Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1993-06-08 PZC MINUTES\. t CITY OF ENGLEWOOD PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION JUNE 8, 1993 I. CALL TO ORDER. The regular meeting of the City Planning and Zoning Commission was called to order by Vice Chairman Shoop at 7:00 P.M. in the City Council Chambers of Englewood City Hall. Members present: Members absent: Also present: Garrett, Gerlick, Mason, Tobin, Cuesta, Dummer, Shoop Merkel, Ex-Officio Covens (with previous notice) Harold J. Stitt, Planning Administrator II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES May 18, 1993 Vice-Chairman Shoop asked for a motion to approve the Minutes of May 18, 1993. Tobin moved: Dummer seconded: The Minutes of May 1~, 1993 be approved as written. AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Gerlick, Mason, Tobin, Cuesta, Dummer, Garrett, Shoop None Covens None The motion carried. ill. MASTER STREET PLAN West Caspian Place CASE #6-93 . Mr. Shoop stated that the issue before the Commission is a Public Hearing to consider amendment of the Master Street Plan by removing West Caspian Place from the Plan. He asked for a motion to open the Public Hearing. Mason moved: Tobin seconded: The Public Hearing on Case #6-93 be opened. AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: Mason, Tobin, Cuesta, Dummer, Garrett, Gerlick None Covens ABSTAIN: None The motion carried. Mr. Shoop asked that members of the audience who wish to address the Commission limit their comments to five minutes, and to avoid repetition of testimony. Mr. Shoop asked that staff present the issue. Harold J. Stitt was sworn in, and testified that he is Planning Administrator for the City of Englewood. The issue before the Commission is to consider the amendment of the Master Street Plan by removing designation of West Caspian Place from the Plan. Mr. Stitt pointed out that the Master Street Plan is a component of the Comprehensive Plan, which guides the growth and development of the total City. The Master Street Plan identifies streets which are primary traffic carriers (collectors, arterials, freeways, etc.), as well as identifies streets where additional right-of-way must be acquired. Mr. Stitt stated that the northwest Englewood area was annexed to the City in 1957. Much of the area was platted in the 1930's and 1940's, but some of the subdivisions date back to the late 1800' s. These blocks were platted with an east/west orientation rather than the north/south orientation typical throughout the majority of the City. The lots were large -- frequently in excess of 50 foot frontage and a depth of nearly 300 feet. Following annexation, efforts were made to encourage improvement and development in the area, and efforts were exerted --by citizens and City staff --to obtain right-of-way dedications for additional streets through both the industrial and residential areas. These efforts date back to the 1960' s accord- ing to records of Quit Claim Deeds which are on file. In 1979, streets which still needed ad- ditional right-of-way dedicated (West Adriatic Avenue, West Baltic Place, West Caspian Place, and West Hillside Avenue) were included in the Master Street Plan. The zoning of the area had been R-1-C, Single-family residence, for a number of years follow- ing annexation to the City. When the School District first proposed the closure of the Scenic View Elementary School, the residents and the City discussed ways to increase the school-age population of this area; ultimately, the entire residential area in Northwest Englewood was re- zoned to R-2-C, Medium Density Residence. This rezoning would allow the construction of single-family or two-family homes, and it was hoped that the rezoning and new street im- provements in the area would encourage additional development and save the school from clo- sure. This was not the case, and the elementary school closed. The school is still operating as Colorado's Finest Alternative High School, but elementary school children from this area are bused to other elementary schools in Englewood. Dedications for right-of-way have been obtained from 22 properties for West Caspian Place; nine properties in the block have not dedicated right-of-way. The policy of the City has been that right-of-way for street purposes will be "dedicated", and not acquired by purchase. Mr. Stitt clarified that "dedication" means that the right-of-way is "given" by the property owner to the City. Mr. Stitt stated that the proposed right-of-way for West Caspian Place is 50 feet. Mr. Stitt cited additional City policies that streets are not actually constructed until the full 2 .. J e dedication has been obtained, or until the City Council is approached by property owners re- questing the construction of the street. Mr. Stitt commented that in his opinion, it is unlikely that the current residents of the block will petition to have the street constructed, and until the full dedication is freely given, the street will not be constructed. Mr. Stitt stated that the City staff does not recommend removal of the street from the Master Street Plan, or. the return of the right-of-way presently dedicated to the