HomeMy WebLinkAboutPL MINUTES 04191994 Meeting Sheet
IIIIII VIII VIII VIII VIII VIII IIII IIII
101186
Box: 19
Folder: PL MINUTES AND AGENDAS 1994
Document: PL MINUTES 04191994
CITY OF ST. ANTHONY
2
3 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
4
5 April 19, 1994
6
7 Chair Gondorchin opened the meeting at 8:02 P.M. with the Pledge of Allegiance.
8
9 Commissioners Present: Gondorchin,Faust, Bergstrom, Makowske,Thompson, and Horst.
10
11 Commissioners Absent: Franzese.
12
13 Also present: Larry Hamer, Interim City-Manager
14 William Soth, City Attorney
15
16 APPROVAL OF FEBRUARY 15, 1994 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES.
17
18 Motion by Faust and seconded by Makowske, to approve the February 15, 1994 Planning
19 Commission minutes with the following changes:
20
21 Page 2, line 20: Change "1994" to "1993" after the.word "October".
Page 2, line 21: Insert the word "been" after "would have".
4F3 Page 2, line 29: Insert the word "was" after "StrategiCare".
24
25 Motion carried unanimously,
26
27 DESIGNATION OF COMMISSION REPRESENTATIVE TO THE MAY 10, 1994
28 CITY COUNCIL MEETING.
29
30 Commissioner Thompson will represent the Planning Commission at the City Council's May
31 10, 1994 meeting.
32
33 PUBLIC HEARINGS
34
35 Darrin and JoAnn Mercil, setback variance for 3112 Silver Lake Road
36
37 Chair Gondorchin opened the public hearing at 8:04 p.m. for a petition for a setback variance
38 request for Darrin and JoAnn Mercil, 3112 Silver Lake Road. Notices of the public hearing
39 had been published in the St. Anthony Bulletin on April 6, 1994 and mailed to property
40 owners within 200 feet of the subject property.
_ 41
42 Staff Report - - - - -- -- --
0 Interim City Manger Hamer told the Commissioners of the previous hearing at which Mr.
45 Mercil requested a variance to put his house five feet from his property line at a 23 foot
Planning Commission Minutes
2 April 19, 1994
3 Page 2
4
5 setback. Mr. Hamer noted that this is not a pre-determined variance by the City Council as
6 is being rumored. Mr.Mercil had requested a five foot setback off the back property line and
7 23 feet from front property line. Mr. Mercil did not receive the results of his survey until
8 after the initial variance had been granted. This survey showed that the City owns a 66 foot
9 right-of-way rather than a 60 foot,and all of it is on his side. His house would,based on this,
10 be set five feet from his property line, which would result in 9 feet to his neighbor's house.
11 Mr. Mercil, due to being at risk of losing his financing, put in the foundation, with the
12 Council's approval,with the written statement that he would remove it if the variance is not
13 granted. The house right now is sitting at a 23 foot setback which was granted at the last
14 variance. The request is 8 feet, which brings it 15 feet to the property line.
15
16 Commissioner Faust asked how this differs from the previous request. The Interim City
17 Manager stated that the garage was the last variance request. The change in the variance
18 request is due to the change in the 6 feet of right-of-way, which would put the house closer
19 to the neighboring house.
20
21 Mr. Mercil addressed the Commissioners, stating that what was requested the last time
turned out not to be the case and he believes that all the Commissioners are familiar with the
3 story. The problem occurred when the survey came back at the time they were ready to
24 begin building, and he was in danger of losing his financing. The Mercils approached the
25 City Council to request changing the variance. The City Council stated the Mercil's would
26 have to re-apply for the variance. The Mercils are doing this now, but due to time
27 constraints,they have had to put in the full foundation, which has been done in accordance
28 with the 23 feet of the original variance. This will be removed if the variance is not granted.
