Before
THE TOBYHANNA TOWNSHIP BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
---
In Re: Regular Business Meeting
---
Tobyhanna Township Government Center Building
State Avenue
Pocono Pines, Pennsylvania 18350
Monday, January 12, 2009 beginning at 7:00 p.m.
---
PRESENT: JOHN E. KERRICK, Chairperson
HEIDI A. PICKARD, Vice-Chairperson
HUGH LAMBERTON, Board Member
JAMIE B. KEENER, Board Member
DONALD J. MOYER, Board Member
PATRICK M. ARMSTRONG, ESQUIRE, Solicitor
---
_______________________________________________________
PANKO REPORTING
537 Sarah Street, 2nd Floor
Stroudsburg, Pennsylvania 18360
(570) 421-3620
2
1 MR. KERRICK: I'd like to welcome
2 everyone here this evening for the regular business
3 meeting before the supervisors of Tobyhanna
4 Township. I call the meeting to order with a
5 Pledge of Allegiance.
6 (Pledge of Allegiance was recited.)
7 MR. KERRICK: First order of
8 business, do you have any announcements, Heidi?
9 MS. PICKARD: Yes, I do. Next
10 Tuesday, the 20th, there is an open space program
11 community workshop from the Conservation District
12 of Monroe County in cooperation with Monroe County
13 Planning Commission and the Regional Open Space
14 Committee. They're having a series of these
15 meetings and it will be Tuesday, the 20th, at
16 7 p.m. here.
17 MR. KERRICK: Anything else?
18 MS. PICKARD: No, that's it. Oh,
19 one other thing. We have -- also are taking
20 letters of interest for the planning commission.
21 There's a seat available and we are accepting those
22 letters until January 28 at 4:30. Bring them here
23 at the township.
24 MR. KERRICK: Next order of
25 business, consider the minutes of December 8, 2008
3
1 regular business meeting and the minutes of the
2 December 19, 2008 special meeting.
3 MS. PICKARD: I had a correction on
4 the December 19 special meeting minutes on Page 9.
5 It should be Shikhman, S-h-i-k-h-m-a-n, rather than
6 Shipman, and that's in three spots.
7 And with that, I'll make a motion
8 that we approve the December 8, 2008 regular
9 business meeting and the December 19, 2008 special
10 meeting with those corrections.
11 MR. KERRICK: Motion on the floor
12 with correction.
13 Do we have a second?
14 MR. LAMBERTON: Second the motion.
15 MR. KERRICK: Motion and second.
16 Questions or comments from the
17 board?
18 Questions or comments from the
19 public on the motion?
20 Call the vote.
21 Jamie?
22 MR. KEENER: I vote in favor.
23 MR. KERRICK: Donny?
24 MR. MOYER: I vote in favor.
25 MR. KERRICK: Hugh?
4
1 MR. LAMBERTON: I vote in favor.
2 MR. KERRICK: Heidi?
3 MS. PICKARD: I vote in favor.
4 MR. KERRICK: I'll vote in favor.
5 Motion carried.
6 Next on our agenda, consider the
7 treasurer's report dated July 12, 2009 (sic). Full
8 amount for board approval, $191,118.15.
9 What's the board's pleasure?
10 MS. PICKARD: I make a motion we
11 approve the January 12, 2009 bill pack in the
12 amount of $191,118.15.
13 MR. KEENER: Second.
14 MR. KERRICK: Motion and second.
15 Questions or comments from the board
16 on the motion?
17 Questions or comments from the
18 public?
19 Call the vote.
20 Jamie?
21 MR. KEENER: I vote in favor.
22 MR. KERRICK: Donny?
23 MR. MOYER: I vote in favor.
24 MR. KERRICK: Hugh?
25 MR. LAMBERTON: I vote in favor.
5
1 MR. KERRICK: Heidi?
2 MS. PICKARD: I vote in favor.
3 MR. KERRICK: Motion carried.
4 Next on our agenda, solicitor's
5 report.
6 MR. ARMSTRONG: The only thing I
7 have in my report, it's actually not on the agenda,
8 just generally with respect to plans that come in
9 here, subdivision and land development plans.
10 We've come into not necessarily a problem but just
11 an issue with respect to the timing between the
12 signing of the plans and the recording of the
13 plans.
14 And it's the suggestion from my
15 office to -- for future plans that come in, if
16 there's a conditional approval on the plan, that
17 the plan not be signed or dated until the
18 conditions are met with those plans. I think the
19 current practice may have been, if there's a
20 conditional approval, to have the plan signed and
21 then just hold on to them until the conditions are
22 met. I think it would probably -- we'd eliminate
23 that time gap between the signing of the plans and
24 the releasing of the plans after the conditions are
25 met if we just do it all at the same time.
6
1 And that kind of brings me into the
2 one plan that I wanted to bring to your attention,
3 Keswick Pointe Phase 1. The conditions have been
4 met on that. It's my understanding that all the
5 conditions are met and that the plan should be
6 ready for recordation. I think they've already
7 been signed, but the plans have not been dated yet.
8 It was approved by this board several months ago
9 and now we would just acknowledge that the
10 conditions are met and that the plans can be signed
11 after tonight's meeting.
12 MS. PICKARD: And we would date them
13 for tonight's date?
14 MR. ARMSTRONG: Tonight's date
15 because the conditions have recently been met.
16 MR. KERRICK: Anything else?
17 MR. ARMSTRONG: No. That's all I
18 have for my report.
19 MR. KERRICK: Next, we have new
20 business. First item, Shikhman medical office
21 building. Time extension on recordation of plans.
22 MR. ARMSTRONG: It's my
23 understanding that Shikhman, they're still waiting
24 for PennDOT approval and therefore they cannot
25 record the plans yet. They're looking for a time
7
1 extension to record their plans. I believe this
2 plan was approved several months ago. I'm not sure
3 of the time extension that you want to give them
4 with respect to recording those plans. That's
5 dependent upon the pleasure of the board.
6 MR. KERRICK: I have a question.
7 MR. ARMSTRONG: Sure.
8 MR. KERRICK: If they receive an
9 approval from PennDOT for their HOP, would they
10 either have to do the improvements or put up the
11 bond? How long do we wait if they don't do that?
