Before
THE TOBYHANNA TOWNSHIP PLANNING COMMISSION
---
In Re: Regular Business Meeting
---
Tobyhanna Township Government Center Building
State Avenue
Pocono Pines, Pennsylvania 18350
Thursday, October 1, 2009, beginning at 7 p.m.
---
PRESENT: MARK SINCAVAGE, Chairperson
ANNE LAMBERTON, Board Member
PATRICIA M. RINEHIMER, Board Member
ROBERT McHALE, P.E.,
Township Engineer
PATRICK ARMSTRONG, ESQUIRE, Solicitor
ALSO PRESENT: PHYLLIS HAASE, Zoning Officer
---
Panko Reporting
537 Sarah Street, 2nd Floor
Stroudsburg, Pennsylvania 18360
(570) 421-3620
1 MR. SINCAVAGE: We'll call the
2 regularly scheduled meeting of the Tobyhanna
3 Township Planning Commission for October 1st, 2009
4 to order. Is there any public comment?
5 The first order of business is
6 to approve the September 2009 minutes which were
7 submitted to us electronically and copies should be
8 available here in the room if anyone would like
9 them.
10 Do we have a motion?
11 MRS. LAMBERTON: I'll make that
12 motion.
13 MR. SINCAVAGE: Do I have a
14 second?
15 MS. RINEHIMER: I'll second it.
16 MR. SINCAVAGE: Al those in
17 favor please say aye.
18 MRS. LAMBERTON: Aye.
19 MS. RINEHIMER: Aye.
20 MR. SINCAVAGE: Aye.
21 Next item on our agenda is the
22 Wee-Wons Day Care expansion. How are you?
23 MS. GUYDISH: Obviously we're
24 not going to be doing our large expansion, okay,
25 that we had planned, but I do have a question,
1 because I don't know the next step.
2 I would like to add an office
3 space on the back of the building. The building is
4 both residential and commercial. Do I need an
5 entire land development plan? It's just going to
6 be a small space. I believe I got some information
7 from zoning, I just need you guys to direct me if
8 that's a feasible thing that I can do.
9 MR. SINCAVAGE: How big is the
10 expansion?
11 MS. GUYDISH: You tell me what I
12 can do without a land development plan. I don't
13 know.
14 MR. ARMSTRONG: Ms. Guydish, I'm
15 Pat Armstrong. We exchanged emails. For the
16 commission's perspective, remember last month you
17 made a recommendation to deny the plan because it's
18 been sitting dormant for over a year. Subsequent
19 to that letter I received an email from Ms.
20 Guydish, and apparently she wants to change the
21 plan a little bit as she's indicated tonight. Now,
22 the plan, as I understand it, was for a commercial
23 expansion of the day care center as well as a
24 little bit of residential expansion.
25 MS. GUYDISH: Yes.
1 MR. ARMSTRONG: And then you
2 went before the zoning hearing board for a special
3 exception and variance. You received a conditional
4 approval for that. The approval had some
5 conditions on it.
6 MS. GUYDISH: Yes.
7 MR. ARMSTRONG: And now you want
8 to change the plan for office space?
9 MS. GUYDISH: Just an office
10 space.
11 MR. ARMSTRONG: It's not
12 residential, it's going to be office space?
13 MS. GUYDISH: Well, it's office
14 space. You will enter it -- the way the building
15 is designed, you can enter it through my home,
16 through the foyer of my home, which is conducive to
17 the people coming into the business, where we need
18 like a conferencing room or private discussion, or
19 you can enter it externally. So you tell me. Is
20 it residential? Is it commercial? It's going to
21 be -- the way I have it planned in my mind, we'll
22 have two French doors from the interior of the
23 house that can be locked. People can enter that
24 way or they can enter externally.
25 MR. ARMSTRONG: But it will be
1 used --
2 MS. GUYDISH: As an office
3 strictly. It would be my private office, but any
4 time a parent needs a private conference, if any of
5 my staff needs to use it as a private conferencing
6 room, they can.
7 MR. SINCAVAGE: Commercial.
8 MS. GUYDISH: Okay.
9 MR. ARMSTRONG: How large would
10 you say it was?
11 MS. GUYDISH: I'm not going to
12 go through the whole land development phase. It's
13 way too costly. So when I called over here I
14 believe someone said if you keep it close to 200
15 square feet, but I don't know. I don't have the
16 facts. I did not choose to read the zoning book.
17 I have it, I didn't choose to read it. Tell me
18 what I need to do.
19 MR. ARMSTRONG: What you're
20 telling the commission is you're going to pretty
21 much scrap everything but this little --
22 MS. GUYDISH: Absolutely.
23 MR. ARMSTRONG: And it will be
24 used for commercial. And you want to know how
25 small it needs to be to fall under land
1 development.
2 MS. GUYDISH: And what my next
3 step is and what I must do.
4 MR. SINCAVAGE: But you did
5 receive a waiver from the zoning hearing board --
6 variance, I'm sorry, for commercial use.
7 MS. GUYDISH: Yes.
8 MR. ARMSTRONG: Actually, you
9 got a special exception approval, but the variance
10 was for acreage I think for a day care center.
11 MR. SINCAVAGE: You needed five
12 acres and you didn't have it.
13 MS. GUYDISH: Yes.
14 MR. ARMSTRONG: What I'm looking
15 at is the Tobyhanna Township Zoning Ordinance,
16 Section 155.16.i. And in here there is commercial
17 district planning and all building permit
18 applications for site development plans, land
19 development plans and subdivision plans, whether
20 the same be a major or minor subdivision related to
21 lands which are situated in commercial districts,
22 which this is --
23 MS. GUYDISH: Yes.
24 MR. ARMSTRONG: -- shall first
25 be reviewed by the Tobyhanna Township Planning
1 Commission and thereafter the Tobyhanna Township
2 Board of Supervisors, except permits for
3 construction and development involving 200 square
4 feet or less may be issued by the zoning officer
5 and need not be reviewed by the Tobyhanna Township
6 Planning Commission and the Tobyhanna Township
7 Board of Supervisors.
8 Basically, this is in the zoning
9 ordinance. It's surprising it's not in the SALDO.
10 It's almost like a written-in waiver of land
11 development. Typically, someone comes in with a
12 certain size, it's not a significant size, they
13 think they should get away with land development,
14 they can always come before the township board of
15 supervisors and request a waiver of land
16 development. And it looks like you're not really
17 looking to request a waiver, you just want to build
18 something and it's small enough that you don't have
19 to go through --
20 MS. GUYDISH: That's right.
21 MR. ARMSTRONG: And it looks
22 like, according to this section of the zoning
23 ordinance, it would be 200 square feet.
