The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2010-05-11 Planning PACKET Note: Anyone wishing to speak at any Planning Commission meeting is encouraged to do so. If you wish to speak, please rise and, after you have been recognized by the Chair, give your name and complete address for the record. You will then be allowed to speak. Please note that the public testimony may be limited by the Chair and normally is not allowed after the Public Hearing is closed. ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING MAY 11, 2010 AGENDA I. CALL TO ORDER: 7:00 PM, Civic Center Council Chambers, 1175 E. Main Street II. ANNOUNCEMENTS III. CONSENT AGENDA A. Approval of Minutes 1. April 13, 2010 Planning Commission Minutes 2. April 27, 2010 Study Session Minutes IV. PUBLIC FORUM V. TYPE II PUBLIC HEARINGS A. PLANNING ACTION: #2009-00726 SUBJECT PROPERTIES: 720 Grandview Drive APPLICANT: McDonald, Lynn & Bill DESCRIPTION: Appeal by Bonnie Brodersen of the Staff Advisor’s decision to approve a Physical and Environmental Constraints Review Permit for the property located at 720 Grandview Drive. Planning Action #2006-01784 previously granted approval for development in the Wrights Creek Floodplain and Riparian Preservation Lands for the improvement of a portion of an existing driveway, re-grading the transition of the driveway to Grandview Drive, the installation a private storm drain and the extension of utilities to serve a new single-family residence. The current application again requests a Physical & Environmental Constraints Review Permit for development in the Wrights Creek Floodplain and Riparian Preservation Lands for the improvement of a portion of an existing driveway, re-grading the transition of the driveway to Grandview Drive, the installation a private storm drain and the extension of utilities to serve a new single-family residence. The current request differs from the previous approval in that it involves alterations to accommodate changes in vehicular access. A request for a COMPREHENSIVE PLAN Tree Removal Permit to remove two dead poplar trees is also included. DESIGNATION: ZONING: ASSESSOR’S MAP #: Single Family Residential; R-1-10; 39 1E 05 CD; TAX LOT: 500. B. PLANNING ACTIONS: #2009-01244 SUBJECT PROPERTY: 1644 Ashland Street APPLICANT: Goodman Networks, Inc. for AT&T Wireless, LLC DESCRIPTION: A request for Site Review approval and a Conditional Use Permit to install rooftop wireless communications facilities on the existing Ashland Street Cinema building located at 1644 Ashland Street, and associated ground mounted equipment. The installation consists of 12 architecturally-integrated panel antennas. The application includes a request for an Administrative Variance from Site Design and Use Standards required landscape buffer. The subject property is located within the Detail Site Review Zone and the Ashland Boulevard Corridor, and the existing COMPREHENSIVE PLAN building is also subject to Additional Standards for Large Scale Projects. DESIGNATION:ZONING:ASSESSOR’S MAP #:TAX LOT: Commercial; C-1; 39 1E 15 AB; 6800. VI. ADJOURNMENT In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to participate in this meeting, please contact the Community Development office at 541-488-5305 (TTY phone is 1-800-735-2900). Notification 48 hours prior to the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to the meeting (28 CFR 35.102-35.104 ADA Title 1). ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING MINUTES April 13, 2010 CALL TO ORDER Chair Pam Marsh called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. in the Civic Center Council Chambers, 1175 East Main Street. Commissioners Present: Staff Present: Larry Blake Brandon Goldman, Senior Planner Michael Dawkins Derek Severson, Associate Planner Dave Dotterrer Richard Appicello, City Attorney Pam Marsh April Lucas, Administrative Assistant Melanie Mindlin Mike Morris John Rinaldi, Jr. Absent Members: Council Liaison: Debbie Miller Eric Navickas, absent ANNOUNCEMENTS Senior Planner Brandon Goldman introduced the City’s new Assistant Planner Michael Piña to the Planning Commission. CONSENT AGENDA A.Approval of Minutes. 