Also in attendance was Mark Anderson, Board Attorney, Jeffrey Perlman, Zoning Officer, William White, Board Engineer and Lucille Grozinski, CSR.

Transcription

1 Chairman Dietz called the Board of Adjustment Meeting of September 5, 2007 to order at 7:30 P.M. announcing that this meeting had been duly advertised according to Chapter 231, Open Public Meetings Act. The meeting took place at the Municipal Building in the Court Room. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL Chairman Dietz - Present Vice-Chairman Wetter Present Jack Kennedy - Absent Frank Valcheck - Present Barry Quick Present John Sheridan- Present Kevin Lovell - Present Joseph Jaghab Alt. #1- Present Helen Haines Alt#2 - Absent Also in attendance was Mark Anderson, Board Attorney, Jeffrey Perlman, Zoning Officer, William White, Board Engineer and Lucille Grozinski, CSR. ACCEPTANCE OF RESOLUTIONS Belle Mead Physical Therapy Mr. Anderson commented that the version before the Board is not the most recent revised version. Chairman Dietz asked what the revision is. Mr. Anderson replied that the resolution should read whereas the applicant does not request in their application but was granted a variance from section of the ordinance for a free-standing sign where no free-standing is permitted and a 25 square foot sign is provided. Mr. Lovell made a motion to approve as amended, seconded by Mr. Valcheck ROLL CALL: Mr. Valcheck yes Mr. Sheridan yes Mr. Quick yes Mr. Lovell yes Chairman Dietz yes BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT BUSINESS BUSINESS FROM THE FLOOR EXECUTIVE CLOSED SESSION APPLICATIONS DUDZINSKI, MIKE BA Block 180A, Lot 7, 926 Route 206. Preliminary & Final site plan with bulk and use variances. adjourned to October 4, 2007 WAGNER, ROBERT BA Block , Lot 15, 1 Cedarview Court. Impervious coverage for an addition. Mr. Robert Wagner, the applicant, appeared and was sworn. Testimony and discussion included the following; Applicant is seeking an impervious coverage variance Current 21.2%, and is requiring and increase to 21.6% The applicant is proposing a 50 square foot addition for a renovated kitchen The existing kitchen is 5 by 7 feet and is very small. The proposed improvement is both an improvement for the family and for the neighborhood

2 Mr. Wetter asked if the applicant will agree to the Board engineer s comments. Mr. Wagner agreed to meet all the comments by the Board engineer. Chairman Dietz asked if all of the existing improvements on the property are on the survey. Mr. Wagner said that the improvements were added on the plan but a new survey was not certified by a certified surveyor. Mr. Wagner also agreed to submit a grading plan associated with the property. Open Public. No members from the comments. Close comments Mr. White said that the applicant has addressed his concerns. Mr. White was concerned that the improvements on the property may not all be on the plan, and some additional decking around the pool may have been put in. Mr. White requested an updated survey so that all improvements are surveyed. Mr. Wetter made a motion to approve the application, seconded by Mr. Sheridan ROLL CALL: Mr. Valcheck yes Mr. Kennedy yes Mr. Sheridan yes Mr. Quick yes Mr. Lovell yes Vice-Chairman Wetter yes Chairman Dietz yes MOONEY, STEVEN & STEPHANIE BA Block 208, Lot 77.10, 14 Ethan Court. Impervious coverage for pool walkway. Mr. Steven Mooney, the applicant, appeared and was sworn. Testimony and discussion included the following; The applicant is seeking an impervious coverage variance for an in-ground pool Currently have 18.2% and proposing to increase the impervious coverage to 19.9% Chairman Dietz asked the applicant if they received a permit to construct a patio. Mr. Mooney replied no. Mr. Mooney said that the landscaper who installed the patio claimed that permits were not required. Mr. Wetter asked if there are any zoning issues with the permit. Mr. Perlman said that the applicant did not receive a zoning permit as required. Mr. Mooney replied that the patio is 20 inches above grade and expensive to remove. Chairman Dietz asked if there is any way the applicant can purchase additional land. Mr. Mooney said that no additional land could be purchased. Mr. Wetter what the impervious coverage is for just the driveway and house. Mr. Perlman replied that the impervious coverage of the house and driveway would put them over the impervious. Mr. Wetter asked if there is any mitigation that the applicant can do. Mr. Wagner replied that a part of the sidewalk is being removed. Mr. Wetter asked where the filter will be located. Mr. Wagner commented that the pool filter will placed consistent with recommendations from the township engineer. Open Public. No members of the public had comments. Close Public Mr. Wetter made a motion to approve the application, seconded by Mr. Valcheck ROLL CALL: Mr. Valcheck yes Mr. Kennedy yes Mr. Sheridan yes Mr. Quick yes Mr. Lovell yes 2

