TOWN OF WILLINGTON
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
JUNE 5, 2001
A. ST. LOUIS CALLED A MEETING OF THE WILLINGTON PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION TO ORDER AT 7:33 P.M. JUNE 5, 2001 AT THE TOWN OFFICE BUILDING, 40 OLD FARMS ROAD, WILLINGTON.
PRESENT: ABSENT:
A. St. Louis, chairman B. Begansky
R. Tulis,vice-chairman D. Lytwynn, alt.
E. Kalbac,secretary
L. Dion
W. Goodale, alt.
S. Trueb, alt.
G. Jones, assistant zoning agent
L. Decker, recording clerk
The commission seated W. Goodale and S. Trueb for vacancies.
PUBLIC HEARING:
1. File #2001-24-Application for a special permit for a truck wash located at 327 Ruby Road (Truckstops of America) in a DC zone. Royce Property LLC owner/applicant. (Received on 03/20/01, hearing on 05/15/01, continued to 06/05/01, decision by 07/17/01).
S. Trueb and R. Tulis recused themselves from this file.
Attorney Franklin Pilicy spoke on behalf of the applicant.
F. Pilicy said this permit is for the truckwash itself. Other aspects of the facility are up and running. The original permit was approved 04/07/98. Someone had been contracted to do the truckwash but that contractor went out of business. A second operator was chosen and he was unable to meet some contingencies of the loan. A permit extension was later approved.
Valid special permits and building permits have been issued and they are seeking new approval of the same truckwash, because the buidling permit will expire in August and they do not want to run out of time.
There are only 2 minor changes from the original plan. There is a change in the shape of the floor drain system bay which will make it easier to clean regularly. There are also a couple very minor changes in the inside of the building.
F. Pilicy submitted several documents for the record including letters of DEP approval, letters from contractors who will be available for hauling waste, and a brochure describing the system, which has also been presented to the town engineer.
F. Pilicy said nothing really leaves the building and all the grit washed from trucks is captured inside. What is left is hauled away. He noted the septic system is already up and functioning.
F. Pilicy stated they were seeking only the ability to do food grade washouts of trucks. This is a standard practice in the industry and it is required by trucks that carry food. The DEP letters fully permit this. Truckers expect to see it as a component of truck washes. They are looking for a food grade wash only, and the original permit had restrictions relating to that.
George Giguerre of Royce Property reviewed the plans of the new drain. It is more of a trench-type than the box-type previously proposed. All water stays in the bays. It is graded so it goes into the pipe and recycling system for cleaning and is pumped through the hoses for washing the trucks. The last design was not cost-effective. Workers can actually climb into the drains and shovel out the grit, put it into wheelbarrows and carry it out to dumpsters for disposal by the waste company. This operator of this has 10-12 truck washes across the country. They prefer a forced air system for better circulation and that is one of the minor changes in the building.
The commission reviewed the file.
A. St. Louis asked about changes in the technical data from the original plan.
G. Giguerre said that is in the brochure which was given to the engineer and the DEP. Regarding the question on Karl’s memo, he had the wrong info.
He reviewed the new memo from Karl Acimovic dated 5/30, which he had not seen, and noted that in the cross-section of the plan, no liquid is held in the trench drain itself.
A. St. Louis asked if it was gravity flow.
G. Giguerre said it is pitched so no water stays in the drain. It is filtered in a processing room. He described how the system works, and said to answer item 1, the trench drains hold no water at all. For item 2, they are simply called “portable.” That is not what they are, as they stay there permanently. The reason for item 3 is they want to be able to take out with a shovel that which is filtered to it. It is better to have laborers clean it out than have to send heavy equipment in a deep pit to have it cleaned.
L. Dion said they want it more spread out.
G. Giguerre said that is correct. It is easier to shovel it out than suck it out, and that is why the pitch was changed.
W. Goodale asked where the waste would be stored.
G. Giguerre said it goes to the dumpster.
W. Goodale asked if the waste was contaminated.
G. Giguerre said No, it is basically sand and grit. Oils go into the oil separator, and 99.9% of what comes off the truck goes to the recycling system. Regarding item 4, there is no auto shutoff, but if the system stopped pumping it would just shut down. It can’t operate if the water is not coming through, because that is what cleans the vehicles. There is no water held; it is always going through the system.