1. March 9, 2010 Planning Commission Minutes. Commissioners Dotterrer/Dawkins m/s to approve the Consent Agenda. Voice Vote: all AYES. Motion passed 8-0. PUBLIC FORUM No one came forward to speak. TYPE II PUBLIC HEARINGS A.PLANNING ACTION: #2009-00726 SUBJECT PROPERTIES: 720 Grandview Drive APPLICANT: McDonald, Lynn & Bill DESCRIPTION: Appeal by Bonnie Brodersen of the Staff Advisor’s decision to approve a Physical and Environmental Constraints Review Permit for the property located at 720 Grandview Drive. Planning Action #2006-01784 previously granted approval for development in the Wrights Creek Floodplain and Riparian Preservation Lands for the improvement of a portion of an existing driveway, re-grading the transition of the driveway to Grandview Drive, the installation a private storm drain and the extension of utilities to serve a new single-family residence. The current application again requests a Physical & Environmental Constraints Review Permit for development in the Wrights Creek Floodplain and Riparian Preservation Lands for the improvement of a portion of an existing driveway, re-grading the transition of the driveway to Grandview Drive, the installation a private storm drain and the extension of utilities to serve a new single-family residence. The current request differs from the previous approval in that it involves alterations to accommodate changes in vehicular access. A request for a Tree Removal Permit to remove two dead poplar trees is also included. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Single Family Residential; ZONING: R-1-10; ASSESSOR’S MAP #: 39 1E 05 CD; TAX LOT: 500. Commissioner Marsh read aloud the public hearing procedures for land use hearings. Ashland Planning Commission April 13, 2010 Page 1 of 3 Declaration of Ex Parte Contact Commissioners Dawkins, Blake, Mindlin, Dotterrer, Rinaldi and Marsh reported site visits. No ex parte contact was reported by any of the commissioners. Commissioner Marsh read aloud the applicable criteria for this planning action; she also noted a letter was submitted by the Appellant, Bonnie Brodersen, requesting the record be kept open for 7 days. Staff Report Associate Planner Derek Severson presented the staff report for this application. He reviewed the location of the subject property, the Applicant’s prior approval, and their current proposal. He explained the Applicant had previously received approval to improve the driveway leading to their property which crosses the corner of tax lot 411. At the time, the owners of tax lot 411 verbally agreed to an access easement; however the Appellant, Bonnie Brodersen, is now the owner of that property and is not willing to grant the same easement. Due to this change in access, the Applicant’s are proposing to construct a new driveway that would be located 13 ft. closer to the creek in order to avoid the corner of the Ms. Brodersen’s property. Mr. Severson noted the previously approved improvement would have resulted in approximately 324 sq. ft. of disturbance within the riparian zone, and the current proposal will result in 743 sq. ft. disturbance. Mr. Severson addressed the concerns raised by the Appellant. He clarified while staff does not believe the proposed driveway improvement will impede access to the Appellant’s property, staff is recommending that the Applicant’s landscape plan be revised to ensure future access to this property. He stated the Appellant has also raised objections with which ordinances apply. Mr. Severson clarified the bulk of the Applicant’s property, including the area identified in the application, are entirely below 25% slope, and therefore the Severe Constraints ordinance does not apply. Additionally, the Water Resources ordinance does not apply because this application was submitted prior to that ordinance taking effect. Mr. Severson clarified this application was previously granted an extension and has been extended again through the Recession Extension Ordinance. He explained the question before the Commission this evening is whether to approve the driveway improvement which results in 743 sq. ft. of disturbance. He clarified this application is substantially the same as the previous application and results in the same end product on the ground. He stated the Applicant’s have exhausted all of their options to access their property from the only available right of way and stated staff is recommending the Commission’s approval. Applicant’s Presentation Mark Bartholomew/Applicant’s Representative/Mr. Bartholomew introduced Landscape Architect Kerry KenCairn, Engineer Mike Thornton, and noted the applicant Lynn McDonald is also present. Mr. Bartholomew stated the staff report does a good job of identifying the issues and presenting the history as clear as possible. He commented that they have been working on this for many years and provided some background on this project. He explained this action started as a simple building permit, but that administrative approval was appealed by the neighbor, Bonnie Brodersen. He stated the Applicants voluntary remanded the application and the City agreed to address Ms. Brodersen’s assignments of error. The application was taken before the Planning Commission and approved, but that approval was then appealed by Ms. Brodersen. An appeal hearing was held in front of the City Council and the Council upheld the Planning Commission’s decision. Ms. Brodersen then appealed