WARWICK TOWNSHIP BOARD OF SUPERVISORS MINUTES
January 16, 2002

Chairman Bruce Bucher convened the January 16, 2002 meeting of the Warwick Township Board of Supervisors at 7:00 p.m. Present were Supervisors Bruce Bucher, W. Logan Myers, Michael Vigunas, Roger Moyer, and Joseph McSparran. In attendance were Township Manager Daniel Zimmerman, Roadmaster Dean Saylor, Code and Zoning Officer Thomas Zorbaugh, Police Chief Richard Garipoli, Jr., Detective Sergeant Edward Tobin, Attorney William Crosswell, John Schick, Mike Skelly, Dennis Kissinger, Donald Vollmer, John Love, Ruth Kiskaddon, Bill Kiskaddon, Kevin Blind, Bruce Hartwigsen, Chuck Braun, Mike Gibson, Randy Holly, Dan McGraw, Linda Brubaker, David Eberly, Mike Leeking, Lester Guyton, Peter Wendel, Kim Doutrich, Tim Shreiner, Sallie Shreiner, Crystal Beckner, James Brubaker, Doretta Stotz, Harold Stotz, David Jones, Raymond Buckwalter, Stacey Morgan, Carla Botti, Albert Knouse, Diane Bomberger, Myra Lopez, Ruth Devenney, Maureen Gallo, and Michael Miller. Richard Reitz of the Lititz Record Express represented the press.

GUEST RECOGNITION: A resident expressed concern that the developer of the Styer tract in Rothsville is pressuring adjoining property owners (Adams and Bucher) into selling their homes in order to provide access to the development. She inquired whether or not the Township required the developer to acquire theses properties as part of the development. The Chairman stated that only a Sketch Plan has been submitted to Township and added that although the Township had discussed the issue of access as part of its review; the Township has not been involved in any aspect of land acquisition. He explained that the Township had suggested that the developer attempt to provide access at the signalized intersection of Rothsville Road and Main Street (SR 772) due to the number of lots proposed as part of the project. He noted that this proposal would require the acquisition of properties; however, it is the affected property owners decision of whether or not they wish to sell their properties. He stated that the property owners have the right to refuse any proposal to sell their respective properties.

The Township Manager explained that although the Planning Commission reviewed a Sketch Plan for the Styer tract in February, 2000, the Township has not received any other submittals for the property since then. He explained that the Planning Commission had discussed the feasibility of providing access at the traffic signal at the intersection of Rothsville Road and Route 772 at the location of the Adams and Bucher properties; however, the Township has received no other information regarding the proposal, to date. He noted that the proposal would provide rear access to some of the properties along Route 772. He explained that if anyone has contacted the Adams and/or Bucher families, the Township has not been involved in those discussions.

The resident inquired whether or not any other access could be provided for the tract. The Township Manager explained that an access point near the existing convenience store was discussed; however, it would be in close proximity to the intersection of Twin Brook Road and Route 772, and PennDOT may not approve an access at that location.

CONTINUATION OF THE DECEMBER 19, 2001 PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER A CONDITIONAL USE APPLICATION RECEIVED FROM LANCASTER HMA, INC., 1100 E. ORANGE STREET, LANCASTER, PA. THE PROPERTY OWNER IS BUCKHILL FARMS, 1001 LITITZ PIKE, LITITZ, PA. THE APPLICANT IS SEEKING CONDITIONAL USE APPROVAL UNDER SECTION 209.3.K OF THE WARWICK TOWNSHIP ZONING ORDINANCE. THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING TO CONSTRUCT A HOSPITAL, RELATED MEDICAL OFFICE BUILDINGS AND CERTAIN ACCESSORY USES IN THE CAMPUS INDUSTRIAL ZONE (I-2) ON THE 43+ ACRE TRACT OF LAND LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF HIGHLANDS DRIVE AND THE EAST SIDE OF HESS LANE BETWEEN WEST WOODS DRIVE AND WEST MILLPORT ROAD.