W. Goodale said water would be needed for pressure.
G. Giguerre said there is a tank.
W. Goodale said it could jam up.
G. Giguerre said there is a system just like this in Southbury that has been operating successfully for 4-5 years.
A. St. Louis asked what was used to make up water that leaves with washed vehicles.
G. Giguerre said there is some evaporation and some water leaves with the trucks and you need something to make up the water back into the system. This system has better filtration ad results.
E. Kalbac asked if they would be washing engines and transmissions.
G. Giguerre said No, that is actually excluded in the state permit.
E. Kalbac asked if it was fully automated or manual.
G. Giguerre said it is manual, with about 4-6 people per bay. He described operation of the facility.
L. Dion asked about the food produce that would be washed out of the food trucks, and if it was mandated.
G. Giguerre said he believes it is mandated by the DOT and state Department of Health. His understanding is that food haulers cannot haul more than one load without the truck being washed out and they need a certificate recognizing that fact to show it was done.
L. Dion said the produce referred to usually refers to vegetables, but there is the possibility of meats being hauled. He asked if there were regulations governing the temperature of the water that must be used to make it a certified, qualified truck wash out.
G. Giguerre said the people who are going to operate this now have 10-12 facilities already up and running. They are the forerunner in the business. They have seen the system in operation and have no doubt this will meet the requirements. He is not sure precisely what the health officials expect, but the people doing this are sure it will work. He is not sure if they must have an actual written certificate.
A. St. Louis asked Mr. Giguerre is he would be giving the certificates.
G. Giguerre said that is what he expects, but maybe they are just expected to comply with the haulers.
F. Pilicy said this request is for food only. It is for open-bodied trucks. There will be no closed trailers.
L. Dion said one of the commission’s original concerns was that a garbage truck might pull in and want a washout.
G. Giguerre said he has never had anyone ask to have their garbage truck washed out.
The commission discussed the types of trucks that might go in for washes.
L. Dion said he thinks the commission would like to know what constitutes a properly rated facility to do this type of cleaning, and how the applicants can prove it will be done.
A. St. Louis said he knows the trucks must be inspected before their next load.
G. Giguerre said you really cannot hide the fact of whether a truck has been cleaned out or not. He will find out the inspection requirements, as these are very good questions.
The commission discussed some confusion over the posting of public notices for the hearing.
W. Goodale asked about waste from the produce.
G. Giguerre said the truckwash wants to maintain the system and they want clean stuff going through it. They may even turn down a truck if there would be too much waste for it to handle. It is incumbent upon the operators to protect their system.
A. St. Louis asked if they had a list of waivers they were asking for.
F. Pilicy the regulations ask for a septic permit, but there is no new system or well. Those are already up and running.
L. Dion asked where the dumpsters would be maintained.
The commission reviewed the plans and discussed waste products.
G. Giguerre said the system can take things up to 1.5” & actually separate it out.
A. St. Louis said waste can be fat, suet and blood.
W. Goodale asked how often it would be cleaned out.
G. Giguerre said he is not sure. 99% of the stuff gets sucked up and they are expecting some sand. Wood getting into the sump is the thing they worry about most.
A. St. Louis asked Mr. Giguerre if he would answer questions 1-4 in writing.
G. Giguerre said absolutely.
K. Acimovic said he thinks the narrative can still be done as well. The previous plans had a narrative to explain how they bring the trucks in and how they operate the system. It would be good to have that again.
E. Kalbac asked about the fact the drains were actually started already but not finished.
G. Giguerre said they had a building permit and the guy doing the project was going to run it. He started his contractors in there for excavation before the loan problems.
A. St. Louis asked if there were any questions from the public.
R. Tulis said one problem he sees is that there are to many “I don’t know” answers. Also, if the sump pump clogs, and it can’t drain, what provisions are there so the bays will not fill up before someone realizes the sump is not working?
Regarding the washout of food, he is troubled by this, because he is a neighbor to the facility, and it is the same stream of water that washes out every food truck. How is it sanitized?
G. Giguerre said it goes through the recycling system.
R. Tulis said bacteria loves this stuff. If you wash it out, there is a lot of biodegradable waste. How often will the dumpster be emptied so he does not get the smell at his house every time the wind blows? If someone wants the inside bay washed and there is a lot of debris, what provisions are there?