24 MS. GUYDISH: So what is my next
25 thing? If I keep it under 200 square feet is there
1 a height limit, because my home is on a second
2 floor, so I did want to make it at least -- it will
3 be 200 square feet, but I want it to have a
4 cathedral ceiling in it so it blends in with the
5 home. Is it just the footprint?
6 MR. ARMSTRONG: This is just
7 square footage.
8 MR. McHALE: That's floor area.
9 MR. ARMSTRONG: Which would
10 include both the first and second floor.
11 MR. McHALE: Floor area is just
12 one floor.
13 MR. ARMSTRONG: 38 feet.
14 MS. GUYDISH: Okay. That's
15 fine.
16 MR. ARMSTRONG: Now, both
17 stories will be used for commercial?
18 MS. GUYDISH: I'm just using --
19 it's just going to be one floor, but it will be
20 with a cathedral ceiling so it blends with the rest
21 of the house, the exterior.
22 MR. SINCAVAGE: That's fine.
23 MR. ARMSTRONG: I misunderstood
24 what you said.
25 MS. GUYDISH: No problem. Now,
1 do I need architectural drawings? Can I draw it
2 up? Do they have to be sealed, printed, what?
3 MR. ARMSTRONG: Probably your
4 best bet, this is -- if you are going to -- yeah,
5 you're going to have to present something showing
6 what you're proposing.
7 MS. GUYDISH: Okay.
8 MR. ARMSTRONG: If it's going to
9 be 200 square feet or less, it will be something
10 that you will deal with the zoning officer about,
11 making sure you comply with all the other -- you
12 still have to comply with all the township
13 ordinances. So you have to show her what you're
14 proposing, plans showing 200 square feet or less
15 that's going to be used for commercial. And you're
16 going to need a building permit from the code
17 enforcement officer. But that's a separate issue.
18 That's under the construction code.
19 MS. GUYDISH: So once I get this
20 drawn up, do they have to be by an architect with a
21 seal.
22 MR. McHALE: You need to talk to
23 the building code official.
24 MR. ARMSTRONG: For the building
25 code official I would image you want to discuss
1 that with them. But I'm assuming --
2 MR. McHALE: It's a commercial
3 structure, I would guess.
4 MR. ARMSTRONG: Yes.
5 MR. McHALE: You better talk to
6 them.
7 MS. GUYDISH: Where do I contact
8 them at?
9 MR. ARMSTRONG: I'm assuming the
10 township would have contact information.
11 MR. McHALE: Yes. If you would
12 get ahold of the folks in the front office, in the
13 administration first thing in the morning, if you
14 wish, they can give you all the phone numbers to
15 the proper people and forms for the zoning permit
16 and give you the proper guidance.
17 MR. ARMSTRONG: Before you
18 leave, there is -- you do have a pending plan that
19 was filed back in '06 maybe?
20 MS. GUYDISH: Yes.
21 MR. ARMSTRONG: '06, '07.
22 Sometime in that timeframe.
23 MS. GUYDISH: '07.
24 MR. ARMSTRONG: That's still
25 pending. This board, this commission has already
1 made a recommendation for denial. It sounds to me
2 like -- are you no longer pursuing that plan?
3 MS. GUYDISH: I am no longer
4 pursuing that plan.
5 MR. SINCAVAGE: She should
6 withdraw it then.
7 MR. ARMSTRONG: I mean, it could
8 be done either way. I would prefer that you
9 withdraw it. It would be by way of a letter to the
10 township saying I hereby withdraw the plan
11 identified, that way the board of supervisors don't
12 have to waste time denying it and I don't have to
13 waste time drafting a letter denying it.
14 MS. GUYDISH: Okay.
15 MR. ARMSTRONG: Just a letter to
16 the township in the near future because I think the
17 time is in the second week of October when the
18 township needs to act. So a letter to the township
19 indicating that you wish to withdraw your plan and
20 identify the plan and have it withdrawn and taken
21 off our agenda.
22 MS. GUYDISH: I'll contact the
23 front office about what I'm trying to do right now.
24 MR. ARMSTRONG: Right. You're
25 going to want to talk to the zoning officer about
1 the square footage and compliance with the zoning
2 ordinance. And you're going to want to get contact
3 information for the building code officials for the
4 township which is the Bureau of Veritas. They used
5 to be Guardian. Now they've merged.
6 MR. SINCAVAGE: You must have
7 dealt with --
8 MS. GUYDISH: I dealt with
9 Guardian.
10 MR. SINCAVAGE: It's the same
11 thing, it's just a different -- the office is still
12 in Coolbaugh.
13 MR. ARMSTRONG: You will be
14 submitting a letter withdrawing your plan?
15 MS. GUYDISH: Yes. Thank you
16 very much.
17 (At this time Ms. Haase appeared
18 at the hearing.)
19 MR. ARMSTRONG: Phyllis, do you
20 want to know what they -- what Wee-Wons is
21 proposing now is I would say a bump out for an
22 office to be used for the day care center, like a
23 commercial office space.
24 MS. HAASE: Yes.
25 MR. ARMSTRONG: And she wants to
1 fall under the -- under the zoning ordinance it's
2 200 square feet for commercial uses, whereas, if
3 she's 200 square feet or under it's basically a
4 waiver -- it looks like a waiver of land
5 development.
6 MS. HAASE: Correct.
7 MR. ARMSTRONG: So she's going
8 to be looking to fall within that 200 or less
9 square footage for the office.
10 MR. McHALE: And it's a single
11 story with 200 square feet or less, for less than
12 200 square feet, but she wanted to vault the
13 ceiling to go closer to the height of her
14 residential structure.
15 MS. HAASE: Okay.
16 And the special exception and
17 variance?
18 MR. McHALE: It's for commercial
19 use.
20 MS. HAASE: Commercial. Okay.
21 MR. ARMSTRONG: Now, she's going
22 to be coming in to talk to you probably just to
23 confirm compliance with the zoning ordinance and
24 the square footage, I guess, once she has a plan
25 mapped out, and she's also going to get contact
1 information for the Bureau of Veritas, the building
2 code official. And she's going to need a building
3 permit.