12 That's part of a condition that we have. Do we
13 just continue if it's five years from now, three
14 years from now?
15 MR. ARMSTRONG: I'm not sure I'm --
16 MR. KERRICK: They're at the stage
17 now, when they have their PennDOT approval, they
18 either have to exercise it or put up a bond --
19 MR. ARMSTRONG: Oh, they do have --
20 MR. KERRICK: -- due to the time of
21 year.
22 MS. PICKARD: No, they don't have
23 it.
24 MR. KERRICK: I thought they did
25 have it.
8
1 MS. PICKARD: They still had a
2 couple of items on the -- they have to do this in
3 order to get it.
4 MR. KERRICK: I stand corrected. I
5 thought they were ready.
6 MS. PICKARD: It won't be approved,
7 according to this, until they have floodability
8 insurance.
9 MR. KERRICK: Say they meet these
10 requirements for PennDOT but they do not do the
11 improvements, we've already approved the plans, but
12 how long do we continue it with the time extension?
13 MR. ARMSTRONG: Well, I'm
14 assuming -- I mean, I'm not familiar with these
15 particular PennDOT improvements that are required
16 for this particular plan, but PennDOT would
17 typically require financial securities for any
18 improvements that PennDOT would require, and that
19 prior to any certificate of occupancy or whatnot
20 I'm assuming they would have to complete those
21 improvements.
22 You're asking whether or not if they
23 get the PennDOT permit and if they --
24 MR. KERRICK: If they meet these
25 conditions --
9
1 MS. PICKARD: They're not gonna get
2 the permit until they get the money in this case.
3 MR. KERRICK: That's the way I read
4 this.
5 MR. ARMSTRONG: Right.
6 MR. KERRICK: And if they don't?
7 MR. ARMSTRONG: If they don't?
8 MR. KERRICK: Say they don't put the
9 financial security up for PennDOT, they have an
10 approved plan as far as Tobyhanna Township goes
11 with the conditions. One of the conditions is the
12 HOP. We're going to extend the time extension
13 for -- possibly tonight we'll extend that. Six
14 months from now they come in for another time
15 extension. Six months from now they come in for
16 another time extension. Do we continue to grant
17 that or do they have to act on this?
18 MS. PICKARD: This is what I think I
19 was asking earlier that you were saying that the
20 MPC would allow the five years.
21 MR. ARMSTRONG: Are you asking me --
22 when a plan gets approved, it has a five-year
23 window to complete the plan, to fall under the
24 ordinance requirements at that time. Okay? And
25 after that five years if the plan -- if a proposed
10
1 land development has not been completed, the
2 construction is not completed, you know, that
3 five-year window is closed and arguably they would
4 be required to apply again under the regulations at
5 the time, five years beyond, the current
6 regulations.
7 I mean, if that's the case, if this
8 goes on for five years and no improvements are
9 made, I mean the argument can be made that they
10 should be held to the township ordinances that are
11 in effect at that time, if it goes beyond the
12 five-year time frame.
13 MR. KERRICK: Well, one of the
14 reasons I ask that question is --
15 MR. ARMSTRONG: And do you have to
16 continue to grant these extensions? And the answer
17 to that is no, if that's your question.
18 MR. KERRICK: But it wouldn't be
19 good to -- possibly it wouldn't be good to do a
20 five-year extension or a two-year extension? We
21 should continue to do it at -- what do we do with
22 this now, about every six months, a year?
23 MR. ARMSTRONG: That's up to the
24 board, the type of extension. The extension that
25 they're requesting is based upon the language in
11
1 the ordinance. The MPC, there's a whole 90-day
2 time frame from when an approved plan should be
3 recorded with the court at the courthouse. And
4 that's the recorder of deeds, they want to see
5 plans that get recorded not more than 90 days after
6 they're signed and dated.
7 MR. KERRICK: Once the conditions
8 are met?
9 MR. ARMSTRONG: Once the conditions
10 are met. That's the way the MPC reads. And that's
11 not the extension that you're granting here. This
12 is -- there's certain language within the
13 township's ordinance that -- the language is
14 different than the MPC, which is why you're
15 requested to grant these extensions for the
16 recording of plans. So if your question is, do you
17 have to extend this --
18 MR. KERRICK: That really wasn't my
19 question. I just didn't know -- I knew there was a
20 five-year window from the time we approved it.
21 MR. ARMSTRONG: For them to fall
22 under the ordinances that were in effect at the
23 time that they filed their initial application.
24 MR. KERRICK: Okay. Any other
25 questions?
12
1 MR. KEENER: But at some point if
2 they don't complete all of the conditions of
3 approval, we could take action to disapprove it?
4 MR. ARMSTRONG: I mean, what would
5 happen is, their approval would -- you know, we're
6 talking five, six years out. I'm not sure -- this
7 was approved in '08? Was it '08 or '07?
8 MR. KERRICK: I think it was '07.
9 MS. PICKARD: I think it was before
10 you.
11 MR. ARMSTRONG: It was before my
12 time?
13 MR. KERRICK: It's been a while.
14 MR. ARMSTRONG: You know, if it goes
15 beyond the five years, it's not necessarily
16 disapproval but, you know, that approval, if none
17 of the improvements have been made and it's just an
18 approved pending plan without completing all the
19 conditions, the approval arguably would be found
20 moot and invalid and they'd have to reapply. And
21 the ordinances on the books at that time, five
22 years out, would be the ordinances that would
23 control.
24 MS. PICKARD: I think it would maybe
25 make sense to contact the applicant or their
13
1 engineer and find out where they're going with it.
2 MR. KEENER: When is their 90 days
3 up? When are we extending it from?
4 MS. PICKARD: It expires this month.
5 This is the third or fourth time we're extending
6 it.
7 MR. KEENER: If we don't extend, the
8 conditional approval doesn't go away.
9 MS. PICKARD: Yeah, that's what --
10 MR. KEENER: So I don't even know
11 why it's in our ordinance.