G. Giguerre said he did not want to answer that because he does not want to talk about stuff he does not know about. This system has been reviewed by DEP and they are sure it will do what it is supposed to do. He does not know the engineering intricacies, but the state has gone through this and they are the presiding authority. The only condition the IWWC had was that the state approved this. If this commission is the engineering authority for the town of Willington then he should have done something differently. He did not realize the purpose of this was to answer these technical questions.
R. Tulis said as a neighbor of the facility, he is concerned with odors. There are odors already.
R. Tulis asked if the DEP needed to issue a certificate regarding the additional water use.
A. St. Louis read from the approval letters.
F. Pilicy said no wastewater is anticipated.
R. Tulis said none “anticipated” does not mean there will not be any.
A. St. Louis said the commission just tonight received a brochure on the workings of the facility.
K. Acimovic said the brochure concentrates on the system itself. It does not answer questions of foodstuffs waste. He suggested a meeting with the engineers to answer those questions.
G. Giguerre said from the applicant standpoint, most efforts were put into getting the DEP approvals, and the IWWC also approved it. He did not think the town was looking for engineering expertise and thought the town would agree with the state’s opinion.
K. Acimovic said he agreed with that.
A. St. Louis read info from the DEP letters on file.
G. Giguerre said there is a system in the state that is just like this that has been in operation for 4-5 years. It is hard to take that evidence and just throw it out the window. With the state approval as well, this seems like a burden he should not be facing.
W. Goodale said he is concerned with the sludge removal. Maybe people from the plants that are up and running could have helped provide information. At the original hearing, and engineer flew in from Florida to explain all these types of questions about the other system. Maybe that would have helped.
A. St. Louis said the DEP letter holds this to be equal to the Universal system from before.
F. Pilicy said the DEP will also provide input after construction. There is no option to escape that, and all must be done within the DEP plan.
R. Tulis said these are common sense questions that neighbors would want to know, and George as the developer should know these things. It should not take an engineer to know what to do should the system shut down, or what to do with waste storage, or to know he will not smell this. This will breed bacteria, and bacteria produces odors.
G. Giguerre said he disagrees that his answers were not adequate, rather, they are just unacceptable to Mr. Tulis.
R. Tulis asked how frequently the dumpster would be emptied.
G. Giguerre said it will be emptied when it is full.
R. Tulis asked how often it would be full.
G. Giguerre said he did not know, but it does not have holes in it. It is solid waste. He rejects the hypothesis that it will be smelly. Ralph has not looked at the system and filters that kill bacteria. Also, a truck driver will not come back if his truck is not cleaned well. If there is tainted water going through, he might as well close the truckwash. If the process did not work, there would not be one already working elsewhere.
R. Tulis asked if there was enough traffic through the truckstop now to support this facility.
G. Giguerre said Yes.
R. Tulis asked if there was a predicted increase.
G. Giguerre said No. They already get about 1200 – 1500 a day, and the most frequent question is “When are you getting a truckwash?” There is enough sufficient business to support this.
S. Trueb asked about backflow protection to prevent contamination of the well.
G. Giguerre said they will be filling off an unused well which is not part of the water supply.
S. Trueb asked where the potable water comes from.
G. Giguerre said it comes to the facility from a chlorinated source and that supplies the johns and sinks. Sewage is the only thing going into the sewage treatment system. The system would not operate if the sump stopped running. It would quit running because it cannot operate without water going through. It takes the water, cleans it, then uses it again.
L. Dion asked if the other facility referred to is used for washing produce trucks.
G. Giguerre said no.
L. Dion said it is the same system, but a different use.
G. Giguerre said Yes.
W. Goodale asked if the recovery system had enough to wash the whole truck.
A. St. Louis said there is a 5000 gallon storage tank.
W. Goodale asked if the sump goes down, and there is no alarm, and no one there, he has a hard time believing anyone will be alert enough to shut it all down. Five thousand gallons is a lot of water to flood the building if there is no recovery.
G. Giguerre said the way the drain system is, they could fill up to 20,000 gallons before anything ever left the building. He reviewed the size of the room and said it would all have to fill up before it exited the building. Compared to the size, this is not that much water. It is not possible to create that problem.