the Council’s decision to the Land Use Board of Appeals (LUBA), who also ultimately upheld the City’s decision. Mr. Bartholomew explained that following the affirmative LUBA decision, the Ms. Brodersen purchased the adjacent property and will not grant the same easement identified in the original application. With that option exhausted, Mr. Bartholomew stated they are now forced to construct a separate driveway closer to the creek. He stated they have no other alternative and this is the only access to the property. Mr. Bartholomew clarified the portion of land that would be disturbed is further away from the creek than the existing Grandview Drive, and stated the Land Use Code allows for this as long as the disturbance is kept to a minimum. Mr. Bartholomew acknowledged the Appellant’s request to leave the record open for 7 days and asked that they be granted an additional 7 days to submit final written argument. Ashland Planning Commission April 13, 2010 Page 2 of 3 Public Testimony Joseph Bova/821 Grandview/Voiced his support for the Commission’s approval of this application and stated construction of a single family home in this location will be an improvement to the neighborhood. Mr. Bova commented on the Appellant’s objections and stated the nearby intermittent creek is non-fish bearing and is not a significant riparian corridor. He thanked the Applicants for the measures they are taking to keep pollutants from entering the creek and stated the proposed driveway may actually reduce the amount of sediment. Mr. Bova commented that the Appellant in this action raised the same arguments in the mid-1990’s when she appealed the building site for his home. He questioned the Appellant’s motivations and stated if she truly cared about the environment she would grant the easement that would allow the driveway to be located further back from the riparian area. But since she is unwilling to do so, the Applicants are forced to move the driveway closer to the creek. Mr. Bova concluded his testimony by encouraging the Commission to support this Application. Rebuttal by the Applicant Kerry KenCairn/Project’s Landscape Architect/Noted a concern has been raised in regards to the Ponderosa Pine tree and noted the Arborist’s letter included in the packet indicates there is no threat to this tree as part of this application. She added they are doing everything they can to stay as far away from the creek as possible. In regards to the proposed condition to modify their landscape plan, Ms. KenCairn stated she did not realize this was an access lot and stated it will not be a problem to modify the landscape plan. Mike Thornton/Project Engineer/Stated they have done the minimal amount possible in terms of road construction in order to provide this access. He stated they understand the importance of protecting the riparian corridor and stated they believe their small impact will have no net negative impact on this riparian habitat. Commission Marsh closed the public hearing at 7:40 p.m. Questions of Staff Mr. Severson clarified staff is asking that the Applicant’s landscape plan be adjusted so that their plantings do not impede future access to the adjacent tax lot. In terms of the new driveway, Mr. Severson clarified the Applicant’s will have to grade a transition from the gravel to a paved surface. Commissioners Dotterrer/Rinaldi m/s to leave the record open until April 21, 2010 at 4:30 p.m. (final written arguments will be due by April 28, 2010 at 4:30 p.m.) and to continue this item to the May 11, 2010 Planning Commission meeting. Voice Vote: all AYES. Motion passed 7-0. OTHER BUSINESS A.Approval of Findings for 2010-2020 SOU Campus Master Plan (PA-2009-00817) Commissioners Dawkins/Morris m/s to approve the Findings for Planning Action 2009-00817. Voice Vote: all AYES. Motion passed 7-0. ADJOURNMENT Meeting adjourned at 7:50 p.m. Respectfully submitted, April Lucas, Administrative Assistant Ashland Planning Commission April 13, 2010 Page 3 of 3 ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION STUDY SESSION MINUTES April 27, 2010 CALL TO ORDER Chair Pam Marsh called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. in the Civic Center Council Chambers, 1175 East Main Street. Commissioners Present: Staff Present: Larry Blake Bill Molnar, Community Development Director Michael Dawkins Brandon Goldman, Senior Planner Dave Dotterrer Derek Severson, Associate Planner Pam Marsh Linda Reid, Housing Program Specialist Melanie Mindlin April Lucas, Administrative Assistant Mike Morris John Rinaldi, Jr. Absent Members: Council Liaison: Debbie Miller, absent Eric Navickas ANNOUNCEMENTS Community Development Director Bill Molnar noted the Economic Development Strategy update will come before the Commission at their May Study Session. He also