SUMMARY MINUTES OF A PUBLIC HEARING
MONDAY, APRIL 19, 1999 AT 7:00 P.M.
Mayor Rosemary Waldorf called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.
Council Members present were Flicks Bateman, Joyce Brown, Joe Capowski, Pat Evans, Kevin Foy, Julie McClintock, Lee Pavăo, and Edith Wiggins. Staff members present were Town Manager Cal Horton, Assistant Town Managers Sonna Loewenthal and Florentine Miller, Town Attorney Ralph Karpinos, Assistant to the Manager Ruffin Hall, Planning Director Roger Waldon, and Town Clerk Joyce Smith.
Council Member Brown announced that the Town had received a “Leadership in Local Government Award” from Common Cause, in response to the Town’s recent action to limit campaign spending. She said that she was present at the annual recognition banquet in Asheville to receive the award.
Regarding the Permitting and Regulating of Bed and Breakfast Inns
Roger Waldon, Planning Director, said that bed and breakfast inns were currently permitted in Chapel Hill. He said that they were permitted either as a very small home occupation, or as a small hotel, which could be located where a hotel was permitted in the Town. Mr. Waldon said that bed and breakfasts were usually recognized as having from three to ten lodging units in a residence with a resident or live-in manager. He said that they were operated in effect as a small hotel. Mr. Waldon said that the staff had identified a number of issues and put together a proposal to create a new definition in the Town’s development ordinance as a proposed Development Ordinance Text Amendment. He said that the amendment would define “bed and breakfast inn” as:
“A building or group of buildings containing one dwelling unit and up to five lodging units. The lodging units are intended for rental or lease primarily to transients for daily or weekly periods with or without board, as distinguished from rooming houses in which occupancy is generally by residents rather than transients.”
Mr. Waldon said that the regulations, as proposed, generally provided the following:
1. The property shall front on an arterial or collector street and have direct access thereto.
2. The property shall not be located within five hundred feet of a zoning lot containing another existing or approved bed and breakfast inn.
3. The inn shall be occupied by a live-in property manager.
4. No cooking facilities shall be allowed in the lodging units.
Mr. Waldon adding that the allowed signage in residential districts would be limited to one wall sign with the display area no larger than 4 square feet, and one parking space would be required for each lodging unit and two per dwelling unit. He said that as proposed, the bed and breakfast inns would be permitted as a principle use in the Town Center-1 and -2 districts, and in the Neighborhood Commercial, Community Commercial, Office/Institutional-1 and -2 districts, and Mixed Use Planned Developments. Mr. Waldon said that the staff proposed that bed and breakfast inns be designated a Special Use in all residential districts.
Mr. Waldon said that the memorandum to the Council identified options, key issues raised in the reports of the Planning Board and Historic District Commission, and points in favor and points in opposition to the use. He said that the staff thought the idea had merit and recommended that the Council adopt the ordinance to amend the Development Ordinance to permit and regulate bed and breakfast inns.
Betsy Pringle, Chair of the Historic District Commission, stated the Commission recommended that the Council not reject the concept of permitting bed and breakfasts, but offered several restrictions and recommendations.
Council Member Bateman asked Ms. Pringle what was meant by economic impact in her statement. Ms. Pringle said that it was the impact it might have on the adjoining property values and on the neighborhood.
Council Member McClintock asked Ms. Pringle what the reason was for opposing bed and breakfasts in Residential-1, -2 and -3 districts. Ms. Pringle said that the Town should start in some of the districts, before going into all districts, in order to see how it would work.
Mayor Waldorf asked if the Commission thought that this was a good idea for the historic district. Ms. Pringle said they thought that more study was needed.
Mr. Chris Belcher, a member of the Commission, said that the Commission felt that bed and breakfasts should not go with all residential districts at once, that the Town should see how it worked in some neighborhoods. He said that the Commission did not want to see a neighborhood with all bed and breakfasts and no residences remaining. He also said that they were not sure about the spacing requirement, that 500 feet was not very much space.
Mayor Waldorf asked Mr. Belcher what specific ideas further study would reveal. Mr. Belcher said that one thing would be parking, and another, that the Commission was concerned that the bed and breakfasts be only a place to spend the night and not be a place to serve three meals or have wedding receptions.