12 MS. PICKARD: That's one of those
13 things that --
14 MR. KEENER: I make a motion that we
15 grant a waiver of recording of the approved plans
16 per SALDO Section 135-113.K.5 for six months.
17 MR. KERRICK: Motion on the floor.
18 Do we have a second?
19 MR. MOYER: Second.
20 MS. PICKARD: Can we put a date in
21 that is after our meeting? I mean, when you say
22 six months --
23 MR. KEENER: July 20.
24 MS. PICKARD: We meet on the 13th.
25 You want to make it July 20?
14
1 MR. KEENER: That's fine.
2 MR. KERRICK: Motion and second on
3 the floor to extend to July 20.
4 Questions or comments from the
5 board?
6 Questions or comments from the
7 public on the motion?
8 Call the vote.
9 Jamie?
10 MR. KEENER: I vote in favor.
11 MR. KERRICK: Donny?
12 MR. MOYER: I vote in favor.
13 MR. KERRICK: Hugh?
14 MR. LAMBERTON: I vote in favor.
15 MR. KERRICK: Heidi?
16 MS. PICKARD: I vote in favor.
17 MR. KERRICK: I vote in favor.
18 Motion carried.
19 Do we have anything else you'd like
20 to discuss?
21 MS. PICKARD: We had --
22 MR. MOYER: Is the solicitor done?
23 MR. ARMSTRONG: Yeah, we have a
24 couple litigation things to discuss in executive
25 session. That's the only announcement I would
15
1 make.
2 MR. KERRICK: So at the present
3 time, could you, Ed, give us an update on our 537
4 Plan?
5 MR. EDWARD PIETROSKI: I think, you
6 know, progress has been slow. Obviously we're
7 waiting -- a large part is for the needs analysis
8 to get done. I know John Brogan is proceeding on
9 that. We've talked various times, and I've given
10 him assistance an explanation where needed. We've
11 even had the meeting with DEP to go over some of
12 those issues. A large portion of the plan really
13 can't proceed until we complete that phase.
14 MS. PICKARD: I was under the
15 impression that John didn't have your direction,
16 that we're still waiting for some kind of
17 understanding on what needed to be completed with
18 the needs assessment and whether we needed a needs
19 assessment.
20 MR. EDWARD PIETROSKI: There was
21 questions posed to DEP at their last meeting and
22 their response was to follow the needs analysis
23 guidance document. And I've gotten conflicting
24 information from different people at DEP on that,
25 but the two gentlemen that were present at the last
16
1 meeting indicated to follow their guidance
2 document, and my understanding is that that's what
3 John was doing. And if there's still confusion on
4 that part, I mean, we could certainly discuss it
5 further, but that was my understanding.
6 There was also brought up the
7 question at the last meeting with DEP that the
8 planning approval for what we have found to be a
9 document referring to the downtown Pocono Pines
10 area, and we've gone back and forth a couple of
11 times with DEP requesting them -- you know, their
12 records to define that. And their last comment to
13 us was we're to show them where we think it is and
14 they'll comment on it.
15 So we're in the process of trying to
16 put together a map and we've been in touch with Bob
17 on that one to go over that issue, to get a map
18 down to them so they can comment as to what they
19 think that surface area is.
20 MR. KERRICK: So at the present
21 time, Ed, you're marking up an area of downtown
22 Pocono Pines --
23 MR. EDWARD PIETROSKI: That's
24 correct.
25 MR. KERRICK: -- to send to DEP for
17
1 their approval or disapproval?
2 MR. EDWARD PIETROSKI: As you may
3 recall the meeting that we had, Bob Corby was here
4 and Jim Rigid. And Bob indicated that he might
5 have something in his files and we questioned him
6 on that and we were told there wasn't anything in
7 the Wilkes-Barre files; Bob was to look further in
8 his files. We sent correspondence to them and what
9 basically came back was, you tell us where it's at
10 and we'll comment on it.
11 So that's what we're doing, we're
12 putting together a map. And, again, we've been in
13 touch with Bob to define that and then that will be
14 going out to them shortly.
15 MR. KERRICK: Any questions?
16 MR. KEENER: What was the original
17 schedule of this 537 Plan?
18 MR. EDWARD PIETROSKI: We're beyond
19 the original schedule. I don't recall exactly what
20 it is. The initial proposal to start this has been
21 three years and the basic time delays are trying to
22 get the needs analysis done. Okay? I know
23 we've -- the township is taking on that part of it,
24 trying to hold down their costs doing it with their
25 SEO.
18
1 There's a number of homes to look at
2 and things to do, and he's working on that; but,
3 again, you know, it's a large area. So that's --
4 until that portion is completed, you know, until we
5 know what the need is to say where do we have to
6 go, there's not much that can proceed with the
7 study.
8 MR. KEENER: But I saw a status
9 report that was sent to us in mid-December.
10 Do you have a copy of that?
11 MS. PICKARD: Well, we just received
12 it. I have it in the back.
13 MR. KEENER: Can you get a copy of
14 it?
15 MS. PICKARD: It was dated
16 December 12, but we got it Friday.
17 MR. KEENER: That actually
18 recommended areas that we should -- the area that
19 we should be looking at. And you just said we
20 shouldn't really make any decisions until the needs
21 survey is completed.
22 MR. EDWARD PIETROSKI: Well, I think
23 at this point we're at a point in the needs survey
24 where there's still a lot to go and we had
25 questioned DEP as to whether we should proceed with
19
1 that. And, again, I got one comment from one
2 individual. The individual that came to a meeting
3 gave us a somewhat different comment, how to
4 proceed. We're making some suggestions in trying
5 to come up with other ways to move this along.
6 There's concerns about the Blakeslee
7 sewer area, which was not originally included for
8 detailed analysis because at the time we did the
9 write-up for how the plan would proceed, there were
10 really no issues in the Blakeslee sewer area.
11 There was a treatment plant down there with
12 sufficient capacity, there wasn't a tremendous
13 demand for service down there. That has changed
14 over time.
15 And we did present an addendum to
16 the study for cost to look at those areas and that
17 has not been approved. So we have not looked at
18 anything in that service area relative to the
19 treatment plant in Blakeslee.