29
30 Mr. Mercil produced two pictures which were presented to the Commission members which
31 showed markings between his home and the south house on the current variance. It would
32 be close enough to present a drainage problem and would produce more of an "inner city"
33 rather than suburban appearance. Moving the house 9 feet away (the current request) would
34 resolve the drainage and appearance problems. Mr. Mercil showed two more pictures to
35 Commission members. Measurements were taken on the other two sides and they have
36 looked at the homes on the west and east. The City has restricted the Mercils to having the
37 garage facing Townview, which leaves them with no back yard, so the house was designed
38 to use the side yard as part of the back yard. Tucking the garage under and extending it out
39 an additional eight feet, they gain a full garage. Putting the garage on the left side of the
40 home would have eliminated any possible side yard on the lot. If the garage had to be placed
- -
- 41 — - - on that side,the lot would have been unusable for their home. Mr. Mercil passed three more
42 pictures to Commission members showing that the other homes approximately line up. Also- -
6 -
3 included was a picture of the white house to the east across Townview, showing that it is
4 closer to the Townview street than his whole project. Also, if the proposed home had been
45 located without the new variance, they would not have had to touch the little yellow house
Planning Commission Minutes
2 April 1.9, 1994
3 Page 3
4
5 previously on the lot. One of the pictures showed stakes indicating the lot line and the
6 previous location of the little yellow house. Mr. Mercil wishes to build in a manner to
7 enhance the community. He welcomed any questions by the Commissioners.
8
9 Commissioner Makowske asked Mr. Mercil if relocating the house according to the new
10 variance request would alleviate the drainage problem. Mr. Mercil stated that by moving the
11 house they would be able to drain adequately down their own property.
12
13 Commissioner Horst requested clarification that the original variance was to move the house
14 forward on the lot,and the current variance request was to move the house north 8 feet, and
15 requested what difference in space this would make. Mr. Mercil answered that the previous
16 distance between houses was 9 feet, and this variance would make that distance 17 feet.
17
18 Chair Gondorchin asked if there were any opposing questions.
19
20 Mr. Earl H. Dahl, 2920 Townview, asked why the new survey changes the old one. Chair
21 Gondorchin asked Mr. Mercil for clarification between the old and new surveys. Mr. Mercil
said two of the markers had been found by the surveyor. Mr. Dahl stated that his house,
3 according to the new survey, is not 7 feet from the lot line. Interim City Manager Hamer
24 stated that in the 40's to early 50's,when Mr. Dahl's house was built, the City did not receive
25 surveys on the houses, so the City doesn't have anything to compare the current survey to.
26 Mr. Dahl stated that if he tried to claim his full 68 feet of lot,he'd cut into his next neighbor's
27 property. Mr. Hamer stated that the surveying company can redo the survey to explain the
28 differences or find any mistakes. The surveys are certified, and clearing up difficulties
29 should be part of that fee.
30
31 Commissioner Faust stated that the survey could very well be accurate, but that the builders,
32 while craftsmen, weren't necessarily accurate at placement of the building on the lot. Mr.
33 Dahl stated that back then there wasn't even a street. Mr. Faust suspects that Mr. Dahl still
34 has the proper lot size, but that the house is simply misplaced on the lot. He suspects that
35 the builders told Mr. Dahl his house was 7 feet from the lot line when it was really 5 feet.
36
37 Mr. Dahl asked where the survey starting point was. Mr. Hamer asked Mr. Mercil where the
38 markers were found, and Mr. Mercil agreed with Mr. Hamer that he believes they were the
39 markers next to Silver Lake Road. Mr. Hamer said that typically surveyors need to do the
40 entire block when they do a survey.
- -41- - -- _
42 Mr. John Mudek, 2916 Townview, stated he is concerned about the salability of Mh-Dahl's - --
home in the future, although this does not directly affect him. Mr. Dahl's lot line is now on
his sidewalk. Although this does not affect Mr. Mudek directly, he feels the Planning
45
01 Planning Commission Minutes
2 April 19, 1994
3 Page 4
4
5 Commission should be aware of this. In fact,the lot line runs down the center of Mr. Dahl's
6 sidewalk,which is against the side of his house. Chair Gondorchin stated there is no change
7 in lot line,just in where the house actually sits on the lot.
8
9 Mr.Dahl had been concerned about encroaching on Mr.Mudek's property for his fu1166-feet.
10 Mr. Mudek understands that Mr. Dahl's house is just situated differently than was thought.
11 Mr. Mudek requested that the survey be redone to be sure that everything is accurate. Mr.
12 Hamer stated that when surveys are done on residential properties,the buyer usually surveys
13 before purchasing the house. Since nobody in this case did that, the problem is surfacing
14 now. Mr. Hamer stated the example of people having lot lines strung by the monuments
15 when they go to build a fence, and finding that a neighbor's fence is actually on their lot.