Council Member Foy asked what the concerns were about the arterial and connector streets that were listed in the memorandum. Mr. Waldon said that the definition of “collector roads” was based on their function and the type of trips that a street typically accommodated and the volume of trips on the street.
Council Member McClintock asked what the rationale was for having the bed and breakfasts on collector roads as opposed to other roads. Mr. Waldon said that they generally experienced a heavier volume of traffic than on local streets so that the impact on those roads would likely be less. He said that the roads were on the periphery of neighborhoods. Mr. Waldon said that off-street parking spaces would be required.
Council Member Bateman asked Mr. Waldon if 500 feet was more or less than a block in Chapel Hill. Mr. Waldon said that the blocks in Chapel Hill were all different sizes.
Mayor Waldorf noted that the Town required that service stations be at least 750 feet apart.
Connie Mullinex said that she and her husband stayed at bed and breakfasts when they traveled, that it was a good way to get to know the community where they were visiting. She said that she would use bed and breakfasts for guests she brought into Town for meetings, and that bed and breakfasts were a good way to preserve the old homes and keep them from decay.
Creston Woods, a resident of Southern Village, former general manager of the Carolina Inn, president of the Orange County Lodging Association, and vice-chair of the Chapel Hill and Orange County Visitor’s Bureau, said that he was speaking for both organizations in urging the Council to adopt the ordinance. He said that many visitors wished to stay in bed and breakfasts and would go elsewhere if they could not find one in Chapel Hill. Mr. Woods said that both organizations concurred with the regulations of the ordinance but thought that the signage regulation was too restrictive.
Pauline Grimson, representing the Westside Neighborhood Association, said that the Association had concerns about bed and breakfasts. She said that the Planning Board recommendation had stated that the Special Use Permit (SUP) was a bit onerous, but she felt that there should be at least the minimum requirements of a SUP. Ms. Grimson said that she felt an owner would be better than a manager and was concerned about how long people would stay in the bed and breakfast business, and then the next owner could use the property differently. She asked where the standards, safeguards and controls were. Ms. Grimson also said that some of the collector and arterial roads had much too much traffic already.
Patrick Oglesby, Chair of the Board of Trustees of the Chapel Hill Preservation Society, said that the executive committee was not opposed to bed and breakfasts, even in historic districts. He noted that they urged the Council to be careful to err on the side of caution and that the Council require a SUP.
Deb Nickell, an historic district resident, said that she supported the ordinance and felt that the addition of bed and breakfasts would be a welcome change. She said that by allowing them, the Town would have an alternative for historic houses that had become obsolete as single family homes for anyone other than the wealthy. Ms. Nickell said that she and her husband owned two homes in the historic district and had renovated and restored them, but that they could not keep both of them, and the neighbors did not want them to rent to students. She said that if there had been an ordinance allowing bed and breakfasts in the historic district, that would have been an option for her. Ms. Nickell urged the Council to pass the ordinance.
Randy Sather said that he had lived on North Boundary Street for 21 years and that he had restored and renovated his home, and was pleased with the number of people who were moving into the neighborhood and doing the same thing. He felt that if his home were a bed and breakfast that people would not want to move in next to it and put in effort, energy and money to restore their home. Mr. Sather said that he did not think having a bed and breakfast would improve the neighborhood now or would have in the past. He said there would be the issues of more traffic, noise, and garbage. Mr. Sather urged the Council to reject the ordinance and cited a letter he had from a local realtor saying that he had nine qualified buyers for homes in the historic district. He said that the homes could be sold to families, and that the Town would be better off not allowing commercial bed and breakfasts.
Sally Sather, resident of North Boundary Street for 21 years, said that the houses in her neighborhood were beautifully kept and maintained, and had beautiful gardens. She said that when homes came on the market for sale they were quickly sold and that they were not languishing in decay. Ms. Sather said that if bed and breakfasts were allowed then the owners would not renovate the homes, but they would just put a coat of paint on them. She said that a commercial development did not belong in the historic district and urged the Council to vote against the ordinance and protect the neighborhoods.
