Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1977-11-09 PC Minutes' PROCEEDINGS OF 7HE PIANNING COMMISSIUK ~ CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW RAMSEY COUN7Y, ~1INP~ESOTA A r~egular• meeting of the Mounds View Planning Comnission was called to order at 8:30 PM on November 9, 1977 At the Mounds View City Hall, 2401 Nighway 10, Mounds View, Min~esota b6172. Members Present: ~hairperson Haake Commission Member Zepper Corts~i9ssion Member Mackeben C~mniss9on Member Fedor f,ommission Member Glazer Comnissi4n Mem6er Barmei;ter Comnissian Membe; Blanchard Commission Member Foss Also Present: Councilmember Baumgartner ~u1lding and Zoning Officia7 Rose Chalrperson Naake stated that the P7anning Commission had ,~ust had an opr.n dis'- cussion with members of the City Cuuncil and the City Attorney and 36 citizens of Mounds Yiew on home accupations. She stated that it had been decided to table the matter until the next Planning Commission meeting, and that there w~uld be an axtr~ meetir,g !n Noveirber to discuss bo~_h home or,r,~prtions and proposed Nowthcrest Park P.U.D, at 7:30 PM on November 21, 1977. Chairperson Haake asked that the October 12, 7977 PTanMng Co~ronisston minutes be - corrected to read, un page 3, the lasC sentence of the motion, "...a 2.5' variance..." rather than a 2' varinnce, MSP (Bianchard-G7azerj to approve the minutes of the October 12, 1977 meeting as corrected. 7 ayes it was noted that Commission Member ?epper was out of the ~•oom at tiie time of the vota but had stated that he had no adAitions or correctio~is to the minutes. CONDITIqNAL USE PERMIT AND VARIANCE REOUEST Of CROWN AUTO STORE - 2701 HIGHWAY TO Official Rose reporterl that Crpwn Auto, iucated at 2701 Highway 10, had requested to buiid an additional two minor auto repair bays, to be appi•oximately 31' x 32'. Current parking requirements requ're 33 spaces for the exfsting and proposed additlon and 23 have been given and the applicant has requested a variance of 10 spaces. Plalning ccnsideratioris include that the existing use classificatian is B-3, The store presently has two repair bays and the building addition would meet satback requirements for B-3 Cond9tional Use with the exception of the continuance of the rear buildjng setback 11ne of 28'. Under the present code, 40' would be required. An nutdoor storaae area and trash dumpster are 7ocated on the east end of the buiTding The site would be located on a raised curb and fenced, with Staff recomnending a minimum 6' opaque fence. The existing fence along the north property Tine sFiouTd be ~extended to the corner to screen abuYting residential proper'v from the new parking ~ ~lovember 9, 1977 Page 2 area, ~, The store ~resentiy has 16 parking spaces and under prusent zoning code, 29 speces wouid be required for the existing store and repair area and the addition of two i~epair bays would require an additional 4 spaces, to bring the totai requtred to 33, However, past and current parking use of the lE spaces prpvided has been adequete, with the exception that some parking has occurred in front of the building and not along the sioes. The parking and paving is planned to be extended 2' off the property line along the north property line. Official Rose asked that the Ptanning Comnission cdnsider pussible adverse effects of the proposed conditional use, with Judgement being based upon but not limited to the relationship to the municipat comprehensive plan, the geographical area involved, whether such use would tend to or actually depreciate the aren in which it is proposed, the chiaracter of the surrounding area ~nd the demonstrated need for such use, Richard Quanheck intr•oduced himself as the represe~tative for James Refrigeration> owner of the property, Chairperson Haake asked what the demonstrated need for the con~itionaT use permit would be. Mr. Quanbeck reptied that in order for Crown Auto to expand, it would be necessary fur them tu add on. Charies Novak introduced himse7f as the architect for James Refrigera~ion and stated that the Crown Auto stores have merged with Empir2 and the store is row more serW r,e ,--..oriented and requtres additional soace to ser~~e the cemmunity. He stated that they now receive more r~equasts for service than they cao handle in their present capacity. _J Coirmission Member Glazer asked if the repair services would increase. Mr. Novak replied thac Lhe,y would not be doing additiunal types of repairs that they were not nlready doing. Co~nission Member Zeppar asked if tha addition wauld change the zoning. Official Rose replied