Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout04-01-1998 PC PROCEEDINGS OF THE MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING COMMISSION CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW RAMSEY COUNTY, MINNESOTA Regular Meeting April 1, 1998 Mounds View City Hall 2410 Highway 10, Mounds View, MN 55112 1. Call to Order The meeting was called to order by Chairperson Peterson at 7:00 p.m., April 1, 1998. 2. Roll Call Members present: Chairperson Peterson, Commissioners Brasaemle (arrived 7:05 p.m.), Johnston, Miller, Obert (arrived 7:04), and Stevenson. Members absent: Commissioner Brooks (excused). Also present: Community Development Director Jopke, Planning Associate Ericson, • Council Liaison Koopmeiners (arrived 7:30 p.m., departed 9:36 p.m.), and Recorder Dave Hix. 3. Citizens' Requests and Comments on Items Not on the Agenda There were no citizen requests or comments on items not on the agenda. Index to Minutes Page Planning Case No. 507-97, 2625 Highway 10, 7715-7761 Eastwood Road, 2 Discussion Regarding Walgreen Development Request, Comprehensive Plan Amendment and Rezoning, TOLD Development Company. Planning Case No. 514-98, 8400 Coral Sea Street, Discussion Regarding 10 Development Review for Completion of the 2nd Phase of Bridges Technology Building Project, Bridges Leasing Company, LLC. Planning Case No. 517-98, 2430 Highway 10 (O'Neil Property), Discussion 11 Regarding the Development Review Stage of the PUD, Preliminary Plat and a Wetland Buffer Permit, AP Mounds View Limited Partnership (Anthony Properties). • . Mounds View Planning Commission April 1, 1998 Regular Meeting Page 2 4. Approval of Minutes: March 4, 1998 (Regular) Motion/Second: Stevenson/Peterson to approve the March 4, 1998 regular meeting minutes as amended. Ayes - 5 Nays - 0 5. Planning Case No. 507-97 2625 Highway 10, 7715-7761 Eastwood Road Applicant: TOLD Development Company Discussion Regarding Walgreen Development Request, Comprehensive Plan Amendment, and Rezoning. The applicant, TOLD Development Company, represented by Robert Cunningham, was present. Associate Ericson made his presentation as follows: TOLD Development, on behalf of Walgreen's, is requesting a Comprehensive Plan Amendment and rezoning of residential properties to allow for the construction of a Walgreen store at the northeast corner of Highway 10 and County Road I. The meeting has been discussed at four previous Planning Commission meetings, public hearings and community meetings in association with the Comprehensive Plan Update process. The new information that the City had was made available as follows: 1. American Planning Association (APA) information, which was not attached because it did not address the issue of how the Walgreen store would affect adjacent property, property values. 2. Discussion with the City Attorney regarding who is responsible for the decline in property values, if any, when a commercial development comes into a residential area. A. The City Attorney advised: Neither the City nor the developer, in general, can be held liable for any real or perceived reduction in property value. There is a certain degree of risk that goes with properties that abut vacant land, or that is in close proximity to major transportation arteries or major commercial centers. In the event a mistake or oversight is made during the • project review or construction, according to Minnesota Statutes, a city, its Mounds View Planning Commission April 1, 1998 Regular Meeting Page 3 staff and paid consultants, in general, cannot be held liable for any damages. 3. Discussion with the City Engineer. A. In regards to questions raised about the Walgreen Development effecting the water table in its immediate area: Rocky Keehn of SEH, the City's Engineering consultant, has advised the City there would be no impact to the water table directly attributable to this project. If anything, because of the impervious surface area proposed, there might be less recharge into the water table. He has also advised the City that storm water runoff which might effect the development's adjacent properties would also be decreased because of the newly regraded parcel. 4. MnDOT meeting concerning right-in right-out access for the project. A. MnDOT has denied the proposed access due to safety considerations. B. MnDOT does not own the access rights for this location and as such • cannot prevent the access being granted if the City so desires. C. MnDOT agreed with TOLD's traffic experts that the addition of a right turn lane on County Road I and the removal of the Eastwood Road Access would improve the overall functioning of the intersection. 