The Chairman outlined the procedures to be followed for the evening's hearing. The Township Solicitor stated that McSparran took office as a member of the Board of Supervisors on January 7, 2002. Prior to that time he had served on the Warwick Township Planning Commission and had heard a presentation on the Lancaster HMA proposal at the Planning Commission's November 28, 2002 meeting. He noted that the Planning Commission has not provided their recommendation on the proposal, to date. He explained that McSparran was not present at the Board's December 19, 2001 Public Hearing. The Township Solicitor inquired whether or not any parties to the proceedings have any objections to McSparran providing a decision on the Conditional Use Application, since he has familiarized himself with the information presented on December 19, 2001. Attorney Stanley stated that he has no objections to McSparran providing a decision on the Case; however, it is his recollection that the Planning Commission has provided a recommendation on the Case with the understanding that the Applicant will present additional information on the proposal pertaining to traffic issues and roadway improvements.

The Township Manager stated that although the Planning Commission has heard the initial Conditional Use presentation, they were aware of the 60-day time limitation for the public hearing to begin, and agreed to permit the Applicant to proceed with the Public Hearing, provided the Applicant continues their presentation at the Planning Commission's January 23, 2002 meeting. He stated that the Planning Commission will provide additional comments on the Plan at that time, not only with respect to traffic and roadway improvements, but also trails, landscape, tree scape, etc. The Township Solicitor inquired whether or not the parties would agree that although the Planning Commission may have made some recommendations with regard to the Plan, there would be further action by the Planning Commission at their January 23, 2002 meeting. Attorney Stanley concurred with the statement and stated that he has no objections to McSparran participating in the Conditional Use hearing and voting on the Application. The Township Solicitor inquired whether or not any other parties present have objections to McSparran participating in the Conditional Use hearing and voting on the Application. No one present indicated any objections. The Township Solicitor inquired whether or not anyone who did not become a party at the December 19, 2001 meeting wishes to do so this evening. No one present indicated their desire to become a party to the Case.

The Chairman announced that the Board has other business to conduct at this evening's meeting; therefore, the Board will continue with Lancaster HMA, Inc.'s presentation until 9:00 p.m. this evening. He added that the hearing will be continued to another date after this time period.

Attorney Stanley, representing Lancaster HMA, stated that at the end of last month's hearing, representatives of the Lancaster Airport Authority indicated that they wish to provide their comments on the proposal. He inquired whether or not the Board would like to hear their comments this evening. The Board indicated that they will hear the Lancaster Airport Authority's comments on the proposal this evening.

David Eberly, representing Lancaster Airport Authority, was sworn in. He stated that although representatives of the Airport Authority are not opposed to the project, they have several concerns that they wish to outline and discuss with the Board.

David Jones, representing Delta Airport Consultants, was sworn in. He provided an aerial photo of the Airport and the proposed hospital site. The photo includes depictions of several flight paths and also some of the improvements (retention basin) that are proposed for the hospital site. He explained that approximately 60% of all flights use the runway (Runway 13-31) that extends in the direction of the hospital site; in addition, a majority of the departure routes use this runway. He advised that for northbound departures, the flight path extends directly above the hospital site and added that although it is not necessarily an unsafe condition, consideration should be given to the number of aircraft operations that would be occurring in close proximity to the hospital site. Jones stated that a "closed traffic pattern" that is used for training purposes also extends directly above the hospital site. He explained that during foul weather (low visibility periods), when instrument approach procedures are needed, aircraft will be circling over the area of the hospital site while waiting to land on the approach runway. Jones outlined the "Obstacle Clearance Surface" section of the FAA regulations and stated that at a distance of 500' from the hospital (coming from the Airport), an airplane could legally fly at an elevation that is only 50' higher than the hospital building. He added that as the airplane approaches the hospital, the Obstacle Clearance Surface does rise and added that at a point directly over the hospital building, an airplane could be flying at an elevation approximately 120' from the top of the hospital building. Jones reported that the figure of 60% equates to approximately 165 aircraft operations per day; a majority of which would be repetitive training operations. He stated that a majority of the aircraft typically using the runway are some of the older (and louder) single-engine planes and corporate turbo-prop aircraft.

Jones stated that the FAA restricts the construction of retention basins with standing water within 10,000' of an active runway. He noted that the hospital site is approximately 3,500' from their runway. He explained that retention basins tend to attract waterfowl (ducks, geese, etc.) which could interfere with an aircraft on an approach to the runway. He stated that they also have a concern over the landscaping that could be used for the site. He stated that the future growth of the landscaping should be limited to an area below the Obstacle Clearance Surface that was described earlier this evening. He stated that their only other concern is outdoor lighting at the site. He requested that consideration be given to downward facing light standards, and that no light be directed in such a manner that could reflect into a pilot's eyes.