3 Vice-Chairman Wetter yes Chairman Dietz yes COPART OF CONNECTICUT, INC. BA Block 73.01, Lot 1, 2124 Camplain Road. Use variance to expand existing non-conforming use by adding staging area. Exhibits; A-1 Use variance Plan A-2 Existing features plan A-3 Pictures of the property prior to Coparts acquired the property Charles Leibling, attorney for the applicant, appeared and was sworn. Introduction and discussion included the following; The property 15.7 acres in size An automobile salvage operation is conducted on the site The applicant operations do not include the dismantling of vehicles The applicant wishes to use a vacant area in front of their property for a staging activities and vehicle storage A variance is thus required to use the vacant area The existing business a legally non-confirming use and utilizing the new area is considered an expansion of the non-conforming use Three bulk variances are required as are site plan exceptions Coparts is prepared to make a number of improvements on the property Bob Heibell, engineer for the applicant, appeared and was sworn. Testimony and discussion included the following; At the time the applicant, Coparts purchased the property, there were four individual lots Since then, Epps Avenue has been vacated and the lots have been merged into one singular lot measuring acres The majority of the lot is in two zones, with most in the industrial zone, with the northeast corner in the R residential zone 97.5% of the property is impervious, including a building, paved driveway and parking in the front of the building, and a stone parking lot to the rear of the property The permitted impervious coverage is 60% There are three areas not considered impervious One of the areas, located to the west of the building, is an area where the applicant proposes to stone for staging and vehicle storage The northwest corner of the property has trees and lawn is proposed to remain The third area, located in the southwest corner, had grass and trees growing on it, but has been paved over the property owner to the south. The adjacent property owner has encroached onto Coparts property. Chairman Dietz asked what materials are being stored in the paved area that was done without Coparts knowledge. Mr. Heibell did not know. Mr. Perlman added that the property owner adjacent to the Coparts facility is Kline s Metals and they have been notified by the township zoning department that Kline s has illegally expanded their non-confirming use. Mr. Lovell asked that the applicant must restore the property regardless of any issues before this board or not. Mr. Leibling said the applicant would assert it s ownership over the property being used by the adjacent land owner. Mr. Wetter asked if the 97.5% impervious coverage is included in the impervious coverage calculation. Mr. Heibell said that it was not, but if included in the impervious coverage, it would be higher. Mr. Heibell said that an area on the property where the 3

