WALL TOWNSHIP PLANNING BOARD

MINUTES - REGULAR MEETING

MUNICIPAL MEETING ROOM

FEBRUARY 24, 2003

Chairman Braun called to order the regular meeting of the Wall Township Planning Board at 7:30 P.M. Members present were Braun, Tobia, Thomson, Brosnan, Morris, Luttman, Farrell, Wilson, Rible, Kiley, Giardina, Attorney Rubino, Attorney Hirsch, Engineer Gerken, Planner Bergailo, Engineer Mallon, Planning Board Secretary Lang, Recording Secretary Betty Schinestuhl and Court Reporter Arnone.

Chairman Braun announced the meeting was being held in accordance with the “Sunshine Law” and a resolution adopted on January 13, 2003.

SALUTE TO THE FLAG

Chairman Braun said the Abrecht application has been withdrawn. Attorney Rubino said this afternoon the applicant withdrew the application. The proposed ordinance would make a car wash a conditional use in that area. They would not meet the requirements.

Chairman Braun read a resolution honoring Joseph Giardina. Mr. Giardina retired the end of last year. Chairman Braun presented Mr. Giardina with the resolution.

Mr. Tobia made a motion to adopt the resolution. Deputy Mayor Thomson seconded the motion and all members voted yes.

Chairman Braun said in addition to the resolution the Board will try to name a street after Mr. Giardina.

Chairman Braun said we are also very honored tonight to have Assemblyman Sean Kean with us. Assemblyman Kean also has a resolution to present to Mr. Giardina. Assemblyman Kean said Mr. Giardina was his mentor on the Board. Assemblyman Kean read the resolution from the New Jersey Senate and General Assembly and presented it to Mr. Giardina. Mr. Giardina thanked the Board and Assemblyman Kean.

Attorney Rubino stepped down on the SDI application. Attorney Hirsch filled in.

CARRIED APPLICATIONS

SDI, L.L.C. – PB#25-2002 – 1840 Old Mill Road, Block 88, Lot 2, HB-80 zone. Application complete: August 12, 2002. Site with variances.

Rick Brodsky, Esq. appeared for the applicant.

Entered into evidence:

February 24, 2003 Page 2

A-21 Certification of revised plans from Freehold Soil Conservation District dated January 28, 2003

A-22 Letter to John Bonello, Esq. from Rick Brodsky, Esq. requesting the purchase of property dated January 29, 2003

A-23 Follow up letter to John Bonello, Esq. from Rick Brodsky, Esq. dated February 4, 2003 requesting the purchase of property

A-24 Letter to John Bonello, Esq. from Rick Brodsky, Esq. dated February 10, 2003 attempting to purchase property

A-25 Stormwater Management report last revised February 2003 prepared by Bohler Engineering

A-26 Freehold Soil Certification letter dated January 28, 2003 prepared by Inez M. Grimm

A-27 Letter to Rick Brodsky, Esq. from John L. Bonello, Esq. dated February 11, 2003 explaining Mr. Rezis’ attempt in obtaining an appraisal

A-28 Letter to John L. Bonello, Esq. from Rick Brodsky, Esq. dated February 14, 2003 inquiring as to Mr. Rezis’ willingness to sell property

A-29 Letter to John L. Bonello, Esq. from Rick Brodsky, Esq. dated February 19, 2003 responding to Mr. Bonello’s letter of February 11, 2003

A-30 Letter to John L. Bonello, Esq. from Rick Brodsky, Esq. dated February 21, 2003 trying to determine fair market value

A-31 Preliminary and Final Site Plan prepared by Bohler Engineering last revised February 2003

A-32 Appraisal of property dated February 11, 2003 prepared by Michael White, MAI

A-33 Letter to Rick Brodsky, Esq. from John L. Bonello, Esq. dated February 24, 2003 stating they never received SDI’s appraisal

PB-10 Fire Prevention letter dated January 28, 2003

PB-11 Review letter from John Mallon dated February 21, 2003

Attorney Brodsky stated he has a copy of the agreement for the purchase of Block 88, Lot 1. He would like it marked into evidence.

Entered into evidence:

A-34 Agreement for purchase of Block 88, Lot 1 (unsigned)

Attorney Bonello said the applicant has agreed to purchase the property. The only thing left is setting a formula which would give a price.