5. Traffic Calming: Two options were presented with their associated costs, which were minimal. The City's Engineer and Director of Public Works gave written opinions that the traffic calming devices presented might be good test cases which, "if proved successful, could be incorporated into future street reconstructions and as a tool to reduce speeds on some streets with long, uninterrupted blocks." The impact that the Walgreen Development would have on the adjacent property owners has not been resolved. TOLD Development Company has offered to compensate the adjacent property owners with additional land or by means of a cash settlement. Staff has recommended approving Planning Commission Resolution 536-98, a resolution recommending that the City Council approve a Comprehensive Plan amendment to change the designations of the properties located at 2625 Highway 10 and 7715-7761 Eastwood Road to NC, Neighborhood Commercial, to allow for the construction of a Walgreen Drug Store. IPStaff recommended that the Planning Commission approve Resolution 5328-98, a Mounds View Planning Commission April 1, 1998 Regular Meeting Page 4 resolution recommending approval of Ordinance No. 614, an ordinance amending the City's official zoning map by rezoning the properties located at 2625 Highway 10 and 7715-7761 Eastwood Road to a B-2, Limited Business District classification. Bob Cunningham, of TOLD Development Company, made a presentation showing changes that had been made to the site plan as a result of citizen requests and City request. Shown was the inclusion of a sidewalk from the Eastwood cul-de-sac into the proposed Walgreen Development. Also included was a deceleration lane on the property for the right turn entry off of Highway 10. There was the inclusion of the dedicated right lane from the primary exit point of the property to the intersection of Highway 10. Finally, there was the addition of a sidewalk from Greenwood to Highway 10. Cunningham reviewed the pros and cons of the development as follows: Pros: 1. 11 percent site coverage 2. substantial amounts of green space and buffering 3. ample landscaping 4. fencing to be part of the buffer package 5. 45-55 jobs to Mounds View's economy • 6. property tax revenue 7. street developments paid by the developer 8. sale of the City owned parcel of land 9. park dedication fees Cons: 1. neighborhood impact 2. access off of Highway 10 The floor was returned to the Commission for questions and comments. Commissioner Johnston asked the developer if he would be willing to move the Highway 10 access point closer to the property line. Mr. Cunningham told the Commissioners the referenced entry point on the site plan was not accurately depicted. After giving the correct dimensions and layout he stated the entry would be adequate. Chairperson Peterson opened the public hearing. William Bakke, 7767 Eastwood Road, asked staff to reread the City Attorney's advisory on the liability of the City in regards to property devaluation of the properties adjacent to • the Walgreen Development. Staff reread the City Attorney's statement. Mounds View Planning Commission April 1, 1998 Regular Meeting Page 5 Carol Arel, 7750 Greenwood Drive, told the Commission that by rezoning an R-1 property to a commercial use will establish a precedent that the City will regret. She added that the citizens' concerns about safety issues and property devaluation have not been satisfactorily addressed. Warren Johnson, 7710 Greenwood Drive, stated to change the Comprehensive Plan, at the cost of tax payer's property, is not what he felt should be done. The Comprehensive Plan was put into affect to protect the citizens and to keep that sort of thing from happening. Chairperson Peterson reminded the citizens that the Comprehensive Plan is in the process of being updated and revised. He encouraged the participation of the entire community to ensure that their voices are heard as part of the update process. Milo Pinkerton stated he was in favor of the area staying residential. He added putting commercial property up against single family homes is poor planning. Tim Behn, 7715 Eastwood, told Mr. Pinkerton that his neighborhood on Eastwood Road, is against the town home project that he (Mr. Pinkerton) is currently developing. • John Wiens, 7760 Greenwood Drive, stated the citizens don't have an advocate to represent them on this project. Margaret Hilton, 7731 Greenwood Drive, stated the residents on Greenwood Drive were never informed of any other project that was going in on this particular site. She stated that some of the residents on Eastwood Drive are racist and that is the motivation for keeping the subsidized housing out of the area. She added, if the Walgreen Development is approved she wants to move but feels she won't be able to sell her home because of its decreased value. Chairperson Peterson told Ms. Hilton the Planning Commission is charged with the very difficult responsibility of making balanced decisions for the City and its citizens. Commissioner Brasaemle, in response to the word "racist", told Ms. Hilton he would be careful using the word "racist" to describe those opposed to the townhome development. He was against the town homes because they fronted on Highway 10; not because he was opposed to affordable housing. He felt the townhome property was more appropriate for commercial development. Mr. Pinkerton asked if there are other proposals concerning this property that