Gay Eddy, Acting Chair of the Planning Board, said that seven of the eight members of the Board present at the April 6th meeting supported the ordinance for bed and breakfasts but had received their packets too late for a sufficient study, and they needed more information. She said that they wanted to review the discussions at the April 19th Public Hearing, to study further information from other small towns which allowed bed and breakfasts, and to study the information available through the National Bed and Breakfast Organization. Ms. Eddy said that they were presently gathering information for review at their May 7th meeting. She said that the one member who declined to generally support the bed and breakfast concept did so until more information was gathered.
Council Member Evans asked if the Planning Board would meet before the Council was scheduled to make its decision. Ms. Eddy said it would, and it was gathering information at present.
Eunice Brock, a Chapel Hill realtor, felt it was a mistake to ban bed and breakfasts. She said that often when old houses came on the market they were sold to non-resident investors who then rented them to students, each of whom had a car. Ms. Brock said that the only place for visitors to stay in the downtown was at the Carolina Inn, which was usually booked for University functions. She felt that bed and breakfasts enhanced the character of a neighborhood. Ms. Brock said that there was not a need for a Special Use Permit, but just a set of good regulations. She urged the Council to vote to accept bed and breakfasts.
Nancy Preston, a resident of the historic district, said that the Town must develop rules that would keep bed and breakfasts from threatening the strong neighborhood of owner-occupied old homes which currently existed in the downtown and had been protected for many years. She said that bed and breakfasts were commercial, and that she would like to see the word “inns” deleted from the ordinance, as that connoted much larger concepts than what she hoped the bed and breakfasts would be. Ms. Preston said that she disagreed with the Manager that they could be operated by a manager, that owner occupancy was critical, and that expansion of the home occupancy rules would be adequate. She urged the Council to appoint a steering committee of opponents and proponents from the community to come to some consensus. Ms. Preston noted that the Manning House was presently being converted back to a single occupancy home.
Betty York, the original petitioner, said that she had been running a bed and breakfast for many years, although with only one room. She said that the Council needed to make a distinction between bed and breakfast inns and bed and breakfast homes, that inns might be more commercial. Ms. York said that all the questions were good questions and needed to be considered.
Katherine Kopp said that she wanted to register her opposition to the ordinance for bed and breakfasts. She said that she lived in the historic district and that her neighborhood was very diverse, and that for the most part the neighbors were good neighbors. Ms. Kopp said that many large old homes had been sold in the last few years to couples and families, and were being restored and renovated to single family homes. She felt that the Town needed to ensure that the older homes and neighborhoods would be able to retain their original use and character.
Kimberly Kyser, a resident of the historic district, a member of the Historic District Commission and a trustee of the Preservation Society, spoke as a resident opposed to the ordinance. She said that there were some areas in Town where homes had become commercial, just like residential areas in the downtowns of other cities, which had already gone commercial. Ms. Kyser said that this would be a dangerous precedent because the neighborhoods were fragile and were already being protected by special legislation.
Shari Whitten-Goldstein, owner of Carolina Mornings, a Bed and Breakfast Reservation Service, said that she specialized in bed and breakfasts in the Asheville area, and that the neighborhoods there had increased in value with bed and breakfasts. She said that people who bought bed and breakfasts took pride in their homes. Ms. Whitten-Goldstein said that she received several calls for bed and breakfasts in Chapel Hill, but that there were very few. She said that the Asheville bed and breakfasts were very discriminating and usually cost about $130 per night. Ms. Whitten-Goldstein said that she would like to see the ordinance approved and felt it was a positive thing.
Council Member McClintock asked Ms. Whitten-Goldstein if the Asheville bed and breakfasts were owner-occupied. Ms. Whitten-Goldstein said that they were, and that was a very important point.
Council Member Brown asked Ms. Whitten-Goldstein how many bed and breakfasts there were in Asheville proper. Ms. Whitten-Goldstein said there were close to 50.
Mary Jenne said that she had lived on Cameron Avenue for 25 years and that she supported the ordinance as a reasonable and logical use of the old homes. She said that Cameron Avenue had many venerable boarding houses and rooming houses, and she would welcome bed and breakfasts in her neighborhood.
Arne Gray said that he owned two houses in the Cameron/McCauley Historic District and he thought that bed and breakfasts would add vitality to the neighborhood. He said that those who regulated historic districts also diminished the vitality in those districts. Mr. Gray said that he would like to have the concerns of vitality considered as well as the market value.