W. Goodale said it puts a lot of responsibility on the employees 24 hours a day.
K. Acimovic said he is still puzzled about some of his questions, and feels answering them in writing would be appropriate.
G. Giguerre said he has no problem with that.
A. St. Louis suggested keeping the hearing open so the applicant could get the info in writing. Any additional technical info that can be provided will be helpful
L. Dion said the written narrative on the plans, even if it is a recap from the original plans to which the permit was granted, would probably answer some of the questions raised tonight. The commission still needs info regarding concerns about bacteria and sanitation.
S. Trueb asked the number of employees anticipated.
G. Giguerre said about 30-40.
L. DION MOVED TO CONTINUE TO JUNE 19, 2001 THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR FILE #2001-24-APPLICATION FOR A SPECIAL PERMIT FOR A TRUCK WASH LOCATED AT 327 RUBY ROAD (TRUCKSTOPS OF AMERICA) IN A DC ZONE. ROYCE PROPERTY LLC OWNER/APPLICANT. (RECEIVED ON 03/20/01, HEARING ON 05/15/01, CONTINUED TO 06/05/01, DECISION BY 07/17/01).
SECONDED BY W. GOODALE.
YES: A. St. Louis, L. Dion, E. Kalbac, W. Goodale
RECUSED: R. Tulis, S. Trueb
R. Tulis and S. Trueb were re-seated.
R. Tulis called the regular meeting to order at 9:10 p.m.
REGULAR MEETING:
1. Public Speaker – Steve Amedy
S. Amedy said he wishes to revisit his previous applications for buffers and an age change for designed elderly zones. They were denied without prejudice by the commission. He asked if a workshop could take place to discuss wording to get his goals accomplished.
A. St. Louis said the commission’s concern was not changing the age, but the additional wording that was also changed as part of the application.
The commission discussed previous concerns.
A. St. Louis said it would be best if Mr. Amedy came in for a pre-application conference, and suggested he contact staff to get on the agenda for the July 17th meeting.
NEW BUSINESS:
1. File #2001-37-Appilcation for a special permit for a rear lot located off Old Farms Road (Map 17, Lot 21, 4.366 acres). Mark & Laura Marquis, owners/applicants. (Received on 06/05/01, hearing by 07/17/01, decision by 09/18/01).
A. St. Louis said the commission needs to set a hearing date and a sitewalk.
R. TULIS MOVED TO SET A JULY 17, 2001 PUBLIC HEARING DATE FOR FILE #2001-37-APPILCATION FOR A SPECIAL PERMIT FOR A REAR LOT LOCATED OFF OLD FARMS ROAD (MAP 17, LOT 21, 4.366 ACRES). MARK & LAURA MARQUIS, OWNERS/APPLICANTS. (RECEIVED ON 06/05/01, HEARING BY 07/17/01, DECISION BY 09/18/01).
SECONDED BY E. KALBAC. UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.
The commission set a sitewalk for 6:30 p.m. Thursday, July 12th, with a raindate of 6:30 p.m. July 16th.
MINUTES:
Deferred for later discussion.
The commission agreed to change the agenda order to conduct the second public hearing. The regular meeting was recessed.
PUBLIC HEARING
2. File #2001-31-Application for a special permit for a municipal recreation area located on the west side of Route 32, north of I-84 (Map 39, Lot 6, 8.11 acres). Town of Willington owners/applicants. (Received on 04/17/01, hearing on 05/15/01, continued to 06/05/01, decision by 07/17/01).
A. St. Louis called the public hearing to order at 9:20 p.m. with the same members seated as above.
A. St. Louis recused himself from this file and noted he is chairman of this project committee.
K. Acimovic spoke on behalf of the town.
K. Acimovic said staff does not yet have the revised plans with the one-way road. The plan is not yet complete, but the overall layout is shown. He reviewed the history of the parcel.
The commission discussed the easements, elevations, planned multi-purposes of the property and test hole data.
K. Acimovic noted that several students from Hall school have requested a skateboard park, and one has been put on the plans. A walking path is also part of the project.
The commission discussed traffic flow and DOT requirements.
K. Acimovic reviewed the grading on the site plan and said much of the fill is already there waiting to be spread because it was given to the town by UCONN at no charge. He reviewed utilities, drainage, sheet flow patterns and sewerage.