would maintain its residential character. Staff told Mr. Pinkerton no other proposals are • currently on the table for the property. • Mounds View Planning Commission April 1, 1998 Regular Meeting Page 6 Chairperson Peterson told Mr. Pinkerton that his reference to the property, the busiest corner in the City, as having residential character, was absurd. Commissioner Obert asked Mr. Pinkerton if he would live and raise his family fronting a highway with daily traffic of 40,000 cars. Mr. Pinkerton told the Commission that there is a developer, if the City would take the time to solicit that developer, who would be willing to develop this property on a residential basis. Ms. Arel expressed her concern that nobody was discussing the effect the development would have on Greenwood Drive. Cliff Ash, 2664 Lake Court Drive, expressed his concerns about the traffic that the theater project and the Walgreen project would create together. Mr. Johnson suggested that the City listen to MnDOT's advise concerning unsafe traffic conditions at the subject intersections. Mr. Cunningham read from a Benshoof and Associates study of the accident history S along Highway 10 from Silver Lake Road south to Long Lake Road: "The review examined the impact that the existing seven right turn access locations had on accident history during the period. There are five right turn access points located north-bound on Highway 10, and two on south bound Highway 10. The accident information was provided by the City of Mounds View and includes a period of 22 months, from January 1996 through November 1997. During this 22-month period a total of 46 accidents were recorded on T.H. 10. None of the recorded accidents occurred at the site of existing right turn accesses along Highway 10 or could be attributed to vehicles using these access points." Commissioner Stevenson asked the applicant if they would be willing to consider restricting the Walgreens onto Highway 10 access to only out-bound right turns, as suggested by MnDOT. Mr. Cunningham told the Commission that TOLD is having Benshoof and Associates discuss the issue in more detail with MNDOT. Based on the outcome of these discussions all right turn issues should be left open. He was not willing to commit whether Walgreens would be willing to continue with the project if the right turn off of Highway 10 was not permitted. Commissioner Johnston expressed his concerns about the lack of an acceleration lane • from the project. • Mounds View Planning Commission April 1, 1998 Regular Meeting Page 7 Ms. Arel stated that the lack of information regarding the right-turn lane issues was proof that the citizens safety concerns had not been appropriately addressed. Chairperson Peterson closed the public hearing and returned the floor to the Commission for questions and comments. Commissioner Johnston, again, stated his concern for the lack of an acceleration lane for the project. He said he would have a hard time voting for the project knowing that MnDOT is not behind the designed access point. Commissioners Stevenson, Brasaemle, and Obert agreed with Johnston and said they would not be in favor of going against MnDOT advice. Commissioner Brasaemle told the Commission that Mounds View is in need of tax- paying commercial developments. If the City's commercial tax base is not expanded the residential tax rates will continue to increase. Mr. Johnson stated the message that was being sent to the City at the Comprehensive Plan Update community forums was that Highway 10 was the only location that • commercial development is welcome. If a project is being considered along Highway 10, the R-1 property that abuts the proposed project should be rezoned to R-2 or R-3 to buffer the R-1 areas from the commercial development. Commissioner Obert reiterated the City's need for an increase in their commercial tax base. Chairperson Peterson stated the Walgreen project was close enough to Highway 10 that it would not be that far of an incursion into the residential area abutting the proposed project. Commissioner Brasaemle agreed with the citizens that the R-1 area needs a bigger buffer area. Commissioner Obert stated the City could run the risk of developing the reputation of being unfriendly to developers by requiring the purchase of buffer property to go along with a given project. Chairperson Peterson stated the City needs to develop a "downtown feel." Currently, most services that the Mounds View citizens require are found outside of the City. He suggested it is time to bring those services into the immediate area and develop that • "downtown feel." Mounds View Planning Commission April 1, 1998 Regular Meeting Page 8 He asked his fellow Commissioners to answer the following question: Is the use of adjacent properties, in regards to the Walgreen project, within the boundaries of what the Comprehensive Plan should look like in its update? Motion/Second: Obert/Stevenson to approve Resolution 536-98, a resolution recommending that the City Council approve a Comprehensive Plan Amendment to change the