16 Letters are then sent by the City to the fence owner asking that the fence be removed to the
17 proper place and a proof available that this has been done. Some people have simply given
18 the misplaced fences to the people who own the property the fence is on rather than move
19 them. Mistakes in surveys do happen, and lot lines aren't always where people think they
20 are.
21
Chair Gondorchin asked if there were any more comments. The Public Hearing was closed
*3 at 8:28 p.m. He asked the Commissioners for their discussion.
24
25 Commissioner Horst stated he had reviewed the site and that it does have a unique situation
26 due to the extra 6 feet of setback, which only occurs on that block and one other block in the
27 City. The street is actually what causes the house to be out of compliance. If it wasn't for
28 the extra 6 feet, the question would only be over a 2 foot variance.
29
30 Commissioner Faust stated that there were two issues with the first variance: 1)that there
31 was no survey, and 2)there was no knowledge of the extra 6 feet of right-of-way. He feels
32 that this variance request is actually an improvement over the first. He would definitely be
33 in favor of recommending the approval.
34
35 Chair Gondorchin stated he does not feel the plight was created by the owner. This is a
36 requirement for approving the variance. Also, the redevelopment will greatly benefit St.
37 Anthony. The lot can't be put to use by today's standards any other way. He would only add
38 to the motion that the survey be rechecked to satisfy Mr. Dahl and any other neighbors.
39
40 Commissioner Makowske moved to approve the variance to send it to the City Council with
---41 - - the original conditions-plus the_condition added here. It was suggested that the original
42 conditions be stated for inclusion in the minutes as well as the new condition and-the - -
�4
3 addition of the extra 6 feet of right-of-way which applies to all the houses on this side on this
block.
45
01 Planning Commission Minutes
2 April 19, 1994
3 Page 5
4
5 Makowske amended his motion.
6
7 Motion by Makowske, second by Berg to recommend Council approval of the variance
8 request from Darrin and JoAnn Mercil, for 3112 Silver Lake Road, as follows: (1) the lot
9 limits the position of the home; (2)the City requires that the garage face Townview Avenue;
10 (3) the lot is platted and buildable, but the previous home was small and not of today's
11 standards; (4)because of the additional 6 feet right-of-way along street there is an additional
12 circumstance that is found in almost no other place in this City; and (5) that the survey be
13 rechecked to satisfy the neighbors.
14
15 Motion carried unanimously.
16
17
18 Conditional use permit and setback variance request by Merlin Olson. for 2700 - 37th
19 Avenue N.E.
20
21 Notice of the public hearing had been published in the St.Anthony Bulletin on April 6, 1994
and mailed to property owners within 350 feet of the subject property.
3
24 Staff Report
25
26 Interim City Manager Hamer reported that C.M. Corp was requesting a variance of 9 feet to
27 the front on 37th Avenue N.E.and 5 feet to the side facing Stinson Boulevard and a building .
28 variance of 11 feet. They are planning to tear down the existing gas station and put up a
29 convenience store with gas pumps and a canopy. This would bring the building
30 approximately 9 feet 6 inches to the property line,the setback to residential is 20 feet. The
31 canopy is off by the street setback of 35 feet.
32
33 Chair Gondorchin asked if a comprehensive sign plan had been submitted. Mr. Hamer stated
34 it had not been submitted. Bill Martin, representing Mr. Olson, stated that the sign on the
35 elevation drawing was not the one which would be used, but that one on a pole would be
36 used, not a monument type.
37
38 Chair Gondorchin asked what site differences exist between the blueprints that Mr. Martin
39 had with him and the drawing submitted to the Commissioner members. Mr. Hamer stated
40 that all gas stations are conditional uses, and since the present structure will be torn down
—41 --- _ .and new construction done on-the property, any conditions the Commissioners desire can be
42 placed on the project. Mr. Martin stated that to the best of his knowledge there were no - —
differences between his blueprints and the elevation drawing. Chair Gondorchin again asked
*4 about the planned sign. Mr. Martin stated that they are requesting a pedestal sign mounted
45 on a pole, but it would not be a high-rise sign. Mr. Martin requests a sign as pictured in
01 Planning Commission Minutes
2 April 19, 1994
3 Page 6
4
5 front. There were earlier drawings with more than one sign,but the owner has now decided
6 to go with one sign, such as the one on the picture, with brick. Commissioner Horst asked
7 if the proposed sign complied with the City's ordinance, and Mr. Martin stated he was not
8 sure. Mr. Hamer stated that the sign had not been presented yet, but must be presented with
9 all measurements, and location, and if the sign was too big, they would have to come back
10 with a new plan.
