: Yes Sussman: Yes Sanders: Yes Weiss: - Chairman Neuer: Yes APPLICATIONS 1. ZB-16-17/New Cingular Wireless PCS, LLC (AT&T) — Carried from 3/16/17 Block: 159.08; Lot: 56; Zone: OB-1 405 Northfield Avenue Seeking “d” and “c” variances for installing twelve (12) telecommunication antennas on a proposed 100° monopole. EXHIBITS A-1— Map 1 - AT&T neighboring coverage —dated 12/21/16 A-2 — Map 2— AT&T proposed composite coverage — dated 12/21/16 A-3 — Map 3— AT&T proposed coverage antenna centerline 97 ft. — dated 12/21/16 A-4— Map 4— AT&T composite coverage with rooftop antenna centerline 47 ft. — dated 12/21/16 A-5 — Map 6 — AT&T Shillelagh site composite coverage — dated 2/12/17 A-6 — Sheet Z-1 Site Plan — revision date of 2/2/17 A-7 — Sheet Z-4 Partial site plan — revision date of 2/2/17 A-8 - Sheet Z-6 Antenna orientation plan and elevation — revision date of 2/2/17 Chairman Neuer stated for the record that Ms. Carey Rose, CSR, from Veritext Reporting, is the official transcriber for this application.

Chairman Neuer disclosed, on the record, that he is a customer of AT&T and owns a few shares of their stock and asked Ms. Beirne if this would be considered a conflict; she said no. Christopher Quinn, attorney for the applicant, approached the podium. Mr. Quinn detailed the application stating that his client is proposing to install twelve (12) antennae on a 100’ monopole. He said that this use is not permitted in the zone and will require the approval of a “D1” use variance; a further required vaiance is requested due to two principal uses on the property plus an additional “D6” variance for the height of the monopole. Mr. Quinn stated that they are also requesting three bulk variances. Mr. Quinn said that he has four witnesses who will be testifying and called his first witness. Chairman Neuer asked if there was an attorney representing any of the objectors; there was none. Ronald Peterson approached the podium and was sworn under oath. Mr. Peterson stated that he was an independent consultant and detailed his professional background as a radio frequency emissions expert. Chairman Neuer accepted Mr. Peterson as an expert in radio frequency emissions discipline. Mr. Peterson stated that he submitted to the Board a site conformity assessment report with FCC tules and regulations dated December 2, 2016. He detailed the levels of emissions that will be transmitted and said that the actual values being transmitted are basically much lower than what they are predicting they will be; he said that the New Jersey state limits are lower. There were no questions for Mr. Peterson from the Board Members or the Board Professionals. Chairman Neuer asked if any members of the public had any questions for Mr. Peterson. Phillip Davies approached the podium and stated that he lives at 12 Fairview Avenue. Mr. Davies asked Mr. Peterson if the levels have been tested on babies and young children or if studies have been done; he said that there is no evidence that there is anything different. Mr. Peterson said that the FCC added an additional factor of five (5) and that is what they are using. He said that since 2010 there has been scientific literature that concludes that there is no evidence of any harmful effects to adults or children.

Mr. Davies stated that there are also negative studies and asked Mr. Peterson how he justifies the negative studies; he said there are all kinds of studies and he does not believe they are valuable. Mr. Davies asked Mr. Peterson how this compares to the tobacco studies in 1960 when they said tobacco was safe and now it kills people; he said that radio frequency energy has been around since 1900 and we have been exposed to it since then. Mr. Peterson said the basis for these studies is that this is more scientific and if it meets the safety criteria then it is safe for everyone. Mike Tormey approached the podium and stated that he lives at 81 Ridgeway Avenue. Mr. Tormey asked Mr. Peterson if the residents will be able to pick up any of the frequencies from the tower; he said that the frequencies are on a different band and it will not interfere with anything i.e. computers or speakers. Mr. Tormey asked Mr. Peterson if the antennae will have any ill effect on the reception for the firehouse; he said no. Mark Koehne approached the podium and stated that he lives at 16 Fairview Avenue. Mr. Koehne asked Mr. Peterson if the reason for building the tower is because of poor service in the area. Chairman Neuer stated that this question is not for this witness because his testimony did not address these issues. Alan Sanders approached the podium and stated that he lives at 27 Old Salem Road. Mr. Sanders stated that he would like to ask about property values. Chairman Neuer stated that Mr. Peterson did not testify about property values; he said that would be a question for the Applicant’s Professional Planner. Mr. Quinn called his next witness.