Joel Harper said that he added his support for the ordinance, especially in a Town that had a history of integrating sororities and fraternities into neighborhoods. He felt that the advantage of bed and breakfasts was that there would not be the problems with alcohol and noise. He urged the Council to support the ordinance.
Kimberly Kyser read a letter from Caroline and Dick Dornan urging the Council not to pass the ordinance. The Dornans said that the neighborhood was returning to single occupancy homes, there were no longer absentee owners, and there were less student rentals. They felt that the function of a historic district was to preserve neighborhoods.
Donna Hudson said that her dream was to be an owner of a bed and breakfast, and if the ordinance were adopted she would have the best looking house and most beautiful garden on the block. She urged the Council to vote in favor of the ordinance.
Council Member Evans read an e-mail letter from Alan Rimer for the record. He said that:
· He believed that bed and breakfasts in the appropriate location would be an appropriate use of larger, older homes.
· The Council should “benchmark” the proposed ordinance against successful ordinances in other communities for the best ordinances.
· Bed and breakfasts should be owner-occupied.
· Serious consideration should be given regarding the necessity of the use of a special use permit.
· Consideration given to the zoning districts in which they might be placed.
Council Member McClintock asked the staff whether the ordinance would apply Town-wide and if all that would be necessary would be for an applicant to go to Town Hall and file an application. Mr. Waldon said, in answer to her second question, that was not correct. He said that the proposal called for all bed and breakfasts to have Special Use Permits—first file an application, then go before the Planning Board, then to a hearing by the Council, and then a decision by the Town Council.
Mayor Waldorf said that it would be a permitted use in all Town Center-1 and -2 and neighborhoods zoned commercial.
Mr. Waldon said that bed and breakfasts would be permitted in all non-residential areas where hotels were permitted. He said that the process for the applicant would be to file an application and go before the Planning Board for review and action.
Council Member McClintock said that if someone was successful in getting a Special Use Permit for a bed and breakfast inn, that permit would be in place no matter who owned the house—a use that would run with the land. She asked if the staff had given any thought to linking this to a conditional use. Council Member McClintock said that the Town used conditional use for the Women’s Center and that had worked out well, and that might be an option for bed and breakfasts. She asked if the Council would like to consider that as an option. Mr. Waldon said that the mechanism for doing that would be to force a rezoning of the property—any rezoning ran with the land except for home occupation, which was tied to the owner of the property.
Mayor Waldorf asked why the staff did not consider this as a way of enabling bed and breakfasts. Mr. Waldon said that the staff had not explored how that might be done, but if the Council was interested, it could be done and brought back for Council consideration.
Mayor Waldorf asked what the pros and cons were if permission was carried with the owner. Mr. Waldon said that would be a very definite positive argument, but that the argument against that would be that as home occupations were structured presently, it was a simple procedure and the applicants did not have to go through a board.
Council Member Brown asked if there could be a special home occupation category that would be tailored for something like bed and breakfasts. Mr. Waldon said that would be one way of doing it, and he would prepare something along those lines.
Mayor pro tem Capowski asked if the staff could provide a map to indicate where the Town Center-1 and -2 districts were. He asked how the staff would address the issue of an owner building a small building behind his/her house for a bed and breakfast. Mr. Waldon said that might be a possibility under the ordinance as it was drafted now.
Mayor pro tem Capowski asked what documentation a person would have to provide the Town if all they were doing was internal renovation. Mr. Waldon said that the applicant would have to address the standards in the proposal and be in compliance—the process would be the same as any Special Use Permit.
Council Member Foy asked if it was possible for a Special Use Permit to expire by its own terms. Mr. Karpinos thought that the Town could establish a system where a Special Use Permit would have a time limit. He said he would be concerned about tying a Special Use Permit to a specific owner. Mr. Karpinos said that he thought it could be written for five or six years, for example, and then it could be renewed.
Council Member Foy asked if bed and breakfasts were permitted anywhere in Chapel Hill. Mr. Waldon said that they could be permitted in zones for hotels and be considered as a hotel, and permitted after being approved by the Planning Board.