designations of the properties located at 2625 Highway 10 and 7715-7761 Eastwood Road to NC, Neighborhood Commercial, to allow for the construction of a Walgreen Drug Store. The floor was opened for discussion of the motion. Commissioner Johnston agreed with Commissioner Stevenson's comment that R-3 zones are appropriate for the Highway 10 corridor properties. Commissioner Stevenson reminded the Commission that four of the five subject properties do not abut Highway 10, and therefore should not be considered for the NC designation. Chairperson Peterson stated the properties along Highway 10 within the 100-yard threshold, whether they front on Highway 10 or not, are part of the Highway 10 corridor development plan. A vote was called on the motion on the floor. Ayes - 2 Nays - 4 The motion failed. Motion/Second: Brasaemle/Peterson to approve resolution 536-98, a Resolution recommending denial of a Comprehensive Plan amendment from low density and high density residential to Neighborhood Commercial for properties located at 2625 Highway 10 and 7715-7761 Eastwood Road; Planning Case No. 507-97. Associate Ericson suggested adding a Whereas indicating that MnDOT has denied access or indicated their disapproval of an access at this location. Amendment to the motion was moved and seconded. The Commission reviewed alternate Resolution 536-98 and made changes in verbiage and the use of the stated goals. • Mayor McCarty, who was in attendance, addressed the Commission by stating the • Mounds View Planning Commission April 1, 1998 Regular Meeting Page 9 following: The defeated motion, denying the resolution of approval, leaves the Commission with a condition that hasn't changed, the zoning hasn't changed and there is no recommendation to the City Council for a change. By adopting the additional resolution, the motion currently on the floor, additional arguments and issues are set up that may create legal questions that need not be addressed. The Mayor suggested withdrawing the motion and not acting on it. Commissioner Brasaemle withdrew the motion and asked if Resolution 538-98 also needed to be acted on. Mayor McCarty told the Commission Resolution 538-98 would come before the Council if the applicant decides to appeal the Planning Commissions decision to deny approval. Commissioner Obert asked the Mayor if the Comprehensive Plan takes precedent over the Zoning Plan. • Mayor McCarty told the Commission the courts have decided that the Comprehensive Plan takes precedence over the Zoning Plan. Director Jopke read from Chapter 1125 of the Code: "The Planning Commission shall make a Finding of Fact and recommend such actions or conditions relating to the title necessary to carry out the intended purpose of the title. Such recommendation shall be in writing and accompanied by a report and recommendation of City Staff." Mr. Cunningham stated he would be willing to put a hold on the process to allow the Commission to get the appropriate advise it needs from the City Attorney. Motion/Second: Stevenson/Obert to table action on the application to the Planning Commission until April 15, 1998. Ayes - 5 Nays - 1 The motion carried. Mayor McCarty asked staff where the application process was at in regards to the 120- day-time limit. Associate Ericson told the Commission and the Mayor the 120-day-time limit expires • May 29, 1998. MIL Mounds View Planning Commission April 1, 1998 Regular Meeting Page 10 6. Planning Case 514-98 8400 Coral Sea Street Applicant: Bridges Leasing Company, LLC Discussion Regarding Development review for Completion of the 2nd Phase of Bridges Technology Building Project. The applicant, Bridges Leasing Company, LLC, was present. Associate Ericson gave a brief background on the project as follows: Bridges Technology Park has applied for a development review to add a 35,188 sq. ft. expansion on their existing building located at 8400 Coral Sea Street. The proposed addition will match the design and style of the existing building. • The applicant is proposing a drainage system which coordinates with an earlier plan which was platted as part of the original North Star Industrial Park 2nd Addition. Because the work is being done within 100 feet of the wetland, the applicant will need to have a wetland buffer permit approved by the City. Rice Creek Watershed district has reviewed the applicant's drainage plans and has approved them pending payment of a cash surety and dedication of an easement area over the existing wetlands on site. Parking for the new site does not meet the City Code. Twenty-seven additional stalls would need to be added, unless the applicant can show that the existing building is currently over parked. The City Attorney is drafting an Ordinance to accomplish the needed easement vacation and will be presented to the Council when it considers the development review. Landscaping, public safety, utilities, and easements issues are in accordance with City requirements. Staff is asking the Planning Commission to review the plans, make any revisions it deems necessary for the