City. Mr. Stitt pointed out that a great deal of time and effort has been expended by staff over the years to work with the residents of the general northwest Englewood area, and to obtain the right-of-way for the additional streets. He suggested that there will be a change of property owners in time, and the new owners may want the street constructed. Mr. Stitt reiterated that inasmuch as the street will not be constructed until all dedications are made, staff urges that the designation be retained on the Master Street Plan. Mr. Stitt addressed the issue of the property owned by Mr. and Mrs. Dan Cooke. The house on this lot is adjacent to or extends into the proposed West Caspian Place right-of-way. Mr. Cooke wants to expand the house further to the north into the proposed right-of-way. Staff recommends that the Public Works Department , through City Council, take steps to acquire the Cooke property, thus enabling Mr. and Mrs. Cooke to purchase property elsewhere, and eliminate the problem with the proposed right-of-way encroachment. Mr. Garrett asked for clarification of the efforts expended to acquire the dedications. Mr. Stitt stated that staff prepared the Quit Claim Deeds for the property owners wanting to dedicate; and several neighborhood meetings were held with staff in attendance. No actual funds were expended for acquisition, but if you consider staff time spent on the project there is an invest- ment on the part of the City. Mr. Stitt pointed out that were the right-of-way presently dedi- cated to be returned to the property from whence it came, and in the future the street is needed, it would mean expending the time and effort once again to accomplish what we now have. Mr. Garrett noted that it appears the majority of the block has dedicated right-of-way; were the remainder of the property owners to dedicate the right-of-way, will be street go through, or would the residents "have another shot at it" if they don't want the street constructed. Mr. Stitt stated that, assuming the right-of-way is fully dedicated, and assuming the Public Works Department would decide to construct and pave the street, the street would have to be included in a Paving District, and residents would have the opportunity to express their opinion on the inclusion of the street in the paving district; this would occur long before the actual construc- tion would begin. Mr. Garrett asked what the City would do with the Cooke property if they were to acquire it. Mr. Stitt stated that this has been briefly discussed at staff level. Mr. Stitt pointed out that there are several housing programs run by the Englewood Housing Authority, and that un- doubtedly they could use the property for one of those programs. 3 Ms. Cuesta inquired whether property dedicated by a previous owner goes with property when e it is sold, or whether it belongs to the City. Mr. Stitt stated that land once dedicated to the City is the property of the City. Mr. Shoop asked for those in favor of retaining the West Caspian Place designation in the Master Street Plan to address the Commission. Myron and Sharon Christianson were sworn in. Mr. Christianson testified that they own 2215, 2217, 2225, and 2227 West Wesley Avenue. They purchased these lots several years ago, and understood at the time of purchase that the street would go through. They developed the south portion of their property with two duplexes, which address from West Wesley. This now leaves the north one-half of their property with no access so they are unable to develop or use this portion of their property. Mr. Christianson stated that the development of their prop- erty has been an improvement to the area, and property values have increased. They want to be able to develop the north part of their property. Ms. Christianson reiterated there is no way the north portion of their property can be used unless the street does go through. Ms. Christianson stated that they are in receipt of a letter from former City Engineer Gary Diede, dated 1983, stating that the street was in the paving plan and was scheduled to be constructed probably in the eighth year of the plan. Ms. Chris- tianson stated that they want to see West Caspian Place remain on the Master Street Plan. In her opinion, if the street were to go through, no one would be "harmed"; conversely, denying some property owners use of landlocked sites is harming those owners. Ms. Christianson pointed out that were the street to go through, the property owners would not have to divide their lots; they could still retain the large lots they enjoy today . Ms. Cuesta inquired what Mr. and Mrs. Christianson would develop on the north part of their lots were they able to do so. Ms. Christianson stated they would probably construct additional duplexes. Mr. Mason inquired as to the size of the duplexes. Mr. Christianson stated the units have 1,500 square feet plus a full basement for each unit. Mrs. Christianson stated that the units were built in 1985, and have been rented to families ever since construction was completed. Mr. Shoop asked if anyone else wished to speak in favor of retaining West Caspian Place on the Master Street Plan. No one else addressed the