Moyer inquired whether or not the training pattern could be altered. Jones explained that, to date, the FAA has not made any provisions to revise the training pattern. Attorney Stanley inquired whether or not landscaping should be restricted to a height no greater than 75'. Jones stated that it appears that 75' should meet the Obstacle Clearance Surface regulations.

The Chairman inquired whether or not the Lancaster Airport tower would have control over a helicopter landing on the proposed helipad located on the hospital site. Eberly responded that at the distance of the proposed helipad to the Airport, the helicopter pilot would be required to notify the tower of an impending departure/arrival. Attorney Stanley stated that at the request of Airport representatives, the developer of the site performed a noise abatement study. He explained that during 2 days of testing, there were no aircraft using Runway 13-31 and requested clarification of whether or not weather and prevailing winds affect which runway is used. Eberly responded that on a day when prevailing winds favor the other runway, it is likely that Runway 13-31 would not be used. He added that the percentages discussed this evening are based on a past history of airport operations and are not exact figures. The Township Solicitor inquired whether or not the regulations regarding wet basins are available. Jones stated that he did not bring a copy of the regulations this evening; however, he will provide them to the Board at a later date.

Kerry Blind, HMA Land Planner (representing ECOS Environmental Design), stated that the Applicant intends to comply with all regulations pertaining to the Obstacle Clearance Surface. He added that the intended outdoor lighting is a "shoebox" style light standard that would direct light downward. Blind clarified that in regard to the wet pond (retention basin), the FAA would prefer that there be no wet ponds in close proximity to the Airport; however, there are no specific regulations restricting their use. He added that the FAA would allow a wet pond provided certain conditions are met. He explained that the proposed basin is not a large area and they wish to construct the wet pond since it is part of the aesthetic appearance of the project. He explained that they would be willing to address any concerns that the FAA may have as part of the proposal.

The Chairman inquired whether or not anyone present has any questions pertaining to the Airport Authority's presentation.

Ruth Kiskaddon stated that she lives within the Buckwood Hills development and can verify that numerous aircraft do fly over the site. The Chairman stated that the Board is aware of the flight patterns at the airport.

Attorney Stanley submitted a copy of the results of the sound study that the Applicant undertook at the Airports request as Applicant's Exhibit 12. He stated that airport noise will be taken into consideration with respect to the materials used to construct the hospital. Attorney Stanley stated that at last month's hearing, Mike Gibson provided testimony on behalf of HMA about the architectural design of the hospital. He explained that Chuck Braun will provide additional testimony regarding the architectural style and elevations of the hospital. He noted that Braun works with Mike Gibson.

Chuck Braun, representing HMA, was sworn in. He stated that each of the four major buildings that are proposed for the site would be covered in brick, similar to the colors found in the Lititz Area. He explained that the windows would reflect the images of the landscaping on the site and the surrounding community. In addition, it will pick up variations of sky color that will change accordingly. He described the design of the front entrance to the hospital for the benefit of those present. He stated that the Women and Babies Center will contain approximately 15,000 square feet and be connected to the hospital via a double connector in order to provide access back and forth from the hospital to the center. He explained that one of the connectors will be used for patients only, and the other connector would be used for the general public.

Braun stated that the same brick and glass would be used for the proposed energy plant. He submitted a rendering of the first of two medical office buildings that would be located on the site. He explained that the building would contain 60,000 square feet within a 3-level building that would also use the brick and reflective glass design. He added that the second medical office building, when constructed, will have the same style brick and reflective glass. Attorney Stanley submitted the architectural renderings and elevations of the hospital, Women and Babies Center, Energy Plant and first medical office building as Applicant's Exhibit 13 (hospital), Exhibit 14 (Womens and Babies Center), Exhibit 15 (Energy Plant), and Exhibit 16 (medical office building).