4 MS. HAASE: Sure. Call me
5 Cathy. We'll go over it.
6 MS. GUYDISH: Thank you.
7 MR. ARMSTRONG: You will be
8 submitting.
9 MS. GUYDISH: I'll be submitting
10 the letter. Do you want me to hand deliver it?
11 MR. ARMSTRONG: That's
12 probably --
13 MS. GUYDISH: Give it to
14 somebody in the office?
15 MR. ARMSTRONG: Just as long as
16 the supervisors get it before the next meeting.
17 MS. GUYDISH: That date is?
18 MR. ARMSTRONG: They have a work
19 session on Monday, don't worry about that. It's
20 the next meeting, which will be the following
21 Monday.
22 MS. GUYDISH: Can I just say I'm
23 withdrawing my --
24 MR. ARMSTRONG: Pending land
25 development and identify the plan number. It will
1 all be in Bob's review letter from 2007 for
2 identification.
3 MS. GUYDISH: Finding Bob's
4 review letter from '07 may be something. You want
5 me to place a number on that?
6 MR. ARMSTRONG: Here. I
7 probably have it. I just want to make sure you
8 identify the plan properly.
9 It would be withdrawing your
10 land development plan for the Wee-Wons Day Care
11 expansion, land development application project No.
12 2007-003.
13 MS. GUYDISH: Thank you very
14 much.
15 MR. SINCAVAGE: Thanks, Cathy.
16 Good luck.
17 MS. GUYDISH: Thank you.
18 MR. SINCAVAGE: Next item on the
19 agenda is Locust Ridge Quarry. No one is present
20 representing them?
21 MR. ARMSTRONG: Remember, we
22 received a letter from them indicating due to
23 economic hardship they are going to postpone moving
24 forward with their plan for a while.
25 MR. McHALE: I believe they said
1 they would be resubmitting before December or
2 sometime in December.
3 MR. SINCAVAGE: Yes. If they
4 decide to move forward it would be before December.
5 So we need no action on that.
6 MR. ARMSTRONG: Just before we
7 move on, as you recall, Glorious Church also had a
8 conditional use and land development plan. You
9 made a recommendation last month and in response
10 they've actually withdrawn their plans.
11 MR. SINCAVAGE: Next item on our
12 agenda is Arrowhead Lake recreational Lodge.
13 This is a sketch plan
14 submission.
15 MR. MICHAEL FENICK: Yes.
16 MR. ARMSTRONG: This is a sketch
17 plan presubmission. Actually, a conditional use
18 application has not been --
19 MR. MICHAEL FENICK: It has not
20 been submitted.
21 MS. HAASE: Mr. Chairman, if I
22 may, this is a presubmission conference for the
23 conditional use application.
24 MR. MICHAEL FENICK: My name is
25 Mike Fenick. I'm with Pennoni Associates. I'm
1 here to talk to you about the Arrowhead Lake
2 Community Lodge project. Currently we have an
3 existing plan, but the first sheet that I show you
4 shows you the existing conditions. They wanted to
5 pretty much update their existing lodge that has no
6 longer been used for quite some time due to some
7 problems with the building and stuff like that.
8 It's currently been removed from the premises. Now
9 it's pretty much an open site there. You will see
10 gravel parking, there is existing pavement parking.
11 What they wish to do is actually update it with a
12 building that is approximately 12,500 square feet.
13 The building is going to house a great room, a
14 fitness center, billiard room and actually a
15 banquet hall which will seat 250 people.
16 As you can see from the plans,
17 we have accommodated for the 250 people being the
18 peak event. That works out to be 73 spaces,
19 including handicap. You can see right here this
20 area right in here, there is existing tennis courts
21 which we wanted to limit the amount of earth
22 disturbance as well. So we'll utilize their
23 existing tennis courts for parking as well. There
24 is going to be tennis courts somewhere else in the
25 community.
1 If there is any questions, I'd
2 open the floor to you.
3 MR. SINCAVAGE: Did I understand
4 you to say that the existing lodge has been
5 demolished?
6 MR. MICHAEL FENICK: Has been
7 demolished. The existing lodge was right in there.
8 MS. HAASE: Mike, as you speak
9 to the commission members I'm just going to hand
10 out some sections of the zoning ordinance. Okay?
11 MR. SINCAVAGE: What about the
12 sewer usage for this building?
13 MR. MICHAEL FENICK: Currently
14 right now Arrowhead Lake is in the process of
15 revising their Act 537 plan. They have a
16 consultant. They are in the process of actually
17 permitting. They are in the process of updating
18 their 537 and permitting the unpermitted sanitary
19 lines within the community. Arrowhead is aware of
20 this process and once the project comes to
21 fruition, at the end of the day they will be able
22 to hook up to the sanitary system. We are aware
23 that there is no holding tanks allowed by the
24 township, and you know, they will have to do some
25 testing to see if they can get an on-lot, stuff
1 like that, which probably won't happen because the
2 soils there are not conducive to having an on-lot
3 system. It's very wet in this area. And, you
4 know, the parking will take up the majority of the
5 front of Lake Shore Drive. So what we would do is,
6 as the land development moves forward, we'll submit
7 the plans to the planning commission, the board of
8 supervisors and ask for a conditional approval upon
9 this item and then knowing that at the end of the
10 day, when this project is completed, they will have
11 to tie into the existing sanitary system.
12 MR. SINCAVAGE: What are you
13 proposing for stormwater?
14 MR. MICHAEL FENICK: Right now
15 we are in the process of working that out. Again,
16 the soils are not going to be conducive to the
17 subsurface or detention or retention. It's very
18 wet. And being so close to the lake where we
19 may -- right in here, we started, you know,
20 draining out a little stormwater facility. We may
21 be requesting a waiver, which we may not need,
22 stormwater requirements set forth in the zoning
23 ordinance, but we have a couple things we want to
24 try before we go ahead with that and present that.
25 I believe Chad Wellow (phonetic) spoke with
1 Mr. McHale about that on the phone.
2 MR. McHALE: His proposal right
3 now would be to treat the water for water quality
4 purposes, as Mike was describing, to the side of
5 the building and then discharge into the lake
6 with -- not a point source discharge, but like a
7 level spreader or something to that effect.
8 MR. MICHAEL FENICK: What
9 happens is, where the site is, we are at the bottom
10 of their overall drainage area, and we are so close
11 to the lake that it's -- just like Bob said, with
12 a level spreader -- we may miss them by just a few
13 CFS, a couple CFS to discharge into the lake. And
14 we just had a meeting with the Monroe Conservation
15 District, and there were questions about whether
16 this project would need NPDS permit given the
17 amount of earth disturbance. We tried to keep it
18 under an acre nonpoint discharge and we've been
19 directed by them we can go over the one acre golden
20 rule earth disturbance as long as we are not
21 creating a nonpoint discharge for the project.