Council Member Foy asked to what extent the Town could quantify the effect that this ordinance would have on the prices of properties. Mr. Waldon said that he did not know if it could be quantified. Mr. Horton said that the staff could find out values from Hillsborough.
Council Member Brown asked if the special concerns voiced this evening could be written into a special home occupation ordinance. Mr. Waldon said that if it were tied to the home occupation approval, then it would be tied to a specific owner, and a subsequent owner would have to get a new approval. He said that the standards would be whatever the Council decided would be desirable.
Council Member Brown asked if it could be made a different sort of an ordinance, rather than a Special Use Permit. Mr. Horton said that it could include such things as regulating signage, parking spaces, storage of refuse and limits on food service.
Council Member Evans said that she had talked with some of her neighbors who thought a bed and breakfast would be just fine in the historic district. She asked if changes to structure had to go before the Historic District Commission. Mr. Waldon said that they would.
Council Member Evans said that she had been sorry to hear that the bed and breakfast in Southern Village had stopped operating due to over-demand and owner could not keep up with their jobs as well as their bed and breakfast. She noted that many visitors to Chapel Hill preferred to stay in a bed and breakfast and were disappointed when they could not, particularly when they wished to stay in the historic district. Council Member Evans said that when a person bought a home in the historic district, they received tax credit for renovation and, if they were a business, they could also write off part of their business.
Council Member Evans said that she had one concern regarding the regulations as to how a home had to be located on the street. She said that the Town required that a house located on a corner on an arterial street must have the access—the driveway—located on a minor street—the local street. Council Member Evans said that this issue must be addressed. She said that one of her neighbors was concerned about houses being turned into rooming houses and what that was doing to the community. Council Member Evans said that many of the neighbors thought that a bed and breakfast would be a great alternative to a rooming house. She also said that the Women’s Center had greatly improved the site where it was located.
Council Member Wiggins asked Mr. Waldon if he could get some addresses where bed and breakfasts were located in Hillsborough. She said that she would like to drive through the neighborhoods where they were located.
Council Member McClintock said that she would like to see the bed and breakfast proposal work, if it could be done right. She said that she had some concerns about doing it through home occupation, that some of the concerns voiced by the neighbors would not be addressed that way, but felt that with a conditional use every case would be different. Council Member McClintock asked the Council if they would consider setting up an additional forum to discuss the concerns.
Council Member Brown said that she was not advocating home occupation, but that all concerns should be considered. She asked if the staff could get some information about the distribution of bed and breakfasts throughout the towns that they had looked at.
Council Member Foy asked how the Historic District Commission’s recommendation not to put bed and breakfasts in Residential-1, -2, and -3 played out in the historic district, specifically what streets would be affected. He asked how the staff came up with the recommendation that five rooms would be permitted.
Mayor Waldorf suggested that everyone who had spoken this evening receive notification as to when this issue would be coming up again before the Planning Board and the Historic District Commission.
Council Member Wiggins stated that she certainly would not object to people like the Mullinix visiting a bed and breakfast in her neighborhood.
Mr. Horton suggested that it might be helpful to have some freedom in scheduling another hearing in order to give the two Boards some time to work on these issues and to hear from the people who were interested in them, since there did not seem to be any urgency.
COUNCIL MEMBER PAVĂO MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER FOY, TO REFER THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE TEXT AMENDMENT REGARDING THE PERMITTING AND REGULATING OF BED AND BREAKFAST INNS BACK TO THE STAFF. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).
Mr. Horton said that the applicant had indicated that he intended to submit a revised application for a Special Use Permit. He said the staff believed that the Council could either defer action on this application and the accompanying application for a Zoning Atlas Amendment, or schedule a time to consider and vote on the applications for May 10th.
Mayor Waldorf asked, if the Council deferred it to an indefinite time, how that would interfere with the protest petition. Mr. Horton said that if it were deferred to an indefinite time everything would start over with regard to notice and process. Mr. Karpinos said that if there was a substantial change in the rezoning application then that could trigger an opportunity for another protest petition to be filed. He said that it did not invalidate the current protest petition insofar as there was a current zoning proposal.