John Schick, representing Rettew Associates, was sworn in. He provided his credentials for the benefit of the Board. He submitted a copy of his resume to the Board as Exhibit 17. The Board recognized John Schick as an expert in the field of traffic planning based on his credentials. Schick provided an overview of the Traffic Impact Study that was prepared in conjunction with the Conditional Use Application. He provided a Traffic Impact Summary for the Board's review as Applicant's Exhibit 18. Schick stated that 8 intersections were reviewed as a part of the traffic study in order to determine the impact that the proposed project would have on these intersections. The intersections include Route 501/Millport Road (signalized), Route 501/Peters Road (signalized), Route 501/Owl Hill Road (signalized), Highlands Drive/Millport Road (unsignalized), Highlands Drive/Peters Road (unsignalized), Buckwalter Road/Millport Road (unsignalized), Hess Lane/Millport Road (unsignalized), and Woodcrest Avenue/Millport Road (unsignalized). Shick explained that in order to determine the impact that this project will have on traffic, a study of the current traffic patterns was performed in September, 2001 to measure peak traffic between 7:00 a.m. and 9:00 a.m. and peak traffic between 4:00 p.m. and 6:00 p.m. Schick explained that Phase I of the development will include a 196,000 square foot hospital and a 60,000 square foot medical office building; Phase II will consist of another 60,000 square foot medical office building, and Phase III will consist of a 20,250 square foot expansion of the hospital. He stated that for the purpose of this study, it was assumed that the entire site would be developed and occupied by the end of 2007. Schick explained that the study also included provisions for the potential build-out of the remaining Buckhill Farms property as part of the Master Plan. He summarized the trip generation information for both the hospital site and the remaining lands of Buckhill Farm that are identified as part of Exhibit 18. He noted that the remaining lands included an undeveloped area that is part of the Shoppes at Kissel Village Shopping Center, which would provide for commercial uses. The remaining Campus Industrial zoned lands were presumed to be used as a business center similar to Greenfield Corporate Center. He detailed the intersection improvements that are recommended as part of the Traffic Impact Study and provided 3 additional exhibits that highlight the recommended intersection improvements. Attorney Stanley presented Exhibit 22, which is a summary of the cost estimates for the recommended intersection improvements and which includes the contributions towards these improvements that are proposed by HMA and Buckhill Farm. He detailed the information for the benefit of the Board. Attorney Stanley noted that the Warwick Township Planning Commission has not yet reviewed the traffic information.

The Township Manager stated that the traffic study information was submitted recently and Township staff would like to review the information with representatives of Manheim Township, the Lancaster Airport Authority, and Warwick Emergency Services Alliance to obtain their input. He explained that Township staff will present its comments, following the January 23, 2002 Planning Commission meeting and after meeting with the indicated parties, and provide testimony at the February 6, 2002 Board meeting.

Myers stated that the information indicates that 15,000 square feet of right-of-way would need to be acquired from the Lancaster Airport Authority on the south side of Millport near the intersection of Route 501. He inquired whether or not the Applicant foresees any problems in acquiring the right-of-way. Attorney Stanley explained that they do not anticipate any problems with the right-of-way acquisition from the Lancaster Airport Authority and noted that the Applicant is proposing to contribute toward the cost of the intersection improvements, and not actually construct the improvements. Myers inquired what is the distance between Millport Road and Peters Road along Highlands Drive. Schick responded that the distance is 320'. He explained the analysis that was performed to indicate how the proposed and existing traffic signals could be inter-connected and how the signals would be synchronized.

Vigunas suggested that the drawing of the Highlands Drive improvements also illustrate the lane transition from three lanes along Highlands Drive south of West Woods Drive, to two lanes north of West Woods Drive. Shick outlined the design for the benefit of the Board. Vigunas requested that a drawing be submitted that illustrates the intersection of West Woods Drive, and inquired whether or not the intersection of Highlands Drive and West Woods Drive was included in the traffic study. Schick responded that the intersection was not included in the traffic study. Vigunas suggested that a right-in access be provided for the HMA site along Highlands Drive to mitigate any potential traffic back-ups. Schick stated that the traffic study does not indicate the need for the right-on access. Vigunas stated that since Highlands Drive is a collector street, it may be prudent to provide for right-in access. He added that at the area of the site that is identified as exit-only, the Applicant should consider constructing an "island" to ensure that traffic uses the exit as it is intended.