20 MR. KEENER: So the study area for
21 the 537 Plan, was that everything for the Blakeslee
22 sewer area?
23 MR. EDWARD PIETROSKI: It was to
24 include the entire township with the understanding,
25 though, that there was not additional work to be
20
1 done in that sewer area because there was a
2 treatment plant, there was a sewer system still
3 relatively new even at this point, but certainly
4 three years ago even more so, and there wasn't a
5 need at that point that anyone identify it, to look
6 closer at that service area. That has subsequently
7 changed with the number of people that have come in
8 and have requested services.
9 There's been some recent discussion
10 that, should we be looking at extending sewers
11 beyond that. And, again, to extend sewers beyond
12 that service area you would have to define the need
13 beyond that service area. You know, you can't --
14 in high quality areas you can't just extend sewers
15 wherever you please. You know, you certainly have
16 to start with a documented need. And even with a
17 documented need, there still has to be additional
18 work done, you know, antidegradation and the like.
19 So it's been a difficult chore here
20 to look at this for sure. The antidegradation
21 makes it, as I'm sure you know, very difficult to
22 just say we're gonna extend the sewer and, you
23 know, connect more houses.
24 MR. KEENER: Even if you don't want
25 to increase the discharge, if you expand the
21
1 service area you're gonna have to do antideg.
2 MR. EDWARD PIETROSKI: That's
3 exactly right. And, again, it starts with this,
4 you know, needs analysis to say that there is at
5 least a problem that deserves looking at. 'Cause
6 the DEP's standpoint will be well, if there's no
7 problem, then why are we extending sewers?
8 MR. KEENER: Heidi has gone out to
9 get that e-mail. I just had a question that was
10 relative to that letter.
11 MR. ARMSTRONG: You don't happen to
12 have that status correspondence with you?
13 MR. EDWARD PIETROSKI: You know
14 what, I've got like a half an inch paper with me;
15 so, no, I do not have a copy of that with me, I'm
16 sorry.
17 MR. KEENER: Actually, I have it
18 here. If I can get it.
19 MR. ARMSTRONG: Can you state your
20 name for the record?
21 MR. EDWARD PIETROSKI: Yeah, sure.
22 Ed Pietroski with Entech Engineers.
23 THE REPORTER: Can you spell the
24 last name, please?
25 MR. EDWARD PIETROSKI: Sure.
22
1 P-i-e-t-r-o-s-k-i.
2 MR. KEENER: Here's one. It says
3 PennTec recommends the Blakeslee sewer area be
4 updated for the Act 537. How can we make that
5 recommendation if we don't know what the needs are?
6 MR. EDWARD PIETROSKI: Well, I think
7 we have to include that area as part of the study
8 in a more developed scope, and that was a scope
9 that we did provide approximately two years ago.
10 MR. KEENER: And then the next one,
11 continue with the Act 537 revision for Pocono Pines
12 and Lake Naomi as a sewered area.
13 MR. EDWARD PIETROSKI: 'Cause there
14 is an existing sewer system out here and that,
15 again, has to do with having a definition of what
16 that 77,000 gallons per day of sewage planning in
17 the downtown Pocono Pines area is.
18 We did a file search of DEP and we
19 were able to find documents that indicate there is
20 planning approval of 77,000 gallons a day for this
21 immediate area in here. Now, when I say immediate
22 area, I don't know the geographical boundary of
23 that because we could not find any mapping for
24 that. Mr. Corby thought that some map did exist,
25 but they have not been able to produce it.
23
1 And one of the problems we
2 classically have when we're doing file searches
3 with DEP is, everything's not always in the file
4 when you go and look.
5 MR. KEENER: And then the last
6 comment was, the remainder of the township would
7 remain as an on-lot sewage management system.
8 Again, how can we make that recommendation without
9 having the needs survey completed?
10 MR. EDWARD PIETROSKI: Again, what
11 we're trying to do is make additional
12 considerations if we're not gonna move forward, you
13 know, to get this needs analysis done. It's either
14 like a one or the other. Preferably we get the
15 needs analysis done, so those would be alternate
16 methods of looking. In other words, don't plan on
17 doing more sewer development in the township except
18 where you can spot a definite need in an existing
19 service area adjacent to an existing service area,
20 for example.
21 MR. KEENER: And that's what I would
22 think would be the end result of, once the needs
23 survey is completed, then you bring all of the
24 options up and then make a decision based on that.
25 But according to this, you know, Item 1 says Entech
24
1 estimates that the needs survey is approximately
2 50 percent complete. This is being completed by
3 township employees.
4 So he's assuming that we're going to
5 complete the needs assessment, not that we're gonna
6 abandon it completely, that we're gonna complete
7 the needs assessment, determine what the needs are,
8 and then make a decision on what we sewer and what
9 we don't sewer.
10 MR. EDWARD PIETROSKI: That was the
11 original game plan.
12 MR. KEENER: But that's what he says
13 on the December 12 --
14 MR. EDWARD PIETROSKI: And, again,
15 we're three years in and we're 50 percent. So
16 we're offering these as alternate suggestions
17 because, again, we're getting discussions now of
18 the Blakeslee service area. And we're finding this
19 additional information that maybe there is
20 capacity, because one of the areas where there is
21 concern is right here in the Pocono Pines area
22 where there is routinely problems with on-lot
23 septic systems, but not a lot of room to correct
24 those problems. So, again, we're offering this as
25 some suggestion of possibly another way of
25
1 attacking this.
2 And needless to say, it's an onerous
3 task, the 537s in the high quality areas. I think,
4 you know, to discuss those recommendations is
5 valid. I'm not sure that that's where we would
6 necessarily go, but there are things we're pointing
7 out based on a lot of what we've come up with after
8 three years of, you know, doing file searches and
9 meeting with DEP and the township and the like
10 trying to move this thing along.
11 MS. PICKARD: Ed, we had discussed
12 with you at one time about getting an estimate from
13 you to help move the needs assessment along, and
14 that was in that period where we weren't sure what
15 the DEP was looking for one way or another.
