9 19 24 West Orange BOA ZB 24 06 PSEG Condensed

cbd6abed-8cda-4dba-9ebd-560688bcfcb2 27 (Pages 105 to 108) Page 105 1 proposed development exacerbate that or any other 2 pre-existing nonconformity in your opinion? 3 THE WITNESS: No, it does not. 4 MR. WILLIAMS: Thank you. 5 THE WITNESS: Actually, specifically we are 6 getting rid of a brick shed. So if that is considered 7 a building, and if that is considered the 8 nonconformity, that shed will be removed. It is brick. 9 MR. WILLIAMS: Thank you. 10 THE WITNESS: And that is on the site plan 11 that is presented. 12 MR. WILLIAMS: Okay. Thank you. 13 THE WITNESS: Two meetings ago. 14 MR. WILLIAMS: Okay. I'm fairly 15 comfortable that I heard and noted correctly the proofs 16 for the D-2, which is the expansion of a nonconforming 17 use, and you spoke about the use being inherently 18 beneficial. You went through the first and second 19 prong of the negative criteria. Of course, you 20 mentioned the purposes of zoning. 21 For the D-6 Variance could you just provide 22 a bit of context about the standards for this Board's 23 review of a D-6 Variance? 24 THE WITNESS: I believe it would be 25 essentially equivalent to what I already testified Page 107 1 wasn't sure if you gave context for those. In other 2 words, was it a C-1 standard you were applying or a 3 C-2? 4 THE WITNESS: For the bulk variance for 5 setback that would be a C-1, but I'm essentially 6 arguing a C-2. 7 MR. WILLIAMS: And your argument is that 8 the tradeoffs, the benefits outweigh the detriments? 9 THE WITNESS: Yes. 10 MR. WILLIAMS: Did I hear that -- 11 THE WITNESS: Yes. 12 MR. WILLIAMS: And then lot coverage, the 13 proof there was -- 14 THE WITNESS: Was also the benefits 15 outweigh the detriments. 16 MR. WILLIAMS: And that's based on in part 17 the civil engineering testimony? 18 THE WITNESS: Yes, it is. 19 MR. WILLIAMS: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I 20 think that concludes my questions for now. 21 CHAIRMAN NEUER: Thank you so much, Mr. 22 Williams, for being so well prepared. Mr. Hess? 23 MR. HESS: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I have 24 no questions of this witness. 25 CHAIRMAN NEUER: Thank you so very much. Page 106 1 about. Again, it's a height variance and it's height 2 of structures that are exactly the same as to what we 3 already have, specifically, the lightning masts. 4 It could even be argued that the lightning 5 mast is not the principal structure but is an accessory 6 structure, but

xactly the same as to what we 3 already have, specifically, the lightning masts. 4 It could even be argued that the lightning 5 mast is not the principal structure but is an accessory 6 structure, but then we are getting into the weeds of 7 planning law. 8 MR. WILLIAMS: Let me ask it a different 9 way. In your opinion is the standard for the Board's 10 review of the D-6 different than that of a D-2? And if 11 so, how, in your opinion? 12 THE WITNESS: In my opinion in this 13 particular case the D-2 and the D-6 go together, and I 14 have addressed the proofs needed for that. 15 MR. WILLIAMS: And in your opinion can the 16 site accommodate the extra height that's being 17 requested? 18 THE WITNESS: Yes. We are mostly asking 19 for lightning mast. It was discussed last week by John 20 Copa, our electric engineer, what the lightning masts 21 are for. 22 MR. WILLIAMS: Thank you, and I'm almost 23 done. I think I have one more question and that is, 24 you provided the recitation of the bulk and area 25 deviations, and I think I heard you address them but I Page 108 1 Now is the time for members of the public 2 to pose questions to the witness based upon the 3 testimony that she has presented this evening. Mr. 4 Fagan, do we have any hands up? 5 MR. FAGAN: Yes, Mr. Chairperson. Before I 6 go to members of the public we have Kevin Malanga with 7 his hand raised. 8 CHAIRMAN NEUER: Welcome back, Mr. Malanga. 9 MR. MALANGA: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Ms. 10 Merainer, good evening. 11 THE WITNESS: Good evening, Mr. Malanga. 12 MR. MALANGA: You refer to the fence as a 13 decorative fence. 14 THE WITNESS: Yes. 15 MR. MALANGA: So it is not a security 16 fence? 17 THE WITNESS: It is. That is the 18 decorative version of what we use. 19 MR. MALANGA: It was indicated at the very 20 beginning of this hearing that the piers or the 21 columns, the brick piers or the columns were going to 22 have a distance of 30 feet between them as proposed by 23 PSE&G. Is that your understanding? 24 THE WITNESS: Yes. We are proposing that 25 because this station is rather unique among our 300