October 23, 2025, Special Meeting

wouldn't be an effective way to mitigate noise. Mr. Dick answered in the affirmative. Mr. Emrah Altunkaya (15 Fundis Road) asked how far the last speaker going to be from the nearest property line. Mr. Dick said that he believes that it's approximately 32 feet. Mr. Altunkaya asked for confirmation of the maximum decibel levels Mr. Dick said that the expected maximum is 76 DBA. Mr. Altunkaya asked now at 30 feet, it's actually almost at the borderline of 50 decibels. So even though it's 75 or 76 at the sound level at the borderline, it's going to be also be borderline with the state level. So it seems like the fencing is not going to do much as well. Mr. Dick said that the model takes into account air/ground absorption and reflections/reduction from buildings/barriers. It's not just a free field distance calculation. Mr. Altunkaya asked for confirmation that these calculations are mostly to make it look sympathetic by taking the averages. But, things happen, so there will be times that neighboring properties are going to be mostly affected and if there is any way to have better sound control at the borderline. Mr. Dick answered, saying that he didn’t agree with his assessment of the sound level from the loudspeaker, and that they did their own modeling with a different conclusion as it is expected to meet the limits of the noise code as stated the fence is going to help at the property line itself. There is an automatic volume control for the loudspeaker that will be sufficient in itself. Ms. Isabell Rise (10 Rosney Terrace) asked what the plans are to ensure that residents can still enjoy their property and peace and quiet. Mr. Dick answered, that there will be a six foot vinyl fence around the site. The rooftop mechanical equipment when evaluated is low noise equipment. The loudspeaker also has automatic volume control, which will reduce the old sound from the loudspeaker to 15 decibels above the ambient when the ambient is lower. Ms. Rise yeah. Asked what happens in the event that there is a system malfunction and it's significantly higher, who is contacted. Chairperson Neuer answered that the Building Department would be contacted to see whether or not there is a basis for a violation or for a change in the installation. This witness has no control over that. Mr. Sean Wright (9 Fundis Road) asked a question in clarification be it had been mentioned

there is a basis for a violation or for a change in the installation. This witness has no control over that. Mr. Sean Wright (9 Fundis Road) asked a question in clarification be it had been mentioned that the fencing wouldn't necessarily be sufficient to decrease the sound levels on the second floor. All of the bedrooms on his property are located on the second floor, (about 50 feet away from that that property line) and what will the applicant be doing to mitigate that sound, and how much sound deadening will the vinyl fence proposed actually provide. Mr. Dick responded that the fencing won't provide reduction at the upper stories necessarily, but this site is below the limits of the noise code at the upper stories as well. Mr. Wright asked what was the methodology in developing this conclusion that at the second floor there would not be any violation of this code. Mr. Dick said that there was a comprehensive outdoor acoustical model of the site using software called “Sound Plan”, which is based on the ISO standard for outdoor sound propagation, where it included the surrounding buildings, the proposed sources, and the topography. Where it modeled the proposed operations, calculated the expected sound levels at the adjacent receiving properties, and a model was done at the property line itself and upper stories.