applicant and direct the staff to prepare a resolution recommending approval of the development review to be acted on at the April 15, 1998 Planning Commission meeting. • Chairperson Peterson turned the floor over to the applicant for their presentation. • Mounds View Planning Commission April 1, 1998 Regular Meeting Page 11 Grady Kinghorn, on behalf of Bridges Leasing Company, LLC, told the commission the proof of parking issue would not be a problem to conform to. The only issue that he felt needed to be addressed was the parking lot which is located within five feet of the wetland setback. As indicated the Rice Creek Watershed has given preliminary approval for the project. The floor was returned to the Commission for questions and comments. Roger Anderson, civil engineer and representative for the applicant, told the Commission there is a 35-foot distance from the closet parking stall to the wetland. All impervious surface drains through the NURP pond which has a skimmer installed to contain any oil that may drain in from the cars parking in the lot. Commissioner Johnston suggested rounding off of the square corners of the parking lot that are close to the wetland area. Commissioner Miller asked the applicant to describe the snow storage accommodations. The applicant complied. Commissioner Brasaemle asked the applicant if they could modify the drive lane, while • maintaining all safety issues, in order to increase the amount of space between the parking area and the wetland. The applicant told the Commission that they would make an effort to do what Brasaemle had requested. No action was taken on the plan review. The applicant told the Commission that the discussed changes would be made ready for consideration at the Planning Commission meeting scheduled for April 15, 1998. 7. Planning Case No. 517-98 2430 Highway 10 (O'Neil Property) Applicant: AP Mounds View Limited Partnership (Anthony Properties) Discussion Regarding The Development review Stage of the PUD, Preliminary Plat and a Wetland Buffer Permit. The applicant, AP Mounds View Limited Partnership (Anthony Properties), represented by Wendell Smith, was present. Director Jopke gave a brief background as follows: S • Mounds View Planning Commission April 1, 1998 Regular Meeting Page 12 The site in question is located at 2430 Highway 10. Anthony Properties Management is proposing to develop a 63,000 sq. ft. movie theater complex, three 11,000 sq. ft. one- story office buildings, a 5000 sq.ft. restaurant, and a 6400 sq. ft. retail building. The movie theater will house 15 separate screens capable of seating 2,188 people. Of the 34 + acres of land available on the site, 8.25 acres will be wetland, 16.73 acres will be developed green space, with the remaining 9.3 acres being dedicated to the actual building sites. There will be parking for 776 cars. On May 12, 1997, the City Council approved a resolution which changed the Comprehensive Plan designation of the O'Neil property from Medium Density Residential to Mixed Use PUD (Commercial and Residential Use). A resolution approving the General Concept PUD was also passed that same evening. A general explanation of the PUD approval process was outlined for the public. There have been several changes to the originally approved general concept plan. These changes were listed as follows: 1. Parcel B is designated as a retail site instead of a restaurant site. 2. The movie theater seating has been reduced from 2648 seats to 2188 seats. The number of screens has been reduced from 16 to 15. 3. The site, less the wetland area, has increased from 23.99 acres to 26.03 acres. 4. Impervious site area has decreased from 36.9 percent of the site area to 35.7 percent. Pervious area has increased from 63.1 percent of the site area to 64.3 percent. 5. The northernmost and southernmost driveways on Highway 10 remain on the plan. 6. Sidewalks are shown along Highway 10 and along the northern edge of he wetland. 7. Trash enclosures are shown for each of the buildings. 8. The two NURP storm water ponds have been replaced with one large pond. This is due to the fact that City storm water from north and east of the site will be piped to the new pond to help alleviate existing storm water problems in the area. 9. Snow storage areas are shown on the plan. 10. No access is shown to Long Lake Road as was encouraged as part of the general concept plan approval. 