22 MR. SINCAVAGE: Any other member
23 have a question at this time?
24 MS. RINEHIMER: No.
25 MR. SINCAVAGE: Phyllis, do you
1 have something you wanted to bring to our attention
2 at this time?
3 MS. HAASE: The only concern I
4 had, you did speak to Princeton Hydrology --
5 MR. MICHAEL FENICK: We are in
6 the process of contacting them. The architect on
7 board is trying to get ahold of them. We are
8 trying to get them to contact folks at Arrowhead.
9 We are trying to get this paperwork sent to us to
10 see exactly where they are in this permitting
11 process.
12 MS. HAASE: Did you speak to
13 Mr. Brogan, our sewage enforcement officer?
14 MR. MICHAEL FENICK: I spoke to
15 Mr. Brogan probably about a month back. I have not
16 had a chance to reach out to him. I'd like to
17 speak to him and see if he's heard anything from
18 Princeton Hydrology or even DEP or Arrowhead. The
19 last time I talked to him he said it's pretty much
20 in the hands of DEP what they are going to allow
21 Arrowhead to do.
22 MS. HAASE: Are you proposing
23 any testing at all of this site for on-lot if
24 you're --
25 MR. MICHAEL FENICK: Yes. What
1 they want to do is if they have to do some on-site
2 testing to prove that an on-lot system doesn't
3 work, they have to get this Act 537 moving along to
4 tie into the existing sanitary line that runs down.
5 MR. McHALE: Are you planning to
6 do that testing before you move forward with your
7 application?
8 MR. MICHAEL FENICK: I'll find
9 out.
10 MR. ARMSTRONG: That's what I
11 was going to ask. Are you going to try to resolve
12 the sewer issue before you move on with the
13 conditional use?
14 MR. MICHAEL FENICK: I'll find
15 out for you.
16 MR. SINCAVAGE: Phyllis, could
17 you move downward a little bit?
18 One of the guiding principles,
19 I'm not sure if you've seen this 155.79, for a
20 special exception, speaks to potential congestion.
21 MR. ARMSTRONG: This is a
22 conditional use.
23 MS. HAASE: It is, but in our
24 ordinance it refers to the conditions of a special
25 exception.
1 MR. SINCAVAGE: It refers to
2 potential congestion of vehicular traffic or
3 creation of undue hazard. I know that Arrowhead
4 Drive coming -- and Lake Shore Drive, that's a very
5 highly used inner roadway system right now and it
6 is dangerous there. I think there have been some
7 problems. And even with the curve, it's like an S
8 curve right down from there on Lake Shore Drive, is
9 a dangerous situation. It's existed since the
10 development has been there. But I would be
11 concerned that you will be bringing in additional
12 traffic here and I was wondering what you were
13 planning on doing to mitigate that.
14 MR. MICHAEL FENICK: Right now
15 my belief is it's not going to be open to the
16 public except what's inside the community. They
17 are going to utilize the existing points of ingress
18 and egress, this becoming a one way, Arrowhead
19 Drive will be a one way, and coming out here will
20 be a two way. That peak moment of 250 people may
21 happen once a year. At most there may be 10 to 15
22 persons utilizing the building everyday. We've
23 accommodated for employees at such time. There has
24 been talks about one employee there everyday, I
25 think a security officer. In the front of the
1 building right here there's going to be an office.
2 As far as opening it up to the outside community,
3 there hasn't been talks about yet. This will be
4 solely for community purposes.
5 MR. SINCAVAGE: I understand
6 that, but, I mean, if you build a nice facility
7 there, it has a banquet accommodations, you could
8 potentially be having weddings there, birthday
9 parties, a lot of different events for the
10 community. I would anticipate that Arrowhead
11 Property Owners Association would have such events
12 for income production. So I would be very
13 concerned with traffic in this area. Even if it's
14 just the -- I understand it's just the inner
15 traffic. You're going to have people coming from
16 within the development, coming over Lake Shore
17 Drive into this area and I'm concerned about that
18 for this.
19 MR. MICHAEL FENICK: Okay.
20 We'll address those issues and speak to Arrowhead.
21 What they'll do at those times, they will be
22 directing traffic and whatnot to help mitigate the
23 traffic flow and not produce so much congestion at
24 the areas of the entrances.
25 MR. SINCAVAGE: Is there any
1 thought to widening Lake Shore Drive? I'm not sure
2 how wide Lake Shore is.
3 MR. MICHAEL FENICK: It's about
4 19 feet. And this is about 16 feet. Actually,
5 Arrowhead Drive is like 16 and Lake Shore Drive is
6 about 19. As far as I know, there hasn't been any
7 talks about widening that. Maybe it's something
8 that can be presented to Arrowhead. After this
9 meeting, bring it up to them and say there should
10 be thoughts about updating Lake Shore Drive to
11 accommodate traffic flow, make it a little wider.
12 I'll find that out.
13 MR. SINCAVAGE: Has this been
14 announced in the public -- I mean within the
15 development, has it been announced?
16 MR. MICHAEL FENICK: I believe
17 so. I believe people do know that they are looking
18 to do this project, yes.
19 MR. SINCAVAGE: I'm sure one of
20 the things is that you have to protect the health
21 and safety of the residence and you want to have
22 the character of the neighborhood. I mean, that
23 building has been there a long time and it was
24 dilapidated the last time I was there, which was a
25 while ago. So I think this is certainly going to
1 be an improvement, so I don't think there will be
2 any opposition, but I want to make sure that
3 residents are also aware that the project is going
4 forward.
5 MR. MICHAEL FENICK: Yes.
6 MR. ARMSTRONG: Are you
7 anticipating complying with all the zoning
8 ordinance provisions or are you going to be looking
9 for any kind of variances?
10 MR. MICHAEL FENICK: No. Not at
11 this time.
12 MR. ARMSTRONG: You meet all the
13 parking?
14 MR. MICHAEL FENICK: We meet the
15 parking right now, yes.
16 MR. ARMSTRONG: Is there any
17 fencing or screening that you propose?
18 MR. MICHAEL FENICK: We are
19 going -- that will be shown in our landscaping and
20 light plan. I believe there will be provisions for
21 landscaping. It's going to need some tree
22 screening.