4 septic area is currently located is where the existing septic system is located. The applicant proposes to remove the stone around the septic system and restore that as a pervious surface Chairman asked if the property is serviced by sewers. Mr. Heibell said no, they are at the edge of Manville Township. Mr. Heibell added that a recent development, Plaza Grande, will be extending sewers down Camplain Road to serve the new development. Once those sewers were turned over to the HTMUA, the applicant would tie into the sewer system. Mr. Wetter asked if the present septic system is functioning. Mr. Heibell said it wasn t functional and added that the applicant gets the septic tank pumped out frequently. Chairman Dietz asked how long might it take for Plaza Grande to out in sewers and get turned over to the HTMUA. Mr. White said it might take a coupe of years. Chairman Dietz commented that s a long time to wait and asked Mr. Heibell what can be done in the mean time. Mr. Heibell responded that the existing septic would need to be examined and there is a possibility that it can be mitigated. Mr. Wetter asked how long has the condition existed. Mr. Heibell replied that about as long as the applicant has owned the property. Mr. Heibell answered that the applicant has been pumping out the septic tank waiting for the sewers to be extended along Camplain Road. Chairman Dietz asked if a holding tank would be sufficient. Mr. White said he didn t know. Mr. Heibell said that the septic tank is serving as a holding tank given the frequency of when it is pumped. Mr. Heibell continued with his direct testimony. The other remaining green area is to the east and the applicant proposes to remove the stone and remove over 3000 square feet of impervious. A total of 7,670 square feet of impervious is proposed to be removed, while a total of 7,120 square feet of impervious is proposed to be added The net reduction of impervious coverage is 570 square feet. Drainage calculations were submitted to the board engineer, and the storm runoff from the proposal had increased The amended impervious coverage Chairman Dietz asked why the area to the west of the building has to be stoned. Mr. Heibell said the proposal is to increase the vehicle storage area, which is about and acre and a half, and was not part of the original use variance given to Coparts. The location where the applicant is proposing to use already has a paved driveway to a house that used to exist on the property. The applicant is also proposing a staging area where vehicles are dropped off and picked up. The applicant also asks the board to use part of the property that was once Epps avenue to use as vehicle storage. Chairman Dietz asked how oil and spillings from the cars from getting into the river. Mr. Heibell said the applicant will address that. Chairman Dietz asked if there will be a fence and landscaping to block the view from adjoining properties. Mr. Heibell said that there are 20 white pines proposed along Camplain Road. Chairman Dietz said that the proposed screening is not sufficient. Mr. Heibell said that the existing driveway is used by the employees, and will remain, and a new access way will be placed on the western portion of the property with a 30 foot gate onto Camplain Road so that trucks and trailers can come in to the staging area, or go straight into the back of the facility. There are no lights on the facility. Coparts uses only the first floor of the building. The applicant is agreeable to installing lights on the facility as per the board engineer. The applicant will agree to contribute to the sidewalk fund for sidewalks, and the applicant is agreeable. Mr. Wetter asked why the applicant wants to retain the driveway to the old house. Mr. Lovell recommended that the applicant lay down gravel for the whole area and clean it up. There is no curbing in front of the building and the applicant is willing to place wheels-tops in front of the parking spots. Chairman Dietz asked if the applicant is bi-furcating the application. Mr. Heibell said no. Mr. Heibell said that the applicant purchased the property in its current conditions, and these improvements upgrade the property. Chairman Dietz said that the board does not know if a use 4

5 variance has ever been granted to the applicant. Mr. Leibling referred to the report prepared by Mr. Perlman that Coparts received a zoning permit. Mr. Perlman said that the auto recycling activity went back on the property as far back as The property was then owned by Vinnie Auto Salvage Body, Inc. and received a use variance for the single lot labeled Block lot 1. Vinnie s Auto Salvage received a use variance for the expansion of the use to include Block 65, lot 21, and Block 72, lot 1. The property was then sold to Coparts. Chairman Dietz asked if any resolution says what the impervious coverage is. Mr. Perlman said he did not know. Mr. Anderson said it is the applicant s responsibility to provide evidence of history of the property. Mr. Leibling said that the applicant is here for only an expansion of a non-conforming use as the applicant received a zoning permit for the balance of the property. Chairman Dietz said that the board did not approve 97.5% impervious coverage, and asked how that much impervious coverage got on the property. Mr. Leibling said that he didn t know, but it is an existing condition. Mr. Heibell said that the applicant will remove some stone and provide a grading plan to the board engineer. Mr. Wetter asked what is on the property. Mr. Heibell said that the applicant takes vehicles and places them in rows and pull out vehicles when they need them. Mr. Wetter asked if there is landscaping along the eastern boundary line along Manville. Mr. Heibell said that Coparts Open Public. The following member of the public had questions. Michael Sopko said that up to when Coparts purchased the property, it was dirt. Close Public Cheryl Hargrove, East Regional Manager of Coparts, appeared and was sworn. Have been East Regoinal Manager for 2 years Coparts has owned the property since May 2002 The prior owner, Vinnie s auto salvage, had tires and weeds on the property Vehicles were strewn everywhere on the property Coparts has cleaned up the property and every car is located in a row Mr. Wetter asked if Coparts conducted any improvements to the ground. Has it been paved or stoned. Ms. Hargrove does not know what improvements on the ground were made. Mr. Wetter said that the property appeared to have more dirt on the property. Chairman Dietz asked if Coparts brought in stone or millings since it was purchased from Vinnie s Autosalvage. Mr. Anderson asked if Ms. Hargrove has actually seen the site. Mr. Leibling said no, the pictures are from Coparts and have been told that these pictures are from the property. Mr. Sheridan asked if it is the testimony of the applicant that the property currently has road millings and stone on it. Ms. Hargrove answered yes. Ms. Hargrove continued her direct testimony. Provide a service to the insurance industry and charities Pick up cars and sell them at auction Seeking to expand the area to help in reducing the flow of Camplain Road The proposed gates will permit trucks to come onto the property and make a left into the staging area The current gate is in the front parking lot The proposed new entrance is further to the west and adjacent to the proposed Chairman Dietz asked if some of these cars are junk cars. Ms. Hargrove said that they are not junk cars. Chairman Dietz if any of the cars are old and dilapidated. Ms. Hargrove said yes. Chairman Dietz asked if nay of other leak oil or anti-freeze. Ms. Hargrove replied that any leakage would have occurred prior to Coparts obtaining them, but sometimes it does happen. Ms. Hargrove said that Coparts has a spill response program to respond to any leaks by any car. Mr. Wetter asked if there is a problem with the existing traffic flow now as employees are using the 5

