Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout04-15-1998 PC . PROCEEDINGS OF THE MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING COMMISSION CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW RAMSEY COUNTY, MINNESOTA Special Meeting April 15, 1998 Mounds View City Hall 2410 Highway 10, Mounds View, MN 55112 Index to Minutes Page Planning Case No. 522-98, 2535-2585 Highway 10(Moundsview Square), 2 Consideration of Resolution No. 543-98 Approving a Conditional Use Permit for Temporary Produce Sales, Craig Gild (Merryville Farm Market) Planning Case No. 520-98, 2824 Woodale Drive, Consideration of Resolution 4 No. 540-98 Approving a Condition al Use Permit for and Oversized Accessory Building, Ronald P. Overton Planning Case No. 518-98, 7581 Spring Lake Road, Consideration of Resolution 5 No. 539-98 Approving a Minor Subdivision, Charles Schultz • Planning Case No. 516-98, 7858 Long Lake Road, Consideration of Resolution 7 No. 541-98 Approving a Conditional Use Permit for and Oversized Garage, Thomas Lammi Planning Case No. 507-98, 2625 Highway 10, 7715-7761 Eastwood Road, 9 Consideration of Resolution Nos. 536-98 and 538-98 Denying the Walgreen's Development Request, Comprehensive Plan Amendment and Rezoning Requests, TOLD Development Company Planning Case No. 514-98, 8400 Coral Sea Street, Consideration of Resolution 13 No. 542-98 Approving the 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), Consideration of 15 Resolution No. 544-98 Approving the Development Review Stage of the PUD, Preliminary Plat and Wetland Buffer Permit, AP Mounds View Limited Partnership (Anthony Properties) • • Mounds View Planning Commission April 15, 1998 Special Meeting Page 2 1. Call To Order The meeting was called to order by Chairperson Peterson at 7:00 p.m., April 15, 1998. 2. Roll Call Members present: Chairperson Peterson, Commissioners Brasaemle,Brooks (departed 9:25), Johnston,Miller, Obert,and Stevenson. Also present: Community Development Director Jopke, Planning Associate Ericson, Council Liaison Koopmeiners, and Recorder Dave Hix. 3. Citizens' Request and Comments on Items Not on the Agenda There were no citizen requests or comments on items not on the agenda. 4. Approval of Minutes No minutes were considered for approval. • 5. Planning Case No. 522-98 2535 -2585 Highway 10 (Moundsview Square) Applicant: Craig Gilb (Merryville Farm Market) Consideration of Resolution No. 543-98 Approving a Conditional Use Permit for Temporary Produce Sales. The applicant, Craig Gilb (Merryville Farm Market), was present. Associate Ericson made his presentation as follows: Merryville Farm Market was requesting a Conditional Use Permit to operate an outdoor produce stand in the parking lot of Moundsview Square Shopping Center from July 1, 1998 to September 30, 1998. Hours of operation were stated as 10:00 a.m. - 7:00 p.m., seven days a week. The stand requires no utility hook-ups. The stand was granted a CUP the last two years at this same location. Staff stated they were not aware of any problems associated with this operation. Linder's Greenhouses, which was also granted an outdoor-sales CUP, will be dismantling • its greenhouse sometime in between June 30 and July 15, so the overlap of operation could be less than the possible 15 days. This overlap, if any, will cause little impact to parking, • Mounds View Planning Commission April 15, 1998 Special Meeting Page 3 as the produce stand occupies only 110 square feet of the parking lot. Signage for the produce stand will be accomplished with small banners affixed to the stand structure and lettering on the canvas roof. According to the City Attorney,the City cannot impose any licensing requirements upon the applicant. The City can, however, control the time, place and manner of the operation through a Conditional Use Permit, so long as the requirements do not, in effect, prohibit the use or impose undue hardship. Staff is recommending the approval of Planning Commission Resolution 543-98, a resolution recommending to the City Council that they approve a Conditional Use Permit for Merryville Farm Market to operate an outdoor produce stand at Moundsview Square Shopping Center from July 1, 1998 to September 30, 1998, with stipulations. The stipulations were listed as follows: 1. The facility shall be allowed to operate from July 1, 1998, to September 30, 1998. 2. The hours of operation of the facility shall not exceed 8:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m. 3. Signage shall be allowed only as affixed to the gazebo base and/or canvas roof. 4. Lighting for the use shall be supplied by existing parking lot standards. Chairperson Peterson asked the applicant if he would like to make a presentation. Craig Gilb, Merryville Farm Market, declined to make a presentation but offered to answer any questions that the staff or the Commission might have. Motion/Second: Stevenson/Brasaemle to approve Resolution 543-98, a resolution recommending to City Council approval of a Conditional Use Permit for outdoor sales at Mounds View Square, requested by Merryville Farm Market;Planning Case No. 522-98, with stipulations. Ayes - 7 Nays - 0 The motion carried. Associate Ericson told the applicant the Public Hearing and meeting with the City Council was scheduled for April 27, 1998. 6. Planning Case No. 520-98 2824 Woodale Drive Applicant: Ronald Overton • Consideration of Resolution No. 540-98 Approving a Conditional Use Permit for and Oversized Accessory Building Mounds View Planning Commission April 15, 1998 Special Meeting Page 4 The applicant,Ronald Overton, was present. Associate Ericson, gave his presentation as follows: Ronald Overton was requesting permission to convert an existing 14'x 22' single-car garage to an accessory building. His intent is to move the existing garage 100' back toward the rear of his property, located at 2824 Woodale Drive. In place of the moved garage,Mr. Overton would be constructing a detached two-car garage. No plans for the new garage have been submitted. Staff is recommending approval of Planning Commission Resolution No. 540-98, recommending to the City Council approval of a Conditional Use Permit for Ronald Overton, allowing a 308 sq.ft. oversized shed at 2824 Woodale Drive, with stipulations. The stipulations were listed as follows: 1. The Conditional Use Permit shall be recorded with Ramsey County within 60 days of City Council approval, and a receipt of such recording shall be provided to the City of Mounds View. • 2. The shed shall be maintained into the future so as to provide a uniform and consistent building appearance with the existing house. 3. The shed shall not be used for living space or other uses not allowed by the district in which it is located or by the Zoning Code. Should the use change for which the permit was granted,the Conditional Use Permit shall become null and void. 4. No other sheds or accessory buildings, other than the proposed garage, shall be allowed on this lot. 5. There shall be no vehicle access to this shed, nor shall any vehicle be stored within said structure. 6. The applicant shall enter into a development agreement with the City to ensure a high quality of workmanship and timely completion of the relocation. Commissioner Brasaemle asked for a clarification as to what constituted a"vehicle". Associate Ericson stated snowmobiles, ATVs, boat, garden tractor, etc are excluded from the Code's definition of a vehicle. The intended Code definition is for items such as cars, vans, etc. • Chairperson Peterson asked the applicant if he would like to make a presentation. Mounds View Planning Commission April 15, 1998 Special Meeting Page 5 Mr. Overton, declined to make a presentation. He told the Commission he is waiting on a call from the City's building inspector in regards to the required foundation. Motion/Second: Brasaemle/Miller to approve resolution 540-98, a resolution recommending the City Council approve a Conditional Use Permit to allow for an oversized storage shed for Ronald Overton, 2824 Woodale Drive: Mounds View Planning Case No. 520-98, with stipulations, as amended. Ayes - 7 Nays - 0 The motion carried. Associate Ericson stated that a Public Hearing and meeting before the City Council has been set for April 27, 1998. 7. Planning Case No. 518-98 7581 Spring Lake Road • Applicant: Charles Schultz Consideration of Resolution No. 539-98 Approving a Minor Subdivision The applicant, Charles Schultz, was present. Associate Ericson gave his presentation as follows: Charles and Shirley Schultz were requesting approval of a minor subdivision to create two lots from their property located at 7581 Spring Lake Road. A copy of the surveyor's certificate, as required by the City, was submitted. The applicant proposed to split off 85', leaving 80'for the existing property. All applicable setback requirements would be met under this configuration. Staff is recommending approval of Resolution 539-98, a resolution recommending to the City Council approval of this minor subdivision subject to stipulations. The stipulations were listed as follows: 1. The applicant shall make payment of a park dedication fee of$1032, as specified by Section 1204.02. • 2. The applicant shall record the City Council resolution of approval, the Certificate of Survey and the drainage and utility easement document with Ramsey County Mounds View Planning Commission April 15, 1998 Special Meeting Page 6 within sixty(60) days of final adoption, and present proof of such recording o the City of Mounds View, or this approval shall be null and void. Chairperson Peterson asked the applicant for their presentation. Mr. Schultz declined to make a presentation. He added, the park dedication fee was extremely high. Associate Ericson told the Commission that the Park Dedication Fee for this minor subdivision would be reviewed by the Park and Recreation Commission at its April meeting, scheduled before the case was to be heard by the City Council, and a recommendation would accompany the Case to the City Council meeting. Motion/Second: BrasaemleBrooks to approve Resolution 539-98, a resolution recommending to the City Council approval of a minor subdivision for Charles and Shirley Schultz, 7581 Spring Lake Road,Mounds View Planning Case No. 518-98, with stipulations as stated above. Ayes - 7 Nays - 0 The motion carried. Chairperson Peterson told the applicant the Case would be passed on to the City Council for their consideration at its April 27, 1998 meeting. 8. Planning Case No. 516-98 7858 Long Lake Road Applicant: Thomas Lammi Consideration of Resolution No. 541-98 Approving a Conditional Use Permit for an Oversized Garage. The applicant, Thomas Lammi, was present. Associate Ericson made his presentation as follows: Thomas Lammi has requested permission to construct a 616 sq. ft. garage addition to his house located at 7858 Long Lake Road. The proposed addition would attach seamlessly to the rear of the existing garage and house, tying into the existing roofline, siding, and soffits. Backyard accessory buildings cannot exceed 25 percent of a backyard's area. The garage addition cannot exceed 1,125 sq. ft. in area. The requested addition meets both of these criteria. A CUP is needed because the addition, in conjunction with the existing garage, Mounds View Planning Commission April 15, 1998 Special Meeting Page 7 exceeds the allowed 864 sq. ft. Staff is recommending the approval of Planning Commission resolution No 541-98, a resolution recommending to the City Council approval of a Conditional Use Permit for Thomas Lammi,allowing a 1,246 sq. ft. oversized garage at 7858 Long Lake road, with stipulations. The stipulations were listed as follows: 1. The conditional use permit shall be recorded with Ramsey County within 60 days of City Council approval, and a receipt of such recording shall be provided to the City of Mounds View. 2. The garage shall be designed and maintained to provide a seamless and uniform building appearance with the existing garage and house. 3. The garage shall not be used for living space or other uses not allowed by the district in which it is located or by the Zoning Code. Should the use change for which the permit was granted, the conditional use permit shall become null and • void. 4. No other sheds or accessory buildings shall be allowed on this lot. 5. There shall be no vehicle access door on the west elevation of the addition. Vehicle ingress/egress shall only be possible through the existing garage. 