tl7at the zonina wouid not change but a Gonditionai use permit wouid be required. He also stated that this particular store is Crown Auto's number one store, which was one of the reasons they wanted to expand. Councl1member 6aumgartner asked if the water would be trapped iF the area was curbed. Mr. Novak replied that the blacktop would be laid so that the water could travel across it ta a catch bas9n at the southeast corner of the parking lot. Commission Member Bu rnieister expressed concern with customers parking in the emeryency vehicte ~rea and ask?d df it r,uuld be pravented. Mr. Novak replied that they cauld put in yellow lines on the blacktop and signs restricting the area. Chairperson Haake questioned if there should be more of a green space in back. Officiat Rose replied that the Staff did not feel that it was necessary to require additional green space as it was appraved with the original construction. Commission Member Mackeben asked what the addition would do to the view ~f the neighbors. OfH cial Rose rep1led that there would be fences and plantings and so forth and that he did naC feel the addition would make a big difference. `~ Commission Memoer Giezer stated thai there seems tu ue a huusekeeping problem on the November 9, 1977 Page 3 e~est side and stated that a fence might be requlred to block tlie oiew. Comnission /r~ Memhar t~ackeben stated that he could foresee a problem With added garba9e witfi the / ;expanslon. Mr. Novak replled that the dumpster is beiny turned a~aay from the street so that the opening would not be visable. He also stated that a survey had been done of a11 the Crown Auto stores and that the average aarking spaces ~er store were 1'/-18, which seemed adequate, exclu~iing the stores located aY targe sho~ping centers. Commission hlember Mackeben pointed out that with the additional two bnys, that several more parking spaces would be required for the cars waitiny to get in and the cars that had been fir+ished but not yet ~icked up. Officlal Rase replied that an additional 4 spaces were added for the expansion. ' Chairperson Haake suggested tHat a publlc hearing be held to let the neighbors khow what was.gofng on. Official Rose replied that it would be the Council's decision to have one. Comnission Member fedor pointed out that since James Refrigeration is also the owner af the ad~acent property, additional space cculd be taken from the vacart propprty for the parking at Crown Auto. Mr. Novak replied that Crown Auto would rather not rent the space now since they do not feel it is necessary and Gecause it would rafse thoir rent. Officlal Rose stated that he had spaken to Doug James of James Refrigeration and Mr. James had said that the space could be taken but he did no1: feel it was necessary at this time. Counc9lmember Baumyartner stated that the Cit,y coulcl require the devetoper to enter -- inta an agreement that if the addlEiona7 parking spaces are requirad, that they woutd ~ expand to the west to meet the requirements. Commission Memher foss asked if plantinys could be required with the development a.qreament as there arn resTdent~al bu~ldings In the area. Chairperson Haaks replied that iC cou7d be incorporated into the agreement. Coir.mission Member G7azer stated that hF would like to see steps taken to contain the refuse from overflowing on the property tine. MSP (Zepper-Burmeister) to make a recommendation to the City Council to grant a varianceforl0 parking spaces and for the Z2' rear yard setback to a71ow the building to be bu11C in conttnuance with the existing building 'line, and a variance of 3' for the parking side yard setback to aliow for continuance of the existing paved line and tliat eancreta curbing be required along all paved lines and on the striped no parking area across from the outdoor storage, and tl~at a screening fence be continued along the north property tine, a minimum of 6' high and npaque, and a screen a minimum of 6' high for the dumpster and outdoor storage and that a develcpment agreement be executed Co caver the above and screening atong the west property tine, and ptantings on the Sunnyside Road side and south side facing along Nigfiway 10, and striping and labeling of xhz no-parking area in frant of the building except where the parking spaces are indicated, and 4f the need arises for more parking spaces, that they oStain more land, and recnmmend to the Council that a conditionai use permit be issued. 