6 same entrance as the trucks. Ms. Hargrove said not that she was aware of any problems. The new gates would improve traffic flow. Chairman Dietz asked how many vehicles can be accommodated on the property. Ms. Hargrove said 1,500 vehicles. The proposed new car storage won t result in a greater number of vehicles stored on the property. Chairman Dietz asked what the turn over rates is for cars parked on the property. Ms. Hargrove said for donated cars, about half sit on the lot for 2 weeks. Vehicles purchased from insurance companies are sold through salvage, and a car may sit there from 2 months to 4 years. Chairman Dietz asked what the average is. Ms. Hargrove guessed that the average is 90 days. Mr. Lovell asked why a car would sit there for 4 years. Ms. Hargrove said that the car might be in litigation. Chairman Dietz asked if a car sitting on the property for 4 years would leak any fluid. Ms. Hargrove replied that these vehicles come from a body shop where any fluids would have been removed. Mr. Lovell asked if DEP took any soil samples when the property was purchased. Ms. Hargrove did not know. Mr. Leibling said that the information requested by the Environmental Commission did not show any contamination on the site, except for the area around the septic bed. Ms. Hargrove commented that regarding the failed septic system, the applicant examined the possibility to hooking into the existing sewer system at the border of Manville, but was told that a development was being built across the street from the applicant s property that would extend sewers. The applicant would then not have to connect to the sewers twice. Chairman Dietz suggested that the applicant visit the health department to discuss the issue. Mr. Wetter asked how many employees are on the property. Ms. Hargrove said 13 employees. Mr. Sheridan asked if the applicant is proposing to increase the number of vehicles on the property. No. Mr. Sheridan asked they need more storage area. Ms. Hargrove said that to rearrange the vehicles and space them out more. Mr. Sheridan asked how many trucks come and go on the site. Ms. Hargrove replied that on weekdays, about 8-10 of trucks of different sizes come and go from the site. Some trucks carry only 2 cars, and some 8 cars. Chairman Dietz if any car carriers visit the site. Ms. Hargrove said occassionally, maybe one every other day, but most are trucks that carry only 2 to 4 cars. Ms. Hargrove said about 100 cars a week load and unload on the property. Chairman Dietz asked if the applicant has a traffic expert. Mr. Leibling said that the applicant is not proposing any increase in the number of vehicles on the property and thus did not hire a traffic expert. Chairman Dietz countered that the applicant is proposing to move the entrance to the facility and thus altering traffic flow. Chairman Dietz stated that the applicant should hire a traffic expert to show adequate ingress and egress. Mr. Anderson commented that the applicant is seeking site plan approval. Mr. Leibling agreed that the applicant will hire a traffic expert. Ms. Hargrove continued with her direct testimony. Coparts employees 13 people There may be 3 to 4 additional visitors throughout the day The visitors enter through the eastern gate. Coparts do not sell cars to the public on the property Cars are sold on-line 26 parking spaces are on the plan 1 st floor of the building is sued for an office Business hours are from Monday to Friday, 8am to 5pm Occasionally drivers show up late, around 6pm Mr. Lovell asked if any of these cars are junked for scrap metal. No. Chairman Dietz commented that there is no landscaping along the property line with the homes in Manville and stated that the residents are looking at an 8 foot high fence. Chairman Dietz asked what the applicant will do to mitigate this view. Ms. Hargove said that they did not add that fence, and 6