Entered into Evidence:

A-35 Applicants appraisal prepared by Robert Gagliano dated January 27, 2003

Attorney Brodsky stated the only other thing he had to present to the Board is for the project engineer to go over some concerns. The applicant agrees to everything in the engineer’s review letter.

Chairman Braun has some concerns with the acquisition of block 88, lot 1. The Board would like those lots merged. He also asked what improvements the applicant is offering. Attorney Brodsky

February 24, 2003 Page 3

said there are no changes in the plans.

Chairman Braun asked about curbing, grades and drainage. He asked if Attorney Brodsky can address those issues with the Board engineer. Attorney Brodsky said yes. He also said the applicant will provide for remedies if the acquisition of block 88, lot 1 defaults.

Attorney Hirsch stated if for any reason the owner of the lot fails to comply with the agreement the applicant would still have their approval without the purchase of the lot. The Board would like the bank to merge the two lots. They can do something with that property but they cannot use it as a separate lot.

Attorney Brodsky said the applicant has concerns regarding title and environmental issues. Attorney Hirsch said if the seller fails to meet those concerns you will still have your approval. Attorney Brodsky said that is acceptable. Deputy Mayor Thomson said if the bank purchases the lot the two lots must be combined.

The application was open to the public.

Dr. Farrell asked if the plans were corrected regarding lot numbers. Mr. Spalt said the plans have been revised.

Dr. Farrell asked about the construction on Old Mill Road. Mr. Spalt said the applicant will be resurfacing the entire frontage.

The application was closed to the public.

Mr. Tobia moved to approve the application for Site Plan subject to the payment of taxes and applicable assessments. The applicant will comply with the requirements of Freehold Soil Conservation District and Monmouth County Planning Board. The applicant will obtain approval from NJDOT. The applicant will comply with Wall Township Affordable Housing Trust Fund and ADA requirements. The applicant will obtain a tree removal permit. The applicant shall schedule a pre-construction meeting with Wall Township Police Department. The applicant shall comply with review letters of the Board professionals. The applicant shall comply with review letters from Monmouth County Board of Health, Wall Township Board of Fire Prevention, Wall Township Police Department, Wall Township Environmental Advisory Committee and Freehold Soil Conservation District. No waivers have been requested. Variances are granted. Applicant must install a Knox Box system. Landscaping shall be enhanced along Old Mill Road subject to Board Planner and Engineer review. A “No Left Turn” shall be installed at Highway 35 exit and right turn arrow shall be installed on pavement. Applicant shall submit application for Subtitle 1 of Title 39. Applicant shall schedule a meeting with Police Department prior to C.O. regarding operation of bank. All lot lines and numbers shall be corrected. Applicant shall merge both lots. Applicant shall curb along frontage. Deputy Mayor Thomson seconded the motion which was unanimously approved by a roll call vote. (Messrs. Tobia, Thomson, Brosnan, Farrell, Luttman, Morris, Rible, Ms. Wilson and Mr. Braun voted yes.)

Ms. Wilson stepped down on the Spielman application.

February 24, 2003 Page 4

Attorney Rubino returned to the meeting.

Attorney Rubino said Ms. Wilson contacted him after the first hearing, when she got back to her office she realized Mr. Wolfe is representing a former client in a legal action against her firm.

MARTIN SPIELMAN AND BERNICE SPIELMAN - PB#32-2002 – 4010 Herbertsville Road, Block 974, Lot 5, CR-40 zone. Application complete: September 11, 2002. Carried from December 2, 2002. Site with variances.

Entered into evidence:

PB-10 Review letter from Glenn Gerken, Schoor DePalma, dated February 18, 2003

PB-11 Review letter from Cheryl Bergailo, Schoor DePalma, dated February 20, 2003

A-11 Monmouth County Planning Board letter dated December 9, 2002 granting final approval

A-12 Freehold Soil Conservation Certification letter dated January 15, 2003

A-13 Revised and Preliminary site plan dated December 2002

A-14 LOI

A-15 Brochure of sheds

Attorney DiCicco appeared for the applicant.

Attorney DiCicco stated suggestions were made by the Board and the Board professionals. We have revised the plans hopefully making it a better application.

Chairman Braun said there were two issues, one was the climbing wall and the other was the architectures of the buildings.

Mr. Spielman said they are in the process of moving the wall, due to the weather it is taking longer. Most of the boards have been moved and as soon as the weather breaks we will move the rest. It will be 105’ from the property line. Additional buffering is being added to protect the view.