6. The applicant shall enter into a development agreement with the City to ensure a high quality of workmanship and timely completion of the development. Chairperson Peterson asked the applicant to make his presentation. Mr.Lammi told the Commission the addition would match the existing structure in all materials, including shingles. Commissioner Obert asked staff if stipulation No. 3 would protect the City from the applicant running a business out of the garage. Associate Ericson stated stipulation No. 3, would cover the possibility of the applicant using the garage for some type of business. Motion/Second: Brasaemle/Obert to approve resolution No. 541-98, a resolution recommending • the City Council approve a Conditional Use Permit to allow an oversized garage for Thomas Lammi, 7858 Long Lake Road;Mounds View Planning Case No. 516-98, with stipulations. • Mounds View Planning Commission April 15, 1998 Special Meeting Page 8 Ayes - 7 Nays - 0 The motion carried. Chairperson Peterson told the applicant the case would be passed on to the City Council for their review on April 27, 1998. 9. Planning Case No 507-97 2625 Highway 10, 7715 - 7761 Eastwood Road Applicant: TOLD Development Company Consideration of Resolution Nos. 536-98 and 538-98 Denying the Walgreen's Development Request, Comprehensive Plan Amendment and Rezoning Requests The applicant, TOLD Development Company, was present. • Associate Ericson stated that Planning Case No. 507-97 was back before the Planning Commission for reconsideration of a motion that had been made at the April 1, 1998 Planning Commission regular meeting. The motion to deny recommending approval by the City Council of Resolution Nos. 536-98 and 538-98 had not been voted on because the wording of the resolutions did not meet with the Planning Commission's approval. Updated versions of each resolution were submitted for the Planning Commission's consideration. Final action on the proposal would need to be taken by May 29, 1998. Letters of support from three of the neighboring property owners were presented to the Planning Commission as new information in the case. Chairperson Peterson clarified the fact that at the last meeting Commissioner Brasaemle had withdrawn his motion and no action was taken. He asked the applicant if he(TOLD) had any new information to present in the case. Bob Cunningham, TOLD Development Company, asked the Planning Commission to pass the case on to the City Council so that he might have an opportunity to address them on the case. He also asked, as a stipulation of approving the Development Plan,that the developer be required to get MnDOT approval for the Highway 10 access into the site. This would lift the burden of overriding a MnDOT decision off of the City's shoulders. • Commissioner Obert asked the applicant if this action meant that the development would Mounds View Planning Commission April 15, 1998 Special Meeting Page 9 continue without the Highway 10 access. Mr. Cunningham concurred. He added there are currently two adjacent property owners that have not reached some type of settlement with the developer on behalf of Walgreens. Carol Arel, 7750 Greenwood Drive, made the following statement: "I've prepared some remarks. So I would appreciate not being interrupted and just allowed to say what I have to say. As you all know I have stood up at many of these meeting before, along with other residents of Mounds View. And, although,I maybe only one of the few residents you hear from tonight,I'm asking you to consider many other Mounds View residents that are not here tonight. The residents that I'm asking you to consider are the residents that are unaware of the plans being made to change the Comprehensive Plan prior to completion of public hearings on the plan. There are residents who have not had their awareness raised to this issue as of yet, due to the continuing nature of the talks on the Comprehensive Plan. I'm asking the Planning Commission to follow the path that you began to lay out at the • meeting two weeks ago, which is to pass a recommendation denying the changes to the Comprehensive Plan. I ask that you don't let an unfortunate situation of the two week delay due to an inadequately prepared denial proposal stop you from, what I believe you saw, as the right course of action two weeks ago. The City of Mounds View, and the Planning Commission in particular, have heard what the residents of the City are asking you to do as officials of the City in connection with the Comprehensive plan, and these were at prior meetings of the Comprehensive--the Comprehensive Plan meetings. And that is not to zone commercial property next to R-1 residential property. This is a community issue setting a dangerous precedent, in my opinion. And it is not just a personal issue to the adjacent property owners. I'm standing before you as a concerned member of the community, who has refused thus far,to be pressured into a last-minute agreement with the developer. Because I still believe that community and the good of the people in the community should come first. I, for one, want to teach my children that they can still grow up in a society where people think of each other, not in a society where the "me first attitude", expressed in prior meetings, is the norm. I want my kids to know that if they elect responsible officials, and work within the processes with those officials, it's likely that a reasonable resolution will be reached. • And since Mr. Cunningham has brought up the agreements,I'd like to specifically refer to a couple of things connected to the agreements: Mounds View Planning Commission April 15, 1998 Special Meeting Page 10 The agreement that is proposed by the developer names the City of Mounds View under the "Hold Harmless Clause" of the agreement. I personally am concerned that my City Council,as my elected representatives, have not been given the opportunity to review an agreement in which they are named prior to signatures being obtained from residents. City government, in my opinion, is a difficult job already, as you all can attest to. In carrying out the best interests of the City,I think, it's more difficult if they do not have all of the information available to them for consideration. Additionally,I'd like the Planning Commission to know that this agreement was presented to us, personally, less than two days ago. We were first contacted over Easter weekend on Good Friday when we were out of town, and we did not see a copy of the agreement until Monday night. We have been, in my opinion, pressured to sign an agreement that strips away all of our rights, as a citizen in Mounds View connected to this project, and we have been pressured to respond prior to this meeting. Only in discussions last night, when we indicated we felt pressure, were we given some additional time to consider. For an agreement of this importance, less than two days time to secure legal counsel and advise and negotiate an extremely broad and open-ended agreement, is not an example of good- faith negotiations with the residents of Mounds View. • Lastly,I want the Commission to know that while a few residents may have agreed to be compensated financially,the issues of traffic, safety, potential drop in property values, potential water problems, and the issue of the right type of commercial development for Mounds View, would, by that I mean, services which would truly benefit the residents in more than just tax base, still remain. In fact, some new information we received last night would indicate that the developer is no longer willing to work with the City and the residents on traffic issues on Greenwood connected to this project. It was indicated to us last night,that the developer views traffic and safety issues as the City's problem and not theirs. I know I personally have not heard any acceptable solutions to address these concerns, or the concerns over the in-out access on Highway 10. And I respectfully ask the Commission to pass a motion recommending denial of this project to the City Council in the best interests of the residents of Mounds View. Thank you for listening to me." Mr.Pinkerton agreed with the statements that Ms. Arel made and added, "If I was the developer I would have removed the access on Highway 10 at this point and he has not done that. That's a very major safety issue, we have our deceleration right in the middle of his right-out acceleration lane, as our property is right next door." MnDOT has indicated that they hope the project does not go forward because it is a dangerous situation. There are also stacking issues from County Road I that need to be addressed. John Weins, 7760 Greenwood Drive, spoke in opposition to the Walgreen development. • Chairperson Peterson asked the developer if, as stated by Ms. Arel, their stance on traffic Mounds View Planning Commission April 15, 1998 Special Meeting Page 11 control measures for Greenwood Drive had changed. Mr. Cunningham stated their concern is that they address all traffic safety issues to the best of their ability. Ms.Arel,quoted Terry Moses, the real estate representative for TOLD Development,as saying, "Traffic issues on Greenwood Drive are the responsibility of the City and the citizens." Terry Moses,Prudential Commercial Reality, stated, "that's not what I conveyed." He told the Commission that as far as he knows the developer's position has not changed in regards to traffic safety concerns on Greenwood Drive. Chairperson Peterson told the Commission that an action, one way or another, needed to be taken on the Case that evening so the Case could move forward to the City Council for its consideration. A written recommendation, showing the Findings of Fact, needs to be sent to the City Council. Motion/Second: Brooks/Johnston to approve denial of Resolution No. 536-98, a resolution • recommending the City Council approve 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. Ayes - 3 Nays -4 The motion failed. Motion/Second: Peterson/Obert to approve Resolution No. 536-98, a resolution recommending the City Council approve 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, as amended that the Highway 10 access is not a necessary part of the development project, language of the final resolution to be drafted by staff. Ayes - 4 Nays - 3 The motion carried. Ms.Arel stated: "This is a--you're looking at an overall big picture. What you're proposing to do is piecemeal, overall big picture, and I guess I have to disagree with that again as being in the best interest of the City." • Chairperson Peterson stated the feedback gathered from the community forums indicates the residents want the Highway 10 corridor to be the main area of commercial . Mounds View Planning Commission April 15, 1998 Special Meeting Page 12 development. The support for keeping commercial development on Highway 10 is overwhelming and the buffering issues for this development are undecided. Commissioner Brasaemle made a statement in explanation of his change in view for the project. He stated the fact that the developer has settled with four out of the six adjacent property owners and the developer's willingness to abide by a MnDOT decision, one way or another, on the Highway 10 access. Motion/Second: Obert/Peterson to approve Resolution No. 538-98, a resolution recommending the City Council approve Ordinance 614, an Ordinance approving the rezoning of properties located at 2625 Highway 10 and 7715 -7761 Eastwood Road from R-3,Medium Density Residential, and R-1, Single-Family Residential,to B-2, Limited Business District; Planning Case No. 507-97. Ayes -4 Nays - 3 The motion carried. Mr.Pinkerton asked the Commission how he was going to get compensated for having an . 