7 was there when it was purchased by Coparts. Mr. Lovell asked if the applicant added the fence along the front of the property. Ms. Hargrove said yes. Chairman Dietz asked if the wall is on the applicant s property. Mr. Heibell commented that the existing concrete wall is 16 inches off Copart s property line. Mr. Heibell did not know how high the wall is, but in some places, it is 8 feet high. Mr. Sheridan asked what the condition is of the wall. Ms. Hargrove replied that the wall is in decent condition. Ms. Hargrove commented that there is also a fence inside of the property that is not in use. It was an electric fence that is no longer operational. Mr. Sheridan asked if the concrete wall is included in the impervious coverage calculation. Mr. Heibell said it was. Mr. Sheridan suggested that eliminating the concrete wall would reduce the impervious coverage of the lot. Chairman Dietz asked if there are any houses abutting the easterly property line. Mr. Heibell replied yes. Chairman asked the applicant to remove the wall and place a nice fence and landscape the area. Ms. Hargrove agreed. Mr. Lovell commented that new stone should be placed in the proposed storage and staging area. The applicant agreed. Chairman Dietz asked Mr. White if the entrance to the facility would be safer if located across from another street. Mr. White replied that usually streets are placed opposite each other but driveways are different. Chairman Dietz asked the applicant to consider moving the driveway directly across from Concord Avenue. Mr. Leibling replied that the initial plan did show the driveway directly across from Concord, but the owners of Plaza Grande expressed a concern about the proposed driveway location. The applicant has since amended the location of the driveway as currently shown. Chairman Dietz asked if the applicant operates late at night or very early in the morning. Ms. Hargrove said no. Open Public. No members of the public had questions. Close Public Chairman Dietz asked that Michael Sopko come before the board and be sworn. Michael Sopko, a member of the public, appeared and was sworn. Testimony and discussion included; Before Coparts purchased the property, he was a patron of Vinnie s Autobody The area behind the building was all dirt. There was no stone or pavement. There were weeds along the edges. The area that was stoned includes an area from behind the building all the way to the northern property line and from the easterly property line to the other property line. The cars were not haphazardly placed on the property, but arranged in rows Mr. Wetter asked if Mr. Sopko observed any installation of stone or gravel on the property. Mr. Sopko did observe Coparts bringing in millings or stone onto the property soon after they purchased of the property. Mr. Sopko said that the business operates late into the evening and into the weekends. Mr. Sopko said that Coparts let s trucks in to unload and load cars. Mr. Sopko said that trucks idle along the side of the road waiting for the gates to open. The trucks leave tire marks along the front of his property and no grass can grow on the property. Mr. Leibling asked how far to the west the stoned area extended. Mr. Sopko said a house existed at one point and there was dirt behind the property. The dirt extended from old Epps Avenue to the Manville border. Mr. Leibling asked what the frequency of the after-hours traffic occurring on the property. Mr. Sopko said there Coparts was operating on weekends and trucks idle overnight as well as pickups that carry flatbeds with cars. This happens once or twice a week. Chairman Dietz asked where they are parked. Mr. Sopko said they are parked along Camplain Road between the fence and the road. Mr. Anderson asked Mr. Sopko what was present on the property west of Epps Road. Mr. Sopko said there were homes on Coparts property west of Epps Road. Mr. Sopko said that within two years of Coparts purchasing the property, they removed the homes. Chairman Dietz asked if Mr. 7

8 Perlman could check to see if Coparts got demolition permits for the homes. Mr. Perlman said that he could not find demolition permits for the homes. Chairman Dietz asked who would be available from Coparts would know what took place on the property. Ms. Hargrove said a manager named Mr. Carson who would be familiar with the property. Chairman Dietz said that he wants that gentleman to attend the next meeting. Mr. Perlman said the next available meeting is December 5 th. Mr. Leibling stated that the applicant would grant an extension of time through December 5 th. Chairman Dietz announced that no further public notice will be required. OMNIPOINT COMMUNICATIONS BA Block , Lot 1, Robin Road. Preliminary & Final major site plan with variances to install antennas on new pole within footprint of existing electric transmission tower. Exhibits: A-1 Coverage area map A-2 Memo from Access Property Management confirming the use of visitor parking for maintenance vehicles Mr. James Pryor, the attorney for the applicant, appeared. Introduction and discussion included the following; Use variance and site plan approval for a new telecom facility to be placed within the footprint of an existing transmission tower as well as new equipment cabinets be placed at the base with new fencing The Board previously approved Sprint Spectrum telecommunication facility at that location Gary Alcon, radio frequency engineer for the applicant, appeared and was sworn. Testimony and discussion included the following; Prepared radio frequency report and testified to its accuracy and validity The proposed site will provide coverage north to Valley Road, east to Route 206, and south to Route 206 at Amwell Road The site will cover residential and commercial areas of Triangle Road and Route 206 Will function similar to the Sprint site already present on the site Open Public: No members of the public had questions. Close public Teresa Begley, zoning consultant to the applicant, Omnipoint has a master agreement with PSE&G The applicant has authorization to go on the proposed site Open Public: No members of the public had questions. Close Public Joseph Chiaravallo, engineer for the applicant, Performed and submitted a report for RF compliance with the FCC and testified to its accuracy and validity Facility will be in full compliance with all standards from FCC and the State of New Jersey respect to radio frequency emissions 8