16 MR. EDWARD PIETROSKI: That's right.
17 MS. PICKARD: But we didn't get any
18 feedback on that.
19 MR. EDWARD PIETROSKI: Well, we
20 actually --
21 MS. PICKARD: I think we were only
22 about 25 percent through the needs assessment. If
23 you need 475, I think we only have about 111 to 125
24 completed.
25 MR. EDWARD PIETROSKI: We actually
26
1 gave you a proposal in March of '07, which was
2 about a little over a year after we started the
3 plan, to do the needs survey. And at that time,
4 you know, based on cost consideration, and I
5 understand because these things aren't cheap, the
6 intention was to go forward with John Brogan doing
7 it because, again --
8 MS. PICKARD: But this is after that
9 fact, because we had the same amount then and we
10 were 25 percent done and we had talked to you about
11 that and we were questioning whether you had some
12 money in your original proposal to monitor John.
13 There was ten grand in the proposal, which included
14 supervising John. So we had asked that question,
15 whether or not that could be applied or -- and that
16 we had 25 done, whether -- where we are at, at that
17 point in time.
18 MR. EDWARD PIETROSKI: Well, I think
19 some of that money was to, you know, assist John
20 as-needed, where he had problems or, you know,
21 things of that nature. It was not meant that we
22 would actually put someone in the field and be
23 going house to house and doing the surveys. So --
24 and I'm having trouble recalling that 'cause I
25 think Jeff was a little more involved in that
27
1 discussion than I was.
2 MS. PICKARD: But that was this year
3 and not in March of '07 --
4 MR. EDWARD PIETROSKI: Yeah, okay.
5 MS. PICKARD: -- you know.
6 MR. KERRICK: There was also some
7 question and initially where John started it, he
8 would drop a question in your office and no one was
9 home. And then we were told that he had to
10 physically make contact with the owner. So that
11 changed the game half -- that changed the rules of
12 the game halfway through. Now, is that still that
13 way since the DEP said follow the handbook?
14 MR. EDWARD PIETROSKI: That was
15 discussed with DEP and I'd have to go back through
16 my notes to recall what they said but, again, their
17 guidance was follow what's in the handbook.
18 MR. KERRICK: I was at that meeting
19 and I don't -- I looked at my notes and I still
20 don't have an answer; they didn't give us an
21 answer. Alls they said was follow the handbook.
22 MR. EDWARD PIETROSKI: I have to go
23 back and read the handbook myself, John. Okay?
24 And, again, we can do that. But I thought when
25 they said, you know, follow the handbook, I thought
28
1 John had familiarity with what was going on in that
2 book; but, again, we can go back and review that
3 again and talk to John about it, revise what he's
4 doing, if necessary.
5 MS. PICKARD: One of the things that
6 we're hearing is that there's going to be changes
7 to the way the 537s are completed now and that
8 there's new changes in the works. So there's a
9 concern that we're gonna get caught in the rule
10 book changing so --
11 MR. EDWARD PIETROSKI: I think if
12 you look back over the history of 537 Plans, and
13 we've been doing 537 Plans in this state since
14 before I was born -- we won't talk about when that
15 was, but they always change, and they pretty much
16 routinely change. It's not uncommon to see the
17 guidelines changing every three to four years on
18 things. You also have this additional, shall we
19 say, nonofficial change, which is the individual
20 thinking of the engineers or planners who are
21 reviewing the plans and how they interpret those
22 537 rules.
23 And I think, John, you saw a little
24 bit of that at the last meeting where we were a
25 little surprised what we were hearing from the two
29
1 individuals here as compared to what I had heard
2 from other individuals. So, again, you always have
3 that situation with a 537. Sometimes they can be
4 done quickly, you know, in a year, sometimes these
5 things drag out over four, five years 'cause
6 there's a lot of information to pull together.
7 So it's not -- I won't say it's
8 common that rules change in the middle of a plan
9 and have a large effect, but, yes, it happens.
10 MR. KERRICK: Heidi and I had a
11 teleconference with you, I believe mid-December,
12 before -- it was before Christmas. And a
13 suggestion we had was that we would finish the
14 Pocono Pines area before we concentrated on the
15 rest, to get that out of the way. So when -- it
16 seems like this whole thing has drug down to almost
17 a crawl. And maybe if we broke it into sections in
18 the township, we could complete this task a little
19 quicker.
20 MR. EDWARD PIETROSKI: I think you
21 could, but I think if you were to say we'll do
22 three separate plans that would --
23 MR. KERRICK: I'm not saying three
24 separate plans, but finish the Pocono Pines area
25 for the information that we need there. We still
30
1 have a big piece with Arrowhead Lake that -- that
2 there're some things there that we weren't aware of
3 that need to be completed, and that could be a
4 phase. But it seems that we're trying to do too
5 much at one time and we're not getting anywhere.
6 MR. EDWARD PIETROSKI: I think,
7 John, to look at it that way -- and not to do
8 multiple studies but to look at it that way and
9 concentrate on one area would make sense.
10 In terms of Arrowhead, I personally
11 went down and did it, a file search, and could not
12 believe the lack of information in the central
13 files at DEP in Wilkes-Barre on that development.
14 Could find almost nothing and large parts of those
15 files were missing.
16 So, again, a lot of time spent
17 trying to find stuff that we couldn't find to come
18 up with the -- you know, what the original planning
19 is on Arrowhead or what any planning has been since
20 then.
21 MS. PICKARD: I believe it was
22 mentioned at the meeting it was on somebody's desk.
23 Isn't that what --
24 MR. EDWARD PIETROSKI: Some of it
25 was, not all of it. And that's the second time
31
1 that particular individual has pulled that one on
2 me; but, yes, some things were on his desk and it
3 still wasn't adequate. You've got sewer plans out
4 there with planning approval and lines in the
5 ground, and the amount of planning approvals that
6 were found were nil, very little.
7 MS. PICKARD: But you weren't able
8 to get anything from Mr. Rigid?
9 MR. EDWARD PIETROSKI: Nothing that
10 was helpful to try and determine what planning was
11 done there.