8 ayes REt7UEST FOR PAfiKING VARIANCE FOR E. E. GI;~TAFSON RT 7664 6REENFIELD AVENUE ~ 0`ficial Rose reported that the appiicant has received zoning, useage a;~d variance apnrova7 for an office building to front Greenfield Avenue and is now requesting November 9, 1977 Page 4 3pproval of a revlsed pint pian which would front tl;e building on County Road I. a he change in the frontage is due to the desire by the applicant to use solar heating• Planning cons9~erations include that the developm3nt was original7y approved with variance for 2 less car parking spaces and a paved servtce setback of 3' rather than 5' on the we~t lot 11ne. The new plot plan provides for 21 parking spaces and 22 are required, so a variance of 1 would be required. Parking with the revision is pienned to approach within 3' or the south property line which abuts a single family home. Proper screening of a minimwn 6' opaque fence and a variance are requfred. Drainage should be plsnned to the direction of Greenfield Avenue. The building placement meets a11 setback requirements, and the sidewalk alang County Road J shuuld be p'Iaced abutting the north property line. Concrete curb, paW ng for driving and par'r,ing areas, plantiogs and redwood screen9ng fences wou7d be required. No tra,h storaye is shown in the plan artd Staff reconmends that the 7ocation be in the south- west corner and properly screened. Mr. Rothgerber introduced hin~setf as the representative for the development and asked that a variance be gr•arited to a71ow use of solar heating. Ne stated that the system must face due sauth and that he expects 80-100% effeciency with the solar program. Mr. Rothgerber a7so pointed out that this woutd be the first solar building in Mounds V4ew. Chairperson Haake asked if th2re would be a backup system. Mr. Rothgerber replted ~~`Shat there would be one, either gas or electric, as it was required by the money , , lender. Councilmember Baumgartner asked why there would be on~y 3' rather than 5' in the back. OPfscia7 Rose replied that it was due t~ space limltattons and that the extra 2' was required for traffic to be abTe to back out of the parking spaces. Counciimember Baumgartner asked 1f it would be a one-way driveway. Mr. Rothgerber replied that it would be and it woutd help the traffic problem by making the inlet on Greenfie7d rather than County Road I. Gommission Member Glazer asked what the nature of the solar system would be and tf ther~ would be any problem with the panels reflecting. Mr. Rothgerber reptied that the panels ~aould be glass and they would he verticle and should not present ariy problem. MSP (Fedor-Blanchard) to grant a variance to E. Gustafsan at 7664 Gr~enfield Avenue of • 1 parking space iess then required by code and 2' on the back 7ot setback requirement and recammend to t~e City Council that they enter tnto a develapment egreement with the developer and inctude that the parking lot be curbed, paved and dralned to Greenf3eld Avenue, that the parking spaces be marked, and screening fiences puC in where required and screening of trash storage, with the green area to be sodded, and that the development and impravement plans be drawn up professionally. 5 ayes , 3 nayss Commission Members Glazer, Haake and Durmeister stated that they voted nay due ta the question if the 2' variance would 6e needed because the parking could possibly be J adjusted. DE4EI.OFMENT STAGE OF P.U.D. PROCESS - NORTHCREST PARK Official Rose stated that this item would be discussed at the November 21 meeting. Navember 9, 1977 Page 5 REZON[NG_APID h1AdOR SUBUIVISION kE~UFSY OF DAIL't HOMES,~ 7555 GROVELAN~ ROAD ~ Afficial Rose reported that the applic~nt has requested to subdivide the east 1/2's of iots 8 and 9, Spring Lake Park Knolls Addition, into three equal 88' frontaga lots fronting on Silver Lake Road, and rezone them from 0-4 to R-2. The w~st 1/2 of lat B, which fronts Groveland has been requested rezoned from B-4 to 0-1. Planning consideratlons include tha*. the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map denotes the area as low density residential, 571ver Lake Road is classified as a minor arterial and the proposed R-2 zoning uce a7ong S11ver Lake Road may better suit the trafflc taden frontage. The rezoning ~f the Groveland frontage woutd be in accordance with the surrouding useage. The proposed R-1 single famYly lot frunting Groveland meets size requlrements for both frontage and square feet ~ut the proposed R-2 duplex lots a11 have substandard frontages of 88', with 100' required, but meet the area requirement of 12,500 square feet, each befng 18,256 square fePt. The rear lot line does coincide with earlier subdivisions. Servic?s are available for the single family lot