9 Open Public: No members of the public had questions. Close public Frank Pazden, Site engineer for the applicant, appeared and was sworn. Testimony and discussion included the following; A compound will be enclosed by a fence similar to tone present for Sprint Spectrum The applicant will place a wood fence 8 feet in height. The applicant will be utilizing the access off of Robin Road and have permission from the property owner for that access Maintenance vehicles will be parked on Robin Road and there are several spaces for visitor use. Walkways will go from the edge of the compound to the edge of the mowed area in order to provide a clear pathway. Pathway will be maintained. Facility will be in compliance with all regulations regarding noise No lighting is proposed The storm-water impact is minimal and maintaining all existing grades. The only impervious coverage will be the concrete slab in the compound Open Public: No members of the public had questions. Close public Mr. Pryor related to the Board that the BPU has new requirements that severely regulate the vegetation that can be planted in and around electric-transmission towers and the applicant cannot plant any vegetation that exceeds 18 inches in height. Mr. Nevill, the planner for the applicant, appeared and was sworn. Testimony and discussion included the following; D1 use variance for the installation of antennas on the transmission tower in a residential zone D6 Height variance exceeds the permitted height of 35 feet. The height of the existing tower is 151 and the height of the antennas are feet The positive criteria is granting the use variance relates to the granting of the FCC license The site is particularly suited for the site The coverage provided by the location of the facility will fill a gap in Omnipoint s coverage area There are no negative impacts associated with this application as the proposal is to go on an existing tower The visual impact of the proposed facility is deminimous given that the towers are already there Open Public: No members of the public had questions. Close Public Mr. Wetter made a motion to approve the application, seconded by Mr. Kennedy ROLL CALL: Mr. Kennedy yes Mr. Valcheck yes Mr. Sheridan yes Mr. Quick yes Mr. Lovell yes Vice-Chairman Wetter yes Chairman Dietz yes 9

10 ACCEPTANCE OF RESOLUTIONS CVS Pharmacy & Retail Mr. Quick made a motion to approve the resolution, seconded by Mr. Lovell ROLL CALL: Mr. Valcheck yes Mr. Quick yes Chairman Dietz yes ACCEPTANCE OF MINUTES April 4, 2007 Mr. Lovell said he was not present and asked to amend the minutes. Mr. Sheridan made a motion to approve the April 4 th minutes as amended, seconded by Mr. Valcheck. All in favor April 18, 2007 Mr. Wetter made a motion to approve the April 18 th minutes as amended, seconded by Mr. Lovell. All in favor May 2, 2007 Mr. Wetter was not in attendance that meeting. Mr. Lovell made a motion to approve the May 2 th minutes as amended, seconded by Mr. Sheridan. All in favor May 16, 2007 Mr. Lovell made a motion to approve the May 16 th minutes, seconded by Mr. Valcheck. All in favor May 17, 2006 Mr. Wetter made a motion to approve the May 17 th minutes, seconded by Mr. Kennedy. All in favor June 6, 2007 Mr. Wetter made a motion to approve the June 6 th minutes, seconded by Mr. Valcheck. All in favor June 21, 2007 Mr. Lovell made a motion to approve the June 21 st minutes, seconded by Mr. Lovell. All in favor July 6, 2007 Mr. Lovell made a motion to approve the July 26 th minutes, seconded by Mr. Valcheck. All in favor July 25, 2007 Mr. Lovell made a motion to approve the July 25 th, 2007, seconded by Mr. Valecheck. All voted in favor. Mr. Quick obstained from voting on portions of the minutes where he was not in attendance. ADJOURNMENT- 11:00 P.M. Submitted by, Jeffrey Perlman 10