Commission in favor. Mr. Shoop then asked that opponents address the Commission. Todd Huffman, 2247 West Wesley Avenue -was sworn in, and testified that there are a num- ber of the area homeowners who have been adding onto their residences, and stated that in his opinion, the lots aren't really that big. Mr. Huffman disagreed with the statement that if the street goes through there would be no harm to anyone, and stated that the assessments for street improvements will be very expensive, and there are some residents who are on fixed incomes. Mr. Huffman stated that the "City" has told him that as long as the street wasn't 4 fully dedicated, the street wouldn't be built. Other people have been told something different. Mr. Huffman stated that 25 feet isn't much, but it's 25 feet that cannot be built on, and there may be people who want to make use of this 25 feet. He stated that he would like to do some major landscaping in the area, but doesn't want to install it only to have it torn out if the street does go through. Mr. Huffman stated that he purchased his property about five years ago; the 25 feet from his property was dedicated at the time of purchase, and the lot was divided into two building sites; he states that he wants to have his property back as "one lot", and to regain control of the 25 feet that was dedicated from the property prior to his ownership. Mr. Garrett asked if the status quo was maintained, does Mr. Huffman feel any "comfort" with the knowledge that the residents do have the opportunity to protest the construction of the street when the dedications are made. Mr. Huffman stated that the residents are coming to a lot of meetings on this issue; he wants to enlarge his home and build a garage on the rear of his property. Mr. Huffman stated that the house on his lot is constructed pretty much in the "center" of the lot, and questioned whether there would be sufficient space on the north por- tion to construct a second home were he inclined to do so if the street did go through. Mr. Huffman stated that he likes a large yard. Mr. Mason asked why the 25 feet cited by Mr. Huffman couldn't be used for the landscaping he wants to put in. Mr. Huffman reiterated that he does want to construct a two garage on the rear of his property, as well as do landscaping. Whether he can regain control of the 25 feet will determine placement of his garage. Cherrie Brandt, 2297 West Wesley Avenue, was sworn in. She testified that the R-2-C zone classification was agreed to by the residents of the area in an effort to keep the elementary school open, but the school was closed, and the R-2-C Zoning has proven to be a "big mis- take". Ms. Brandt noted that most of the existing residences sit quite far back from West Wesley and/or West Iliff Avenue, so there would be very little chance of them being able to construct new residences on the back half of their property were West Caspian Place to go through. Ms. Brandt stated that residents are adding onto their homes, and if the street were to go through, they would lose the 25 feet and a lot of "living space". She stated that she and her husband have lived there 18 years; it is a unique area because of the larger lots and privacy that homeowners enjoy. She asked that the City "not rip it apart for the sake of progress", and pointed out that it is "only a handful of people who are in favor" of West Caspian Place. Ms. Brandt reiterated her plea that the area not be ruined for those who live there; she pointed out that those in favor of the street are not residents of the area. Ms. Brandt stated that homeown- ers want to retain the privacy and peaceful atmosphere of the area. She stated that in 1992, her property at 2297 West Wesley was in the Clean, Green & Proud "Proud Property Pro- gram". They have landscaped their site with ponds at the rear of the house. This would be lost were the street to go through. Ms. Brandt stated that West Caspian Place "should be totally taken off the Master Street Plan"; if in the future people want to see the street go through, put it back on then. Ms. Brandt stated that it is "crazy" to invest in landscaping only to see it torn out if the street does go through. Ms. Brandt stated that a lot of the residents are really cleaning the area up, and are proud to live in this area. She asked that this not be taken away from the residents. 5 Mr. Mason suggested that if the 25 feet from all properties is not dedicated, the residents are e really under no threat to have the street constructed. Ms. Brandt disagreed. She stated that residents have been told that if the right-of-way were not dedicated, it would be condemned -- she stated that she has been told that by City "officials", but refused to cite names. She reit- erated that she and her husband purchased their property in 1975, and were never notified that the street was proposed. Mr. Mason stated that if the City were to "take" the property for street purposes, there would have to be "fair and equitable compensation" to the property owner. Ms. Brandt cited homeowners who have been denied permits to construct within this proposed right-of-way. She asked if she was to request a Building Permit to