commented on the Croman Mill Plan and stated the Council held their first public hearing on April 6 and this item will be continued at the Council’s May 4 meeting. thth Commissioner Marsh stated at the May Study Session she would like the Commission to revisit the goals they set at their annual retreat and determine what still needs to be accomplished before the end of the year. PRESENTATIONS A.2010-2014 CDBG Consolidated Plan Update. Housing Program Specialist Linda Reid and Senior Planner Brandon Goldman provided a presentation on the 2010-2014 CDBG Consolidated Plan. Mr. Goldman explained the Consolidated Plan contains an assessment of needs for specific eligible activities to benefit low income populations and populations with special needs. It also contains a housing market analysis, an evaluation of resources that are available to serve the specific populations, an assessment of barriers to affordable housing, an analysis of impediments to fair housing, an evaluation of economic and community development needs, and an outline of the public participation process for how the CDBG funds will be allocated. He noted most of the demographic information comes from the 2000 Census but in order to have it be more up to date, Ms. Reid and the Housing Commission supplemented the 2006-2008 American Survey data. Ms. Reid commented on the Consolidated Plan’s public participation process, provided information on the City’s housing types and vacancy rates, and provided information on the City’s demographics. The following are some of the key figures listed by Ms. Reid: Ashland has 17 Census block groups and of those 8 are considered low to moderate income. Between 1990 and 2008 the total population of people 55 or older doubled; and all other age groups with the exception of children under age 5 were reduced. There is a higher percentage of individuals living below the poverty level in Ashland than in Jackson County, the State of Oregon, and the United States as a whole. Ashland has a lower median income than Medford, Jackson County, the State of Oregon, and the United States. Ashland Planning Commission April 27, 2010 Page 1 of 3 Staff noted the City Council approved the 2010-2010 Consolidated Plan on April 20, 2010 and asked if the Planning Commissioners had any questions. Commissioner Dotterrer asked what impact Southern Oregon University students have on this data. Ms. Reid stated it is not possible to separate this information out of the Census report; however the University is coming out with their own data which will be very helpful. Commissioner Mindlin asked if CDBG funds could be used for transportation needs. Ms. Reid stated CDBG funds could be used for transportation improvements if those improvements primarily benefit low to moderate income families, and she provided some examples. Mr. Molnar noted the current Obama administration is moving in the direction of forming relationships between transportation and housing needs and indicated there may be future funding possibilities in this regard. Mindlin noted recent reports are indicating money spent on public transportation benefits lower income families to a greater extent per dollar than money spent on affordable housing projects. Ms. Reid briefly reviewed the grant recipients for this year’s award and stated the leftover funds will be used to complete ADA and public facility improvements in qualified low income areas. B.Regional Plan for the Greater Bear Creek Valley Update. Associate Planner Derek Severson and Community Development Director Bill Molnar provided an update on the Regional Plan for the Greater Bear Creek Valley. Mr. Severson explained this plan, which is also called Regional Problem Solving or RPS, is a coordinated planning process that addresses the doubling of the valley’s population over the next 40-50 years. He stated the full Draft Plan is now available on the City’s website and stated the City is currently scheduled to present their final comments on the Plan at a public hearing before the Jackson County Planning Commission on August 12, 2010. Mr. Severson provided some history on this process. He stated in 2003 the City of Ashland agreed to participate in the RPS process, but decided to not identify any urban reserves, and instead would accommodate growth through infill and increased density. Mr. Severson reviewed the issues that were in a 2007 letter from the Mayor, and commented on a recent discrepancy in regards to the population allocation that is identified. He stated the City is in the process of working through this issue with the County and clarified Ashland never said our population would not grow, but rather that we would accommodate that growth within our current boundaries. Mr. Severson provided information on the adoption process and