Bucher inquired whether or not a site development plan has been provided for the remaining lands of Buckhill Farm. Attorney Stanley stated that the Applicant is unable to specify the ultimate use of the vacant lots; however, as part of the Master Plan, specific items such as access, sidewalks and trail extensions have been illustrated. He stated that they estimated an approximate use for these lands based on the size of the lots to provide trip generation information. Schick added that the traffic figures assumed that all of the lots would directly access Highlands Drive.

The Chairman opened the meeting to public comment.

Michael Leeking stated that the traffic signals that are proposed should be designed so that motorcycles would activate the looping system to change the signal.

McSparran inquired what is the basis for not including the intersection of West Woods Drive and Highlands Drive in the traffic study. Attorney Stanley stated that upon discussions with Township staff and based on the fact that the site will not directly access West Woods Drive, the intersection was not considered for evaluation. The Township Manager noted that Township staff will provide recommendations for West Woods Drive as part of its presentation.

Attorney Stanley explained that based on discussions with representatives of Thaddeus Stevens School, they have indicated that they would need to move into the existing hospital site by April, 2004 in order to make the project feasible. He explained that typically, these types of hospital buildings require 24 months of construction; however, due to time constraints, they are willing to cut the construction schedule to 20 months. Based on their required construction schedule, they anticipate submittal of a Preliminary Plan in March for approval in June, which would allow them to break ground on the project. Subsequently, a Final plan would be submitted in June, with an anticipated Building Permit issuance of September, 2002. He submitted the schedule to the Board for their review.

Ruth Kiskadden, West Woods Drive, stated that since the construction of Highlands Drive she has seen a significant increase in traffic on West Woods Drive and based on the traffic figures discussed this evening, individuals may try to find another way around Highlands Drive, which would include West Woods Drive. The Chairman stated that Township staff intends to present this issue at the Board's February 6, 2002 meeting.

Lester Guyton, 24 Red Oak Drive, stated that his family physician's office is within the Kissel Hill Family Clinic and inquired whether or not the facility would be closed when the hospital is constructed. A representative of HMA responded that they are currently reviewing the issue and added that she does not have an answer at this time.

On a motion by Moyer, seconded by McSparran, the Board voted unanimously to continue the public hearing to the Board's February 6, 2002 meeting.

APPROVAL OF MINUTES: On a motion by Myers, seconded by Vigunas, the Board unanimously approved the minutes of the December 5, and December 19, 2001 meetings as submitted.

TREASURER'S REPORT On a motion by Moyer, seconded by Vigunas, the Board unanimously approved the Treasurer's report for December, 2001 as submitted.

PAYMENT OF BILLS: The Board reviewed the list of bills submitted for payment. On a motion by Vigunas, seconded by McSparran, the Board unanimously approved the payment of bills from the General Fund in the amount of $208,358.76.

MANAGER'S REPORT: The Township Manager provided a status report on the Township's winter operations. He provided a copy of the Township's Winter Operations Policy for the Board's review.

The Township Manager provided a status report on several recreation projects. He stated that the meeting for the Recreation and Open Space Study was rescheduled for Monday, February 4, 2002. The reason for the delay was that the committee had not yet received the comments from DCNR relating to the current draft. DCNR has advised that the review comments will be available prior to the February 4, 2002 meeting.

The Township Manager provided a status report on candidates for commission and boards. He stated that notification letters have been sent out to the designated appointees. In addition, letters have been sent out to the candidates who were not appointed. He noted that the Township continues to receive requests for consideration, and added that the Township currently has 8 potential candidates that are being held in reserve.

The Township Manager provided a status report on the Forney Field Project. He explained that an agreement is currently being drafted by the solicitor. The draft will be discussed at the January 28, 2002 Recreation Advisory Committee meeting.

The Township Manager provided a copy of the new Warwick Emergency Services Alliance brochure to the Board for their review and information.

The Board unanimously approved the Township Manager's Report

TAX COLLECTOR'S REPORT: The Board reviewed the December, 2001 Tax Collector's report. On a motion by Moyer, seconded by Myers, the Board unanimously approved the Tax Collector's December, 2001 report.

PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT REPORT: The Roadmaster presented a report that outlines the activities of the Public Works Department during December, 2001. On a motion by Vigunas, seconded by Myers, the Board unanimously approved the Public Works Department's December, 2001 report.