construct a gazebo on the rear of her property, would she be able to obtain such a Permit. Mr. Stitt stated that he be- lieved she would be issued a Permit. Ms. Brandt stated that Mr. Cooke's property has not dedicated the 25 feet for right-of-way, yet he has been denied a Permit to add onto his home. Ms. Brandt submitted petitions and a letter in opposition to West Caspian Place for the record. Frank Burlingame, 2274 and 2288 West Iliff Avenue, was sworn .in and testified that he owns Lots 6 and 7, and the south one-half of Lots 4 and 5. He stated he purchased the south half of Lots 4, 5, and all of Lot 6 ten years ago, and liked the area so well, he purchased Lot 7 on which he now has a "guest house". The south half of Lots 4 and 5 are developed as an or- chard. The right-of-way from his lots had been dedicated prior to his acquisition of the prop- erty, and he is not in favor of the construction of the street. He stated that when he purchased the property, he was told by the "zoning board" that a large percentage of the property owners were against the street going through; he felt secure in purchasing the property, and that the area would remain as it was then. He also talked to his neighbors, and they were in opposition to the street, so he assumed there would "never" be a street there. He purchased the second portion of his property (Lot 7) two years ago. Mr. Burlingame stated that he is very happy with the way things are now, and does not want to see it changed. Mr. Burlingame stated that he has an "agreement " with the City that he maintains the 25 foot strip dedicated from his property, and he in turn was allowed to construct the fence. Ms. Tobin asked if improvement of the street would be a personal hardship on Mr. Burl- ingame. He responded affirmatively; he is now retired and on fixed income. He stated that installation of utilities would also be an expense many of them could ill afford, and cited a dis- cussion he had with residents along Baltic A venue who were billed for water and sewer hook- up. He stated that a street light was requested, and the City didn't have the money to pay for the installation of the light. Mr. Mason suggested that Mr. Burlingame would not be "harmed"by the status quo inasmuch as the 25 feet has been dedicated from his property. Mr. Burlingame acknowledged he would not be harmed, and stated that he wants to see the property given back to the owners. 6 Mr. Dummer commented that it appears the residents are opposed to the "uncertainty" of what may happen; he emphasized that without the total dedication of the right-of-way, the area will retain its status quo --the street will not be constructed. Mr. Burlingame responded that some people have been told by the City that the street will go through; others have been told it is not going to go through. He stated that he does not see any group of people pleading to have the street constructed. He wanted to live in a low density residential area, which is why he pur- chased here. Mr. Burlingame further stated that in his opinion , the "City has owed the Cookes for years --ever since the Building Permit was denied." Aaron and Marjorie Barnes, 2268 West Iliff A venue, were sworn in. Ms. Barnes testified that they did not receive written notice of the meeting this evening , or of the meeting in April when the issue was initially discussed. Both times, they were notified of the meeting by neighbors. Ms. Barnes stated that they very recently purchased the property, but were never told that a street was proposed to be constructed at the rear of their property. They do not want the street constructed, and urged that West Caspian Place be removed from the Master Street Plan. David Chumley was sworn in. He testified that he purchased property at 2055 West Wesley for development property a few years ago , with plans to construct units on both north and south sides of his property. Now , it does not appear that the street will ever go through, but he is glad to see the City reach a resolution of the problem faced by Mr. and Mrs. Cooke. Mr. Chumley stated that in his opinion, the "status quo" should be preserved --keep the des- ignation of West Caspian Place on the Master Street Plan, but the street not be actually con- structed until all dedications are made. Mr. Chumley stated that the dedication has been made from his property, but his lot has not been divided. Ms. Tobin asked for clarification of the City's position on condemnation. She commented that many people in Colorado are very wary of "condemnation", and cited efforts to condemn pri- vate property for Coors Stadium in Denver. Lee D. Merkel was sworn in, and testified that if there is a need to . acquire property , but the negotiations with the property owner is not satisfactory to both parties, the City can "condemn" the property. Mr. Merkel pointed out that appraisals must be acquired, and a fair market value determined for the property, which is paid to the property owner after this de- termination is made in Court. Mr. Merkel pointed out that West Caspian Place is not needed for circulation, but only to provide access for further development; the residents aren't in fa- vor of the street construction. He questioned that condemnation would be brought into the issue of West Caspian Place unless at least 90% of the dedications were made, and the major- ity of the residents were pushing to have the street put through. Mr. Merkel stated that staff recommends maintaining the "status quo" of the area , and not losing the effort and time that have been expended over a number of years to get the right-of-way that has been obtained. Mr. Merkel stated that staff does recommend that Mr. and Mrs. Cooke be compensated for their property, and the street remain on the Master Street Plan. Should the City Council de- termine to remove the street from the Master Street Plan, they will also have to conduct a Public Hearing on the issue. 