Mr. Spielman explained he is planning on adding several barns. They will be purchased from Lantz Structures. It is an A-frame barn. There will be windows and doors. It will be used for the campers to change before and after swimming. These buildings are located on the site plan. They are located behind the theater and gym. When the tents wear out we will replace them with the barns. The barns will be 36’ X 14’.

Mr. Spielman said the bike storage shed will be replaced. It will be replaced by a barn shaped roof shed. It will have an overhead door and be 24’ X 14’.

Mr. Spielman explained the extra bunk space will be used to house campers. They sleep there for two weeks. He said he has no intention of increasing the day campers but the amount of overnighters will be increased. Anyone who stays overnight has to be a day camper.

Mr. Tobia asked about the loading zone. Mr. Spielman said a loading zone is not proposed. It is

February 24, 2003 Page 5

not needed. He said they get deliveries two to three times per week for food. The tractor trailer comes between 6:00 – 7:30 A.M. They unload along the side where the dining room is located.

Mr. Tobia asked if there was any reason why a loading zone could not be provided. Mr. Spielman said we would have to give up some parking spaces. He said the deliveries are before anyone arrives. Chairman Braun said if you can’t provide a loading space could you put up “No Parking Between 6:00 A.M. and 8:00 A.M.” Mr. Spielman agreed to that.

Committeeman Brosnan asked what the length of time a delivery takes is. Mr. Spielman said between 45 minutes and an hour.

Captain Morris asked Mr. Spielman to explain the parking situation. He asked if there was any place to bank some spaces. Mr. Spielman said there are approximately 55 spaces in front. The gravel portion holds approximately 125 spaces. Mr. Spielman explained there are no parking spaces in front of the dining room. That space is used for the trucks to deliver food. Deputy Mayor Thomson suggested putting a sign “Loading Zone – No Parking”. Mr. Spielman agreed.

Captain Morris asked if the rear parking lot could be expanded. Mr. Spielman said there is no need for that we have adequate parking now.

Peter Strong, Engineer, gave his credentials which were accepted by the Board.

Attorney Rubino asked if there was anything the applicant could not comply with in the Engineer’s letter. Mr. Strong said we will comply with everything.

The application was open and closed to the public.

Mr. Tobia moved to approve the application for site plan subject to payment of taxes and applicable assessments. The applicant shall comply with the review letters of the Board Professionals. The applicant will comply with the requirements of Freehold Soil Conservation District, Monmouth County Planning Board, and Monmouth County Board of Health. The applicant will obtain approval from NJDEP and NJDOT. The applicant will comply with Wall Township Affordable Housing Trust Fund and ADA requirements. The applicant will obtain a tree removal permit. The applicant will comply with review letters from Wall Township Police Department, Wall Township Bureau of Fire Prevention, Monmouth County Board of Health, Freehold Soil Conservation and Wall Township Environmental Advisory Committee. Waivers will be granted except architectural plans shall be submitted to Board Engineer for approval. Variances are granted. The applicant shall submit an application for Title 1 of Subtitle 39. The applicant shall schedule a pre-construction meeting with Wall Township Police Department. Residential buffering shall be enhanced with evergreens subject to Board Planner approval. Climbing wall shall be relocated prior to issuance of Building Permit. All structures shall comply with Building Code. Signage shall be prepared for declaration of a loading zone with No Parking signs in front of building.

Attorney Rubino said all architectures were submitted. There will be no variance needed.

Mr. Farrell seconded the motion which was unanimously approved by a roll call vote. (Messrs. Tobia, Farrell, Brosnan, Kiley, Luttman, Morris, Rible, Thomson and Braun voted yes.)

February 24, 2003 Page 6

The Board recessed at 8:35 P.M.

The meeting resumed at 8:50 P.M.

CHRISTOPHER STEPHEN ENTERPRISES – PB#23-2001 – Highway 34 & Holly Boulevard, Block 845, Lot 31, OP-10 zone. Application complete: June 5, 2001, amended March 11, 2002. Carried from August 27, 2001, February 25, 2002, March 11, 2002, April 29, 2002, September 9, 2002, November 25, 2002 and January 27, 2003. Site plan.

John Giunco, Esq. appeared for the applicant.

Chairman Braun said the Board will hear this application for about 50 minutes and it will be carried to next Monday, March 3, 2003.

Attorney Giunco said the name is being changed to River Edge Commons.