fronting Grovetand but no servfces are availabTe Ynr Lhe duplex R-2 lots fronting Silver Lake Road. Ilowever, if the rezoning and the subdivision is approved, services must be peLitioned for and be in place before development can occur along Silver Lake Raad. The single fam~ly to! could be developed. A 5' utility erid drainage easement would be required along the rear lot lines, with ^ an additional 12' of utility and drainage easements necessar•y for the installation of service along Silver lake Road. A circle driveway would be adv9sabte due to the -~ heavy traffic along Silver Lake Raad. Chairperson Haake stated that she believed the area in question had been rezaned to R-1 a few years eariier. Councllmember Daumgartner agreed and stated !liat a luwsuit had been involved in the rezaning. Co~renission Member Zepper expressed concern with the lots for the duplexes not havtng en~ugh frontage, even Chough they did meet th~ square footage requirement. Ne also stated that the 7ots were small enough without puCt9n9 in a circle drlveway. Cnmmis;ion Member Foss suggested that a stngle drivewa,y could be put in with a turn- around. Chairperson Haake stated that she felt that since duplexes were planned Yor the lot:;, they should meet tlie frontage requirements. Mr. Oailey stated that he wanted to bring ut11it1es in from Grove7and. Official Rose replied that tt~e City would not a17ow it, but pointed out that several lots had been subdivided on Si7ver take Road and that improvements could be petitioned for. Commissiom Member Foss stated t}~at he felt i}~e proposed use would be the best for tliat propert,y and that the duplexes would provide a buffer for the area. Commission Member Zepper stated that he agreed with the duplex use but fett iarger Tots were necessary. ~ Mr. Dailey stated that he would withdraw his request if the planning Comm95sion did not want to approve it. Chairperson Haake recommended that he let the Planrsing ~ovemoer 9, 1977 Page 6 s Coir~ission members vote on his request and stated that if they did turn iC down, it ,~,.woaid autrnnattcally go to the City Counctl where lie cbuld appeal. ~; j~ idSP (Zepper-Foss) to deny the su6division request as prNSenCed by Daiiey Itorees far the f luts at approximately 7fib5 Groveland Road because of the substandard frontefle of the ; lats along Silver lake Road. A roilcall vote was taken: Commission Member foss - aye Comnissian Member Blanchard - aye Cammission Member Burmeister - aye Chairperson Maake - aye Cortmission Member Glazer - nay Cormnission Member Fedor - nay Commissian hlember Macl;eben - nuy Commission Member Zepper - aye b ayes 3 nayes Commission Mem6er fedor stated that he had voted against the denial because the proposed Tots were 1~ times the required square footaye of R-2 lots, even though they did have substandard frontage. Comm9sston f4embers Mackeben and Glazer stated that they had the same reasons for voting nay. CON~TTIONAI USE PEkMIT Of ALEXANDER DIVERSIFSEO SALES, INC. - 2848 H~GHWAY 10 Offfcial Rose reported that the appllcant has requested a canditiona7 use permit.for the operat9on nf a used auto sales business to be iocated on the corner of Graveiand Road and Highway 10, at th? site of a closed gasoline station. The applicant plans to purchase the property if A permit is approved. flis sales are excluslvely )ate model Cadillac and Lincoln autas. Planning considerations inciude that the Comprehensive P7a^ directs the remaining undeveloped~land in District 12 a7ong Highway 10 to develop medium denity and the futurE redevelopment of the existing spot commercial site to medium density. The land is presenCly zoned 8-4 and the proposed useage requires a B-3 conditional usp permit zoning. 8-4 zoning uses a17ow B-? uses. S9ng1e family homes abut the pruperLy on the west and south. The site ha; nn existing garage approximately 72' long and 30' deep with a paved area and two accesses, one off Groveland and one off Hi~hway 10. The appiicant pians to have on-si*.e approximate7y 25 cars, which Staff r?commends be reduced to 15 if the permit is approved. The reduction would then a11ow fur approximately 20-12 pai^king space,. if approved, the parking spaces and traffic lznes should be marked. The sfte presently offers screening fence along the south and west 71nes. This fencittg shoutd be extended further east and north to screen mure adequately the property abutting it. The appiicant pians to use t,he existing signs arid lighting. Chairperson Haake asked if the paving could be extended tavrard Highway 10 to a]lo~v more room for display cars. Official Rose