7 Dan Cooke was sworn in and testified that he has been told that 30% of his house is "non-con-e forming", and that he cannot be granted a Building Permit to upgrade. Mr. Cooke stated that he "has it in writing" that he cannot get a Building Permit because of the street issue, and he wants some resolution to the matter. Ms. Cuesta asked if Mr. Cooke would be satisfied if the City purchased his property. Mr. Cooke answered in the affirmative. He testified that when he purchased the property in 1985, he was told the street was shown on the Master Street Plan, but there was no interest in build- ing the street. Mr. Cooke stated that he was then informed, in writing, that the street would be built in 1993, and has been informed within the last year or so that the street could be con- structed in either 1995 or 1997. Ms. Cuesta asked whether Mr. Cooke could sell the property, or get loans to finance im- provements. Mr. Cooke stated that he has the credit for the loans for improvement, but the bank will not grant the loan until the issue with the street right-of-way is resolved. Discussion ensued. Mr. Merkel pointed out that this issue was referred to the Planning Commission by the City Council in early 1992. The staff recommendation to the Commission is that West Caspian Place not be removed from the Master Street Plan, but that the street not be constructed; staff does urge that the Public Works Department and City Council remove the street from the Paving District Program, however, and that Mr. and Mrs. Cooke's property be acquired by the City. Mr. Cooke stated that he has received so many different "stories" regarding the street, that he now requests that everything be in writing. Ms. Brandt commented that the most frightening thing is to not get a "yes" or a "no". Ms. Tobin commented that it appears policies change with the change of City officials. Mr. Cooke stated that this is the case. Mr. Dummer asked of Mr. Cooke whether his property was inspected at the time he purchased it; he noted that lending authorities cite criteria prior to approving loans. He questioned if the property had a "non-conforming" designation at the time of purchase how did he acquire the loan, and why did he proceed with the purchase. Mr. Cooke stated that he purchased the property through a private party, but did have problems getting it refinanced because banks do not want to make loans on non-conforming structures. Ms. Cuesta inquired about that landscaping that would be destroyed were property dedicated and the street constructed. Mr. Cooke stated that a lot of trees on his property would be de- stroyed were the street to be constructed. Mr. Gerlick inquired whether Mr. Cooke was aware of problems on the property when he purchased it. Mr. Cooke stated that he was aware the street was in the Master Street Plan; he was able to obtain building permits up until 1986 to remodel the house, but when he said he wanted to "add on" to the house, he was not given a permit. 8 e Ms. Cuesta asked what would happen if the City were to return the dedicated right-of-way to the property owners; why does the City want to put a street through there and what do the property owners have to go through to get this right-of-way returned to them . Mr. Merkel stated that were the right-of-way to be returned now, and at some time in the future it is de- termined that the street must go through, property owners may have constructed improvements in this 25 feet that could make it more difficult or expensive to obtain the needed right-of-way. Mr. Merkel emphasized that even if the street continues to be shown on the Master Street Plan , it will not be constructed until fully dedicated, or City Council is petitioned to construct the street. Mr. Cooke stated that he has not been able to get a commitment from City Council because they "cannot commit future City Councils" to a course of action. Brief discussion ensued. Mr. Shoop asked if anyone else had questions , or wished to address the Commission. Garrett moved: Mason seconded: The Public Hearing on Case #6~93 be closed . AYES: NAYS: Tobin, Cuesta, Dummer, Garrett, Gerlick , Mason None ABSENT: Covens ABSTAIN: None The motion carried. Mr. Shoop asked the pleasure of the Commission. Ms. Cuesta stated that she had a hard time reconciling putting in more cement for a street and removing grass and trees. She stated that we should be thankful we have people willing to live on and maintain these