Entered into evidence:

A-44 Letter from Monmouth County Planning Board

A-45 Traffic report prepared by McDonough & Rea dated December 2002

A-46 Noise report dated February 7, 2003

PB-25

PB-26 Review letter from Nicholas Verderese, Schoor DePalma, dated January 20, 2003

Attorney Giunco said he received a letter from Mr. Thomas Kelly dated February 20, 2003 asking about noise. Attorney Giunco responded to him February 21, 2003 providing a copy of the noise report. Attorney Rubino said he had a meeting with Mr. Kelly. A list of mechanical equipment will be submitted to Mr. Gerken’s office. Mr. Gerken has a noise expert on staff. They will review that list.

Sworn by Reporter Arnone: Jennifer Beahm, Planner

John Rea, Traffic Engineer

Cheryl Bergailo, Planner

Kenneth Wondrack

Ms. Beahm gave her credentials which were accepted by the Board.

Attorney Giunco asked Ms. Beahm if she has reviewed the Township Ordinances and Master Plan. Ms. Beahm said yes.

Ms. Beahm explained a variance is needed for lot depth. The lot depth proposed is 400’ where 500’ is required. Ms. Beahm said the lot was created in 1989. At that time the lot conformed to zoning requirements. It was approved for commercial use. Nothing was ever built on the lot. Residential lots were developed adjacent to this property. Ms. Beahm explained to the west the lots are fully developed, to the east is Route 34 and there is a zone boundary along the property line. There is no property in the area to be purchased to increase the depth of the lot.

February 24, 2003 Page 7

Ms. Beahm explained a 100’ front yard setback and a 75’ rear setback are required. The application proposed meets both those requirements. Ms. Beahm said there is also a 75’ buffer from the residents being proposed. Ms. Beahm said the pre-existing lot subdivision was approved in 1989 before the new ordinance requiring 500’ lot width. There is no property to be acquired. It is a hardship.

Ms. Beahm said there is no detriment or negative criteria.

Chairman Braun said if this property were 100’ wider it could be built the way it is. This plan meets everything except lot depth. Ms. Beahm agreed.

Chairman Braun asked if the applicant withdrew the request for a sign variance. Attorney Giunco said they would like to withdraw the request for a sign variance. They will conform to the ordinance.

Chairman Braun asked if the planner addressed the retaining wall in the buffer. Ms. Beahm said Mr. McCarthy will address that.

Attorney Mancuso asked if Mr. McCarthy will be brought back. Attorney Giunco said yes.

John Rea, traffic engineer, gave his credentials which were accepted by the Board. Chairman Braun said the Board’s expert will be here Monday, March 3, 2003. The objectors will also have a traffic expert.

Mr. Rea said he has reviewed the revised plans. Mr. Rea said he has performed a traffic study of Route 34 and Paynters Road, Route 34 and Holly Boulevard, Paynters Road and Ramshorn Drive and Route 34 and Lakewood Road. The study was done over a period of several weeks on different days.

Mr. Rea explained levels of service run from A – F depending on how long drivers wait to clear the intersection. A is the highest and F is the lowest. He studied pre and post development. Paynters Road and Ramshorn Drive, peak hours are a level B which is acceptable. Route 34 and Holly Boulevard, only right turn, operate at a level B at both peak times. Route 34 and Lakewood Road operate at C for pre-development morning peak hours and D for pre-development P.M. hours. There will be no decrease in the level of service after development. Route 34 and Paynters Road thru movements are good. The overall intersection is graded B at mornings and afternoons. The biggest impact will be on the east point of Paynters Road at the traffic signal. That intersection has been the subject of most of the comments. December 30, 2002 was the latest study. There will not be a decrease in service. Because of the long traffic signal people that pull up to the traffic light on Paynters Road wait approximately 100 seconds. There is only 20 seconds of green time. The average is a level E, which is acceptable to DOT. DOT also accepts level F. The delay will be in the morning and afternoon peak hours and they will not change with this development. Mr. Rea explained the biggest impact will occur in the afternoon. Approximately 74 vehicles will want to turn north onto Route 34. They will use the left turn lane. The traffic operates on 120 second cycle. 30 cycles per hour. 2½ cars are being added per cycle. In the afternoon between 4:30 and 5:30 P.M. instead of being the third car in line you may be the 5^th or 6^th car. There is a 21 second green time on Paynters Road. Mr. Rea

February 24, 2003 Page 8

said in his opinion it will be a mistake not to have the Paynters Road access. Without the Paynters Road access drivers would have to take Route 34 north to the jug handle at Lakewood Road, which operates at a D level, or make a series of right turns through the neighborhood to reach Route 34 north. Mr. Rea explained the applicant will widen a long section of Paynters Road to allow for a two-lane approach to the traffic light. This application can be approved by the Planning Board and will not have a significant impact on Route 34 and Paynters Road.