Council Member Foy asked Mr. Horton why he recommended the resolutions. Mr. Horton answered because the application did not meet the requirements and could reasonably be voted on and disposed of. He said that the Council had been dealing with this matter for a long time and that this was one of several deferrals in which the applicant had asked for more time. Mr. Horton said that he thought that it would be reasonable to dispose of it, if the Council did not want to resume this process.
Council Member Foy asked if the proposal would remain in its priority position if the Council deferred it. Mr. Horton said that it preserved its status, but if the Council voted on it, it could not come back for a year, if it were defeated.
Council Member Evans said that the fees already paid would not have to be paid again. Mr. Horton said that she was correct.
Council Member Evans asked what the fees were for the rezoning and the application. Mr. Horton said it would be over $2,000 and that the Town had spent well over $2,000 in time on this application.
COUNCIL MEMBER BROWN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER MCCLINTOCK, TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 1 INSTRUCTING THE TOWN MANAGER TO PLACE THE SOUTH COLUMBIA TOWNHOMES APPLICATION FOR A ZONING ATLAS AMENDMENT ON THE MAY 10, 1999 COUNCIL AGENDA IN ORDER TO RECONVENE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND TAKE ACTION ON THE APPLICATION.
Council Member Bateman asked Mr. Horton if he recommended that the Council vote Aye or Nay because of the amount of staff time that had been put into this application. Mr. Horton answered the applicant had not presented anything substantially different than what had already been presented to the Council the last time, and it was clear that the applicant had not responded to the requirements that the Council had suggested. He said that the fact that the letter had mentioned that one of the persons who had been working on the application was no longer with this company had not affected his recommendation.
Mayor pro tem Capowski asked if the Council adopted Resolution 1 and Resolution 2 and voted on this application on May 10th, would it require a seven-vote majority in order to do the rezoning. Mr. Horton said that was correct.
THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).
A RESOLUTION INSTRUCTING THE TOWN MANAGER TO PLACE THE SOUTH COLUMBIA TOWNHOMES APPLICATION FOR A ZONING ATLAS AMENDMENT ON THE MAY 10, 1999 COUNCIL AGENDA IN ORDER TO RECONVENE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND TAKE ACTION ON THE APPLICATION (99-4-19/R-1)
WHEREAS, the Town Council opened and continued Public Hearings on May 18, June 8, and June 22, 1998, and again on January 20, 1999, February 8, 1999, and April 19, 1999, on an application for a Zoning Atlas Amendment related to the South Columbia Street Townhomes; and
WHEREAS, the applicant has not submitted a revised application for evaluation and consideration;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council instructs the Town Manager to place the application for a Zoning Atlas Amendment for the South Columbia Townhomes, which was considered at a Public Hearing on January 20, 1999, on the May 10, 1999 Council agenda in order to reconvene the Public Hearing and take action on the application.
This the 19th day of April, 1999.
COUNCIL MEMBER FOY MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER PAVĂO, TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 2, CONTINUING THE PUBLIC HEARING ON THE SOUTH COLUMBIA STREET TOWNHOMES APPLICATION FOR A ZONING ATLAS AMENDMENT. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).
A RESOLUTION INSTRUCTING THE TOWN MANAGER TO PLACE THE SOUTH COLUMBIA TOWNHOMES APPLICATION FOR A SPECIAL USE PERMIT ON THE MAY 10, 1999 COUNCIL AGENDA IN ORDER TO RECONVENE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND TAKE ACTION ON THE APPLICATION (99-4-19/R-2)
WHEREAS, the Town Council opened and continued Public Hearings on May 18, June 8, and June 22, 1998, and again on January 20, 1999, February 8, 1999, and April 19, 1999, on an application for a Special Use Permit related to the South Columbia Street Townhomes; and
WHEREAS, the applicant has not submitted a revised application for evaluation and consideration;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council instructs the Town Manager to place the application for a Special Use Permit for the South Columbia Townhomes, which was considered at a Public Hearing on January 20, 1999, on the May 10, 1999 Council agenda in order to reconvene the Public Hearing and take action on the application.
This the 19th day of April, 1999.
The meeting was adjourned at 8:40 p.m.
The minutes of April 19, 1999 were adopted on the 24th day
of May, 1999.
__________________________________________
Joyce A. Smith, CMC