larger lots. Mr. Garrett stated that he agreed that time, effort and money has been expended over the past many years to obtain the dedications ; but if the City were to purchase the Cooke property, this is money that must be expended today. This street would be one block in length, and "doesn't go anywhere". He stated that he does have concerns that Mr. Cooke says he has dedicated the right-of-way , and has been denied a Building Permit. Mr. Garrett urged that the dedications be returned to the properties. Mr. Merkel stated that if a proposed street is shown on the Master Street Plan, building can be prohibited within the projected street right-of-way. Were West Caspian Place to be removed from the Master Street Plan, Mr. Cooke could, in all probability, obtain a Building Permit. In response to an inquiry from Ms. Tobin, Mr. Cooke stated that right-of-way will have to be deeded back from the City, and he wants a "written guarantee there will never be a street put through in this block." 9 Mr. Gerlick stated that no one can given a written guarantee there will never be a street put 9 through. Mr. Mason pointed out that right-of-way was never dedicated from Mr. Cooke's property, so there is nothing to be dedicated back to Mr. Cooke. Mr. Mason stated that in his opinion, the only solution short of purchasing the property is to guarantee there will not be a street through this block. Mr. Shoop asked if the right-of-way were to be returned, would it go to the current property owners. · Mr. Stitt stated that we would have to go through the Quit Claim Deed process. and agreed with Mr. Mason that the right-of-way from Mr. Cooke's property was never dedicated. Mr. Garrett stated that the designation of West Caspian Place on the Master Street Plan is a "cloud" on the title to Mr. Cooke's property, and that financing institutions are reluctant to loan in situations like this. Mr. Stitt pointed out that when the Comprehensive Plan is re- corded, it isn't recorded against every property . Discussion ensued. Tobin moved: Cuesta seconded: The Planning Commission recommend to City Council that the Master Street Plan be amended by removing West Caspian Place from said Plan. Mr. Mason stated that in his opinion, this is not the solution to Mr. Cooke's problem, and pointed out that this will not "guarantee" receipt of a loan to expand his house. Mr. Gerlick pointed out that people who purchased their property after the right-of-way was dedicated, will be receiving 25 feet of land they did not pay for. Mr. Mason also cited the people who purchased property in good faith that the street would be constructed, and developed a portion of their property will now be deprived the use of the rear portion of their property. Mr. Mason pointed out that were the street to remain on the Master Street Plan, the street would not be constructed until all right-of-way was dedicated. Ms. Tobin opined that removal of the street from the Master Street Plan will remove a "City boulder" from Mr. Cooke's way. Discussion ensued. Mr. Mason asked whether there had been any activity to purchase Mr. Cooke's property. Mr. Merkel stated that appraisals have been obtained, and it would be a matter of negotiation. Mr. Gerlick stated that removal of the street from the Master Street Plan will certainly ad- versely affect the people who purchased property and constructed the duplexes. Mr. Mason urged that the "status quo" would harm no one , and that no one should feel they were "duped". Ms. Brandt disagreed , commenting that they were never told the street was going through. 10 f e Discussion ensued in the audience between Ms. Brandt and Ms. Christianson, who pointed out that even though they are not residents of the immediate area, they are taxpayers. Further discussion ensued. The vote was called: AYES: NAYS: Tobin, Cuesta, Dummer, Garrett, Shoop Gerlick, Mason ABSENT: Covens ABSTAIN: None The motion carried. IV. CITY TOUR Mr. Merkel stated that there have been several discussions regarding a tour of the City. He suggested scheduling such a tour sometime after the Independence Day Holiday; we should know who the new member of the Commission is by that time, and this individual can be in- cluded on the tour. Discussion ensued. Topics to be included on the city tour included the housing projects, the water and sewer plant, Swedish Medical Center, a tour of the "City boundaries", and economic development projects. A tentative proposed date of July 20, at 4 P.M. -6 P.M. was suggested, with pizza or sandwiches to be ordered in for 6:00 P.M. and the regular meeting scheduled at 7:00 P.M. V. PUBLIC FORUM. No one was present to address the Commission. VI. DIRECTOR'S CHOICE Mr. Merkel announced that City Manager Fraser has submitted his resignation effective July 2, and will assume the position of City Manager for the City of Loveland. Director of Fi- nance Lorraine Hayes has been named Acting City Manager. vn. COMMISSIONER'S CHOICE. Mr. Garrett discussed the closure of Oxford A venue for construction, and the impact it will have on bicycle routes. Discussion ensued. Nothing additional was brought before the Commission, and the meeting was declared ad- journed. G~~ei~4- 11