11
12 Chair Gondorchin_suggested that Mr. Martin submit a short dissertation on the entire
13 concept, including traffic flow, hours of operation, etc.. Mr. Martin stated he thought that
14 the hours of operation would be 6 a.m. to 11 p.m.. Mr. Olson, according to Mr. Martin,
15 operates two other convenience stores. He also explained the request to close 2 existing
16 approaches, the need by today's standards for a canopy, sufficient space for traffic flow of
17 cars and parking. Chair Gondorchin asked the projected size of the new building.
18 Convenience stores today are starting at approximately 3,000 square feet, whereas this plan
19 will provide a bare minimum of 2,500 square feet (60 feet by 36 feet). Chair Gondorchin
20 stated that he and Commissioner Franzese had wondered about the proposed driveways, i.e.,
21 would the driveway on 37th Avenue be a right turn only on exit, given the traffic from the
stoplight at 37th and Stinson? Mr. Martin stated that part of the reason for changing the
3 driveways was to increase safety while maintaining flow, but that they had not considered
24 making the 37th Avenue exit a right turn only. Mr. Hamer stated that stations historically
25 are on corners and their driveways are close to the intersections.
26
27 Commissioner Makowske stated that he sees two issues,the conditional use permit and the
28 variance request. He thinks they can be taken together during the process. Part of the
29 requirement for recommending approval for a variance is that there must be a hardship due
30 to the land or to correct extraordinary circumstances, and the submitted documents address
31 the conditional use more than the hardship question. The only thing Mr. Martin can see as
32 far as hardship, is that the owner could operate with the existing building,which Mr. Martin
33 assumes is well within the setbacks, but the operation would not be profitable. Mr. Martin
34 again stated the layout must be directed by customer flow, and that the proposed plan is the
35 most convenient for a convenience store.
36
37 Commissioner Faust asked Mr. Martin how long Mr. Olson had owned the property. Mr.
38 Martin stated that he understood that Mr. Olson bought the station last fall and promptly
39 painted it. Commissioner Faust asked where Mr. Olson's other two stations were;Mr. Martin
40 answered that they are located on University Avenue N.E. in North Minneapolis, and
41 — Johnson Street.N. E.in North Minneapolis. Commissioner Faust confirmed that the name
42 of the store is Stop N Go, and asked what kind of gas they handled. Mi. Martin thought it
463 was Phillips 66, but Commissioner Thompson thought it was Conoco, in which case there
4 would be a competitor within a few blocks. Commissioner Faust wondered if more building
45 plans had been done.
�l
2 Planning Commission Minutes
3 April 19, 1994
4 Page 7
5
6 Chair Gondorchin stated that the Commission is more accustomed to seeing additions to
7 existing structure rather than new construction. Since this is a new project,they want a better
8 idea of scale. Mr. Martin asked if what the Commission was asking for was more building
9 plans. Chair Gondorchin stated that he did not want to stall the project,but he wanted to poll
10 the Commissioners as to whether this should be delayed until more comprehensive plans
11 arrive. Chair Gondorchin stated there was no time line in the request. He doesn't feel the
12 request is unreasonable, and that the variance could be granted due to the facility being
13 outmoded by today's standards.
14
15 Commissioner Makowske agreed with Chair Gondorchin, but felt that more details are
16 needed. He has no problem with the conditional use permit, although he feels the
17 Commission should hold off on that until the variance is settled. His biggest concern is that
18 a hardship should really be caused by the land, and since it is conditional use,he'd like to see
19 it upgraded. He's'not sure there is a case for hardship there with reference to how the land
20 is zoned or other situations like that. Chair Gondorchin stated that, having been a patron of
21 the previous facility, a retail facility could not be operated there due to lack of parking, and
that is a hardship. Commissioner Makowske stated that parts of the plan that are sketchy
3 include the sign, to make sure that it is conforming. Commissioner Faust stated that he
24 would like to see Mr. Martin return to Mr. Olson, who has previously dealt with the
25 Commission, and make sure nothing is forgotten, e.g.,the lighting, signage on the canopy,
26 etc.. Commissioner Faust thinks the conditional use and variance should be done together
27 for the good of the project. However, unless the Commission is very definitive on what the
28 conditions and requirements are, the Commission will be surprised later on and more
29 variance requests will come in. Chair Gondorchin stated that this had been presented as a
30 concept review, the Commission likely would have said "great, now get us some detail."