12 MR. KEENER: Do you have the test
13 report?
14 Do you have a copy of the test
15 activity report, Ed?
16 MR. EDWARD PIETROSKI: Yes, I do.
17 You need the --
18 MR. KEENER: This is just the
19 proposal, this isn't the test activity.
20 MR. EDWARD PIETROSKI: I thought it
21 was the test. I didn't look at it before I handed
22 it to you. Let me go back and see if it's in my
23 file.
24 MR. KERRICK: Ed, I have another
25 question.
32
1 MR. EDWARD PIETROSKI: Yes?
2 MR. KERRICK: The original area that
3 was identified on the last 537 Plan dating back to
4 the eighties maybe, possibly, they had an initial
5 area from the Blakeslee area, which is sewered now,
6 and it continued due east until approximately
7 Locust Lake Village, down the corridor of 940. Do
8 we still have to go through the needs analysis in
9 that area?
10 MR. EDWARD PIETROSKI: I think
11 that's a case where you will; because even though
12 that was a prior plan, nothing was implemented in
13 terms of central sewers in that area.
14 Antidegradation rules and regulations have marched
15 on and have advanced since that time. So if you
16 were to go and build something in that area
17 relative to sewers, they're gonna hit you with
18 meeting the antidegradation requirements.
19 So, again, could you go and build
20 sewers there? Yes, assuming we could show there's
21 a need to do them, assuming we show that there are
22 no other alternatives to a central sewer there,
23 other than central sewer collection, going to the
24 treatment plant, and discharging. But that has to
25 take into account a somewhat exhaustive approach to
33
1 say there are no alternatives for any type of land
2 disposal of any effluence in the area. And that's
3 not just to say septic tanks but spray irrigations,
4 drip irrigations, and, you know, all these
5 different types of systems. So you would have to
6 go through that analysis again.
7 MR. KERRICK: I don't understand
8 that because it was identified at one time.
9 MR. EDWARD PIETROSKI: It was
10 identified as an area that needed sewers at one
11 time, okay, but it wasn't recommended at that time
12 to build them. Okay? Or more appropriately, I
13 guess it would be to say, they weren't built; that
14 part of the plan wasn't implemented.
15 MR. KERRICK: The way I read the
16 plan or what turned out, it was a money issue more
17 than -- is what they could afford at the time, not
18 so much the area. It was scaled back to the
19 sewered area that we do have, the Section 1, 2, and
20 3. If you say we have to do it, then obviously we
21 have to do it.
22 MR. KEENER: Yeah. Because, like I
23 said, any time you increase the service area that
24 would be served by the public sewer -- I mean,
25 right now it's not served by the public sewer. So
34
1 the 537 Plan that was approved and the system that
2 was built was based on an approved 537 Plan. That
3 plan did not include the expanded service area as
4 part of the approved plan. It identified it as an
5 area that potentially should be served, but it
6 didn't include it as part of the sewer service area
7 for the approved 537.
8 So we might have to go back and
9 that's what I thought this -- if we're doing a
10 townshipwide 537 Plan update, that's what this
11 document, in part, should be looking at. If
12 there's needs identified in that particular
13 geographic area, then there should be alternatives
14 evaluated accordingly. And that -- I mean, if
15 we're doing a townshipwide 537 Plan update, we
16 should look at the needs throughout the township.
17 And I think that's why it's 400-something samples
18 we need to take.
19 I know Pocono Pines was the primary
20 focus but this was -- or is the time to be looking,
21 if there's properties that are identified as need,
22 if there's a certain number of needs there then,
23 yeah, we should look at it as an alternative.
24 MR. EDWARD PIETROSKI: I think one
25 thing, John, as you said, it was identified as a
35
1 plan. I think it goes back to an earlier piece of
2 business you did with your solicitor when you were
3 talking about the approval period of plans. You
4 know, if they're not implemented in five years, new
5 zoning or planning rules take effect in the
6 township, and DEP is gonna take the same approach.
7 Since that plan's been done, okay,
8 and you implemented a portion of it but not all of
9 it, okay, you know, you did a portion, they're now
10 gonna say our 537 planning rules have changed, you
11 need to comply with those new rules because a
12 certain time period has gone on, irregardless of
13 why you chose not to do it at that time.
14 MR. KERRICK: Well, one other
15 question I have is, we have a few communities that
16 stretch into neighboring townships. How do we do
17 our update of the 537 Plan? Do we have to get a
18 copy of theirs to see if they've updated? It's one
19 community but it stretches into the other.
20 MR. EDWARD PIETROSKI: You're
21 specifically referring to Arrowhead?
22 MR. KERRICK: No, no, there's more
23 than Arrowhead. There's Locust Lake, there's
24 Stillwater. They're several communities that we
25 have that actually border Coolbaugh Township:
36
1 Pocono Township, Tunkhannock Township.
2 MR. EDWARD PIETROSKI: Even though
3 they are community areas, okay -- well, Locust
4 Lake, for one, doesn't have central sewer, it has
5 it all on lots. So each township on each side of
6 their line is gonna take care of those areas.
7 MR. KERRICK: Okay.
8 MR. EDWARD PIETROSKI: Arrowhead, a
9 similar thing could be said; but there was at some
10 point -- or everybody's been totally ignoring
11 what's going on over there, but there was at some
12 point a plan which said there is a cord sewered
13 area over there that discharges to a treatment --
14 or that is collected by a treatment plant, treated
15 and discharged. What we can't find is, where
16 additions have been made to that service area in
17 planning. Okay? That's what we can't find, but
18 that can still remain.
19 Again, if there was an addition to
20 that sewered area, that would occur in the
21 Coolbaugh Township portion, that's a review for
22 Coolbaugh Township. If there was an addition to
23 that service area that would occur on the Tobyhanna
24 Township portion, that's a review for Tobyhanna
25 Township.
37
1 MR. KEENER: Coolbaugh did a 537
2 update that included Arrowhead.
3 MR. KERRICK: Since our plan was
4 approved.