Mr. Rea explained the original application was for 87,500 s.f. of office space. That would go to a level service of F. DOT has already issued a permit for the Route 34 driveway for the larger office building. An amended application showing the revisions to the plan has been submitted. He said he does not think there will be a problem with DOT approving the amended plans.

Mr. Rea said the Route 34 entrance will allow only for a right in and right out. It meets DOT standards.

Mr. Rea explained during A.M. traffic east bound is heavier than P.M. peak hours on Ramshorn Drive. Traffic wants to go north so the left turn onto Paynter’s Road is heavier. The traffic flow from the proposed building will go in the opposite direction.

Mr. Rea said he does not think there will be a problem with school buses in the morning peak hours. He said there is very little if any school bus traffic at that time and less during the afternoon.

Mr. Rea explained jug handles are very close to the intersection. You can only fit three to four cars at the jug handle. Cars have to stack. DOT won’t let the jug handle back onto the main road.

Mr. Rea explained DOT has jurisdiction on Route 34. When DOT reviews the site plan frontage on other the State can limit the number of cuts on a main highway and force the traffic to side streets. DOT can ask the applicant to have the access on the side streets.

Attorney Rubino stated if the Paynter’s Road access was shut down the DOT can force us to open it. Mr. Rea said it can happen.

Mr. Rea said he could not support having access on Holly Boulevard.

Captain Morris asked about level of service during the summer. Mr. Rea said most of the studies were done in the fall and some may have been done during the winter.

Captain Morris asked if the level of service would change in the summer. Mr. Rea said it will certainly change on weekends. The increase will occur on weekends. The office complex will be less busy then. He also said the summer traffic spreads out throughout the day.

Chairman Braun stated the Board will hear from our traffic expert on March 3, 2003.

Mr. Rea said he prepared the traffic study. He said he also follows standard. He said he has continued his education in traffic. He said he has lectured in certain colleges.

February 24, 2003 Page 9

Captain Morris asked if Mr. Rea studied Holly Boulevard. Mr. Rea said no because they are not going to send much traffic there.

Attorney Mancuso, representing objecting neighbors cross examined the traffic engineer.

Attorney Mancuso said the level of service going east on Paynters Road is an E. Mr. Rae said yes.

Attorney Mancuso said both pre and post development it remains an E. Mr. Rae said yes.

Attorney Mancuso said there are 320 parking stalls on site. He said the level of service will not be affected when the offices close at 5:00 P.M. Mr. Rea said in his opinion even though there are 320 parking spaces it does not mean they will all be filled. He said cars will leave at different hours. He said they will come and go all hours of the day.

Attorney Mancuso said the level of service on Paynters Road to Route 34 would change from a level E to F with 438 spaces. He said with the removal of 118 stalls we will be able to keep the level E. Mr. Rea said the east bound approach would go from E to F. There is a lot of green time on Route 34. They want to move traffic on a state highway.

Attorney Mancuso asked if Mr. Rea requested two entrances on Route 34. Mr. Rea said no the DOT would not approve that.

Attorney Mancuso said Chief Hall, in his letter of August 2001, recommended an acceleration and deceleration lane on Route 34. He asked Mr. Rea if those lanes were being provided. Mr. Rea said an acceleration lane is not proposed. He said he does not think the DOT would approve an acceleration lane.

Attorney Mancuso stated Chief Hall also recommended two entrances on Route 34. Mr. Rea said he does not believe he would get approval from DOT. Attorney Rubino said the DOT in the last 10 years has been very reluctant to give two entrances on Route 34.

Attorney Giunco said this application has been through the DOT process for the larger project and gotten approval. We expect approval for the reduced project.

Chairman Braun asked Mr. Rea to come back next Monday.

Robert McCarthy, Engineer, was previously sworn.