18'wall with high-intensity lights built behind his town home development. He said he felt like the rug was being pulled out from under his development half way through its completion. Commissioner Obert thanked the citizens for their participation in the process. Ms.Arel expressed her"disappointment in the fact the Planning Commission, while rightfully so, bends over backwards to treat the developers fairly. I find that it was extremely unfortunate that both sets of proposals were not available two weeks ago, and basically,that left the residents in a position where they got caught off guard." A ten-minute recess was taken at 8:40 p.m. Back on the record at 8:50 p.m. 10. Planning Case No 514-98 8400 Coral Sea Street Applicant: Bridges Leasing Company, LLC Consideration of Resolution No 542-98 Approving the Development Review for Completion of the 2nd Phase of Bridges Technology Building Project • Mounds View Planning Commission April 15, 1998 Special Meeting Page 13 The applicant,Bridges Leasing Company, LLC, was present. Associate Ericson gave his presentation as follows: Bridges Leasing Company,LLC, is applying for permission to expand its current facility by building a 35,188 sq. ft. office/warehouse facility. This expansion will bring the total build-out to 64,376 sq. ft. The parcel of land, currently zoned I-1,Industrial District, is undeveloped with the western edge of the property in wetland, and the remaining area covered by dense tree cover. The proposed expansion will match the design and style of the existing building. Two areas of concern were addressed at the Planning Commission meeting held April 1, 1998. One being parking requirements. The second being the closeness of the paved parking lot to the adjacent wetland. The applicant has provided a master plan showing how the required parking numbers can be met. A proof of parking for 38 stalls was indicated on the site plan. This will require either a variance or a conditional use permit. The parking issue can be resolved after approval or denial of the application is achieved. • The paved parking area has been modified, as suggested by the Commission at the April 1, 1998,meeting to show the closest point to the wetland as being ten feet. Because work is being done within 100 feet of a wetland, the applicant will be required to have a wetland buffer permit approved by the City. The revised site plan showed the 100- foot wetland buffer, the edge of the easement area, and statistics regarding the area of the buffer and the percent of which is covered in pervious and impervious surface. An ordinance vacating the drainage and utility easements between Lots 2 and 3 was drafted by the City Attorney and presented to the Commission. An easement document that will dedicate to the City a drainage and utility easement over the delineated wetland area is being prepared by the City Attorney. Staff is recommending approval of Resolution 542-98, a resolution recommending approval to the City Council of a development review for the Bridges Technology Park Phase II expansion,with stipulations. Stipulations were listed as follows: 1. Prior to the issuance of any City permits, the applicant shall accomplish the following: • a. Obtain a Rice Creek Watershed District permit(has been met). • Mounds View Planning Commission . April 15, 1998 Special Meeting Page 14 b. Enter into a development agreement with the City. c. Coordinate with City staff to resolve the parking requirement inconsistency either by obtaining a variance or conditional use permit for the reduced parking ratios. d. Arrange to combine Lots 2 and 3,Block 1 of the North Star Industrial Park 2nd Addition with Ramsey County and provide proof of such application to the City. e. Arrange to have recorded with Ramsey County the drainage and utility easement document for the wetland area as indicated on the revised site plan dated 4/8/98, and provide proof of such recordation to the City. 2. Approval of this development review shall be contingent upon the adoption of Ordinance 615, and ordinance vacating a portion of a drainage and utility easement over and across Lots 2 and 3. Chairperson Peterson asked the applicant to make their presentation. • Grady Kinghorn, Bridges Leasing Company, LLC, declined to make a presentation but offered to answer any questions that staff or the Commission had. Motion/Second: Stevenson/Brasaemle to approve Resolution No. 542-98, a resolution recommending approval by the City Council of a Development Review for the expansion of the Bridges Technology Park, 8400 Coral Sea Street; Planning Case No. 514-98, with stipulations. Ayes - 6 Nays - 0 The motion carried. Associate Ericson recommended that the applicant return to the next Planning Commission meeting to apply for the variance or conditional use permit to allow for the parking ratios as shown on the site plan. Commissioner Stevenson suggested having more facts present in regards to the shared parking with Phase I of the project. 11. • Planning Case No.517-98 2430 Highway 10(O'Neil Property) Applicant: AP Mounds View Limited Partnership (Anthony Properties) . Mounds View Planning Commission April 15, 1998 Special Meeting Page 15 Consideration of Resolution No. 544-98 Approving the Development Review Stage of the PUD, Preliminary Plat and a Wetland Buffer Permit. The applicant, AP Mounds View Limited Partnership (Anthony Properties), was present. Planning Director Jopke gave his presentation as follows: The Planning Commission reviewed this item on April 1, 1998 and made several recommendations and changes that needed to be shown as part of the site plan made available at this meeting. Full public notice was provide for this meeting. The application was accepted March 17, 1998. The 60-day approval period expires on May 17, 1998, unless extended. The site is located at 2430 Highway 10 and is bound by Long Lake Road and County Road H2. The property is owned by the O'Neil family and is under contract for purchase and development by Anthony Properties Management. The developer is proposing to construct a 63,000 sq. ft., 15 screen, 2188-seat movie theater,three 10,000 sq. ft. one-story office buildings, a 5000 sq. ft. restaurant, and a 6400 sq. ft. retail building. the movie • theater would be operated by Carmike Theaters. Parking for a total of 776 cars was provided on the site. Joint use of the theater and office parking is indicated because of offsetting hours. On May 12, 1997 the City Council approved Resolution 5104, a Comprehensive Plan Amendment, Ordinance No. 598, a rezoning, and Resolution 5119, approval of the General Concept PUD Plan for the site. Plan changes made to the original PUD General Concept plan were also reviewed. Staff is recommending approval of Resolution No. 544-98 recommending City Council approve a PUD development stage plan with stipulations for the Anthony Properties/O'Neil development at 2430 Highway 10. Stipulations were listed as follows: 1. That the landscape plan should be amended to incorporate the changes suggested by the City forester in his 3/31/98 memorandum. 2. That the site plan be amended to incorporate the changes suggested by SEH in the memorandum dated 3/31/98 and the comments from the Fire Marshal. 410 3. The drainage/utility plan should be amended to eliminate the City storm sewer • Mounds View Planning Commission April 15, 1998 Special Meeting Page 16 system on the property as per the memorandum from Rocky Keehn dated 4/13/98. 4. The light standards on the theater portion of the site should not exceed 24' in height. 5. Preliminary and final plats in accordance with Title 1200, the subdivision regulations, of the Mounds view Municipal Code must be approved by the City prior to the issuance of permits for more than one building site. 6. City approval of a wetland buffer permit in accordance with Title 1300,the flood plain and water management regulations, of the Mounds View Municipal Code. 7. Approval of the required permit from the Rice Creek Watershed District. 8. Approval of the permits from MnDOT for the accesses onto Highway 10. Director Jopke also mentioned he had received a call from a Mr. Welsh, 2558 Mounds View Drive, who indicated he favored the Anthony Properties development as well as the ring road connection. • Chairperson Peterson asked the applicant to make his presentation. Wendell Smith, representing Anthony Properties, gave his presentation as follows: A brief overview of the project was given which restated the facts and details as presented by Mr. Jopke. Changes to the original General Concept PUD Plan were reviewed. There was a building finish presentation as well as architectural elevations of the theater and office space exteriors. In response to the list of stipulations,Mr. Wendell responded as follows: 1. The developer will comply with the City Forester's requests. 2. The developer will comply with the changes suggested by SEH. 3. The City storm sewer will be eliminated from the plan as recommended by Mr. Keehn. 4. The developer would like to intermix the 40' standards, as shown on the plan, with some 24' standards. The 40' standards (a total of 6) give off more light and require fewer standards. The 24' standards would be used on the south side of the site, by • the office building, which is also closest to the residential areas. 5. The developer will comply with Title 1200. • Mounds View Planning Commission April 15, 1998 Special Meeting Page 17 6. The developer will comply with Title 1300. 7. Compliance with the Rice Creek Watershed District is in process and information will be supplied when available. 8. There is a letter from MnDOT, dated November 27, 1997, that approved the signal and the intersection, subject to financing. There have been three residential homes purchased by Anthony Properties on County Road H2. One of the homes has been re-sold and the property value did not decrease in the least. Motion/Second: Stevenson/Miller to approve Resolution 544-98, a resolution recommending the City Council approve a PUD development stage plan, for commercial uses on the O'Neil property, 2430 Highway 10;Planning Case No. 517-98, with stipulations, and amended, either/or,that the light standards on the theater portion of the site should not exceed 24' or prior to bringing the plans to the City Council, a study must be done insuring that the lights on the standards in the parking lot are not visible along direct sight lines from south of County Road H2. Ayes - 6 Nays - 0 • The motion carried. Commissioner Johnston suggested that No. 3, Allowed Uses, in the PUD document, should give the development the flexibility of having a restaurant and/or a retail development;this statement should be built into the agreement. The word "retail" in this portion of the document should read "retail/restaurant". The Commission agreed unanimously. 12. Staff Reports/Information Items Associate Ericson told the Commission that he would be representing the City in court on April 16, 1998 in regards to the property located at 8217 Long Lake Road, the Larry Wolfgram property. This property has had several Nuisance Code violations. Director Jopke told the Commission he had attended the national American Planning Association Conference, held in Boston Mass. Information from the conference was made available to any interested parties. 13. Chairperson and Planning Commissioners' Reports • No reports were considered. 0 Mounds View Planning Commission April 15, 1998 Special Meeting Page 18 14. Adjournment to Agenda Meeting There being no further business before the Special meeting of the Planning Commission, Chairperson Peterson adjourned the meeting at 10:45 p.m. (The Special Meeting immediately adjourned to the Agenda Session). Respectfully submitted, Rick Jopke Community Development Director • • • Planning Comm. Mtg April 15, 1998 Please Sign In ! Name Address Phone # Item of Interest: (Walgreens,Bridges,or Theater,Etc.) v,?J' CL) 5,3c>/ ez i;,c)c. r/ 7V0- 63- OWe.% A:� 2,2,47 .04,-der, . /'\\ ,...--, ,7.- 6\n'1 ,A c: GJS SLor3c4 0r f-iwj 0 bi Q..Q `111 wo•. e . M °16 -V3i �_! 5 . L.-r-----A-A''' ' 0(0 t ds)-ii t,J0-0--46, 0,-. --2,9 -6/-(0'0 (2.6.,?._.4 1,4 • ' W 0 1 d-G-e.-w!0 , e,( 77 a� Gee e� .� z.LL cvA 3 „...„....,...i.; ckt,...e._ -3 /�� 7� z��� �4r�-cam .7.1.714:;91 76:k 0,f)e, c_ e 3 G&-c,/rr Cr -e 1 2 32 V O ;)-c. 7 LeaL , '''-e:-' ' s-. ',/5--,:- r 17 -� L. Uaw Aka vv'tel 2 'p 1-rw it C-ec i I i Gt \\)--e,re -2-y oC (74,0‘. t� 07-14 `11-• 15'3 8 c 7 r. k C77- 0 "2 G 71_z -DA-fi/e, . .r)-9-. r,,i •e/c/ SL1,-• ).( • 7V/-;.??,f . CD //1€4-.:(' .e w 244 * ke CY pr5-- z . 7 / 1r ,ter >� S.Nivo`. .,vv.i�s <,,c)�\ T 032t4JoOn Or . i i i - ') %C f fj )-a i � •� -/_.' � 4y l -1C�1 7 ��s� Lv1��P�P �.�-�"X3�'C 74(1;' 7“°' r ,e. C 4V.s - 1?2 9 S &-1)e.. 7 q .3 -7,_<—‘ (9//VI_ .- MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING COMMISSION • RESOLUTION NO. 536-98 CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW COUNTY OF RAMSEY STATE OF MINNESOTA RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL 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. WHEREAS, TOLD Development Company has applied for a comprehensive plan amendment which would change the designation of the properties located at 2625 Highway 10 and 7715-7761 Eastwood Road from high and low density residential to neighborhood commercial; and, WHEREAS, the subject properties are described as follows: The South 1/ of Lot 51,All of Lot 50, Lot 49 and Lot 78, Spring Lake Park Hillview, Ramsey County, Minnesota • WHEREAS, Section 401.09 of the Mounds View Municipal Code states that the Cityhas P adopted the Comprehensive Plan for the City of Mounds View, dated 1979, as its plan for future development and growth within the City; and, WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Mounds View adopted the 1979 Comprehensive Plan in 1982 by Resolution No. 1467; and, WHEREAS, the 1979 Comprehensive Plan places the subject properties in District 6 and designates these properties for both high and low density residential development as indicated by Exhibit 1, attached herewith; and, WHEREAS, both the Comprehensive Plan and the zoning map designate these properties for residential development; and, WHEREAS, there has been much community sentiment regarding the inappropriateness of future residential development fronting Highway 10; and, WHEREAS, in a study completed by SRF Consulting in April, 1997, the property at 2625 Highway 10 was deemed to be too restrictive for stand-alone development due to access limitations and size constraints; and, 111 Planning Commission Resolution No. 536-98 • April 15, 1998 Page 2 WHEREAS, the SRF study indicated that development potential of the property located at 2625 Highway 10 would be enhanced if combined with adjacent properties; and; WHEREAS, the Planning Commission makes the following findings that the proposed amendment is consistent with the general land use goals and policies contained in the Comprehensive Plan as follows: Goal 1. Develop a cohesive land use pattern which ensures compatibility and functional relationships among activities and uses. The change from high density and low density residential to neighborhood commercial will allow for the commercial development of the northeast corner of the Highway 10 and County Road I intersection, an intersection that already supports three corners of higher intensity commercial uses--a Hardees Restaurant and the Moundsview Square Shopping Center, a SuperAmerica gas station and convenience store, and a Burger King Restaurant. Given the high traffic counts at this intersection, it would seem more appropriate to use the land for commercial rather than residential development. The proposed amendment is in keeping with the community goal of limiting commercial development to the Highway 10 corridor. The neighborhood commercial designation is the least common designation used in the comprehensive plan, representing less than one-quarter of one percent of the properties in the City. The proposed use would be set back approximately 130 feet from neighboring residential properties and separated by a minimum 70 feet of greenspace and other physical buffering. The neighborhood commercial designation, as opposed to the •more intensive highway commercial designation, would in itself be a buffer to the adjoining residential properties. Goal 2. Maintain and, where necessary, upgrade land uses and environmental quality. The policy under this goal directs attention to protecting integrated use districts (residential neighborhoods, commercial centers, industrial parks) from penetration by through traffic. By virtue of its proximity to Highway 10 and County Road I, the residential district already experiences a penetration of through traffic. Redeveloping the subject properties for a commercial use will add to the existing traffic in this residential district. The tradeoff, however, is that Eastwood Road would no longer feed into the Highway 10 / County Road I intersection thus eliminating a notable point of conflict and with the addition of a right turn lane onto Highway 10 from westbound County Road I, the overall functioning of the intersection will be significantly improved. Goal 3. Preserve and protect property values. Planning Commission Resolution No. 536-98 April 15, 1998 Page 3 It is hoped that in the long run, property values will increase with the introduction of a lower-intensity neighborhood commercial use at the corner of the most traveled intersection of the City. The positive impact to the City's tax base will serve to lessen the tax burden to residential properties across the City. Goal 4. Ensure community development is compatible with features of the natural environment and is accommodated without destroying desirable environmental features and natural amenities. Other than a few mature trees present on the subject properties, there are no natural environmental features or amenities that will be threatened or degraded as a result of the proposed development. The plans for development will include a system for capturing stormwater run-off for the subject properties which should improve conditions for properties immediately adjacent to the development. In so doing, the quality of the stormwater that now runs untreated into the City's sewer system will be significantly improved. Goal 5. Prevent development which is not accompanied by a sufficient level of supportive services • and facilities (utilities, parking, access, etc.) The properties are located on Highway 10, a principal arterial and the major thoroughfare in Mounds View, and County Road I, a minor arterial street. While adequate opportunity for access to the development is available to County Road I, access may not be possible onto Highway 10 because of the limited highway frontage. The Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT) will need to review and approve any requests for access onto Highway 10. Water, sanitary sewer, storm sewer, gas and electric lines are available. Comments from the Blaine/Spring Lake Park/Mounds View Fire Department regarding access to the subject properties as well as to the properties on a dead-end Eastwood Road indicate that as long as there is a sufficient turning radius at the end of the cul-de-sac, no reduction in the level of service or response time would be expected. The parking requirements would be examined during the development review. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission makes the following additional findings that the proposed amendment is consistent with the commercial goals and policies contained in the Comprehensive Plan as follows: Goal 1. Commercial development shall be considered in order to provide a broad tax and expanded employment base within Mounds View. • Redesignating the subject properties to allow for the development of a specific neighborhood commercial use will increase the City's tax base ten-fold and create 35 positions, more than Planning Commission Resolution No. 536-98 • April 15, 1998 Page 4 half of which would be full-time positions. Many of the jobs created would be filled by Mounds View residents. Goal 2. Provide safe, convenient, attractive, and accessible commercial development within Mounds View. The development proposed at the northeast corner of Highway 10 and County Road I would be put through an intensive review process by which all aspects of the building design and site layout would be examined. The proposed use would be buffered from the adjacent residential areas by an expanse of greenspace, plantings and a fence. In terms of convenience, a neighborhood commercial use at this location would give those residents living north of County Road I and east of Highway 10 the ability to walk for certain goods and services without having to cross either thoroughfare, which are viewed as major barriers to pedestrian and other non-vehicular traffic. To encourage pedestrian use, the City would require that a sidewalk be extended to the site from Greenwood Drive on the north side of County Road I and there would be a pedestrian access from Eastwood Road to the north. • Goal 3. Major retail sales and services will be developed in planned and concentrated centers. Now that the majority of the available vacant land within the City is either developed or is slated for development, this goal may not be as applicable as infill development becomes more prevalent. However, if one considers that by locating on the fourth corner of an intersection already populated with higher intensity commercial uses, then this goal is met. The development will provide for its own stormwater retention and treatment system. Goal 4. The development of small, neighborhood convenience stores will be limited to locations which best serve residential areas without impairing residential development. Any development proposed for this site will be put through an intensive review process through which compatibility with the character of the surrounding neighborhood will be strongly encouraged. The access to the proposed use will be convenient for the surrounding community and non-vehicular traffic will be encouraged through the installation of pathways and sidewalks. WHEREAS, the Comprehensive Plan land use map designation for District 6 is proposed 110 to be amended as shown on Exhibit 2, attached herewith. Planning Commission Resolution No. 536-98 April 15, 1998 Page 5 NOW, THEREFORE, the Mounds View Planning Commission does hereby recommend that the City Council approve an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan to redesignate the south 1/z of Lot 51 and all of Lots 50, 49 and 78 to NC, Neighborhood Commercial. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Mounds View Planning Commission directs Staff to forward this Resolution to the City Council prior to approval of the minutes. Adopted this 15th day of April, 1998. Jerry Pet son, Chairperson ATTEST: • Rick Jopke, Community Development Director (SEAL) NMATA\GROUPS\COMDEVIDEV CASES\507-97\536-98PC.RES • MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING COMMISSION • RESOLUTION NO. 538-98 CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW COUNTY OF RAMSEY STATE OF MINNESOTA A RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF ORDINANCE 614, AN ORDINANCE APPROVING THE REZONING OF PROPERTIES LOCATED AT 2625 HIGHWAY 10 AND 7715-7761 EASTWOOD ROAD FROM R-3, MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL, AND R-1, SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL, TO B-2, LIMITED BUSINESS DISTRICT; PLANNING CASE NO. 507-97. WHEREAS, TOLD Development Company has applied for a rezoning of the properties located at 2625 Highway 10 and 7715-7761 Eastwood Road from residential to commercial; and, WHEREAS, the subject properties are described as follows: The South '/ of Lot 51,All of Lot S0,Lot 49 and Lot 78, Spring Lake Park Hillview, Ramsey County, Minnesota • WHEREAS, this rezoning request is to be acted on in tandem with a comprehensive plan amendment requested by the applicant which changes the land use designations from Low and High Density Residential (LD & HD) to Neighborhood Commercial (NC); and, WHEREAS, the rezoning request would be consistent with the comprehensive plan if the comprehensive plan amendment request is approved by the Mounds View City Council; and, WHEREAS, the subject properties form a contiguous tract of land at the northeast corner of the Highway 10 and County Road I, an intersection having the highest traffic counts of any intersection within the City; and, WHEREAS, the other three corners of this above-cited intersection have already developed with high intensity commercial uses; and, WHEREAS, allowed uses in a limited business district would be low-intensity commercial, which would serve as a transition into the established residential neighborhood; and, WHEREAS, a use of this type should serve as a benefit to the immediate area; and, WHEREAS, the developer has indicated that the proposed use would fill a need for a . growing demographic group within the immediate area; and, Planning Commission Resolution No. 538-98 • April 15, 1998 Page 2 WHEREAS, there has been much community sentiment regarding the inappropriateness of future residential development fronting Highway 10; and, WHEREAS, in a study completed by SRF Consulting in April, 1997, the property at 2625 Highway 10 was deemed to be too restrictive for stand-alone development due to access limitations and size constraints; and, WHEREAS, the SRF study indicated that development potential of the property located at 2625 Highway 10 would be enhanced if combined with adjacent properties; and; NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Mounds View Planning Commission does hereby recommend that the City Council adopt Ordinance 614, and ordinance approving the rezoning of properties located at 2625 Highway 10 and 7715-61 Eastwood Road to B-2, Limited Business District. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Mounds View Planning Commission directs Staff to forward this Resolution to the City Council prior to approval of the minutes. • Adopted this 15th day of April, 1998. Je Peterson, Chairperson ATTEST: Rick Jopke, Community Development Director (SEAL) N:\DATA\GROUPS\COMDEV\DEV CASES\507-97\538-98PC.RES MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING COMMISSION ` RESOLUTION NO. 539-98 CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW COUNTY OF RAMSEY STATE OF MINNESOTA RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF A MINOR SUBDIVISION FOR CHARLES AND SHIRLE SCHULTZ, 7581 SPRING LAKE ROAD; MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING CASE NO. 518-98 WHEREAS, Charles and Shirle Schultz have requested approval for a minor subdivision dividing their property located at 7581 Spring Lake Road, property zoned R-1, Single Family Residential, legally described as follows: Lot 41, Spring Lake Park Knolls,Ramsey County WHEREAS, the two lots created by this minor subdivision, Lot A(the southern half with the existing home) and Lot B (the northern half)would be legally described as follows: Lot A: The South 80.00 Feet of Lot 41, Spring Lake Park Knolls, Ramsey County • Lot B: That Part of Lot 41, Spring Lake Park Knolls, Ramsey County, Lying North of the South 80.00 Feet Thereof WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the applicant's request for a minor subdivision and has determined that it is in conformance with Chapters 1201, 1202, 1104 and 1204 of the Municipal Code; and WHEREAS, the applicant has submitted a Certificate and Plat of Survey for the above described property. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Mounds View Planning Commission recommends approval of the minor subdivision request made by Charles and Shirle Schultz, 7581 Spring Lake Road, contingent upon the following: 1. The applicant shall make payment of a park dedication fee in an amount specified by the City Council according to the requirements in Section 1204.02. 2. The applicant shall record the City Council resolution of approval, the Certificate of Survey and the drainage and utility easement document with Ramsey County within sixty(60) days of final adoption, and present proof of such recording to the City of Mounds View, or this approval shall be null and void. 7581 Spring Lake Road Minor Subdivision Resolution No. 539-98 April 15, 1998 Page 2 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Mounds View Planning Commission directs staff to forward this resolution to the City Council prior to approval of the minutes. Adopted this 15th day of April, 1998 • Jerry Pc14r7voh, Chairperson ATTEST: . ZII Rick Jopke, Commu Development Director (SEAL) • NADATAIGROUPSTOMDEVIDEVCASES1518-981539-98PC.RES • MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 540-98 CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW COUNTY OF RAMSEY STATE OF MINNESOTA RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO ALLOW FOR AN OVERSIZED STORAGE SHED FOR RONALD OVERTON, 2824 WOODALE DRIVE; MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING CASE NO. 520-98 WHEREAS, Ronald Overton has applied for a conditional use permit to convert an existing 308 square-foot garage into a back yard storage shed on property located at 2824 Woodale Drive, zoned R-1, Single Family Residential, legally described as followed: LOT 93 KNOLLWOOD PARK ADDITION, RAMSEY COUNTY,MINNESOTA WHEREAS, The Mounds View Zoning Code allows, with a conditional use permit, up to 1,264 square feet of garage/accessory building on one lot; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the following documents regarding this proposal: a. Planning Application b. Zoning Map c. Site Plan WHEREAS, the Planning Commission finds that the dimensional requirements in Chapter 1104 the Zoning Code for this proposal have been met; and, WHEREAS, the Planning Commission makes the following findings that possible adverse effects have been considered in its recommendation, as required by Section 1125.01 Subd. 1.e.: 1. Relationship with the Comprehensive Plan. The Comprehensive Plan encourages the development and maintenance of residential areas so as to improve the quality,appearance and attractiveness of housing units and residential property in general. The Comprehensive Plan designates this property,2824 Woodale Drive,low-density residential. This proposal does not conflict with the Comprehensive Plan. 2. The Geographical Area Involved. 4. The Character of the Surrounding Area The majority of the lots in this area are larger than what is typical for Mounds View. The subject Planning Commission Resolution 540-98 April 15, 1998 Page 2 property along with those immediately adjacent to it are 3/4 of an acre or larger,some of which are heavily wooded. While the proposed shed is larger than what is might be standard for this area,the placement of the building 100 feet behind home hides it street view. The shed would be visible only to the two neighboring properties. The home behind the subject property is screened by the rolling typography and extensive tree cover. 3. Whether such use will tend to or actually depreciate the area in which it is proposed. The conversion and relocation of the existing garage will serve to increase the subject property's value without negatively impacting the values of the neighboring properties. However,because the garage's stucco exterior matches the exterior of the home,staff would stipulate that the shed maintain a consistent and uniform appearance with the house until such time that the shed is removed from the property. 5. The demonstrated need for such a use. The existing garage is small,even for a single car garage. The applicant would like to park more than one vehicle inside at a time. The structure,however,is in solid repair,and could be retained as a storage shed,which the applicant currently does not have. The applicant currently stores yard and garden equipment outside,under their deck and in the back yard in the open. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission makes the following findings regarding the criteria for approval of a conditional use permit, as required by Section 1125.01 Subd. 3.b.: • (1) The use will not create an excessive burden on existing parks,schools,streets and other public facilities and utilities which serve or are proposed to serve the area. (7) The use will not cause traffic hazards or congestion. (8) Adequate utilities,access roads,drainage and necessary facilities have been or will be provided. The conversion of the garage to a storage shed will not create a greater impact on existing public facilities or services,on utilities or access roads,nor will it create an increase in traffic on adjacent streets. The increase in runoff from the larger structure is not significant and will not affect the drainage system. (2) The use will be sufficiently compatible or separated by distance or screening from adjacent residentially zoned or used land so that existing homes will not be depreciated in value and there will be no deterrence to development of vacant land. (3) The structure and site shall have an appearance that will not have an adverse effect upon adjacent residential properties. The placement of the shed 100 feet behind the home will hide it from street view. The shed will, however,will be in full view of the two adjoining properties. Through the CUP,it will be required that the shed maintain the same exterior appearance of the house. (4) The use,in the opinion of the City Council,is reasonably related to the overall needs of the City and to the existing land use. • (5) The use is consistent with the purposes of the Zoning Code and the purposes of the zoning district in which the applicant intends to locate the proposed use. (6) The use is not in conflict with the Comprehensive Plan of the City. Planning Commission Resolution 540-98 April 15, 1998 • Page 3 Sheds and out-buildings are typical uses in residential areas,and allow for the storage of yard and garden equipment. Having this shed will allow for the property owner to store items,currently left outside,within a secure and protected structure. NOW, THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED that the Mounds View Planning Commission recommends approval of the conditional use permit with the following stipulations: 1. The conditional use permit shall be recorded with Ramsey County within 60 days of City Council approval, and a receipt of such recording shall be provided to the City of Mounds View. 2. . The shed shall be maintained into the future so as to provide a uniform and consistent building appearance with the existing house. 3. The shed shall not be used for living space or other uses not allowed by the district in which it is located or by the Zoning Code. Should the use change for which the permit was granted, the conditional use permit shall become null and void. 4. No other sheds or accessory buildings, other than the proposed garage, shall be allowed on this lot. III 5. There shall be no vehicle access to this shed, nor shall any vehicle be stored within said structure. 6. The applicant shall enter into a development agreement with the City to ensure a high quality of workmanship and timely completion of the relocation. BE IT FINALLY RESOLVED that the Planning Commission directs staff to forward this resolution to the City Council prior to approval of the minutes. Adopted this 15th day of April, 1998. Jerry Peter n, airperson ATTEST: Li ji_d Rick Jopke, Communi Development Director (SEAL) N:\DATA\GROUPS\COMDEV\DEVCASES\520-98\540-98PC.RES • MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING COMMISSION • RESOLUTION NO. 541-98 CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW COUNTY OF RAMSEY STATE OF MINNESOTA RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO ALLOW AN OVERSIZED GARAGE FOR THOMAS LAMMT, 7858 LONG LAKE ROAD; MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING CASE NO. 516-98 WHEREAS, Thomas Lanni has applied for a conditional use permit to construct a 616 square foot addition to his garage 630 square-foot garage on property located at 7858 Long Lake Road, zoned R-1, Single Family Residential, legally described as followed: LOT 3 BLOCK 1, T.V. CONSTRUCTION, INC ADDN, RAMSEY COUNTY,MINNESOTA WHEREAS, The Mounds View Zoning Code allows, with a conditional use permit, up to 1,264 square feet of garage/accessory building on one lot; and • WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the following documents regarding this proposal: a. Planning Application b. Zoning Map c. Site Plan WHEREAS, the Planning Commission finds that the dimensional requirements in Chapter 1104 the Zoning Code for this proposal have been met; and, WHEREAS the Plannin l Commis i -ef 11 • . .i .. _ effects have been considered in its recommendation, as required by Section 1125.01 Subd. i.e.: 1. Relationship with the Comprehensive Plan. The Comprehensive Plan encourages the development and maintenance of residential areas so as to improve the quality,appearance and attractiveness of housing units and residential property in general. The Comprehensive Plan designates this property,7858 Long Lake Road,low-density residential. This proposal does not conflict with the Comprehensive Plan. 2. The Geographical Area Involved. 4. The Character of the Surrounding Area • The majority of the lots in this area are larger than the subject property although many of the lots Planning Commission Resolution 541-98 April 15, 1998 • Page 2 across Long Lake Road are smaller parcels. While the proposed garage is larger than what is typical for this area,the placement of the garage addition behind the home hides it from Long Lake Road. The garage would be visible only to the three adjoining properties. Staff has spoken to two of the three neighboring property owners,who do not foresee a problem with the addition. 3. Whether such use will tend to or actually depreciate the area in which it is proposed. This addition will serve to increase the subject property's value without negatively impacting the values of the neighboring properties. 5. The demonstrated need for such a use. The applicant has indicated that they own antique and classic vehicles that are currently parked in different locations across the metro area. With the applicant's everyday-use vehicles there is no room in the garage or driveway for the other vehicles owned by the applicant. The size requested is the minimum needed to satisfy the applicant's needs. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission makes the following findings regarding the criteria for approval of a conditional use permit, as required by Section 1125.01 Subd. 3.b.: (1) The use will not create an excessive burden on existing parks,schools,streets and other public • facilities and utilities which serve or are proposed to serve the area. (7) The use will not cause traffic hazards or congestion. (8) Adequate utilities,access roads,drainage and necessary facilities have been or will be provided. The construction of an oversized garage will not create a greater impact on existing public facilities or services,on utilities or access roads,nor will it create an increase in traffic on adjacent streets. The increase in runoff from the larger structure is not significant and will not affect the drainage system. (2) The use will be sufficiently compatible or separated by distance or screening from adjacent residentially zoned or used land so that existing homes will not be depreciated in value and there will be no deterrence to development of vacant land. (3) The structure and site shall have an appearance that will not have an adverse effect upon adjacent residential properties. The placement of the garage addition so that the structure is hidden from street view will provide adequate screening,and will preserve the residential character of the neighborhood. The garage addition,will however,be in full view of the three adjoining properties. (4) The use,in the opinion of the City Council,is reasonably related to the overall needs of the City and to the existing land use. (5) The use is consistent with the purposes of the Zoning Code and the purposes of the zoning district in which the applicant intends t3 locate the proposed use. • (6) The use is not in conflict with the Comprehensive Plan of the City. Garages are typical uses in residential areas,and allow for storage of vehicles and other equipment. Planning Commission Resolution 541-98 April 15, 1998 • Page 3 Having this garage will allow for the property owner to store his collectable vehicles upon his own property. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Mounds View Planning Commission recommends approval of the conditional use permit with the following stipulations: 1. The conditional use permit shall be recorded with Ramsey County within 60 days of City Council approval, and a receipt of such recording shall be provided to the City of Mounds View. 2. The garage shall be designed and maintained to provide a seamless and uniform building appearance with the existing garage and house. 3. The garage shall not be used for living space or other uses not allowed by the district in which it is located or by the Zoning Code. Should the use change for which the permit was granted, the conditional use permit shall become null and void. 4. No other sheds or accessory buildings shall be allowed on this lot. 5.. There shall be no vehicle access door on the west elevation of the addition. Vehicle ingress/egress shall only be possible through the existing garage. • 6. The applicant shall enter into a development agreement with the City to ensure a high quality of workmanship and timely completion of the development. BE IT FINALLY RESOLVED that the Planning Commission directs staff to forward this resolution to the City Council prior to approval of the minutes. Adopted this 15th day of April, 1998. Jerry Pefdrsoii, Chairperson ATTEST: LAP P Rick Jo•ke, Communi Development Director (SEAL) N:\DATA\GROUPS\COMDEV\DEVCASES1516-98\541-98PC.RES • MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 542-98 • CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW COUNTY OF RAMSEY STATE OF MINNESOTA RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF A DEVELOPMENT REVIEW FOR'THE EXPANSION OF TIlE BRIDGES TECHNOLOGY PARK, 8400 CORAL SEA STREET; PLANNING CASE NO. 514-98 WHEREAS, Bridges Leasing Company, LLC, has requested City approval to expand its building at 8400 Coral Sea Street to include the property at 8450 Coral Sea Street; and WHEREAS, the Mounds View City Council approved Resolution 4800 on 8/28/95 approving a development review and wetland alteration permit for Midwest IV to permit the construction of a 29,168 square foot office/warehouse building; and, WHEREAS, Chapter 1006 of the Mounds View Municipal Code requires that a development review be conducted for all commercial and industrial development within the City; and, WHEREAS, the Mounds View Planning Commission has reviewed the following • documents regarding this proposal: 1. Planning Application,dated 3/5/98 2. Zoning and Location Map 3. City Council Resolution No. 4800,approved 8/28/95 4. Site Plans,dated 3/6/98 and revised 4/8/98 WHEREAS, the Mounds View Planning Commission finds that the dimensional requirements as set forth in Chapter 1104 of the Municipal Code have been met; and, WHEREAS, the Mounds View Planning Commission finds that the site plans dated 3/6/98 and revised site plans dated 4/8/98 conform to the requirements of Chapter 1116, Industrial Zoning District; and, WHEREAS, the Rice Creek Watershed District and the City Engineer have reviewed the proposed drainage plans and find them in conformance to watershed and local water management plan requirements; and, WHEREAS, the City Forester has reviewed the proposed landscaping plan and finds it to be acceptable; and, WHEREAS, the Mounds View/Spring Lake Park/Blaine Fire Marshal has reviewed the • site plans concerning access and drive aisles and find them to conform to Fire Department specifications. Planning Commission Resolution 542-98 Bridges Development Review • April 15, 1998 Page 2 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Mounds View Planning Commission recommends approval to the City Council of a development review for Bridges Leasing Company, LLC, to expand the Bridges Technology Park as shown on site plans dated 3/6/98 and revised 4/8/98, subject to the following stipulations: 1. Prior to the issuance of any City permits, the applicant shall accomplish the following: a. Obtain a Rice Creek Watershed District permit. b. Enter into a development agreement with the City. c. Coordinate with City staff to resolve the parking requirement inconsistency either by obtaining a variance or conditional use permit for the reduced parking ratios. d. Arrange to combine Lots 2 and 3, Block 1 of the North Star Industrial Park 2nd Addition with Ramsey County and provide proof of such application to the City. e. Arrange to have recorded with Ramsey County the drainage and utility easement document for the wetland area as indicated on the revised site plan dated 4/8/98 • and provide proof of such recordation to the City. 2. Approval of this development review shall be contingent upon the adoption of Ordinance 615, an ordinance vacating a portion of a drainage and utility easement over and across Lots 2 and 3. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Planning Commission directs Staff to forward this resolution to the City Council prior to approval of the minutes. Adopted this 15th day of April, 1998 Jerry Peterson, Chairperson ATTEST: Rick Jopke, Commu 'ty Development Director • SEAL N:\DATA\GROUPS\COMDEV\DEVCASES\514-981542-98PC.RES MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING COMMISSION • RESOLUTION NO. 543-98 CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW COUNTY OF RAMSEY STATE OF MINNESOTA RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING TO CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR OUTDOOR SALES AT MOUNDSVIEW SQUARE, REQUESTED BY MERRYVILLE FARM MARKET; PLANNING CASE NO. 522-98 WHEREAS, Craig Gilb, representing Merryville Farm Market, has applied for a conditional use permit to conduct open and outdoor sales at Moundsview Square Shopping Center; property zoned B-4, legally described as follows: That Part Lying Northeasterly of the Centerline of State Trunk Highway 10 of NE 1/. ofNE'/. (Subject to Roads and Highways) in Section 7, Township 30, Range 23 WHEREAS, the Mound View Zoning Code allows open and outdoor sales in the B-4 Regional Business District with the approval of a conditional use permit; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the following documents regarding 4) this proposal: a. Planning Application b. Zoning Map c. Site Plan d. Letter from Property Owner e. Letter from City Attorney WHEREAS, The Mounds View Planning Commission makes the following findings that the criteria for approval in Section 1115.04, Subd. 2 have been met: a Outdoor service,sales and equipment rental connected with the principal use is limited to thirty percent(30%)of the gross floor area of the principal use. The shopping center contains 102,035 square feet of building area. The applicant proposes to occupy 110 square feet of the parking lot, which is less than 1% of the building square footage on the site. This criterion has been met. b. Outside sales areas are fenced or screened from view of neighboring residential uses or an abutting residential district in compliance with Subdivisions 1103.08(1)through(5)of this Title. The parking lot fronting Highway 10 does not abut any residential properties. The nearest . residential property is Wildwood Manor, an apartment building for senior citizens, which would be well screened from the proposed use by a stand of trees. Merryville Farm Market Planning Commission Resolution 543-98 • April 15, 1998 Page 2 c. All lighting shall be hooded and so directed that the light source shall not be visible from the public right of way or from neighboring residences and shall be in compliance with Section 1103.09 of the Code. The applicant will not have any lighting associated with the produce stand as it will be operating during daylight hours. d. Sales area is grassed or surfaced to control dust. The applicant is proposing to use an existing parking lot which is surfaced with asphalt. This criterion is met. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has considered the provisions from Section 1125.01(1)e of the Zoning Code regarding possible adverse effects of the proposed use and makes the following findings: (1) Relationship to Municipal Comprehensive Plan. (2) The geographical area involved. (3) Whether such use will tend to or actually depreciate the area in which it is • proposed. (4) The character of the surrounding area. (5) The demonstrated need for such use. The proposal is for a temporary produce stand in the parking lot of an existing shopping center. The Comprehensive Plan designates this site as HC--Highway Commercial. The produce stand is an appropriate use within this designation. The shopping center is surrounded by roadways and the area where the use is to be located is 1,000 feet from the nearest residential property. The sale of produce is a typical seasonal business in a community such as Mounds View and it serves a community need. The short duration of the use will result in little, if any, adverse effect upon the surrounding area. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Mounds View Planning Commission recommends approval of the conditional use permit with the following stipulations: 1. The facility shall be allowed to operate from July 1, 1998, to September 30, 1998. 2. The hours of operation of the facility shall not exceed 8:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m. 3. Signage shall be allowed only as affixed to the gazebo base and/or canvas roof. 4. Lighting for the use shall be supplied by existing parking lot standards. Merryville Farm Market Planning Commission Resolution 543-98 April 15, 1998 Page 3 BE IT FINALLY RESOLVED that the Planning Commission directs staff to forward this resolution to the City Council prior to approval of the minutes. Adopted this 15th day of April, 1998. Iva Jerry Peters airperson Attest: Rick Jopke, Communi Development Director (Seal) N:\DATA\GROUPS\COMDEV\DEVCASES\522-98\543-98PC.RES 1111 • MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 544-98 CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW COUNTY OF RAMSEY STATE OF MINNESOTA RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF A PUD DEVELOPMENT STAGE PLAN, FOR COMMERCIAL USES ON THE O'NEIL PROPERTY, 2430 HIGHWAY 10; PLANNING CASE NO. 517-98. WHEREAS, the O'NeilroPrt3' e is described as follows: P The Southwest 1/4 of the northwest 1/4 of Section 8, Township 30, Range 23, lying southwesterly of State Trunk Highway No. 10-62, according to the United States Government Survey thereof and situate in Ramsey County, Minnesota and all that part of the northwest 1/4 of the northwest 1/4 of Section 8,Township 30,Range 23,lying southwesterly of State Trunk Highway No. 10, according to the United States Government Survey thereof and situate in Ramsey County,Minnesota WHEREAS, Anthony Properties Management, Inc. and Louise O'Neil have previously AO applied for and the City has approved an amendment of the comprehensive plan designation of the O'Neil property to a Mixed Use PUD; and, WHEREAS, Anthony Properties Management, Inc. and Louise O'Neil have previously applied for and the city has approved a rezoning which changed the designation on the O'Neil Property from B-1 (neighborhood commercial) and R-2 (duplex residential) to Planned Unit Development (PUD) for the development of commercial uses and a PUD general concept plan; and, WHEREAS, in accordance with Chapter 1120 of the Mounds View Municipal Code, Anthony Properties Management, Inc and Louise O'Neil have applied for approvaLof_a_PI ID development stage plan approval; and, WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the following documents: * Site plan, grading, drainage, erosion control, landscape and utility plans by Sunde Engineering, dated 3-6-98 * Theater elevation drawings * Office elevation drawings * Memorandum from the City Engineer (Rocky Keehn), dated 4-13-98 * Memorandum from the SEH dated 3-31-98 • * Fax from the Fire Marshal (Mark Bishop), dated 3-3-98 * Letter from U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, dated 4-7-98 Planning Commission Resolution No. 544-98 1111 April 15, 1998 Page 2 * Letter from the Minnesota Dept. of Natural Resources, dated 3-26-98 * Memorandum from City Forester (Rick Wriskey), dated 3-31-98 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission fords that this proposal meets the purpose and intent of Planned Unit Developments as stated in Section 1120.01 of the Mounds View Municipal Code in that the proposal has planned the overall development of this property and included an appropriate mix of uses which compliment each other, and will add to the vitality of the City Center. Requirements have been included to insure high quality architectural design and coordinated signage. The substantial wetland on the property will be preserved, and consideration will be given to preserving the tree cover on this parcel outside of development areas wherever possible. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission fords that this proposal meets the general requirements and standards for Planned Unit Developments (Section 1120.02) through the stipulations established in Exhibit 1 to this resolution. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission fords that this proposal meets the special • requirements and standards for commercial PUDs (Section 1120.03 Subd. 2) as follows: Required Provided Minimum Project Size 5 acres 26.03 acres Minimum Street Frontage 200 feet 1690 feet Minimum Property Width 200 feet 1280 feet WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has found that the proposed PUD development stage plan is generally consistent with the approved PUD general concept plan; and, WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has found that the proposed PUD development stage plan meets the review and evaluation criteria found in 1120.04, Subdivision 3f.of the Mounds View Municipal Code. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the Mounds View Planning Commission does hereby recommend that the City Council approve a PUD development stage plan dated 3-6-98, for the O'Neil property, 2430 Highway 10, and as described in Exhibit 1, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference, and subject to the following stipulations: 1. That the landscape plan should be amended to incorporate the changes suggested by the City Forester in his 3-31-98 memorandum. A final landscape plan should be submitted • for approval by the City Forester. 2. That the site plan be amended to incorporate the changes suggested by SEH in the Planning Commission Resolution No. 544-98 • April 15, 1998 Page 3 memorandum dated 3-31-98 and the comments from the Fire Marshal. The site plan submitted for PUD final plan approval should include the changes. 3. The drainage/utilities plan should be amended to eliminate the City storm sewer system on the property as per the memorandum from Rocky Keehn dated 4-13-98. The drainage/utility plan submitted for PUD final plan approval should include the changes. 4. The developer shall complete a sight line study of the light standards on the theater portion of the site to determine if the light standards are visible from residential properties to the south. If it is determined that they would be visible, the height of the visible light standards should not exceed 24 feet in height. 5. Preliminary and final plats in accordance with Title 1200 of the Mounds View Municipal Code must be approved by the City prior to the issuance of permits for more than one building on the site. 6. City approval of a wetland buffer permit in accordance with Chapter 1010 of the Mounds View Municipal Code. 7. Approval of the required permit from the Rice Creek Watershed District. 8. Approval of the permits from MnDOT for the accesses onto Highway 10. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Mounds View Planning Commission directs Staff to forward this Resolution to the City Council prior to approval of the minutes. Adopted this 15th day of April, 1998. • Tz Je Pet son, Chairperson ATTEST: Rick Jopke, Community Development Director (SEAL) N:\DATA\GROUPS\COMDEV\DEVCASES\471-97\PCRES2.ZON • p c� 00 00 Z � wa rncirn cu v, U 20 as •c' 'Cr Lc, Zi.-. wa " g o ,ca rn •0 z 0 o o •a � � 6m �, zz a) co ca a) cif 0 aj o 0 a. a) O +. a)a r tq 0 E•-. v] `- O ° � c 0Ea� oo z � tea. CO Q EEM ° wa a) fn cn m .c ro of as C4 0 E ••,-. coco y � m � -cti cj cnacocnacn "3 � UWO fz v, as m a) a) a) a) a) a) 2 v .+ al a1 a, U U U U U U 0 0 713 ami Cr) 0• 0 cin o m o L. co as c6 ca ctf as co ca 4 Ow a) vs o -� m �,,o o a L O co co fn OO Cr) z -. o OO v ti �� "_ co co a) .2 MON I� LC) N0 COa) o L y p tiN. e- CNi1- OCfl H C .— co- Q m en - 0 H N d d 73 X X U U ? 3, C ai 413. - .0 y 0.1 174 X a c EE CO al as Q "' Es- - oa' 8 w w 3 E: ir.io as .:. a� - E Q" .v .2 � = m y E � o i ,) .,.. .._.E via) a a) N .� k O 0 E E' a) 03-C O X E N •z S N { a) F" U C a) cu •p(13 c m `� p ~ Q. 4 R a) a 2 W a) CD a) -L. 1-4 0 '• °) U)= caQ H c 3 2Q Via) CSa2E2 za .�' 0 " m �+ a 'E o 2 0) :ago n m 0) co 00a 0- ,0 � r- NM ¢ m c ._ o a) ca . p U a) cLs Z p a) a) a) as N as IXa0 N Q = E RS aa)) a) ^ L -- z 2 as 0 03 w ' E cb of F-7) Z15 000aa � ti O a , ci ri MOa. cCc :. ca �. `o as 2 aL' -S. 0 W a. 0 E- ¢ a. ,7_1 g c ' t 4.0..,..z Ts •� - s .;i [�!f' r D.Nfg. . I liii 7c„11 Ola fd N33�t1 - ; Q .:'• •J'{ n 3R+--•. —., fn a) I( .7• / 4 'I- E 1 '; i I•% r 1 tys i dy { ..i ta.'NI=X13€13..i ,ij,1.J ,i itg •n' ,Ik-1,1-• V / :•': a y 1 ....2;_ya, 0 U) a o CD w S 1 I 7 `\\ ,_ vi a. O crj w . �\` ` `\ o `.9O Q • \\�� \ 'i,! \ • C a) .•f—' as . 4 L ,,,, 3 -:. 1.6.-.. N 0 • C. // iv' ! z ..1:i ii"( 0 Ia , . - • . ..,...„, • ;7 ., _ -• . . ,...„......f , r! 7. d a p co � t d3ON ---7,....,,,3,4z4,1,-,_. - ON- ..'� . , ,•'L . - -''a .1 ' a. 4.. CO". cq - ...CI I t[� 00 00 Q) a) O O G\ QA tr) CZ co O a) A.-. .Z O a) d i 1 Cu a) Q c '-r L. 0 .. E ) 0. a 0 • 1 as 0 (78 a) ca „ ,0 c M Q 76 0 ` zz .� a) O o0 • U 13 - •Z ° 0 N's a� C� m en 4 °c a aoi m � 20 oc O 0 0 ° ° a �' ` O-oam o .E o w o c c oZ vo a) ca 0 a ca oi a) o• O a a C0c . X (p ONO wO +. Q) CD 0 Q ' 0 o cO wca •LO co 0 Q v 00 0 i` N L. c) Ca X .0 O 0 ao0a)v) v (1 44 O, N az. 0 — .c 0 a) a Z a )O Z a ca ) r• Q0aa a) (D (ONOOO a) O L a) 0 E p a a � o - ZC7Vi •` ° atEl_) as N ° - -zo . sQac ° �, CD 0_ a) � - m ,;; co a aao . o 0 • 0 o 92 co a� c c c •`0 ,-.o Es. .1. a Q0)-0 U � CD 0 c N p 0 a 0 = = cn •r Cl)N to •Z c 0 a) c 0 a a . . Q C.) (1.) 4 , w CD Q' �" L co = 0 a) S -0 `0 y a ° E ° � ,� c�"n p pQ V co cn in Q � E � o _ a O 0 E a) N S. a .p 0 ca o 0 O. ca c a •c a) ti � uo) oo E C >, °- ) E o a) 0'+' as CZ www E oz) . pOa vNr- oo Q.c •c asa0 c) a > ai LE 4......0 aa)) ' c g -' a� a`) a`) •�' °-as o- as aa)) E aa) Q ° o o � co o S ascs 0 E cb -Ea o c �, n aa `m � E a m `° ro c °' a) � a •. A } 0 a a a % 0 . 0 8 8 aa)) a) cn .73 m .� i CO c 4 O cca a) S. � o ao) c � a) aa. a.t c o as -••E ca ac°) c`i `a z° E m O O Of .0 0)�. cis E U) co N L fl.� O 76 ° 4� j M 0 , ; 3 40.. o 0 .- � r- 3 = •C� E N a . C,) m m` a � W F" u) co z° ca OS. •c 0 .r s 0 co O o -0 rn 0) a z) 0 vi H W c cmoa) a � :? c Tn. 0.7° °- a) oavQ) 0asc >-, E p cu 0 � -a 0 a z c~-a o :g m a om a ° ° ° Q E PO ,� 1-ii 2 a c a .0 0 a) Y 0 v 0 :4 ~ a v ti Cu '� coi 0 ti - Cu 0 L.G w 0 —N.'S ° o)'o 0) 0 s a) a) -� ° -. w -�.c m o a > rt �.-c ° a)-c a ca a H 0 CC Ct vai O Z a) E o e. `�. ca a s O w a IIIE A Q Wag zA Ow w Q 0 a o I_ L m ti M as as _c c ca c`i co ,g,E ,.c ai E .� 0. c .- L.. w.. a) E `"," a) 0, cn cn m ai Cl)i ED_ c c .S .S c ,�? .. � -- V E V 0 0 L.0 E E E .� C 0 0 0 m RI RS a) a) E a) 0 0 MI` O It) COM N a • as 4- EU N � 1� w. � w Q. N, Z aovM aoaocfl o000 0 0 ° U CO N O) r CO U) 'a• N c a) w as 0 -0 a a) -'03) = O y Q E a •� o) p a) E E w C c 0o. M m > a� c E E w E as 0 a 0.m 0 x 'X A m CL Na cco < � � EE CU 03 F" " °' z cr a) a)o 3 CY = c 0 -. aa)) aa)) ca 0 0 0 _ctic c Na- Ao a Cn al c 173 3� J oma. -0°cvca ap N z ¢ ci) 3 * s- C Q t04 N 1 0) O C L _ < Li- O `. C O O p 03 p a 7 Oo O = UW I I - � Lmo Ca ..� N E xac c •C Octi LRS .. co o o aw Wa) Y 4m = a) — 3 Q C ct a .« .0 o _ zoeC7Qo - a ° a : a) , n 'Sdcaco o ._ ca m � 0 ONaa. alI- O 0i- 6 v) ictcn • • Q c L t- o0 00 a) c 0 ° a) � - c.` C.\ ' v a = as a) '� a) �. t. c ac) a) � a' oaS o ° a) 035 0 � � � m E _ � ,� o' m� as m -a18 : •� "= a) V aa)) rnCZ E o a co• a.2 �a ° to E ° ac C- 0. AZO • � � � � � L) L = a) ca E 01 :� 0 m to -' ZZ c°) n. orn � caa3i xn. `n 3 .c � oc tnc .cQU c — a) a) ooQc a) c ` c _ _� .., ooc o O00 U) vs ' .o c > c .-o t as ••� o .c a 03 C -c al - _0 W )�.] 0 o J x o •o ° a) vi >, c_0. u) .�. o cTa -a •c dv c LL 0.7 a' •0 a L -g ..0 = a) _ �- ca c — a) ..c c .0 O ° 4... o c c -a co >O = U O Baa ° vo, a) � o •c a) c to a) o rno ' a) a) L 3 C7 U c Ws aid � 2 � � a� > ~ _ � al� Y ca cai c- Q E z0Z 0 4- Q' co � +0. O w - > C o mi V - > � O OCL U) to as > a) 'Oni .. o > Q tL E o '= d a) :II O� W ca N o- E U is = 2 a p ° -0 ' `. 0 0 `~ 'a 0) 3 a) us C O c a. to a) > a. p. ,-, ° a) - 0 o 0. ° m 0) • 0 0 o L ° x � N > Us c a � zsa) a) a) °' c a) a � us-C co a3� o. a 3 >C � P- 2 ° � = a � � � v > tn • -,- w > caUoc 2c 2 wW3 0. ci L >,_� a) Qr as = O to a) to Cn ° `) 4) > a) to O O O U a) (a 2 . N 1 > O .-. as — (n a) .= to -- to a) 2 O /� Q a) ... CO 0 ca O � C 0) 0 u) oa) L. tB _c Z' c •Y o o O c -c o = _ cn L a) -A E U fn 'a c 'a O I-' �. L o ° a) 0 .` �r- ` (a (� (= o = Tco ja > '070 c -a ° oa . -a � caOc c .-0 ) ®J 3 0 o v) c a L i (a E O _a) i 0.. m > O a) O O O '� > a) Y 00 -c 0 a) o W Z �' c >. ccami a) m c1-us 0 c ca > xcama) camcC0_ C >, ° as O>- 0E2 c O L c N in a)us C - d a) -o a) - - o '• o -0 .r .,..• a) >. W U L C ° V fa to L •a ...a" = a) Q) O '5" Q) a) 0 Q ° o .L. i a) o (ca O 0 U - E ,.+_.•a) 0 ca a) ,,. > m- a = o Ga e � � cv � ca) Qcao �uoc atn � Q. 00) Ooa) a) a) ° ca Q. Q a > ■ C 0 0 .0 a) Q. o h Z ac) 0 0. CO 3 co) 0. 0. 0 co 0 a) -0 c al I—• 0 W P, 0 E'-' Q v c �' a) co a a) p Wz -a • N •a a) ami a) c >,c ° Z _ 'n a) .0 o. c) ai CI.�' 4-,_ Z c • 0 c -ac � � o c o c a ca o .� �; o �• � o a 0 5 L a) a) c � V O cUc o O = U a _ , a) v = a) a a) = a) c g O a) ca a) `� - _C m •n" ca O.+' >O - O > x = 0 ti L pp = C w U E0 = L O v-• Q.W = E �� rn mo E o. E o > 3 aao 0..= L O ca O ❑. L ca a) a) L O L O Q O Z toN- M C O ot.= o c "a a) — a s uo - 3 ° a) a) :4 ' caala3) alt3c � c a) ,° 2 a) �j , C 'tn `� o -la; > "a L ° to c rn a cQ' 0 tna cal c 0 (1 .= .a o �° •� o E E•-. en U, r ° -a -a 'c N •= o ,a E L o -0 V 5 p.a) 4,0 3 a W 0 cnoocc c 'a Lo. ° LcaOc O � ca ° ca � oo o ;cn' ° o >, mQ >,2 .. a) C). 0a) 5 a 2 co rn ca E to a Q,i. og � c a) o c a>i a C - o � c o C to OW ° Q O a) to a) 0. O - •a ca •3 a) _ o .r a) w o c c c C a msto a) c 0 = _ "6 -c 0 "a 0 1 O a.0 > 0) u acca'a) �� c°) 5oEo ac o . n 0 � ct�= aci c%) E -g. c a cca cca(13 4- r Tli � � cC a ao ° — o. c Oas • -aCE to ca v) tn � Q- c Eu' Z a a)) 0 0 c o , a. > N o a) ca a) C c U O O a) -0 - stn - caa Q-aatnasa) �� oco' a) 0.CC . 0 ai > 0 z >4 E �' - °' 0 ;C. c R mZtr) •a aci 0> > Z 2-= c c ia 'Nc cN •« OLD �Z Qac` v0) a) 0.o O O 2 E a) o o 73 > 0 E t .r o o a) C ..`N" C w "�" O .. L C .CD O al 0 -5rn )) as O 'a °' ` 0 0 0 a °- o E o W c) W CT c a) a) h. 0i c a) O N aa) aa) .� 3 o N 0. 0 c N EO 0. o z d ate) cc ■ 1- (tCCc� CD ■ 1- EL. a)-0 ■ a. 0 c� v) Q � t,= QU ca a Oel a a) am (-... .000 H p w w 0 >, ° C N a) O o O � L U) o� o, in = 0u� aC .. a) c .CwEc .., a) °) � all `L° � � � ._m. N C 0 0 0 C O N p o C C OE 0 >, OL 'C ow ,O �n z o O O fn E 0 .. `�- o O m v°) -oo O m t a) C N , O Q 10 . �, a) O C O fa. 64 ° - fU 0 C U m p 0 O ,� O C O 0 ."' ZZ ca n. Ea) m_ 20 .0Ra) Ea) .. a. m � � �n � CO p 77 cn > - - a) C .. -a 0 a) O a C ca L O >, O .r C N b- a m C a) «� cn U 'a ca N O a a) 9 D) 2 v O .a Z v] C ,_; _a O .u) 4" -.a- OL _ a) 0 5 - 0 U O E a) ° a)0 > 0 •• o p W �l " o. o m P) 0a4 co o m `a)� o fl' a.) _„ > -a > co - a0) ° C Q- d � o c c o a4- L = >, � �°) � umiV Q� � am 3 a- m0° c0i USO m e ma m ci= a) 0 am m m ,C C o cn o = p L- > ° C7 U a - M.n E ai 15 - > M � � 00 F=— '� Qma �Ccai — o •— a. = OCC o > CDz � ,v >, > C w W W E p 0 v) Es o — EU o) 0 °- - m a �m = _ z � t0 soLc C z zz m .x Ew - 0 a a co' L 3 0 .c `' 0 0 . s o4- . .- - °� N� ° d � Z a- � cn2 mca) accv •° ° sco, Ecti , > 4- a) Ev) O moo ,10:1 -,4 o cn mm G m o a >,�- mo .- 04- ?: 0 . ° m — S t = 0 -7,7 = taxa a2 o) � � ° ° o - c000 . > 0 � a H E Cs Q a � ami ww3 E4_, =a ca C C o s 1— ° F O VU) .0tai •� w a U a o � '...r' W >, L ° w — cn ° C a)C.) � s 1 (1) 4) .§ M. ) o a >,� E = W000) . 0 m m ON 0 `° � Q v) '- m = o mommai.C - '3cacp '= a-!.= 0" c .- VZcc � a o ° = C '3m = � c3m -- � oC ° m•nco3 Cb � mca •- L m = C . _c L o E a) a C c O ca L rt" +z O c a- p � 0-_C ° 0 0 •,, a) 0 � o) � u) : •c ca 0 E .., a) z 0 o O m n 4.- -co _ o m cn — s E m = Ng t0 voi 0 �n m 'c o co E cn c4 a "-' O S ? 3 cn c cn m -8 0 °) tai Z ca w n 3 .0 E (63411 " -a •c0o b mom " - 9) ° 0 - - � C4_ 0 W � j 0co u cc � c CD L.- � o3ccaa) c � cm Fx-4 W a ) a) 0 M — (41 ° 20 t3 E � 4- o ,00 -4-. 0 N >. a6(S C >. a -? ) aa) ›-' .. N 0E C - •-" ,_ -mn. o >, 00mmm oom m ,.. owEa) • as map ma as -6- J ;acca A - 00a'o3c = 0c`�a305,,� .t .--=' a �1 0 wj Q , r = o oa ao o ao>i 5 � EL m 5.c E c rno� m ,- .0 all) a) F— U) � Q m a4_. -om .. . F- E = m .r ._ a2 a0 L T- 1•- 0 a-o O OA a F d Wa 0 a c L co Q c 0 .. 'a o m L L Owc_0 ami0tai mom as- mom .. C) o _co .0C tai = No .c.. .(7), aZ »� _ ,-- E E --- o12 c p - o m c ••L" - _ � O0a• a) oU) -0C a � � o w u) ate) o oU) rna m ° � .c c o o cZs m 0 a ZcO . ma? ' .. 0 .c o C)=N a) W I._ 0 .-, C46 13.46 a LO L 0 0 � ;U x a0 -C � Ws ci O pL a-a m ` "m 0 Oa.. .. N E c N 0 a) 0 . 0 00 ,_ , 11. 0 O C m .. ` "a L = 0 . O .., a) m C p C .., L0 = C w 0 > p C C C > .Q m 0 loo ,--L 0 E > 1 -a 00 m ° 3 c as- >. 0 - u) .4-, a >,croam Uo >,- pmU ;= -am ° - WE - 0a -aa C� � +" L "X oc'-.>-, E an" 10 � �'Lc •. � •0 (00 .,,�o_,, �'0 a) -.(7.3a) a) a '0 0 C L -0 O C 0 (lS 0 > a Q E r=, -ccO >+ O C L O a) t m -a >� p ml OL u) -c 13 a o O , Q m •C O a V •C -a O C m a a m Z O _ -a m o 2 U o C .