5 MR. KEENER: I'm not sure what the
6 date of it. We're looking at that on another
7 project so, you know, I'm not sure the specific
8 date. The 537 planning is done on the boundary,
9 the municipal boundary, but you do need to take
10 into consideration, if an area that's outside of
11 the township is going to be served by sewer within
12 the township, that has to be incorporated into both
13 plans. Actually, one is basically a sending area
14 and the other is the receiving area, as far as
15 treatment. So, yeah, they both need to address it.
16 MR. KERRICK: Game plan going
17 forward, needs analysis.
18 MR. EDWARD PIETROSKI: That's, I
19 think, the big thing.
20 MR. KERRICK: In the Pocono Pines
21 area.
22 MR. EDWARD PIETROSKI: Yes.
23 MR. KERRICK: Any other questions
24 for Ed?
25 MS. PICKARD: Well, just if we could
38
1 get an update about whether or not there would be a
2 portion of that, that they would be able to do or a
3 proposal to move this along quicker.
4 MR. EDWARD PIETROSKI: To us assist
5 John Brogan in getting that done quicker? Let me
6 go back and put something together.
7 MR. KERRICK: Okay. Any questions,
8 Jaime?
9 MR. KEENER: I just want to make
10 sure that it gets moved forward. You know, it's
11 been since 2005 and here we are in 2009, we need to
12 get it done.
13 MS. PICKARD: Well, it's very
14 difficult for the needs analysis to be done in the
15 middle of the winter.
16 MR. KEENER: I know that, but we've
17 had three summers to get it done.
18 MR. KERRICK: Pat, anything else?
19 Thank you for your time.
20 MR. EDWARD PIETROSKI: You're
21 welcome.
22 MR. KERRICK: Do you want to open it
23 up to the public at this time?
24 Does the public have anything they'd
25 like to address the board?
39
1 Yes, ma'am? State your name for the
2 stenographer.
3 MS. BARBARA DeGEORGE: Barbara
4 DeGeorge, Emerald Lake. With regard to that issue
5 about the 537, is the entire township being needs
6 analyzed for this?
7 MR. KERRICK: At the present time
8 we're doing the whole township. That doesn't
9 say that this --
10 MS. PICKARD: Part of it was that we
11 needed 475 homes to be tested. And you can have
12 the inspection, on-lot inspection in there. And I
13 think our sewage enforcement officer had broken
14 that down into some communities to get a general
15 balance across the township.
16 MS. BARBARA DeGEORGE: Okay, thank
17 you.
18 MR. KEENER: Yeah, there's a
19 percentage of the number of lots or parcels within
20 the township that DEP requires you go out and test
21 to get a representative sample.
22 MR. KERRICK: Do you have any other
23 questions?
24 MS. BARBARA DeGEORGE: No. I mean,
25 I could go on all night but --
40
1 MR. FREDERICK SCHURR: Fred Schurr.
2 I have a complaint about -- I'm one of four
3 mailboxes that are constantly being targeted and
4 being knocked down. Now, I know -- I've talked to
5 some other people and they said they made reports
6 about it. Now, I went and took pictures of it and
7 I have a mailbox that's made of steel. Now, they
8 knocked that over four, five times. I understand
9 that Tobyhanna's doing the 940.
10 MR. KERRICK: That's correct and
11 incorrect. There's Tobyhanna Township, PA
12 Department of Transportation, and Locust Ridge
13 Quarry is the subcontractor for PennDOT.
14 MR. FREDERICK SCHURR: So we can't
15 pin it down to who's doing this?
16 MR. KERRICK: I don't think it was
17 done maliciously.
18 MR. FREDERICK SCHURR: Let's say the
19 10th, the last two snowstorms that we had, was the
20 township doing the roads?
21 MR. KERRICK: Everybody was doing
22 the roads, all the contractors I just named.
23 MR. ARMSTRONG: What's your name,
24 sir?
25 MR. KERRICK: Fred Schurr.
41
1 MR. FREDERICK SCHURR: Schurr,
2 S-c-h-u-r-r. Now, I have pictures here, I'll show
3 you, showing what actually is being done to these
4 mailboxes.
5 MR. ARMSTRONG: And what's your
6 address?
7 MR. FREDERICK SCHURR: The address
8 is Camelot Forest. All right, here's a picture of
9 it the way this guy is swinging in here to hit
10 these boxes.
11 MR. KERRICK: I disagree with that.
12 I don't see where anybody's swung in. That's just
13 a straight line around the curve.
14 MR. FREDERICK SCHURR: Well, here it
15 is, here it is, coming in here. If we're up on --
16 it's not even on the road, he's way off on the
17 other side of the road. And here is another one
18 here.
19 MR. KERRICK: What's this straight
20 line? Where does anybody veer?
21 MR. FREDERICK SCHURR: That's not
22 a -- that's after the time. Here's where the
23 tracks are over here. That's after the time.
24 MR. KERRICK: That's not a plow
25 truck, sir.
42
1 MR. FREDERICK SCHURR: Oh, yes, it
2 is.
3 MR. KERRICK: No, it isn't.
4 MR. FREDERICK SCHURR: All right,
5 okay. Now, somebody said that the mailboxes are
6 being knocked because of the amount of snow. This
7 is the amount of snow on the last two things, so
8 that has nothing to do with it. You can't knock a
9 steel box down without going into it, deliberately
10 going into it. And this has been going on -- I've
11 had this done about three years now. Finally last
12 year they were able to knock the box over.
13 Now, whether or not the guy is
14 coming in here to deliberately -- there's a
15 challenge to knock that steel box off or he's just
16 doing it deliberately to knock these other two guys
17 out.
18 MR. ARMSTRONG: I don't think
19 anyone's doing anything -- at least from the
20 township's standpoint, no one's doing anything
21 deliberately. I mean, you don't know which plow is
22 responsible for this?
23 MR. FREDERICK SCHURR: No. I know
24 that there's no other boxes around that area
25 knocked down, and this box is way the hell back
43
1 here. That's farther than the other ones here.
2 MR. KERRICK: For the record, my box
3 was knocked over too and I live on 940. It
4 could've been our trucks, it could've been
5 PennDOT's trucks, or it could have been somebody
6 else's. I put it back up.