11. Deceleration lanes are shown on the plan. No action was required by the Commission. The evening's meeting was for informational • purposes only. • Mounds View Planning Commission April 1, 1998 Regular Meeting Page 13 The floor was returned to the Commission for questions and comments. Commissioner Johnston asked staff if the MnDOT approval of the associated traffic signal depends on the realignment of Edgewood Road and if so how close would the realignment come to City Hall. Director Jopke told the Commission the realignment of Edgewood Road is part of the project at this point in time. He gave no specific plan dimensions. The floor was turned over to the applicant for his presentation. Wendell Smith showed the Commission an updated artistic rendering of the proposed facilities. He told the Commission that the contractor for the project has been selected. The changes that have been made from the original site, and as presented by Director Jopke, were reviewed. No access on to County Road H2 or Long Lake Road has been designed into the project. This design element was a direct result of working with the neighborhood that had made it known from early on in the project that they did not want the theater to impact the traffic going through their neighborhood. • The Fire Marshal's request to widen the facility entries will be accommodated. These plan changes will be made available at the next Planning Commission meeting. Several of the Commissioners expressed their concern that the City has not been given formal notice from MnDOT that the traffic intersections involved with the project have been approved for construction. They requested that the applicant furnish an official notification from MnDOT at the April 15, 1998 Planning Commission meeting. The current plan shows a sidewalk coming from Long Lake Road to the facility entrance an• a so -rom ong a e ov- • -'. ••. • : . •••. • • - . -- - • would prefer to eliminate the sidewalk from Long Lake Road to the facility entrance and have a bituminous path instead. This change will be shown on all future drawings. A site-drainage overview was given by Brian Mundstock, of SEI, the consulting engineering company for the project. Motion/Second: Brasaemle/Stevenson to continue the Planning Commission regular meeting of April 1, 1998 beyond the 11:00 p.m. cutoff point. Ayes - 6 Nays - 0 4111 The motion carried. 11111 Mounds View Planning Commission April 1, 1998 Regular Meeting Page 14 Wendell Smith continued his presentation. Chairperson Peterson asked staff if they had any outstanding issues that the applicant would need to address before the April 15, 1998 Planning Commission meeting. Staff had no outstanding issues for the applicant to address. Several members of the Planning Commission, again, asked for a written notification from MnDOT in regards to their acceptance of the facility's southern entrance design. Mr. Smith asked the Commission to hold a straw pole to give the developer an indication of the Planning Commission's leaning on the project. Commissioner Obert indicated his full support for the proposed project. Commissioner Johnston offered his support. He did express some concern with the neighborhood committee's request to not have any future curb cuts on Long Lake Road. Commissioner Miller agreed with Johnston on the curb cut issue. She also told the • applicant she is looking forward to the project's completion. Chairperson Peterson said he was very enthusiastic about the project. He added it's good for the City and good for the residents; everybody wins. Commissioner Stevenson said he was behind the project and asked when the project was scheduled for completion. Mr. Wendell said if the City could approve the project by the 17th of April, the theaters would be open by Christmas. Director Jopke told the Commission that the parking lot arrangements for City Hall, part of the realignment of Edgewood Road, would be considered for approval by the City Council at the same time the theater project is considered for approval. Commissioner Brasaemle gave the project his full support. 8. Staff Reports/Information Items The next community forum will be held April 8, 1998, 7:00 p.m., at the Edgewood cafeteria. Mounds View Planning Commission April 1, 1998 Regular Meeting Page 15 9. Chairperson and Planning Commissioners' Reports There were no Chairperson or Planning Commissioner reports. 10. Adjournment to Agenda Session There being no further business before the Regular meeting of the Planning Commission Chairperson Peterson adjourned the meeting at 11:24 p.m. (The Regular Meeting adjourned to the Agenda Session). Respectfully submitted, 0—(5cjita Rick Jopke Community Development Director • • 0 Planning Comm. Mfg April 1, 1998 Please Sign In ! Name Address Phone # Project of Interest: (Walgreens,Bridges,or Theater) C ;,f-(- A, li 24- 6 Al btice C4. 1))-- 7& 5 2/gg /4, /' /c2(c, c,-LL:_s 5' acv- C?/, 7)4 476- V7c?Y Ci' a4A'soJ 793.1✓ 8-675 /4,7/v 7&;-y'7/7 Are/171>e I -77Sv 6feFftcoC e1-;/1 6 `7g0"73C.ac1 ea(7 1 ret,ot,S ` '',/-0(9 , ' �1 5'0 Gaol Lt1 ' )5(.0D ti ...iat,,- ( ,.;k„,,,, 3 /:4"-e• n,71 ezt;t - 76K7--A Yo , 0/A/A,6 v laI ,J IA)i ,v s 7'7 r D �, px,iil 00,Q -0r 736-41109 WQ\ 5r-e-o s 13 RP) MUNDsioc . s ( 47-oo bJ, ouJ St+Alco Pe K. &St- 3344•- 614EI L- W f{ 1 c -LL � �4 �t�vt �T (.-t e,t -e--;-1 !,'1 �J((111 L e 2-,t�A K k 716,/ ,L✓��a-�. v-� '7 3 2-3-2- 4e t� e,____ k )� _e_‘s '773 C) are entv,,0(4 Ur. 1-O -if 19.L1 ly)i'sl' ,Pe/f,; 14 t iki\ .25223 Pau -- g-.v 61` M-d .A , AL he-, ci,ci, L...3---ez-K bv,k.A.* Ce 31 - 19'0,,, bi 0,-LA - ' '1 A A X715- 4Arc1 11 7F i77 t ( /' 4u4,,,y- P") Y 1 L_ 4517 7SL( --`1( 7 t 2 `/11.e,t---1' Ili 'f /II- ` .- g '7' . - 1 - 47//' lad •