31 He asked Mr. Hamer about the conditional use aspect, especially hours of operation. Mr.
32 Hamer stated that 12 midnight was the limit.
33
34 Commissioner Faust stated that because of the gas station use, there are some potential
35 pollution problems, and that if they tear down the old building they'll have to bring it up to
36 current standards. Mr. Martin stated that the property already has been impacted and there
37 is an environmental consultant working on it. Commissioner Makowske asked if this meant
38 contaminated soil removal, and Mr. Martin stated that this was already scheduled.
39 Commissioner Faust stated that was an example of the kind of condition the Commission has
40 to put on the project, even though it's already being done, to protect the community.
--- 41 - - - —Commissioner.Thompson asked about-the current undergroundtanks, and Mr. Martin stated
42 they had already been removed. Chair Gondorchin stated that the elements that need-
0 _ -
3 consideration include the hours of operation, contaminated soil, lighting consistent with
4 similar operations; the canopy, including lighting,direction,and signage. The City does not
45
91 Planning Commission Minutes
2 April 19, 1994
3 Page 8
4
5 intend canopies to be billboards. Mr. Martin asked if this could be tabled until next
6 meeting,and he'd bring more information.
7
8 Chair Gondorchin asked the consensus of the other Commissioners regarding the concept.
9 Commissioners Bergstrom, Thompson, and Faust supported the concept. Commissioner
10 Horst stated he had a problem conceptually with the building itself and only 9-1/2 feet to the
11 property line,and the impact it would have on the neighbors. Mr. Hamer stated that mailings
12 had been sent to the neighbors and no one is at the meeting. Mr.Martin stated he had spoken
13 with the neighbors on both sides(the occupants,not the owners)and explained the proposed
14 landscaping and that they had no problems with.it. Commissioner Horst again asked what
15 the variance should be based on. He asked Mr. Martin if there was any other design that
16 could be used here. Mr. Martin stated that they could draw plans based on.the current
17 setbacks, and try to build within them, but it usually doesn't work. Commissioner Horst
18 stated that he would like to see that, that he doesn't have a problem with the front of the
19 property, but with the building being so near the back.
20
21 Commissioner Makowske agreed that a hardship other than economic must be proven to
a2 approve the setback. Other than the question of hardship, he's in favor of the project. Mr.
3 Martin stated that the next set of drawings would have more detail. Chair Gondorchin asked
24 if next month's appearance should be a concept review. Commissioner Faust is concerned
25 that the Commission not thwart the owner's efforts and he feels that the decision should be
26 made next time, rather than do a concept review.
27
28 Chair Gondorchin stated that he does not have as much of a problem with the size of the
29 building as with whether or not the package is to the current standard. There is no strict
30 regulation as to how near it is to the lot line, especially with respect to granting a variance.
31 Commissioner Horst questioned Mr. Martin as to standard sizes of convenience stores. Mr.
32 Martin reiterated that the general market currently has convenience stores at 3,000 feet.
33 Commissioner Horst asked if this was a realistic goal given the size of the lot, and Mr.
34 Martin stated yes. The Commissioners discussed Mr.Martin's difficult position speaking for
35 Mr.Olson,and the Commission making recommendations based on Mr.Martin's statements.
36 Mr. Hamer suggested Mr. Martin that Mr. Olson should attend the May 17th meeting. There
37 was some question as to Mr. Olson possibly desiring 24 hour operation in the future.
38
39 Chair Gondorchin asked about the building size. He asked the Commissioners if there was
40 a size they had in mind. There was debate about different building sizes between 700 square
- - 41- - -feet-and-the proposed 2,500 square feet. Commissioner Horst wondered how a variance
42 could be granted if there's no hardship and if there's nothing special about the Tot. - -
43 Commissioner Makowske stated that technically the Commissioners could be liable for their
4 decision and had to have a good basis for that decision. Commissioner Bergstrom asked if
45
�1 Planning Commission Minutes
2 April 19, 1994
3 Page 9
4
5
6 the conditional use could be used to set the hardship. Commissioner Horst stated that the
7 person using the property can't create a condition.
