HAZLET – The merits of compliance versus courtesy were debated Thursday evening during a township land use board meeting, where a controversial site plan hearing continued for a proposed New Jersey Natural Gas regulator station at 469 South Laurel Ave.
The gas utility is seeking upward of 20 variances and waivers for a regulator project that would transfer natural gas from a transmission line to customer distribution lines. On Thursday sound expert Edward Potenta provided testimony regarding the decibel level of the mechanical regulator in proximity to nearby residences.
New Jersey Natural Gas has eyed a plot of land located in an R-100 Single Family Residential Zoning District for the project. If approved, the regulator would rest near the property lines of a single-family residence to the east on South Laurel Ave, and a trailer park community situated to the north near the Holly Hill Motel on State Route 36. A busing depot operated by R. Helfrich & Son Inc. sits to the south.
Using industry specifications for the model of equipment that would be used to operate the regulator, Potenta completed tests at the site between the hours of 4-5 a.m. and 6-7 a.m., respectively, where he measured existing noise from motor vehicles traveling the nearby highway, as well as buses departing the depot.
While New Jersey’s sound level standards are 50 decibels between the hours of 10 p.m. and 7 a.m. – and 65 decibels during daytime hours – Potenta testified that the proposed regulator, when surrounded by sound dampening barriers, would emit a constant maximum decibel level of 42. Potenta considered this reading inconsequential when compared to highway traffic and busing noise measured during those morning hours, which reached levels of 77 (4-5 a.m.) and 74 (6-7 a.m.) decibles.
However, board engineer Fran Mullan disputed the length of Potenta’s sound study, noting that sound readings were only provided for early morning periods.
“What is the degree and consistency of the negative impact on those families and property owners? The existing noise levels are variable. A passing car, a truck idling in the morning, comes and goes. These are background noises most folks can grow accustomed to. My biggest concern is a steady-state mechanical equipment constant hum in the still of the night, when most households are shutting down,” Mullan said.
The gas utility’s legal representation, Nancy A. Skidmore of Roseland, NJ firm Connell Foley, argued the relevance of sound test results at any point during the day, noting that the test “was not requested by the board,” but rather completed “for the benefit of the community.”
“This test has been on the books since March,” Skidmore added. “The notion that we should have had an ongoing test throughout the night; we should have been told about that sort of request before today.”
Mullan also questioned Potenta’s proposed sound barriers. These absorptive walls would stand eight feet in height and be placed to the east and west of the regulator, dampening noise emitted toward the single-family dwelling on South Laurel Ave.
Potenta testified Thursday that this particular regulator design would not comply with sound standards if the absorptive barriers were not included. The gas utility is seeking a waiver for the walls, as board attorney Gregory Vella noted, township code only permits a maximum of six-foot fencing in this type of residential zoning.
Additionally, Mullan expressed his concern, for any future residential constructions that may occur on a currently vacant plot situated to the north of the proposed regulator site.
“I continuously struggle with how to determine what are the negative impacts to this particular property and all the other uses contemplated and allowed by zoning on this particular property,” Mullan said. “This proposal is going to introduce a steady-state mechanical hum that does not currently exist. It needs relief from zoning. It has to be mitigated with elements that need significant relief. They’re not even close to the acceptable standards.”
According to Potenta, regulations require an analysis of existing residences only, not potential constructions.
“Not today,” Potenta replied when questioned about an applicant’s responsibility to consider compliance for speculative developments. “Maybe in the future, but definitely not today.”
The remainder of the hearing was carried to the Jan. 21, when board members expect public comments to be heard.
"gas" - Google News
December 06, 2020 at 11:46AM
https://ift.tt/37D05me
Hazlet Gas Regulator Hearing Stirs Debate on Compliance vs. Courtesy - TAPinto.net
"gas" - Google News
https://ift.tt/2LxAFvS
https://ift.tt/3fcD5NP
Bagikan Berita Ini
0 Response to "Hazlet Gas Regulator Hearing Stirs Debate on Compliance vs. Courtesy - TAPinto.net"
Post a Comment