POLICE DEPARTMENT REPORT: The Police Chief presented a report that outlines the activities of the Police Department during December, 2001. On a motion by Moyer, seconded by Vigunas, the Board unanimously approved the Police Department's December, 2001 report.

EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT COORDINATOR REPORT: The Board reviewed a report submitted by the Emergency Management Coordinator that outlines his activities during the fourth quarter of 2001. On a motion by Moyer, seconded by Vigunas, the Board unanimously approved the Emergency Management Coordinator's report.

ZONING OFFICER'S REPORT: The Zoning Officer presented a report that outlines the Zoning/Building permits issued in December, 2001. The report also outlines the cases heard at the Zoning Hearing Board's December 12, 2001 meeting. On a motion by Vigunas, seconded by Myers, the Board unanimously approved the Zoning Officer's December, 2001 report.

COMMUNICATIONS: The Board received a letter from the Rodney May, Elizabeth Township Secretary/Treasurer, indicating that their Board has reviewed and discussed the draft of the Regional Comprehensive Recreation, Park and Open Space Plan. One of the recommendations of the plan was a jointly funded (Warwick Township, Lititz Borough and Elizabeth Township) position of a full-time director to administer the Plan. The letter indicates that at this time the Elizabeth Township Board of Supervisors is not in favor of hiring a full-time director to administer the Plan; they do acknowledge the need for a small community park in Elizabeth Township and they are actively searching for an appropriate site to be developed as park land.

CONSIDER THE REQUEST TO RELEASE THE LETTER OF CREDIT FOR THE MIKE GARMAN/PINE HILL ROAD PROJECT: The Board reviewed the request. The Township Engineer stated that based on their recent observation, the site improvements have been completed in an acceptable manner. Therefore, they recommend the Township release the "site improvement" Letter-of-Credit (actually and Escrow account) in the amount of $3,173.50. On a motion by Moyer, seconded by Myers, the Board unanimously approved a release of the $3,173.50 Letter-of-Credit (Escrow account) for Mike Garman.

STATUS REPORT FOR THE LITITZ/WARWICK STRATEGIC PLAN: The Township Manager provided a status report on the objectives for the year 2001, and outlined the objectives for the year 2002 for each of the components outlined in the Strategic Plan (Infrastructure, Community Service, Economic Development, and Physical). The Board is agreeable to the objectives for 2002 as outlined.

CONSIDER PROPOSAL FOR AUDITING SERVICES FROM SAGER, SWISHER AND COMPANY: The Board reviewed the proposal. The Township Manager submitted a copy of the proposal submitted by Sager, Swisher and Company which provides estimates to perform auditing services for the years ending 2001, 2002 and 2003. On a motion Moyer, seconded by Vigunas, the Board unanimously accepted the proposal submitted by Sager, Swisher and Company for auditing services.

CONSIDER REQUEST TO CLOSE LOG CABIN ROAD BRIDGE FOR WEDDING: The Board reviewed the request. The request is being made to close the road on Sunday, June 23, 2002 from 1:30 p.m. to 3:30 p.m. The Board briefly discussed the request. On a motion by McSparran, seconded by Myers, the Board voted unanimously to authorize closing the Log Cabin Road bridge on June 23, 2002 from 1:30 p.m. to 3:30 p.m.

DISCUSS CREEK ROAD - TURN BACK PROGRAM: Myers reported that PennDOT is proposing roadway improvements to Creek Road, portions of which are located in Warwick Township and Manheim Township. He explained that the improvements include the removal of mature trees, widening of the roadway, and a complete pavement overlay. He expressed concern over the removal of the trees and the potential for speeding when the improvements are completed. He stated that he discussed the issue with PennDOT representatives and they indicated that both Warwick Township and Manheim Township could consider accepting the roadway as part of the States turn-back program, which would provide an option for the municipalities input regarding the ultimate width of the roadway. Myers explained that he and the Township Manager had met with Manheim Township representatives to discuss the issue. He added that the representatives indicated that they will discuss the issue with their officials and provide their input on a possible turn-back. He noted that Warwick Township has not heard any comments from the Manheim Township officials to date. The Township Manager stated that he will explore the available options and provide a report to the Board after he has heard from Manheim Township's officials.

ADJOURNMENT: With no further business to come before the Board, the meeting was adjourned at 10:55 p.m.

Respectfully submitted,

Daniel L. Zimmerman
Township Manager