> C o a) C C ° L O p m : > O 0 N :A C W U "., N ° O 0 i -0wt- c N O c N m o m .c'a ,4° c._>, c a) t4 .0 p-rAM a N •g a) cn2 OL O m C O - 9- O ca C ca a o co N :� cs o wm _c - m O � v� mEm0 00 — w- a) a) ° o ti >Owa aoa -aa. 2 - cL?. W RS 0 CD 0 N) O O cn Cr L O a).0 a) m a rn c m "� O > .0 0 L .r W "C "� 'U m N a C a N 0 U a C m - C m 0 _C . t C C OL — ° m inc 3 — O c Q m m t 0 0 -cL •C 0 O ,m a) "- = -~ C O a_c0 E m . - 0 v) � >. ao) O O >,F-- - m -L O 0 0 0 2 m t3 m to C a O — o0- 0 U O o j 0 O C — N '(B O O c'.3 .0 N >,,� ,- t N =o. 0 ,R4= -1-2,, mc, u) OL m op Q� :R C a L m 4 E a c m cc3 ° 7) N C C C C > W m a to L to C •L a) 0 p > L C Y R a) 4_ C O 'L =' :a > .041 >" 0cn � ,° . 0 � : ,E . € E0 .° mm Em ° ° 0 ,� 3 Ltaio „ doN 01c 0-°i om � 3 c o ° o 0 0- 0-0 c . < 2 m o `l .cm -0 c 0 cb� . axw G) a) ui mL 0) 0 .0Q m m ami - m aci U �a m = w mL m - oyc-B, ¢ o � UO UEaa, EaaUUi ca.R "-. - 3 °o.U) _ G30L � � cEma00aa) a 0- 3 woW v) $ a) 0„, 0 o a tai -zs � � � a o a " m os Lm ,- o oo m m � Zv d `a = ° L O .. ° O L 3 .." U) o L ° a) i < .0 0 .. a m < m ° a m cn ;.., ,1- --. N a a) .9 N N - -c- l- 00 00 ai G\ O' _ N a) 13 Oc= U C i Oc y o Na) •= O ca Q O dQ N N `" Q. = C vs o O\ O ZQO fa U OO `-' a0 Ea LU t - o 03•111, a) aa)) V °� " � Ia1) o o ami CD .0 aoi v, - v, z2 L A E C -a W 11„. 0) cs 175 -0 csI- c13 U ca -.- cis OO UT i E U .2 OLti aC)°� .S N C C 2 aa) Opv) E c- < CD c a) 0 3 � o "'cn_c � 0 � = moo � c a zA ~ Lai � u? OQ--- oa) I ca _rn.c ,... 13 ° a >I _a cam, o p CL � D ami o c N V • U) o •NN ;a .- ° nsL >, E .c > U `Wti' p C o c '� N o ,>..E1 -a N -C O-0 N o o g N Ca 4- 73 O U U ca a' o f L E o E 0 . a) L - _ to v- • c _ Q 0 (. as a) vi co3 Qoa) °-- v) 0 == 3c"a > aa) � U = LO U ) a) > .a N > a) `= w. O O ° .' L a) U N Q C a) .. N Nom .° -° a .0) C a a? c - -a N �w ow P-1 1- "p rn E a) > E s a) `L' c - O u) U) - 00C -IC 03 `0 >, CL 3 �G �" C ct ° ° �' a) E -. 3 P. u o N x � -a ° t ,c _° 3 ww3 c`a a c c `c ..-• c Lt— v O N O o 0. ca o a > 2c L , to a) N O 4E. a) •3 c `� to L c L .-. i Q N C/) O ER) LEo - aciE -° -a ;aNcaLL caacs °. = - c •9 A v) a - Lo o ,� aZN " = Eorn �°�-), c3cLNc c � Lo U a) ca O ;4. .� a 2cts a) E c v z N -Oa s 3 U N OS O O ccsY ° oL0cta) .-aa) ocNc oa) am o3 -C(13 E ., U)i CL 0 c�a •co L- C4 � �o. w .2 CA as O fl.rn0 C l4= Ti ,w c c0 ai> x Wc 2 as c a) r, .:SN 3 c"_a rn .- °-°- 0c � i .a °)-c -aa) c ate) ate) a co ca O w E Z 3 co cam 5 c)= a) 0 c c7) =� a) a) 3 a i o•5 >, as y+ 0-4 o L J s o c � - 2•- 3 ca) n. CI. " A p tea) -ate L.- (/) ° c4w ••c C riD) U a) o °) o 0 0 0 O . c a) a°) 0 w > a o •■ •■ I � Q -c •a - 'NwwL -a o � h -a N Ori •P.4 44 a al d Z,t3, 4.1 o � o ca ° 0 _ a) c A U' eco aiL cc o0 a) c -a ca O O N .. ..' a) a) a) •N 73 L OZ c � � E' a) a) N � � •. 'c' ;sa) NE E. a) E •N01- I- U L Z O c a) -a Z .. O N vim- °. Q O >, - . c4 Q .� N a � c -° ccsasE - 0. Z'aocF a) o > u. oa) > Na) to N L O as f E O .. --)4 c -a a) c O C N ca..c4. ° �' O ca L c = o.- 3 _o a) O 75 N al 'a d_ 'a m -ate ` 0 ac) Q ° rn03 •E o o a• °- N -a a " mow c E � ° -0 o a3 ) -a ao aci c N Q3 01 .r3 E � c -aa.Y - '010 0 .N o 8 C as .- a a) ca .. ca Cl) � a) C U a) =° a c ac) o 0 o 8._c aa)) •Y ° _ _1 Lii a)'a >,NZ m ao U) L a) O 3 °. to a) c a) c -o a -a a) c o �. a) a) O L 'a a) O c > vi J N N o _ U O a o a) L o c 3aia) a) cu " .aU' > Q ° � ca °) .N0> -•iEa) a) v) �� "� c a) jLLL o � o o 2 c o olb c a) CELL C a o Z 'a ac a) 1_, c Qa o - - ...eCO. • E N >, c•� em a) w C " � L � cao cam oOc � Q .E (D a) N s- •al af _ � c o 0 0 . (DU) aUi N o o -a E c c n ac) ,,'� a � .c p a)) o car ow a) -aL ca c o N - UU) n o v' � a= oa L- a 3 L N U) a ... N O o w N cn ca c co Q la to L a) w o c t° _c -L n o N c ••c -o o L a) 3 c Ln 03 as L o c 'a o L � w CL ca _ = an. vrn•- a) c a) NO A - — O ' o c E .N ,a• U .-. 3 m c ,...as o o ,- ca c •a .a a CO o c -a � ca L o . c 0_ .G E O � -a 3 0 ° o ccs a) o c a 3 °- O c _ L. ca, L w U' c L X E L a) N a) N co L N a) L ca L•. c�o co 13 c c cc .Q o 4 U O c cca o 0 O ." L c > c c .� o Q Q Z c N °' ,_ N o o (a O a) O -a a .� — a) .� o ,8 °. L O` U Q • ° c .•. (a a 4.4 >, L- 2 r- .,.., CO ca (fl o a) o L a) ' ° Ts o o - °- c ON c g aa) -0 o a) a- a? ca E o ca > :E c -a a°) c � °- 3 Es)-0 ctx a .`sc •_E a a = ;.. o c E o �a L a •- E o � a o o o a m ca = -0 N a a O .: LQ-� > o� EC aHULA Cr) wooQZa) U' frt o ,.a `., N a) L °' C U D ca rn a).. O L C a) E c o w 11 w Q c > c N Q a) •. (a o 'N L c c a + a) a) O a) N O a) O as L O O S 'a^N L a) �- o a) c o L o > C r_ L a) c Z -,t• a) Q 0 GI U 13 a... .- 1- 3 < 03 T- I- -a = 0...0 ca 5 1.- L 0 a) N 0 N °. a ca 0 ca w co L N u) o c— o0 oo c — �� L .r O .. C — O� Q1 oc _c0 �,rnoc •3 ,a) CE2 moan cccc � � � • L cs O at) •0 •c c`o �' aci o • Q L .S rn o a; �Oj Z u) c I- L C L .r •,••, a •a a C (� Z 0 of cn .. a>i E _ ° i a) o c � 5 • a) 3 - ZZ CL o CI) a) L-• _ •ii L fl. c a) C ,� 0 L _ 0 0 0 C Eco '� cm a) 8 cn O co a a? a) O as p `" v) E) fc6 a = o -• o c m aa) ca L'+'E 0) c o 0 a) a '3 z � � L N Q.w a) U •as O w c .� :S - `-`6 L � O C"�' a) a) v) c) ° � .- `O0V � c c o°) a) c:1.as < a`, a) -Nc oO .50 d � ... a) c 3 `- co a) ° as a) O X O Q.. a al a) 'cp U LT O 0) a .O >, .c r 15 wc � o `n o ca o � cC ° a) Ec"n -°a �' Z � C7 `- c O O 0 E .c � c to O — L CIS -0 cr,a -0 w •- a) _a 2 , Z o a) .co- 0 L .. a) .� u) a) as CD" u) — a) a) .o _c c a) Zz c� E c c o) ' E o aa) > so a) .°3 z as ° I- a) -' ' E. a. RS .. CO ° a � N � wt � L t �m aa, m � s > • 3c c o c c, ca -e a ..E " w . � o a) °)•S a`) c a = a) �•- a) �' °) `' a)_c ° a) y- C w. 0 a) 0Co ° C - 3 C >,.0 a.— • , C L 0 L O O O co O V cu ,�. •� ca w w �. a) L > .n ° aau') oca a) -2- 0 ° .n > o) a) u) ° _02 'c W c . -a .c .a -a u) aaV V al as F .Q a) t _c a al 'a o N L .0 cc a) a) I- Co a - vv) 7° 46 ocII n. L .n° cn as - .- a) 3w - c A v) c .c a) o O c u) `m m .c as � .. ca = f as -0 •c 45 E ° a) rnc .c ca "' O Q ° 2 3 2 •° � to -a V c-L° ate) a) = c) u) a) a-) E f� L _c w 0 CO L o uJ O t a) N .0. i :) = ,, t„,,= c Y c N a)L U a) 0 CI CO 13 m� � a3E c03mOCDas •N Oaau) c aticc - _ to E-.Z sE OLa o _ � . ° Ec W u •, a) D a) N ° t co cu .c w u ° c •E- 3 ) a) c -aI— ° = a) a) c > w _o oL a) o a) 4 •C C\ o C\ CSC) oo ami Ic _ a) ° ° °' � �ir - O L a) a) �' C L C 3 a) ca •''' - U rt V 1 Ue , 0 a) � s C •- 3 0 ° 3 cE= CU o m ».. �. o � ca) a) a) - a) 4 to L to .. c� O- O C C C ° '' 0 X t C 0 L y N C c O O tII 0O-Y1. O z to a) U 0 7-13 O -a Y U a c O w �) C U = O O ca = W CL 0 fa i C Rf O U p C O'O C (a — '. y, c O E co u) 0 3 o U 0 v `� 0 3 ° a) � "-' C m .� ai vaW' p c ca ,_ c Ea00 6aia) =U aEiH `� F- �- Ew 3 0 U CIS >,s" rn� 3ani soca) o-� a) Z04 SI O O E ...--N045. CO C C a) O --' - -p a a) U O ° C _C C a) U O C C U +r p J O LLa a) .O CO O U c OC ° Q fes' co - ,-1 l7� a) Rf C' U a) _ co O > p) F- c O C c O Y O C A. x W Mi L O 2 ..... a) . ,_ • np U a 2 C L >, 2 Ya) C CO_. C W W 3 VO • c3 ; a ? O C a U m - Q a = - ac > .in g O o o E c 3 C " o .cc0oo a 0 . a) v) ?d rn3 - c 0) -a c -0 C 0 E c ai � YO Ti g! OaC aao Y cO D U cnCI /)E = fa % ( j O Cl, QQQ +r O = O. O r' 0 'Q c 4- N a >°. aU D i 0 a) Cr) X N (B 4) ° rn a O 0aC 0 = OO ..a ,.(130 O > •- 3 C N - a > O •Oc -Q a "0 N RI C O O OOL o3cQ= a .0 V) U LL a .. O C C C a UE O7 O o Op7:3 4-- O ad O.0E O 8 o ca a [y Ocam = c c ocNa - acaM : 3 15 -a E v ° w ao o - = , ac �'W 0 . mo ; a) flTa- oa0 a 7 .0 a) S. = ao cm ›, . ca � m � 0aoN - ° al aOcc cC > � c ° � � = aca - ccaocn � E � UQo.- 3 ° � -ac °O. > � OU' t . t4 O CJ OO N r ' c. N L 0 CI a O ss F- as .2 a co .a N i• 13 2 o. U N II 0 r- � . O f-- 0W Q F-+ a. Q ag a o a) O Q ai C (13 � c °� .0 s a) C ° �' cQ 4,:s. C Q10 .. �' O U i Ca p z Z C L .17." LCO ° «' E - a) al oa) .o afp .- as 'Q• N = C a] O N Z. 2 >, o. .N a) O C 3 t2) N w ca a) .0 L cII •v) O Q. O E C -- ` OLE L ` E a) _ iE F- L Y 4-4 L > D co .0 .a C .a .c 0 O o > ° -t U o O. as L Q' v 0 .- a) •- N > Q C O c C 3 0 o f 0 a) o U _c ca 0 a) — is U O O O O w — a) U a C rnm >, CM0 c E � o a� cam a) _ > = a) :) _csnoC .c °) >, cu .13 _CcnCf) ,ie ° O °> > n coEOC L O a) r' O C U O C .. a) L Y CC U 'a +. E c° o ..o a-a 'Q C O ca U a J a) O C C 5 t p E— L._ oa) 'vi — to8CO oEaa)) 0as0 rnYa) o = U � ~ >> z c-0 �C Qfl- C C U X U OY C I - ca a) L C a W • C '- O a-C O_ OQ �r -� J a)-a) .-. .0 a) Q a ° — me U o o = a 3 "- rn o c � c E o 0 -a c ca a) co o ° .) ca N .0 0 C .• co ca ccl) CO 0 O. a O • o m s ul o f � � a) o o S. a� o � � 0 `- mow° E a-g � . w 13 N � - > ° a •c o _ acaC � 13 CO C cu a) o ° Q I- „ «i •� -0 co c U aL c ° 'aQ U O LYy. > OE . i E- C 2 a- ca to O d _O 0 = O ca to 4- w �. 'O a) >''t6 •'> to = p O c •m w L U O a) a) ca (a C C = C .. 'a �, L- '-' L �. N C U a) > O tot to •L O, a) a) C C E U O. �« O C ca L O ca C O a) L . 0 ` «4 E ° L O -0 Cl)13 ca. 2 O E `- c .0 a) U) a) a) _ `0 N 0 O O. O U z Q as O .. z al 0 ca _ .. o � aca a) rn a>i � 4... � ~ v aa)) 7 o cot ~ ac) ac) c o .ola m ami ro o ca ¢ zw °� _c U i C 0 •a C ° O m tn =° U = 2) = U = tom > w o�.c 0 c � C70 = ..„(-) a) C p :II 'N Q v U a) U) Q. = p .00,, N i C c 0..4 ii — W C W O a) t O — U to 'O O C) .c U ca0 U O a' a)• L U U w a) .. w ° z en co U ■ I- oQ ,_ g . - 1- 1-. caJ ca s.... al F- 2 . 3 FL- o .E w Oces, a >, 0 -0N t . oO 00 a `) C O a) O C I o\ a > = • , 3 r, C. o ° c = — c - ao •Cvc. N zC • OZ 4,-_ _ 0 avO (a L O >40o Cu O2 Naa >, o0�• o +- .. OQa c0.) .=oaN c a a � c o o Ooa� mai � � o - 4az 0 I `" 00� HcaLa CuO o > o Q_ .c . cc 12 CuC Cu` ° Y oa cm c oL a) 5ac a) co u) ZL a f ° � p m L o ' L O c wd 13 oaE ° � � CO Cu d �ca) n Q � w Cu mc -04-ai = � a � EC0 U� E . ,- Li ° vi QU p ° O Oa L o 0a ° 0a) L o. ,- 2E0 c ° ..L- . °UCO CO = •c a) N = C o ) wC7 cud) CE ca > a= 0 $ 4-- � CO 0) (/) ° w Ca. c a) aaaOc .a. O c '•- U c a ° C C -+caOO � = oCRS aO c L cE> = oCu EC) 6 a =1Q a , w '- eornO ` 'EoCMF- .00 -0 a) c • (nO a OatE p ( V E as _Nie imai ' wWa 0 a o c — CuaL C iCuo' O r-.O a) 0 4.110c :42 - Oc L ( .a iC ac 0OaaO ) a > U Ca) UO v) >L ° c ° � � - EQmwo Q H C c C . - aOao ca C= = cFrng2 0 (0 =ac , —Cw " O m > > o a Ep ow =oc >, ca oc H 0o �saas E ° -• a -a ' EQ � ` Lc -0 a > 0C _ Cu x Z aMu) Oo o Cu0 cEgO OQ. a .0 F-4 L `� - CuaC 22.. > 0. 0 m :r •Eca -aa� E co O u- " 3 '- Cu M 'X 'N m cLa > E •c �� to a) ° (a al a a f�-1 N L a>,•� . CO M N c C O L•• >, N Cu .ca. 4- ti' V) •� +-0• = U W N 1 - L > I- .� N Q _ a o _o Qto v) v) o N < a. v) o C 0 le Pa'' H A CI) Aas ° Cu >, co To ooc ET4E. pQ may=- o . o E c oL .- L 3 Cl) ao2 � o ;c � aai Cu o4- 'v) � coLE d p '- Cu C > .- 0 �.� La o L ° os E ± - vo) o_4- ca •d oo ° OCO Ec ~ Cao ,� (a a a U _ co .. ,c U • C a) `•• CD to E a ca O Q. N (i o CO Rf (o ca N N CO . 0) E `•°- c_ N O O a) 000 o .C (a > � -aE (a Oo3 .r ° 4' NO -0 E U) 0 •- 137 2 � a)737E -DMO CI al S2 � N � a 1- -s .i M v) Q LI Cu a = ° (a O C w O a) w _ H LO O L C �. CO C o1-6 -13 ° 13) u) >.. - C p C Cu '4- a CO p O N U a O a s a) i- m >, ca .. ca o o � � � � c � a) � al 0 C .0 3 - ° C� cp - a.L = C ›. 8 ° o ,o aocx O _001 >,IS, CU --' M a) = C L a. .0 (La a) ° •p a) a) c (a a S .a C .47.4 Q, E0 = 4- U a) a � � _ ° 3L L E - = >, oa) � a .cCl) a) ° a) a) 0O 41.. I— E z paL cam o O (n 1-_' _c a) ..c Cap ° +-• —0 0 •• ,� . W cs �° o aXi CV a°i o c •~ o Q-= o -a cD o,o o 73 CD a � 4 coa. E ` oa < CO Cuao> 3 'QoaEi .CE O Q. � a L > 3Ecc > .3O -Hc acio_rnc� Eo :° o w ° a) aOpV � Cu .-. ° C) o'U o- E = 0 - aa) ° 0 w >< -a—CL m` oC 0 — '5,x � CD- OCOCcuc �cac a) a) C6 -C -9: 02 ° aa � •c0 E _ >, a� E . - O Uoa V) c L a) Y U a) L (a 0 . cn o v) a) (a E U a UC - o 6 CO w 3 � a ax) m L E Cu E c Z o` (0 o s -0 — (0 .c = -o .0 C N N a) W a) .. L �.. " 4) " a) (a U (a to ° i a) O Ouoa) (" cc' -ca ; ccs ••- oa) w "-' c .. c .r a) pa Gly c o L ,« c o ,� o w m6 = c coOE -acaE ° L ° o o Eo ,a aci >, Q �d �- L ••) ca — c ° L o to > co oC O C >, oa (n ° a) (1.) . %> (n c E .. 0 3 ' aN w � � �«- c UN O Q ',..- "-12173 O o N c c Q 3- o — C O ca c ..: cu E a O'„'. Z ..a x * al5o � UoR(BM > 0oai000Caci woca � .- tea 0 ...I - 0 0 .5Eu a.5 av) V a � O o aC a 2 7 5 < -Cu wxw LMCOoo c oYaoa) a) tn •- a. (a O otoa ° c 4- ZM O ca o L (a c 2 L ca t (a a) o. ca Cu L N ° 'o o o c Q O c o ■ I- aC U .. a ■ t- a) 3 as . E a) mi-- 2 ._ 30 , , 0 ON a >, — t— 00 co I CO 0 ,o '1'. 1 a, Uo— o 0 0 CD �m_ Z - Aoom-C (0 co- a) Zv? o Z a) � C � p n 0 S vim' ® -o N :---: (L) o U m•5 Q -0 c a Zoe CO cD -i o c 2 ov) >, • 4... _ >' 0 0 .a73 ) a 73 5 3Q� aax1 .0 > C U I ..�. � � �' �N a a� � 0 CD X4Z4 - WW W CO 3 z ° > '>- ap CI E o _. Q-a . CO ) t. Z. Iii Z c o cc) w oU `�Z a) ' W O a. 0co E~a r,_ > C F-a Q = N •C a W Q O �. > a �j t— 00 00 rn o1, o, \ 0 N. oz azo foo 0x, 71 z � vl ww Qo zoo a id x a ww3 > w v) 0 ,© (-1x Z aal ixo A w ao W int A a a d A L o O 2 1-a o c - 'E CO � `o -o a) ca � `o Q +-• ° U to Y , Q a 42 cI4c-D. 0 t z o a) c 3 'E >, _a as Q c o aa)) A „,L- o) E of cn .oO H ''' 3 I�. a) w c � -o cn .`' a (0 al _ ccs c c Oa �, -.�� L. o a w a) ca >>,2 Z, > L 3 ca w c Q 2 0 o A o f- >- a) a) a Z F- O w E cv w Z �� >, A o 0 w c' ° w; d o� Li_ O rn cn C� ax0 CD r.+ O H v� w o v a" C7 0 w Z 0 a) U9.. Qa) ct 0 2 O W w t- O s � � 0 z � C7 u) 0 t- o0 � _a rt 0Na.