23 MR. SINCAVAGE: When you met
24 with the conversation district, was there any talks
25 of BMPs such as rain gardens, drainage areas,
1 infiltration areas along the parking areas, that
2 type of thing?
3 MR. MICHAEL FENICK: We didn't
4 talk about that. Like I said before, this area up
5 in here may act as a rain garden. We've run a few
6 more stormwater calculations to see what we can
7 actually get to work. And like what Bob had said,
8 we are looking at having that, have a level
9 spreader and just --
10 MR. SINCAVAGE: Did you look at
11 any rain gardens within --
12 MR. MICHAEL FENICK: Right here?
13 MR. SINCAVAGE: Like in the
14 parking area here, to try to get some infiltration?
15 MR. MICHAEL FENICK: We haven't
16 looked at that yet. They're probably some things
17 that we'll be looking at. We haven't finalized our
18 stormwater system, so to speak. We haven't
19 finalized our stormwater calcs yet. See what works
20 before we ask for a potential waiver for the
21 stormwater requirements. The main topic of
22 conversation at the Monroe Conservation was this
23 whole NPDS permitting, because if the project went
24 to an NPDS permit, it would be very difficult where
25 it's at as far as that's concerned and it would be
1 pretty difficult to meet -- abiding by the
2 stormwater requirements.
3 MR. SINCAVAGE: It certainly is
4 a challenging site for drainage, that's for sure.
5 MR. MICHAEL FENICK: Yeah, it
6 really is. I have walked there quite a few times
7 and this is just wet. I just walked around.
8 MR. SINCAVAGE: The only other
9 comment I would have at this time is I would like
10 to see -- make sure that there is landscaping
11 shown. We need some buffering. I would want to
12 see some buffering for residential.
13 MR. MICHAEL FENICK: Yeah, and
14 there will be. Like I said, this is just, you
15 know, a pretty generic sketch plan. And like I
16 said, all those requirements to be met, will be a
17 separate, a stand alone landscape lighting plan,
18 showing the tree buffers and screening.
19 MR. SINCAVAGE: Bob, are buffers
20 required with residential with this type of use?
21 MR. McHALE: Around development
22 amenities?
23 MR. SINCAVAGE: Yes.
24 MR. MICHAEL FENICK: I think I
25 read something in there if you're abutting a
1 residential lot, which there already is an existing
2 treeline.
3 MR. SINCAVAGE: But I'm
4 wondering if you need a buffer or screen.
5 MR. ARMSTRONG: Irregardless of
6 the buffering requirements for the neighboring,
7 there is actually a subsection under the
8 conditional use for this indoor/outdoor commercial
9 recreational facility. Adequate fencing, screening
10 or natural growth not less than 8 feet in height
11 where required by the board of supervisors shall be
12 constructed or planted around the perimeter of the
13 parcel.
14 MR. MICHAEL FENICK: Okay.
15 So we are looking -- it would be
16 the front here then?
17 MR. McHALE: Phyllis, was this
18 going to be categorized as a development amenity
19 under Section 155.101 or 155.102, indoor/outdoor
20 commercial recreational uses or both?
21 MS. HAASE: I believe we went
22 under development amenity.
23 MR. MICHAEL FENICK: Correct.
24 MR. McHALE: So it's not going
25 to be used for commercial recreational use. It's
1 going to be just totally within the development.
2 MR. MICHAEL FENICK: In the
3 development, yeah.
4 MS. HAASE: And that's something
5 that you need to make certain with the Arrowhead
6 Board, that this will be for members of the
7 community. And as I stated before, if it will be
8 open to the public we need to view this a little
9 differently. So that's something you need to
10 confirm with them. We are going under the
11 assumption that this is strictly for the private
12 community.
13 MR. MICHAEL FENICK: Yes.
14 MR. SINCAVAGE: So, Phyllis, my
15 question to that would be, what if someone, a
16 resident of a community, a daughter or son has a
17 wedding there and there's people coming from
18 outside the community to attend the wedding?
19 MS. HAASE: I think that's going
20 to occur. You're going to have guests. My feeling
21 would be different -- just recently Arrowhead
22 advertised I believe it was a concert.
23 MR. MICHAEL FENICK: I don't
24 know.
25 MS. HAASE: They had a performer
1 that people from outside the development could come
2 in there. And that's going to have to be viewed
3 differently. If it's a guest of a resident --
4 MR. SINCAVAGE: So that's okay.
5 MS. HAASE: Yes, because
6 currently you can still use the amenities there if
7 you're a guest of a homeowner.
8 MR. SINCAVAGE: I see what
9 you're saying. I can see the difference.
10 MR. McHALE: In relationship to
11 the buffers, 155.101 Subparagraph i, it does say a
12 buffer strip not less than 20 feet in width shall
13 be provided between any such use and any plotted
14 lot of the subdivision.
15 MS. HAASE: I believe, Mike, you
16 did show that, correct? We had discussed the 20
17 foot --
18 MR. MICHAEL FENICK: Yes, we
19 did.
20 MS. HAASE: -- setback and you
21 required the buffer.
22 MR. ARMSTRONG: And this is only
23 going to be used for Arrowhead Lake residents?
24 MR. MICHAEL FENICK: Yes, as far
25 as I'm concerned.
1 MR. SINCAVAGE: So you're
2 showing an infringement upon the 20 foot with the
3 parking area.
4 MR. MICHAEL FENICK: There will
5 be no parking in here. This is a throughway.
6 MR. SINCAVAGE: Okay. So this
7 throughway isn't considered part of the parking,
8 that is correct, Bob?
9 MR. McHALE: No. It says
10 between any such use. So that would be any
11 function or related function on the plans. So you
12 would need 20 feet from the property line.
13 MR. MICHAEL FENICK: For the
14 cartway right here?
15 MR. McHALE: For anything,
16 anything related to the amenity. And it says in
17 any plotted lot of the subdivision. So if there is
18 a right of way there, that's something we have to
19 talk about later, Pat. But if there is a plotted
20 lot, like to the left there, Mike, where the
21 cul-de-sac is, if they were on this side and
22 adjoining this particular parcel, you will need
23 that 20 feet. So we'll need to look at that a
24 little closer.
25 MR. MICHAEL FENICK: That's
1 fine.
2 MR. SINCAVAGE: Mike, I'm a
3 little confused. It appears that from this
4 revision, that you're going to be using Arrowhead
5 Drive as a private -- not private, but as an
6 entrance into the new facility. What happens to
7 the property owners across the street?