7 MR. FREDERICK SCHURR: Well, I'll
8 tell you --
9 MR. KERRICK: And this is not the
10 first time it was knocked over.
11 MR. FREDERICK SCHURR: I tell you,
12 it's funny that these boxes are always knocked over
13 any time there's a storm. And it's ridiculous
14 because -- and knock the steel parts over like this
15 one was. Let's see here.
16 MR. ARMSTRONG: Have you thought --
17 I mean, I'm just thinking outside the box, have you
18 thought about moving the mailboxes back a little
19 bit?
20 MR. FREDERICK SCHURR: I can't move
21 it back any further. The post office won't let you
22 go back any further. It's on private property
23 there. You see how far back this is?
24 MR. ARMSTRONG: You live off the
25 road --
44
1 MR. KERRICK: This is on PennDOT's
2 right-of-way. The right-of-way goes from center
3 line 40 feet back here. The right-of-way is way
4 back here.
5 MR. FREDERICK SCHURR: No, it isn't,
6 John.
7 MR. KERRICK: I'm not gonna argue
8 with you, sir.
9 MR. FREDERICK SCHURR: Why don't you
10 come over and look?
11 MR. KERRICK: I'll measure it for
12 you. Yes, I know where you live, I know where your
13 mailbox is, and I know what the right-of-way is.
14 That's 80 feet, 40 feet from center line.
15 MR. FREDERICK SCHURR: Well, that's
16 where the post office told me to put the box. Now,
17 who's wrong?
18 MR. KERRICK: I'm not disagreeing
19 with you.
20 MR. FREDERICK SCHURR: Ah, you come
21 here and it's --
22 MR. KEENER: Let me see the picture.
23 MR. FREDERICK SCHURR: One guy's
24 been -- my box is not that bad because I get it
25 fixed again, but these guys have their boxes
45
1 knocked over. And one guy this year put five boxes
2 so far he told me. Now, here's the road. Here's
3 the road and here's over -- it's right over here.
4 Now, that's way off that right-of-way.
5 MR. KEENER: That track actually
6 looks like --
7 MR. FREDERICK SCHURR: Well, that's
8 an old track.
9 MR. MOYER: Are the boxes -- that
10 box that's lying on the ground, is it cut or banged
11 up from where it looked like it was hit by a plow?
12 MR. KEENER: No. The plow would
13 have hit this one and smashed it. If the plow --
14 MR. FREDERICK SCHURR: Oh, come on,
15 don't give me that bull about the snow.
16 MR. KEENER: If the plow would have
17 hit that mailbox, this one would have been
18 completely annihilated.
19 MR. FREDERICK SCHURR: The guy just
20 fixed it after I took the -- before I took -- after
21 I took the picture here.
22 MR. KEENER: Okay.
23 MR. FREDERICK SCHURR: And here,
24 see? See, here it is, here, right in here. The
25 box is down. That's the other storm.
46
1 MR. KEENER: But if the plow
2 actually hit it, the box would be completely
3 annihilated. I think the snow is hitting it and
4 knocking it off because it's not --
5 MR. FREDERICK SCHURR: How can that
6 much snow be doing that? Come on, will you?
7 What's the matter with you guys?
8 MR. KERRICK: Mr. Schurr, every snow
9 we've had this year has been wet and heavy.
10 MR. FREDERICK SCHURR: Oh, come on,
11 not this last one.
12 MR. KERRICK: I'm not gonna argue
13 with you.
14 MR. FREDERICK SCHURR: I'll show you
15 here, that's why I have them. I'm showing you how
16 much snow is there.
17 MR. KERRICK: And I can take
18 pictures of mine and show you mine. I don't know
19 what you -- we are not responsible for mailboxes in
20 PennDOT's right-of-way.
21 MR. FREDERICK SCHURR: It's not the
22 right-of-way. How can that be the right-of-way
23 when it's off the road, huh? The post office told
24 me that's where you gotta put the box.
25 MR. KERRICK: I can't speak for the
47
1 post office. PennDOT right-of-way in that area is
2 80 feet, 40 feet from center line. If you want to
3 take a tape measure, I'll walk over and I'll show
4 you where the right-of-way is. I'll be more than
5 happy to. I can tell you no one from this
6 department tried to knock over the mailboxes.
7 MR. FREDERICK SCHURR: Listen, I
8 have other stories to tell you about just about the
9 plow --
10 MR. KERRICK: I don't need to hear
11 stories.
12 MR. FREDERICK SCHURR: No, I know.
13 But I know what's going on.
14 MR. KERRICK: What's going on?
15 What's going on? Are you accusing us of something?
16 MR. ARMSTRONG: Sir, no one's
17 deliberately knocking down your mailboxes, number
18 one. Number two, I don't think we can sit here
19 tonight and know what plows were responsible for
20 that, if they are responsible for that. And number
21 three, I think it's pretty clear from the pictures
22 it's not the plow itself that's hitting the
23 mailboxes --
24 MR. FREDERICK SCHURR: What's
25 hitting it?
48
1 MR. ARMSTRONG: -- it's the snow --
2 MR. FREDERICK SCHURR: Oh, come on,
3 there isn't any snow there.
4 MR. ARMSTRONG: We're not going to
5 stand here tonight and argue this, okay, sir? But
6 I think the board understands your concern and --
7 MR. KERRICK: Absolutely I
8 understand his concern, but I disagree.
9 Anyone else have anything they'd
10 like to address the board?
11 Motion for adjournment.
12 MR. KEENER: So moved.
13 MR. KERRICK: We're adjourned.
14 Thank you for coming.
15 I'd like to make one more
16 announcement. We're going into executive session
17 for litigation matters.
18 (Meeting concluded at 7:55 p.m.)
19 ---
20
21
22
23
24
25
49
1
2
3
4
5
6
7 I hereby certify that the
8 proceedings and evidence are contained fully and
9 accurately in the notes taken by me at the meeting
10 in the above matter; and that the foregoing is a
11 true and correct transcript of the same.
12
13
14 ______________________
15 EVILYS E. BRATHWAITE
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25