R. Tulis suggested that trenching be done now for the utilities.
K. Acimovic said the original plan called for 2500 gallons for septic, but that has been reduced to 1500-1800 after talking with the Eastern Highlands Health District. This has also been through the IWWC and they had no major objections. He reviewed areas of change that came from IWWC suggestions. He also noted he did not wish for this to become a parking area for people pulling off the highway.
R. Tulis said that would likely happen anyway, and suggested adequate signage.
K. Acimovic said the S&E controls were reviewed by the IWWC, and a renovation analysis will be done, per Sue’s request, to ensure that there is no contamination. He would like to look for approval at this time without final septic included until the design is completed. At that point, he will then come back before the commission.
L. Dion asked if this was being done in phases.
K. Acimovic said Yes. They want to do the grading and utilities first and get things stabilized. Some parts of the plan are still conceptual.
S. Trueb asked about connecting the field fence with the parking lot fence since there is otherwise direct access to the train tracks in a place where many little kids will be playing.
The commission reviewed fencing plans.
W. Goodale asked about emergency access to the fields.
K. Acimovic said there will be a boulder barrier. He showed the planned ambulance route over the field.
S. Trueb said a gate may be a good idea.
W. Goodale said that will also keep other people from driving on the field.
The commission discussed emergency vehicle access.
W. Goodale asked if there would be a payphone.
K. Acimovic said he could show the line coming in on the plans.
W. Goodale said they will need handicapped access to the playscape.
K. Acimovic said they will likely have the playscape itself be accessible like the one at Center School.
W. Goodale asked if there was lighting in the parking lot.
K. Acimovic said there is none now, but if and when they put in the pavilion, it will be done. He does not know where they are going with the lighting concept right now. It will likely be similar to what is in back of the town office building. He reviewed which parts of the project will be done now, and which will be done later.
R. Tulis asked the number of parking spaces.
K. Acimovic said it is about 70. They also have permission from the state to park overflow cars in the commuter lot.
E. Kalbac asked if the town would be doing all this or if it would go out to bid.
K. Acimovic said it will go out to bid. The town does not have all the necessary equipment, especially for the first phase.
S. Trueb asked about signage.
K. Acimovic said the intent is to keep it as secluded as possible. He reviewed signage require by the DOT.
W. Goodale asked if this needed to be re-zoned.
K. Acimovic said it is a permitted use in R-80.
R. Tulis asked if there were any comments from the public.
Richard Rave, president of the Willington baseball league, said this is something the town definitely needs and it will definitely benefit the larger programs. A lot of thought and public opinion went into creating this and it addresses a lot of needs in the town. It is a benefit for the whole town and is a well- put together plan. He hopes to see it through in its entirety.
R. Tulis said the plan is then to grade, seed, and get the major fields in first.
K. Acimovic said they will also do the utilities. Walking path and access road, as well as drainage.
S. TRUEB MOVED TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR FILE #2001-31-APPLICATION FOR A SPECIAL PERMIT FOR A MUNICIPAL RECREATION AREA LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF ROUTE 32, NORTH OF I-84 (MAP 39, LOT 6, 8.11 ACRES). TOWN OF WILLINGTON OWNERS/APPLICANTS. (RECEIVED ON 04/17/01, HEARING ON 05/15/01, CONTINUED TO 06/05/01, DECISION BY 07/17/01).
SECONDED BY E. KALBAC.
YES: R. Tulis, L. Dion, E. Kalbac, W. Goodale, S. Trueb
RECUSED: A. St. Louis
REGULAR MEETING
R. Tulis reconvened the regular meeting. Members present and seated as abouve.
MINUTES:
R. TULIS MOVED TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF 05/15/01 AS AMENDED.
SECONDED BY S. TRUEB.