8 MR. MICHAEL FENICK: They'll be
9 able to use that as well to access there.
10 MR. SINCAVAGE: Is that
11 cul-de-sac improved?
12 MR. MICHAEL FENICK: Actually,
13 if you go out there today, there is no such
14 cul-de-sac out there. It's just broken pave and
15 gravel. There is no definitive cul-de-sac. It's
16 atypical. There's just a boundary. They never
17 really constructed a cul-de-sac.
18 MR. SINCAVAGE: Yeah, but it
19 should be there, especially if you're going to
20 propose this, because that property owner on the
21 corner there needs to have access to his property.
22 MR. MICHAEL FENICK: That's
23 something that we'll have to address.
24 MR. SINCAVAGE: Bob, I don't
25 know if that's right that they can show -- see how
1 they are showing the entrance right in there? I
2 mean, you're taking away the access road. You're
3 talking away the road.
4 MS. HAASE: I think you had
5 mentioned too making that one way, is that correct,
6 when you initially started, making that one way up?
7 MR. MICHAEL FENICK: Yes. I'm
8 not even quite sure if there is driveways coming in
9 off of Arrowhead Drive.
10 MRS. LAMBERTON: There has to
11 be. There is a lake behind it.
12 MR. McHALE: Do they front
13 another road?
14 MR. MICHAEL FENICK: No. I take
15 that back. The lake is behind it.
16 MRS. LAMBERTON: Obviously they
17 have to get there.
18 MR. SINCAVAGE: They may not be
19 sold.
20 MR. MICHAEL FENICK: We'll have
21 to look at that.
22 MR. SINCAVAGE: But people need
23 access.
24 MR. ARMSTRONG: If they are
25 improved lots, they have to have access. You will
1 look into that before the conditional use.
2 MR. MICHAEL FENICK: Yes.
3 MR. ARMSTRONG: And the sanitary
4 sewer.
5 MR. MICHAEL FENICK: Yes.
6 MR. SINCAVAGE: I see two
7 symbols that are kind of floating out in the middle
8 of the right of way there. Are those property
9 lines or are you saying that the property lines
10 aren't properly lined up, up to the left, those two
11 points there?
12 MR. MICHAEL FENICK: We did not
13 do the survey. Brian Courtright performed the
14 boundary survey, and this is his base plan that we
15 are working off of.
16 MR. SINCAVAGE: Whatever that
17 discrepancy is, you should make sure you tie it in.
18 It's identified as a found pin.
19 See, iron pin found? That's what that symbol is.
20 So to me that would indicate that that's the guy's
21 property line that was surveyed and your overlay
22 map isn't lining up.
23 MR. MICHAEL FENICK: On the
24 existing conditions plan which is the one you have
25 there, it's not -- they are not identified as iron
1 pins found. Either way we are going to have to
2 address this, and see what they are going to do to
3 resolve the boundary. Like I said, we didn't
4 perform the survey. We got this information from
5 the surveyor hired by Arrowhead Lake.
6 MR. SINCAVAGE: I'm sorry to
7 disagree with you. I'm looking at a map that you
8 just handed me and that's what is shown. This
9 symbol is identified as an iron pin found. That's
10 that symbol.
11 MR. MICHAEL FENICK: Yeah, and
12 where it says iron pin found, he may not have
13 found --
14 MR. SINCAVAGE: That's a symbol.
15 MR. MICHAEL FENICK: That's
16 generic.
17 MR. SINCAVAGE: Okay.
18 MR. MICHAEL FENICK: Should be a
19 difference on the plan between iron pin found
20 and --
21 MR. SINCAVAGE: Yeah, I see.
22 There is something wrong. Just make sure you tie
23 it in.
24 MR. MICHAEL FENICK: We'll
25 correspond with Brian.
1 MR. ARMSTRONG: You haven't
2 applied for a conditional use application?
3 MR. MICHAEL FENICK: Correct.
4 MR. ARMSTRONG: What this is is
5 a presubmission. He's coming in looking for some
6 kind of guidance from the commission and the zoning
7 officer.
8 MS. HAASE: The applicant needs
9 to submit -- under item G is all the information
10 that the applicant needs to submit.
11 MR. ARMSTRONG: You're familiar
12 with the zoning ordinance and what you need?
13 MR. MICHAEL FENICK: Yes.
14 MS. HAASE: In essence, this
15 meeting was to determine the nature and extent of
16 the information to be supplied on the site
17 development plan under 159.79.G.
18 MR. SINCAVAGE: You've seen
19 these, Mike, right?
20 MR. MICHAEL FENICK: Yes.
21 MR. McHALE: Item No. 6
22 indicates any other information to be determined
23 during the presubmission conference to be
24 necessary.
25 MR. SINCAVAGE: I think we
1 pointed out a couple things to you.
2 MR. MICHAEL FENICK: Yes. Sure.
3 MR. SINCAVAGE: Any others?
4 MRS. LAMBERTON: I agree.
5 MR. SINCAVAGE: We made our
6 comments.
7 MS. HAASE: Mr. Chairman, you'd
8 like all the items under G to be submitted on the
9 plan?
10 MR. SINCAVAGE: Don't ask me.
11 Ask the board. But I would say yes, that we are
12 going to need all that information. Because this
13 is an existing site, so we want to see, I would
14 want to see everything that's going on in that
15 area, especially given that survey point is off
16 that roadway, the traffic issue within that area.
17 Where is the 100 year flood --
18 Phyllis, could you go to the lake, please? Did you
19 identify the 100 year flood?
20 MR. MICHAEL FENICK: It's on the
21 existing conditions plan, I believe the 100 year
22 flood is somewhere in here. I'm not exactly sure
23 what contour it is. We've since gotten an updated
24 survey plan from the surveyor that may not show all
25 of the notes and everything like that applicable.
1 I do know that it was identified. Data was
2 actually put on a USGS datum from a USGS disk found
3 on the dam. The elevation has been put on the same
4 datum, so that way we can see how the building
5 corresponds to the dam and all that information.
6 That way, in the event of a flood, the building is
7 not going to be under water or have water, which
8 was the problem the first time. The water
9 inundated and ruined the lodge.
10 MR. SINCAVAGE: I don't see
11 anything that I would ask not to --
12 MRS. LAMBERTON: I would say
13 that every item should be.
14 MR. SINCAVAGE: Yes. So all the
15 items under G.