8
9 There was further discussion,with the consensus that Mr.Martin should take back for further
10 detail: lighting, signage (canopy and monument), landscaping, screening, outside trash
11 (fenced or merely screened). With regard to landscaping, with only 9 feet 6 inches, there
12 isn't a lot of space to work with, and what can be put in that won't offend the neighbors.
13 Some of this is aesthetics, but needs to be addressed.
14
15 Mr. Martin was informed of the date of the next Planning Commission meeting is May 17th.
16 There was discussion as to the Commission's responsibility to notify owners in the vicinity
17 of the property. The neighboring properties are rentals, and the notice is sent both to the
18 renter and the owners. Discussion was held concerning using certified mail to notify owners,
19 and how the public notice in the paper constitutes notice.
20
21 Motion by Makowske, second by Horst, to table this request until the next Planning
a2 Commission meeting on May 17, 1994.
3
24 Motion carried unanimously.
25
26 Miscellaneous
27
28 Interim City Manger Larry Hamer reported the he met with the Development/Redevelopment
29 Task Force and that they are splitting up into groups and looking into different properties
30 which they identified as needing redevelopment or development. They suggested at the
31 meeting that Planning Commission members become involved in the meetings, perhaps
32 observe in some of the committees as to recommendations of what to do with some of the
33 properties. Commissioner Makowske stated he did arrive for the March meeting, but it had
34 apparently been canceled. He is, however, still interested in being a member of the Task
35 Force.
36
37 Commissioner Bergstrom reported on the Environmental Quality/Recycling Task Force met
38 last week and chose a two-fold path: 1) take last year's lessons and convert them to action
39 and 2)be open and flexible on new issues. Tasks being developed are: 1)public education,
40 2)homeowner conservation, 3) surface water quality,especially regarding Silver Lake. The
-41 - - - Task Force has-broken up-into sub-groups which will, over the next two months, define a
42 specific, achievable goal for the next 12 months.0 - — - - -
3
4 Commissioner Faust asked Mr. Hamer about progress with Cub Foods at Apache. Mr.
45 Hamer indicated he spoke with Dennis Cavanaugh of C. G. Rein, Co., managers of Apache
1 Planning Commission Minutes
2 April 19, 1994
3 Page 10
4
5
6 Plaza. There was further general discussion of the situation. The status of the Apache New
7 Market was also discussed.
8
9 Commissioner Horst stated that he and Commissioner Bergstrom had attended Planning
10 Commissioner training. They both found it very valuable, although Commissioner Horst
11 was forced to miss the second half. He would like an opportunity to attend the second half
12 at a future date.
13
14 Commissioner Makowske stated that he is still interested in the Economic Redevelopment
15 Task Force. He also found the GTS meeting very beneficial, especially Peter Bennett's help
16 with questions. The meeting stated that planning commissions should be working 90%in
17 the future and 10%the kinds of things the Planning Commission dealt with at this meeting.
18 He's not sure how applicable that is to this Commission, considering the state of
19 development of the city.
20
21 Chair Gondorchin asked Mr. Hamer about the Road Task Force and where they are with
2 sidewalks and paving paths. Mr. .Hamer stated that the Task Force is in the process of
3 prioritizing these projects, but it is a slow process..
24
25 Chair Gondorchin asked about a zoning news subscription flyer he had received in his
26 meeting packet. After discussion and comparison it was decided that this was for the
27 national version of a newsletter the City currently subscribes to. Both are published
28 by the American Planning Association; St. Anthony subscribes to the Minnesota chapter's
29 newsletter. Mr. Hamer will look through his mail to see if he can fi-nd it, and will pass
30 anything interesting on to the Commission members.
31
32 Commissioner Horst thanked Mr. Hamer for the new chairs.
33
34 Chair Gondorchin stated he really enjoyed the program at the Volunteer Dinner. Cal Stoll
35 was very informative and entertaining. He supports the idea of volunteering and appreciates
36 the people who do it.
37
38 Motion by Faust, second by Makowske to adjourn the meeting at 9:45 P.M..
39
40 Motion carried unanimously.
42 Respectfully submitted, - - - — - -
103
4 Lois Bjelke
45 Secretary