Attorney Giunco asked Mr. McCarthy to explain why a retaining wall in the buffer is being proposed. Mr. McCarthy said they are necessary because of the slope of the property. He said it is a cut and fill situation. He said the retaining walls are necessary because of the topography of the property and to preserve as many trees as possible. It will be located within the 75’ buffer along the westerly side of the property. He said they can be built out of the buffer but he did not think that was a better solution. If they are located outside the buffer the single walls would be between 12’ and 16’ in height. They would eliminate some of the landscaping. He said the proposed retaining walls are esthetically pleasing on both sides.

February 24, 2003 Page 10

Chairman Braun said the applicant has to prove the walls add to the esthetics. Attorney Rubino said if they can’t prove that they need a variance. Attorney Giunco said in his opinion this is better. Attorney Rubino asked if a variance is needed or not. Ms. Bergailo read her review letter regarding the retaining walls. Attorney Giunco said at the last hearing Mr. McCarthy gave testimony regarding the grade elevation. He said he was under the opinion that this was satisfied. Attorney Rubino said he feels more confident saying a variance is necessary. Chairman Braun said he was under the impression the retaining walls just had to be addressed. Attorney Rubino said you are not concerned about impacting the buffer. Chairman Braun said that is correct.

Mr. McCarthy said the topography from north to south and east to west varies. There is a drop of 25’ from east to west. He said retaining walls are necessary. He said they help the site and should be accepted as part of the buffer.

Mr. McCarthy explained they are no longer putting the sanitary sewer through the easement. Attorney Rubino said you are adding these walls so you no longer have to run drainage through the residential properties. Mr. McCarthy agreed. He said he believes the walls are part of the buffer. It also allows us to landscape both sides of the retaining wall.

Mr. McCarthy said the only thing he did not go over is the lighting. There will be 250 Watt and 450 Watt lighting. The poles will be 20’ high. The only wall lighting will be on the building entrances and exits. All lights have shields and point downward.

Mr. Tobia said you are going to plant additional evergreens around the retaining wall for additional screening. Mr. McCarthy said that is correct.

Ms. Wilson asked Mr. McCarthy to describe the retaining wall. Mr. McCarthy it will be a stone block wall. It will be concrete. It slightly slopes up and then another wall will be next to it. The wall will be tapered.

Attorney Mancuso asked if the basement under one of the buildings will be used just for storage. Mr. McCarthy said it will not be used for office. There will be some mechanicals.

Attorney Rubino said we make it a standard condition that the applicant must file a deed restriction regarding the use of the basement.

Attorney Mancuso said there are 320 parking spaces. There will be a maximum of 64 doctors. Attorney Rubino said Mr. McCarthy isn’t the right person to comment on that. That information usually comes from the property owner.

Attorney Mancuso asked about scheduled trash pick-up. Mr. McCarthy said there is no schedule yet.

Attorney Mancuso asked if the trash bins could be moved to another spot. Mr. McCarthy said they are in an excellent position for pick-up. They are surrounded on three sides by walls. They all have landscaping around them. Attorney Mancuso asked if it was possible to move them. Mr. McCarthy said anything is possible. Attorney Mancuso asked if they could be moved slightly closer to Route 34. Chairman Braun said he does not think that can be answered tonight. Mr.

February 24, 2003 Page 11

McCarthy said they are placed in the best place. They are as far to the east on the property as possible.

Chairman Braun said this application will be carried to March 3, 2003. Attorney Rubino said no further noticing is necessary.

REVIEW AND RECOMMEND:

A. Ordinance No. 6-2003 – Funeral Homes & Funeral Services

Ms. Bergailo said this ordinance adds funeral homes to the OP-10 zone.

Mr. Luttman moved to recommend to the Township Committee that Ordinance No. 6-2003 be adopted. Ms. Wilson seconded the motion, which was unanimously approved by a roll call vote. (Mr. Luttman, Ms. Wilson, Messrs. Thomson, Brosnan, Morris, Farrell, Kiley, Rible, Tobia and Braun voted yes.)

MINUTES TO BE APROVED

Deputy Mayor Thomson moved to approve the minutes of the Regular and Workshop Meetings of January 13, 2003, January 21, 2003 and January 27, 2003. Ms. Wilson seconded the motion, which was unanimously approved by a roll call vote.

There being no further business to come before the Board, a motion was made, seconded and unanimously approved to adjourn the meeting at 10:25 P.M.

Respectfully submitted,

Betty Schinestuhl

Recording Secretary