16 MR. MICHAEL FENICK: And that's
17 Section 155 --
18 MS. HAASE: Mike, just -- you
19 can have mine.
20 MR. MICHAEL FENICK: Any other
21 questions?
22 MR. SINCAVAGE: It will be nice
23 to see a new structure there.
24 MR. MICHAEL FENICK: It's going
25 to be nice. I have seen a rendering of it. It
1 will be impressive. It'll be a nice building.
2 MR. SINCAVAGE: It'll be a nice
3 improvement.
4 MR. MICHAEL FENICK: It really
5 will.
6 MR. SINCAVAGE: Thanks.
7 MR. MICHAEL FENICK: Thank you.
8 MS. HAASE: If you'd like to
9 contact me tomorrow, possibly I can arrange a
10 meeting with Mr. Brogan and maybe Mr. McHale and
11 myself.
12 MR. MICHAEL FENICK: That's
13 fine. That's great.
14 MS. HAASE: That's something
15 that needs to be addressed.
16 MR. MICHAEL FENICK: Great. No
17 problem.
18 MR. SINCAVAGE: Next item on our
19 agenda is Keswick Pointe.
20 MR. CHARLES HANNIG: Hi. I
21 believe the township has received the revisions of
22 the PRD plan for Phase I, basically, which is the
23 front entranceway. You may recall that we
24 presented the information I believe to this body
25 last month regarding our request for a waiver that
1 was needed to meet the profiles in the ordinance.
2 And we came up with the combination, ever thanks to
3 Bob, of utilizing two vertical curves joined
4 together to lessen the request for a waiver. That
5 was approved by both this body and the supervisors
6 and now has been illustrated in the plans, which is
7 before you, I believe, tonight. Is that a proper
8 articulation of what is before --
9 MR. McHALE: Yes, sir. You have
10 that.
11 MR. CHARLES HANNIG: Right in
12 here is the stretch of road, the front entranceway.
13 The area basically coming in from Route 115 is out
14 here and coming up the hill here we came across the
15 encased electric line that was a little bit
16 different than what was located in the plan that
17 serviced the treatment plant. And because it's a
18 three-phase line, it's put in by PPL, it's encased
19 in concrete all the way up that road. So it would
20 have been -- if we stayed with our original design,
21 it would have meant that we would have been down to
22 cover only an inch or two over that encased line.
23 By creating a new profile of the road from 115 up
24 to our entranceway, with two different vertical
25 curves, we are able to mitigate that problem and
1 still maintain proper cover. I think it probably
2 also, just by de facto, maintains a little bit
3 better cover on top of the sewer line that crosses
4 in that area. I believe this is the sewer line
5 right there. So it may have even influenced that.
6 So, but more the electric line right here was
7 definitely the problem. By this solution, two
8 vertical curves, it was better than trying to do it
9 all in one fast movement. So we appreciate Bob's
10 input on that. Reilly has demonstrated it on this
11 plan here and that also affected some of our
12 culverting that has to be put back in here and the
13 drainage had to be modified as well, all of which
14 has been illustrated on this plan. That's what's
15 before you. I don't think there is anything here
16 we haven't discussed, but --
17 MR. McHALE: Do you have the
18 stormwater post construction?
19 Again, the same area. There's
20 just going to be some minor modification of storm
21 sewer inlet and those kind of things. Again, most
22 of it is in that general vicinity. We've already
23 looked at this enlarged island that's at the
24 entryway for the proposed signage and that again
25 was before the planning commission and the board of
1 supervisors. So really these plans are depicting
2 what's gone on for the last few months of
3 interaction and discussion because the project is
4 under construction and we didn't want to wait too
5 long to get it before everyone in case there were
6 comments or other input on it.
7 Could we go to the utilities
8 plan, Sheet 37?
9 The new utilities plan depicts
10 the conversion from what was a gravity end low
11 pressure sanitary sewer collection system to an all
12 low pressure system. So the route for the entire
13 pressure system is going to be the same pretty much
14 as it was on the original approval, only those
15 areas that were gravity have been converted to low
16 pressure sewer system. The only thing we are at
17 right now, as far as the -- you know, the route is
18 going to be the same. Instead of tieing into an
19 existing manhole here closer to the plan, there is
20 an existing manhole over to the right near where
21 the multi-purpose facilities are going to be. And
22 the force main will come off of Keswick Drive and
23 drop down into that existing main at the same
24 location that the -- I think it's a 6 inch low
25 pressure sewer line that comes from New Ventures
1 Park that ties into that same manhole.
2 At this point, the general route
3 layout, everything is fine. What we'll probably
4 ask for on the Phase I drawing though is to show
5 just the low pressure line that will be constructed
6 here. It's going to show up on the Phase III
7 portion of it, but for Phase I to be approved, if
8 you will, for these sheets, that should be shown
9 and we'll get with their engineer to make sure
10 those kind of things are depicted. There will also
11 be some items incidental, like valving, risers,
12 manholes, some configurations that aren't quite
13 ironed out yet, but we will be doing that here in
14 the next few days and coordinating those items.
15 Other than that --
16 MR. CHARLES HANNIG: Did Casey
17 call you? Because I asked him to speak to you
18 about those final decisions, so he can depict it in
19 the plan. He said, well, I didn't put it in the
20 plan because Bob hasn't told me if he agreed yet.
21 I said, I think Bob's position is until you present
22 it in plan form, there is nothing for him to
23 review. I said the two of you have to chat. So I
24 hope he called you.
25 MR. McHALE: He submitted
1 details that were very similar to the previous
2 submission with some -- there were some
3 modifications to them. So I'm going to go through
4 those and get back with Casey and get those things
5 ironed out in the next few days.
6 MR. CHARLES HANNIG: Some of
7 that we are anxious because we are trying to order
8 components so we get the sewer in. We are running
9 out of daylight.
10 MR. McHALE: We have the board
11 of supervisors' work session on Monday. The
12 board's meeting is on the 12th, I believe. So if
13 the planning commission felt comfortable with, you
14 know, the layout and the general schematic of what
15 is shown on these, if you all felt comfortable with
16 making a recommendation to the board, that's up to
17 you all.
18 MR. SINCAVAGE: There is no
19 layout change in the driveway coming in. We
20 already made a recommendation. So we have no
21 problem with the sewer going in to gravity. I
22 think that was requested actually by the township
23 to take a look at that, take a second look at that.