replied that that could be determined once an accurate sketch plan was drawn up. --' Chait-per~son Naake asked if the building wouid ba chan~ed. Mr. Alexander replled that no structural changes would be made. Novemb~sr 9, 1977 Page 7 r Commission Piember Zep~er asked tf h1r, Alexander owned any other lots, t4r. Alexander rt"1rep11ed that he had been part owner of a lot in St. Paul on R1ce Street but had sold f out due to a conflict wlth his partner. He also stated that his 1ot would be 6esicully for dealers to shop wholesale but that he would also sell wholesale to any customer who waiked in. Mr. Alexander also stated that the ma~ority of his business would be conducted from auctions and that he wou]d only be heving a few display cara on his lot. He also stated that he could get by with 20 spots for display cars. MS (Foss-Glazer) to grant the conditional use permit for the operaCion nf a used auto sales business at 2848 Highway 10 with the folTowing recortmendations, that a site plan be presented to the City Staff and approved, tha~ the site ptan show appruxintately 20 cars far disp1ay, and that the fence be extended forCher east and norih to screen adequately the abutting property and also to show proper lane access in and out af the property. 6 nayes 2 ayes Commission ~embers Foss and Glazer voted in favor of thr. motion and all other members voted against it. MS (Burmefster-Foss) to grant a conditional use permtt cm;tingent upon the applacant bring9ng 6ack a professionally certified site plan to the Planning Commi;sion. 6 nayes 2 ayes Commission Member Gtazer stxted that he voted against the motion for two reasons, that it was not in harmoqy with the Comprehensive Pian, which the City has quite an investment in, and that a used car lot was not de>ireab7e along Highway lv, ~ Cortmission Members Zepper, Mackeben, Fedor, Haake and Blanchard stated that they agreed - with Comniission Member Giazer's comments. MAJOR SIfBDIVISION REqUEST OF EUGENE TOMAS •• 5065 BDNA ROAD Official Rose reported that Mr. Tomas has requested to combine and subdivide three icts of 220', 100' and 90' frobtage cn Bona Road to form five lots, all with II1.46' frontayas for single family construction. Pt~nning consideratians 1nclude that ali lats have substandard Prontages of 81.Ab' so a variance of 3.5' would be needed. A17 lots have equal square footages of 10,956 square feet, which is su6standard by 44- square feet per tot. Services ar.r: availabte 9n the street for all lots. The middle iot present7y has a storm sewer outlet and drainage easemenC which Staff is studying to see if there is a possibility for removal of the outlet. The lot would st171 be buitdable if the sewer outlet is not abandoned. Staff recommends a minimaT 5' drainage anc' utility easement around the perimeter of all lots. 7he applir,ant is presently having a proposed grading plan prepared which would be requirpd ta R~et drainage requirements. Upon signature of the final plat a developm~nt agreement would be entered into by the appllcant tuith a required bond amount for the size oF the development, which would insure City code satisfactian. Commission Member Mackeben asked if variances had been granted before for both sub- standard square footage and subsCandard frontage. Chairpersoh Haake repiied that she could n~t recall any instances except maybe for hardship. ~i t+r. Tomas stated that he would 7ike to have five lots created rather thai~ four bQCause of the economics of dlviding the extra cost into four tots. He stated that the added cost would be enouyh to puY the houses into the high $60,OOU range and felt that it NovembE~ 9, 1977 Pag~ 8 ' would not be compatibie k~ith the rest of the netghborhood. ~ouncilmember Bauingartner asked the Planning Commission members Co consider Mr, Tomas' co~nents about the higher cost ard stated thnt if Che Commission were to approve four lots rathPr than five, they would be pricing many people aut of a home. Commission Member Rurmeister pointed out that there were targe lats in the neighbor- hood and that the City did not know what was 9oin~ to be developed yet on the Berwyn Additlon 1ots. MSp (hiackeben-Fedor) to ask the City Council to deny the request of Eugene 7amas for a ma~nr subdivision at 5D65 Bona Road because of the substandard 1ot frontage and substandard square footage, which dues not create a hardship. 