listed the next steps. He clarified the Jackson County Board of Commissioners is the deciding body in this action and once they have made their decision it will be forwarded to the Oregon Department of Land Conservation and Development (DLCD). He stated the cities will then have to incorporate the adopted plan into their individual Comprehensive Plans, and noted this will be fairly simple for Ashland since we are not proposing any changes. Once this step is complete and the DLCD adopts the plan, there will be an opportunity for cities to appeal the Plan. Mr. Molnar clarified the purpose of this meeting is to bring everyone up to date, and stated if the Commission would like to issue formal comments to the City Council in time for their public hearing, staff could allocate time at the Commission’s May meeting. Commissioner Marsh questioned if this process has considered how the current economic recession will affect this Plan. Mr. Severson stated this has not really be discussed and stated it is not about the timeframe and deals more with how to accommodate the doubling when it occurs. Commissioner Mindlin commented that all of the issues outlined in the 2007 letter are still very important and noted she has concerns with the transportation planning. She stated transportation development in the County will have an effect on Ashland even if it is happening elsewhere. Comment was made questioning if there will be an affirmation by the participants at the end of this process. Mr. Molnar shared some the concerns that were raised about cities backing out of the process in the end. He stated in lieu of an affirmation process, all of the cities who participated will have the opportunity to appeal the Plan. Ashland Planning Commission April 27, 2010 Page 2 of 3 Commissioner Rinaldi commented that all of the issues raised in the 2007 letter are just as relevant today as they were then, and questioned how this Plan will affect air quality, wastewater capacity, etc. Commissioner Marsh read into the record a statement emailed to the Commission from “sd96950@hotmail.com”. Commissioner Marsh noted the Commission could revisit this at their May meeting if they need to, but stated there seems to be general agreement with reinforcing the comments that are already on the table. Several commissioners voiced their agreement with this statement. Marsh stated she also agrees with the comments that have already made by the City, but stated she hopes the Council will not hold back when this goes before the County and hopes they will make a strong statement about our land use values being incorporated over time into the RPS process. Commissioner Dawkins commented that the City had the opportunity to stand with Jacksonville and not participate in this process which would have made a much stronger statement, but at this point there is not much room for disagreement. C.FEMA Flood Map Rate Modernization Update. Senior Planner Brandon Goldman provided an update on the FEMA Flood Map modernization. He explained this is a nationwide project that modifies the 100 yr. and 500 yr. flood zones in the City. Mr. Goldman stated these maps do not change the Ashland Modified Flood Plain, but they may impact citizens’ flood insurance need and rates, developable land area, and building code requirements. He stated the City is working to alert the community about these changes and their opportunity to lock in insurance rates if they are affected. Mr. Molnar clarified the Ashland Modified Flood Zone was identified back in the 1980’s based on discrepancies with the FEMA Flood Zone. He stated the Ashland zone was based on where water actually flowed during flooding events and stated staff does not anticipate moving that zone based on this newer information from FEMA. Mr. Goldman noted that both zones are regulated, so even if someone is in the FEMA Flood Zone but not the Ashland Modified Flood Zone, they will be regulated to the same extent. Mr. Goldman provided further information on the grandfathering clause to lock in insurance rates and clarified citizens will need to purchase insurance before the map revisions go into effect. He noted all of the updated FEMA Flood maps are posted to the City’s website and citizens are encouraged to contact the Planning Division with questions. He stated this item will come back to the Commission in June, where they will be asked to adopt the revised maps and approve ordinance amendments that are necessary for consistency. Mr. Goldman noted the outreach that is being performed and staff was thanked for all their efforts to assist the community through this process. ADJOURNMENT Meeting adjourned at 8:52 p.m. Respectfully submitted, April Lucas, Administrative Assistant Ashland Planning Commission April 27, 2010 Page 3 of 3 Memo th