Daniel Penesso approached the podium and was sworn under oath. He said that he is a radio frequency engineer, employed by Black and Veatch, who is hired by AT&T as a consultant and was involved in the design of the network. Mr. Penesso detailed his educational and professional back ground as a design expert and said that no licenses are required for this profession. Chairman Neuer accepted Mr. Penesso as an expert radio frequency engineer with regard to design and implementation of wireless networks. Mr. Quinn asked Mr. Penesso if currently there is adequate service in the vicinity; he replied no. Mr. Penesso presented Map one of the AT&T coverage in the area of the proposed site dated December 21, 2016 that was marked as Exhibit A-1 for identification. Mr. Penesso referred to Exhibit A-1 and detailed the service that is currently provided in the area. He said that the Exhibit clearly shows a deficiency of coverage in the area. Mr. Penesso said that the proposed antennae will provide a stronger signal and more coverage. Chairman Neuer asked Mr. Penesso what the approximate area of the deficiency is; he said approximately one half mile on Northfield Avenue. Chairman Neuer asked Mr. Penesso how many antennae are being proposed; he said three (3) sectors of antennae. Mr. Penesso said that they are proposing a 100’ monopole and that this is the minimum height the pole can be in order to provide the required coverage. Mr. Schwarzbaum asked Mr. Penesso how many users they have; he said that he does not have the subscriber information. Mr. Sanders asked Mr. Penesso if the coverage they are proposing is primarily in West Orange; he replied yes Chairman Neuer asked Mr. Penesso if the height of the monopole was lower would they need more poles; he said yes.

Chairman Neuer asked Mr. Penesso if they investigated any other sites; he said yes. Mr. Penesso said they looked at different locations with heights lower than 106 feet. Mr. Quentzel asked Mr. Penesso what dBm stands for; he said decibel in milliwatts. Mr. Schwarzbaum asked Mr. Penesso if he has an overlay of their competitors; he said no. Mr. Penesso detailed the locations of the other cell towers that AT&T has antennae on. Ms. Gabry asked Mr. Penesso if the other towers were monopoles; he replied no. Mr. Penesso said that they are utility towers that are over 120 feet high. Mr. Schwarzbaum asked Mr. Penesso if potential co-location can be used to provide this coverage; he said no. Mr. Penesso said that each carrier has their own frequencies and designs and that he cannot provide testimony on the gaps. He said that carriers can co-locate on different structures with a ten (10) foot separation and they do this all of the time but this time they cannot. Mr. Sanders asked Mr. Penesso if other carriers can co-locate on the proposed pole; he said yes. Mr. Penesso said that even if other carriers co-locate they will still be under the required frequency. He said that if they design below the trees they will not get the signal and that there are no buildings tall enough in the area to co-locate. Mr. Penesso presented Map two of the AT&T proposed composite coverage dated December 21, 2016 that was marked as Exhibit A-2 for identification. Mr. Penesso referred to Exhibit A-2 and detailed what the proposed coverage will be. Mr. Penesso stated that there is no other site in the township that would provide this coverage; he said they approached the golf course but could not secure a lease with them. Mr. Penesso said that they also investigated the fire department as a location. Mr. Penesso said that the station will be un-manned and that there is no pollution or smoke associated with the monopole. 10