YES: R. Tulis, A. St. Louis, L. Dion, S. Trueb
ABSTAIN: E. Kalbac, W. Goodale
CORRESPONDENCE:
1. 5/15 letter from J. Halchek, re: Managerial authority for Rainbow Acres Campground
2. 5/17 letter from Vallid Labs, Inc., re: water lab tests for Rainbow Acres
3. CC 5/21 letter from G. Jones to W. Hoar, re: violation regarding junk vehicles
4. CC 5/21 letter from G. Jones to F. McKinnon, re: Cease & Desist Order for junk vehicles
5. 3/30 letter from Branse & Willis, re: billboards
6. 5/23 letter from Century 21, Donald Liberatore, re: land use for Stafford Springs parcel
7. CC 5/30 letter from G. Jones to D. Liberatore, response to letter dated 5/23
8. CC 5/29 letter from S. Yorgensen to Ruby Associates, re: Sand & Gravel operation renewal
9. CC 5/29 letter from S. Yorgensen to Harrison Residence, re: Sand 7 Gravel permit renewal
10. CC 5/17 receipt from Skip’s, Inc. to Joe Halchek, re: septic pumping
11. 5/3 memo from G. Jones/K. Acimovic, re: Truck wash application
12. 5/30 memo from K. Acimovic, re: Truck wash application
13. Connecticut Town & City, March-April 2001
DISCUSSION:
E. Kalbac asked if Scott Kneeland had resigned from the commission.
G. Jones said Yes
PLAN OF CONSERVATION & DEVELOPMENT:
R. Tulis said the contract has been signed, and they expect to have a scheduled “plan of attack” in about 2 weeks.
OLD BUSINESS:
1. File #2001-24-Application for a special permit for a truck wash located at 327 Ruby Road (Truckstops of America) in a DC zone. Royce Property LLC owner/applicant. (Received on 03/20/01, hearing on 05/15/01, continued to 06/05/01, decision by 07/17/01).
Public hearing continued.
2. File #2001-31--Application for a special permit for a municipal recreation area located on the west side of Route 32, north of I-84 (Map 39, Lot 6, 8.11 acres). Town of Willington owners/applicants. (Received on 04/17/01, hearing on 05/15/01, continued to 06/05/01, decision by 07/17/01).
A. St. Louis recused himself from this file.
R. Tulis said the commission has been aware of this plan for some time and an 8-25 review was done. He does not see any issues, and it is something the town needs and wants. Everyone involved in putting this together did a marvelous job.
W. Goodale said it is long overdue for the town, and has a lot of support. A two year time span may be what is necessary for the seeding process.
L. Dion said it is a good application and it is badly needed. It certainly fits in with even the outdated plan of development. He is a little disappointed, however, that some things are inconclusive.
The commission discussed the file and possible conditions for approval.
L. DION MOVED TO APPROVE FILE #2001-31-APPLICATION FOR A SPECIAL PERMIT FOR A MUNICIPAL RECREATION AREA LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF ROUTE 32, NORTH OF I-84 (MAP 39, LOT 6, 8.11 ACRES). TOWN OF WILLINGTON OWNERS/APPLICANTS. (RECEIVED ON 04/17/01, HEARING ON 05/15/01, CONTINUED TO 06/05/01, DECISION BY 07/17/01), WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:
a) final septic system plans to be submitted to the commission prior to installation
b) final pavilion plans to be submitted to the commission prior to construction
c) handicapped parking and all other ADA issues shall be adequately addressed
d) any changes in the overall layout of the siteplan must come before the commission
e) any signage other than traffic control signage as required by DOT must come before the commission
f) any changes or additions in lighting must come before the commission
SECONDED BY W. GOODALE.
YES: R. Tulis, L. Dion, E. Kalbac, W. Goodale, S. Trueb
RECUSED: A. St. Louis
3. File #2000-57-Amendments to zoning regulations of the Town of Willington to include the addition of tower regulations, landscaping definition and changes to Sections 5, 7, 11 and 12. Town of Willington, applicant. (Public hearing on 01/16/01, 03/27/01).
The commission concurred that 11 p.m. was not the time to begin reviewing regulations and suggested a special meeting.
A. ST. LOUIS MOVED TO CALL A 06/12/01 SPECIAL MEETING TO DISCUSS FILE #2000-57-AMENDMENTS TO ZONING REGULATIONS OF THE TOWN OF WILLINGTON TO INCLUDE THE ADDITION OF TOWER REGULATIONS, LANDSCAPING DEFINITION AND CHANGES TO SECTIONS 5, 7, 11 AND 12. TOWN OF WILLINGTON, APPLICANT. (PUBLIC HEARING ON 01/16/01, 03/27/01).
SECONDED BY R. TULIS. UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.
R. TULIS MOVED TO ADJOURN THE MEETING AT 11:05 P.M.
SECONDED BY E. KALBAC. UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED.
| 