DATE: May 11, 2010 TO: Ashland Planning Commission FROM: Derek Severson, Associate Planner RE: 720 Grandview Drive Appeal Hearing th At the April 13 Planning Commission meeting, the appellant Bonnie Brodersen requested that the record remain open for seven days. The applicants requested that they be allowed an additional seven days to submit written argument. The following materials were submitted subsequent to the distribution of the April 13, 2010 Planning Commission packets and can be viewed on the City’s website at: http://www.ashland.or.us/GrandviewAppeal th Submitted on April 13, before or during the public hearing 62-page Memorandum by appellant Bonnie Brodersen includes 19-page memorandum and 43 pages of attachments. Single-page e-mail from city staff Carolyn Schwendener “RE: Legal Notice” confirming legal notice for hearing. Single-page “Public Hearing” notice for publication of legal notice for hearing. Single-page e-mail from city staff April Lucas “Community Notice” and single-page attachment “Notice of Site Visit” requesting publication of “Notice of Site Visit” Five-page submittal including “Notice of Ministerial Decision” for PL-2010-00435 granting ministerial approval of a requested “recession extension” of Planning Action #2006-01784. Includes single page “Notice of Ministerial Decision” letter, two-page permit form, single page zoning permit application, and single page request letter from applicants’ attorney Mark S. Bartholomew. Single-page “Agency Authorization” submitted by applicant Lynn McDonald Single-page color map comparing current proposal to previous approved proposal submitted by applicants’ landscape architect/planner Kerry Kencairn. Single-page “Addendum to Memorandum: Please attach to Memo” by appellant Bonnie Brodersen Submitted during seven days when record remained open to new submittals (4/14-4/21) 4/20/2010 274-page “Addendum to Memorandum Submitted 4/13/2010” by Bonnie Brodersen with a single-page large format attachment labeled “City of Ashland Physical & Environmental Constraints” 4/21/2010 Materials entered into the record by the City of Ashland 4/21/2010 1) 24-page Physical & Environmental Constraints Review Ordinance (AMC 18.62) in effect prior to adoption of Water Resources Ordinance. 2) 9-page signed Ordinance #2998 amending Physical & Environmental Constraints Review (18.62) & Procedures (18.108) Chapters for consistency with the Water Resources Ordinance PLANNING DEPARTMENT Tel: 541-488-5305 51 Winburn Way Fax: 541-552-2050 Ashland, Oregon 97520 TTY: 800-735-2900 www.ashland.or.us 3) Single-page DLCD Notice of Adoption for Water Resources Ordinance 4) 9-page Notice of Final Decision for Water Resources Ordinance including affidavit of mailing and mailing list 5) Single-page DLCD Notice of Adoption for “Recession Extension” Ordinance 6) 4-pages of Speaker Request Forms for Council & PC Hearings on the Recession Extension Ordinance 7) 7-page Planning Action File #79-110 During seven days allowed for the applicants to submit written arguments (4/21-4/28) 4/27/2010 Two-page written submittal and a one-page map attachment labeled (S-1) Site Plan from applicants’ attorney Mark S. Bartholomew th After reviewing the materials submitted subsequent to the April 13 meeting, staff’s recommendation for approval with the conditions listed in the staff report remains unchanged. PLANNING DEPARTMENT Tel: 541-488-5305 51 Winburn Way Fax: 541-552-2050 Ashland, Oregon 97520 TTY: 800-735-2900 www.ashland.or.us ~, , ,,' " -'- ;, ,c. ,,',./ " - , . " ' " ' " , ; , , , j,', ',> ;" i3:v;;:( . ' ~l7~--;~t ',. [i " ",." '" ; __ ',::::~ ~"';':'" ,'c ',' ',-' ..' ,'" -11 , , I' :: ,~,,' ,"", ,,' J~~ t:{,'JJ, :- :" ,,', ~" ,', ,,',," ,,', '.; , ", '" '''. , e , " , ":", ,,' ': ',H "", :;":' " , :", H ,', ' :' , , :' : 'I',' ',' ': ,H,," 'H" " ,,' ""'" ' ", 'H , : ' " ", " "" '," 'H " ,""'" ,,-,;' ,,' ,'He " , I" "~He ' ',' -- ,,',,' '-', ,'" ,".-.-" ,::, "",: :' ", ' " ,:"'" 0-.:' " I j ,'"" '.' ' o " '.' , : ': ,',.,,'; " .' : , h C' , " ',' , :: ~ .Si .Q tl OJ OJ u '" .... 0 " ji " 0 OJ U " ~ ~ ~ '- ; '<Q, ',' ~ tl , , '" ] ~? " OJ g. <t :,' , . , ,\ " ',;', <> ,', -- ,-: ;.;. ,'-'- " , : " " , , :" , ,," i: ,.( ," ,,,' 'c:X " -, , ::, 7"'_ " " " , '>-. ,''- " , , ' :.:' ,', ' ~ , -~>' 1; ',:, ' ," . '\' ", ': :,:,-' , " , ,',': :,', y " ' ,', ~'"j'':~''''' ..,) JW~)UL~ttUkj[J(JUD~y~ ':'$'/~ '; / ;':,: ' , 7d" ,,"" · ;" I , X ' 4I{J:'1t , ,': " JIl, "4,\ ",:" .>,;; ,', , ;; " -- " ";",, , ' :' ,,, '; " ' :' . ,< ,: " , :c, "c:;: UIJ ',:';; ,:', ' ,'" 'I, , '," Ie j) <, '>;: . ,,", ..,.: " " I" . .\ '" :,," ,;'" .~ ,. , .~ f, r" " J' " f ',-: '>' '. . "" ~ , , 'ic ,,;'::: " ';', "~ie, ",' ': ,',:' f}~ 'He,: 'e, H :' , ',', ' 'I' ,,: ' :'" " :> H' " :" .: ': iii OJ c, . ' LL 0 " 0 " N ;~-<:;::: 0 ;:0 0 '" 0