6 ayes 3 nayes Commission Members Zepper, Blanchard and Foss voted against the m~tion and Cormiission Member Zepper explained the reason for voting against the motion was that there were older> sma7ler homes in the area and tihaC the hfgher price would price several people right out of a home. MINOR SUBDIVISIOh RE~EST Of CEDAR BAY BUIlOERS - 8347 GREENW00~ DRIVk Official Rose reported that the applicant has requested to subdivide the parcel fronting Greenwood Orive 202.5' x 146' deep, except for the north 16.5', which extends west to front Eastwood Road. The subdivision request would create two equal frontage lnts of - ~. 101.25' on GreentJOOd ~riVe. __. Plnrning considerations include that both lots meet all size requirements and that services have be:~+i provided for a two lot subdivision. The I6.5' leg extandirog to Eastwood Road should be combined with the property to Lhe souCh, if possible. Parcet e has an existing garage located on it whicn meets setback requirements for the subdivision. Also, if the 16.5' property leg is not cambined with the soutih property, t,he west 327' and the north 16.5' should be recorded as dralnage and utility 2aseroents, Otherwise, the rear 5' should be required for drainage and utility easements. Rudie Bayer, developEr of the property stated that he dfd not feel he shou7d have to take the yarage off the property. Iie aiso stated that he had p7anned on using the garage during canstruction to store toois and equipment. Ne stated that he hoped to eventually incorporate the garage into part of the house that was to ~e built on that lot. M5P (Zepper-Foss) to approve the minor subdivision request of Cedar Bay Builders, 8247 Greenwood Orive, creating a south lot of 101.25' x 146' and a north iot basicaity of 101.25' x i46', with a 322' x 16.5' deep 7eg on the ncrth property line to the west. Approval sha11 be contingent with a 5' utility and drainage easement atong tha western proparty line of parcel B and 89.75' along the western line of parcel A, to a poinC where the util9ties cress the 16,5' leg and a. 10' easement where it crocses. 6 ayes 2 nayes Corrmission Members Macke6en and ~edor voted against the motion and Commission Member Mackeber~ staCed that he did not believe that a garage would be allowed on a piece _~ of prvperty without a residence. Commissiqn Member Fedor stated Lhat hc~ fe7t snme- thing better could be done with the 16.5'. ' November 9, 1977 Pege 9 =~ r1AJOR SUBDiViS10N REQUEST OF CEDAR DAY tiUILDERS - 8466 FAI CHILD APPROXIMATELY ~9fficial Rose reported that the appllcant has requested to subdivide the property cornering on County Road J and Feirchiid into six tots for single family development. Planniny considerations include that ail lots exceed code size requirements, services hava been provided for six lots, easements of 5' for drainage and utit,ity purposes should be required along the side properCy tines, an~i upon signature of the final plat a davelopment agreement shoutd be entered into with the applicant with a required bond amaunt to cover the size of the development. ; MSP (Glazer-Foss) to recommend to the Gity Council tha;: they approve the request of Cedar Bay Buitders for the property at 8466 Feirchlld for a ma~or subd4vision, ! dividing Qne 1ot into six lots, as presented on the prellminary plat, revised ~ 11/1/77. This recommendatiun is contingent upon a drainage and utitity easement of 5' on the south lat line of 1ot 1, and on the north and south 1ot tines of 8~~S lots 2-6. 8 ayes 1~ MSP (Mackeben-Zepper) to ad~ourn the m~eting at 12:00 PM. • Respectfully submitted, I ~ _~;. : , , . Pamela Young Recording SecretaMy . / ~ ~.= , '' ~a ~ _. , , „ . . ~ ~ ~ , _ , . . ; _, ,, 1 1~ A 4 1 ~1 I .,. ' l { 4 1. 31 il. ~ e. ~ ~ a J 9 ~' (:, ~ 'x PC, r1I~~~~ ~i , ..,. ~ . ~ , ~( 1 a~ ~r ! I : ? ~, , ; , r ~ t . ,;. ~; .i; ~ ~,:.~~ ,r~` ., . , ~. 1 F . ~~ ~ ~ 1'ly k ~ { F - ~ ' ! ~ . . .. . . I. } ~ ~ . ; l ', ' . . . . Y { ~i 1 .~ 1:~~ if ~~ ~~ .' ~ I 1 .~ r ~ I~ i. r t, ~ .:', ~ } t '. .. .~.. .I. .. ~., t . '~, , ._ ,.d_.P'....:~ ..,. A,T[.. , ,.. . . !', '~ >.. ~ ~~~. ~ rr, _:... ......~._~. , ' .' . ,. . .~.. . ... „ .. . , .:,1 ~k.. .~. a '6< < ~' ~ x;.rt ~~ , ~ . ~.`~ r i,` i ~ ,. ~ „ 7 .,~ .if .. : . -.~ .~. . ~,.~ ` ,:i:.' .:r ,',~ r ,•.i ,<<~ 'p . ~' .... : , ~. ~. r , i ri • i . 1«s~ }sD~ .~ ~ ~ _~ ~ ., ~;~~ ~~ ~~'i~FiY ~~ ~+ i~ ~ - ~ .t aF2~i~~JiY1'1 i~ i , , , ~ _. ~. ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ , , . . - .. q' , , t r ~ ~*~ , , t, . , .. , ~ ' ~. .. ' ,. ~ ,~ ,. • .1 ~ . , t} .~ ~ ' ~' , , t ~ ~ 4 ! . ~.. , ' „ , ' .~ . . . • . i . ' ' . ~ _ , r.. ' ~ . ~ ~ , .. .......:.:...~.~ n....~.....:.zu~r.:.~~..u<}a 515«+:Y~..;...f~+aHV{.e. .::~.il>.~Jfnu.,~~....,.JeI.4y..~in~~..~. .:.~ ~~:w.:..~:L..IDVx' '~rc%+~' k t.f . e..• Fdu. ,.. ~ . . ~~ !n.