24 We are good. Bob's good. I'll
25 entertain a motion to recommend to the board of
1 supervisors the approval of the revisions to Phase
2 I of the PRD for Keswick Pointe.
3 MRS. LAMBERTON: I'll make that
4 motion.
5 MR. SINCAVAGE: I have a motion.
6 Do I have a second to that motion?
7 MS. RINEHIMER: I'll second it.
8 MR. SINCAVAGE: Motion and
9 seconded. All those in favor please say aye.
10 MRS. LAMBERTON: Aye.
11 MS. RINEHIMER: Aye.
12 MR. SINCAVAGE: Aye.
13 MR. CHARLES HANNIG: Thank you.
14 MR. ARMSTRONG: That was grinder
15 pumps.
16 MR. CHARLES HANNIG: Your
17 question?
18 MR. ARMSTRONG: Typically we are
19 going to want some kind of document, you know,
20 maintaining --
21 MR. McHALE: Operations or
22 maintenance agreement.
23 MR. ARMSTRONG: O and M
24 agreement.
25 MR. CHARLES HANNIG: Yes.
1 MR. McHALE: We already talked
2 about that. That was in Reilly's last review
3 letter I think back in July that you were going to
4 pull all that together and there were some other
5 items that came up that would be addressed in that
6 document.
7 MR. CHARLES HANNIG: The
8 finalization of the system here, the next step is
9 details. We've already met with the company that
10 we think is going to provide these. We pretty much
11 wrestled through the cost. As a matter of fact, I
12 had Peabody Barnes, I gave them the task, the
13 company that will supply it from the local
14 supplier, service guy --
15 MR. SINCAVAGE: Site specific.
16 MR. McHALE: Pumping Solutions.
17 MR. CHARLES HANNIG: Well, one
18 of the problems is one of the systems they have has
19 this kind of fill rock, the lid, and maybe one wall
20 in that rock looks fine, but certain places, like
21 putting four of them together, these four rocks all
22 look the same. So I have asked them to come back.
23 They didn't have it. They are actually fabricating
24 it at our request, a lid that's a flat profile lid
25 for the same system that we are talking about, for
1 the residential application. I mean it's rock, it
2 looks pretty genuine, but when you put three or
3 four of them together you catch on in a hurry that
4 it's not a rock. So I didn't like that too much.
5 So they are actually fabricating that. They are
6 close to finalizing a prototype for us to review.
7 And we still have, mostly in the townhouse area,
8 the ones we are going to use, they are a nice
9 compact system, all coming together in a skid. As
10 a matter of fact, we are talking now about
11 electronically monitoring all these. We are
12 talking about that option.
13 MR. SINCAVAGE: Great.
14 MR. CHARLES HANNIG: We are
15 pleased with the investigation. So far we are
16 pulling that together. I have actually had them
17 give us language that will be in their contract
18 requiring them to warranty it for a year and then
19 have a contract available to the customer,
20 thereafter. So that's already been worked out. So
21 putting together what you need is all there, all
22 the pieces are there. We just haven't pulled the
23 trigger on that because right now they are
24 interested in fabricating lids. Once I give them
25 the -- they may not be as interested, and other
1 people are. So we talked, you know. But I'm
2 feeling pretty good with this and the people that
3 we interviewed so.
4 MR. SINCAVAGE: Thank you.
5 MR. CHARLES HANNIG: Thank you.
6 MR. SINCAVAGE: Move on the Act
7 167, Stormwater.
8 MR. ARMSTRONG: As you know,
9 this has been on the township's plate for quite
10 sometime. Last week we forwarded, the planning
11 commission and the supervisors, both, the latest
12 and greatest Act 167 Stormwater Ordinance along
13 with the appendices. I don't know if you've had a
14 chance to review it. The sustentative portion of
15 the ordinance pretty much stayed the same. There
16 has been a couple small changes throughout the
17 year. Are there any questions or comments from the
18 commission with respect to it?
19 MR. SINCAVAGE: We made
20 recommendation on this before.
21 MRS. LAMBERTON: I'm good with
22 it.
23 MR. SINCAVAGE: We are good.
24 Bob?
25 MR. McHALE: The vacant lot
1 portion where it exists, that section of vacant
2 lots in existing recorded subdivisions, it's
3 already in the Brodhead McMichaels and Tobyhanna.
4 And, again, I think we discussed this briefly about
5 that we need to give the folks a tool to work from
6 and that is that tool. I think you all were aware
7 of that, but we did put that in that copy. We
8 talked about that last meeting.
9 MR. SINCAVAGE: That's one of
10 the exhibits, isn't it, that shows them what
11 they --
12 MR. McHALE: Yes.
13 MR. SINCAVAGE: Yes, I looked at
14 that.
15 MR. ARMSTRONG: Just a
16 reiteration of your previous motion to recommend
17 approval.
18 MR. SINCAVAGE: I'll entertain a
19 motion to recommend to the board of supervisors
20 approval of the Act 167 Stormwater plan for the
21 Brodhead McMichaels Watershed area.
22 MRS. LAMBERTON: I'll make that
23 motion.
24 MR. SINCAVAGE: I have a motion.
25 Second to the motion?
1 MS. RINEHIMER: I'll second it.
2 MR. SINCAVAGE: Motion and
3 second. All those in favor please say aye.
4 MRS. LAMBERTON: Aye.
5 MS. RINEHIMER: Aye.
6 MR. SINCAVAGE: Aye.
7 Time waivers for the Wee-Wons.
8 We did receive that. We are okay until December.
9 MR. ARMSTRONG: We did?
10 MS. HAASE: I don't know the
11 date.
12 MR. SINCAVAGE: It was on our
13 disk.
14 MR. ARMSTRONG: She's going to
15 be withdrawing the plans, so it doesn't necessarily
16 matter, but. That's fine. Don't worry about it.
17 MR. SINCAVAGE: But it was for
18 December something.
19 Brick City. Anything new?
20 MR. McHALE: No, sir. No
21 update.
22 MR. SINCAVAGE: Do we have
23 anything else to come before the board?
24 If not we stand adjourned.
25 (Meeting concluded at 7:55 p.m.)
1 ---
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10 I hereby certify that the
11 proceedings and evidence are contained fully and
12 accurately in the notes taken by me at the hearing
13 in the above matter, to the best of my ability; and
14 that the foregoing is a true and correct transcript
15 of the same.
16
17
18
19 JOSEPHINE HOLLMAN, C.R.
20
21
22
23
24
25