Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout05 Hearing Examiner PLANNIl�G AND ZONING ear!n 6c. ,,, nt,pia ITEM DATE SUBMIT D BY ca414-6 ecovilvmtr- _ Ot-4-La- I .6 i i Y(1. d' 4_, Azke,,,,,,, 1 pz 0 ., , ., (e2 o d i(Vez fa Zeele5-ea"44,4 ,naule atftiluW azi-V-- ' i ' / Pz_ `4"01-%-• 8 - z ? - 93 P ; z e2- i �• � - Z-, - : 2 10Z - loon ; q5 5( PUBLIC HEARING COMMENT SHEET (PLEASE PRINT CLEARLY) NAME: 0 +-- STREET ADDRESS: l :- I CITY/STATE/ZIP: NAME OF CASE BEING HEARD:( .SC-C ? Check the appropriate line: Applicant or Representative I Neutral/ wish to speak do not wish to speak --in fav$r/ '`� _ I Opposed/ wish to speak - I wish to speak do not wish to speak I do not wish to speak Written comments may be attached to this form or you may write them in below. • a.. PUBLIC HEARING COMMENT SHEET (PLEASE PRINT CLEARLY) ,(am ��i 'E NAME: - STREET ADDRESS: A��¢s' (_-v CITY/STATE/ZIP: � �� Sz , NAME OF CASE BEING HEARD: S Lt. P-4O ... cR ******************************************************************************************** Check the appropriate line: Applicant or Representative Neutral/ wish to speak do not wish to speak In favor/ I Opposed/ wish to speak I wish to speak do not wish to speak I do not wish to speak Written comments may be attached to this form or you may write them in below. =PI BEFORE THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION CITY OF CALDWELL,IDAHO IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION ) CASE NO. SUP-40-98, COURSE OF OF INDEPENDENT ORDER OF ODD FELLOWS ) PROCEEDINGS, GENERAL FACTS, FOR A SPECIAL USE PERMIT TO CONSTRUCT ) TESTIMONY,APPLICABLE LEGAL A MEETING AND SOCIAL EVENTS BUILDING ) STANDARDS, COMPREHENSIVE IN AN R-3 ZONE ) PLAN ANALYSIS,FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW, AND ORDER OF DECISION I COURSE OF PROCEEDINGS 1.1 The Caldwell Community Development Department issued a notice of public hearing on application SUP-40-98 to be held on August 13, 1998. Public notice requirements set forth in Idaho Code, Chapter 65, Local Planning Act, have been met. On July 29, 1998, notice was published in the Idaho-Press Tribune; on July 29, 1998,notice was mailed to all property owners within 300 feet of the project site and to all political subdivisions providing services to the site; and, on August 6, 1998,notice was posted on the site. 1.2 Files and exhibits relative to this application are available for review in the Community Development Department, Caldwell City Hall, and were available for review at the hearing. II GENERAL FACTS 2.1 APPLICANT(S): Independent Order of Odd Fellows, 515 N. 6th Avenue, Caldwell, ID, 83605. 2.2 OWNER(S): Same as above. 2.3 PROPOSAL: The Applicant seeks approval for a Special Use Permit to construct a building in which to hold meetings and social events. 2.3.1 Applicant's narrative - The Independent Order of Odd Fellows (IOOF), a fraternal organization, has sold their lodge building located in downtown Caldwell and they have to vacate the premises by October 9, 1998. The building they wish to build will be used for meetings and social events in conjunction with their fraternal activities. Their charter prohibits alcoholic beverages on the premises. 2.4 LOCATION: The proposed building will be located on a separate parcel of land adjacent to the IOOF home on the northwest and 16th Street on the southeast. The IOOF home is located on a separate parcel. Both parcels are owned by the IOOF. On the proposed site, there is an existing garage and storage shed. 2.5 NATURAL RESOURCES AND HAZARDOUS AREAS: The project site is not within the near vicinity of the Boise River or Indian Creek, and the site is not within a flood area. Pg -3 2.6 LAND USE: The project site is zoned R-3 and is surrounded by R-2 to the northeast and northwest, and M-1 to the southeast. 2.6.1 A fraternal organization is not specifically listed in the Land Use Schedule as either a permitted or special use. However, the Community Development Director has determined that a fraternal organization can be classified as a semi-public use. Semi-public uses are permitted by special use in all zones. There is no other use listed in the Land Use Schedule that can be considered to be "similar"to a fraternal organization. 2.7 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: High Density Residential. 2.7.1 High Density Residential is defined as "suitable primarily for multi-family housing such as apartments, townhouses, condominiums, mobile home parks and other compact residential development. Also suitable for professional office development, and limited neighborhood commercial uses in selected locations as well as a variety of public and semi-public uses and compatible institutional uses". 2.8 AREA OF CITY IMPACT: The project site is not within the Area of City Impact. 2.9 PUBLIC FACILITIES: 2.9.1 Irrigation—Caldwell Lateral Irrigation District was notified on July 29, 1998. 2.9.2 The Fire Marshal will review the building plans as part of the building permit process and all site requirements will have to be met prior to a building permit being issued. 2.9.3 The Engineering Department will review building plans during the building permit process and all site requirements will have to be met prior to a building permit being issued. 2.10 TRANSPORTATION: Access to the site will be from 16th Street. 2.10.1 Parking — A parking plan will be made available to the Community Development Department once the Special Use Permit has been approved. Parking surface will be a paved and will have to comply with City storm drainage policies. 2.11 PARKS, RECREATION AND OPEN SPACE: This request does not include parks, recreation and open space. 2.12 HISTORIC AREAS: This property is not within the City's area of historic significance. 2.13 HOUSING: This request is to construct a building in which to hold meetings and social events. 2.14 COMMUNITY DESIGN: Elgin and 1661 Streets are not arterials. III TESTIMONY 3.1 Bud Knickerbocker presented the staff report, and Exhibit PZ-1000, a copy of an Assessor's map showing the subject property and surrounding zoning. 3.2 Harold Bivens,Applicant's representative, stated that the local chapter of the IOOF had sold their building and needs a place to build. They will start building when they get their permit. Leo Holmes testified that he was not opposed to the proposed building but he is concerned with the number of horses located on the parcel with the IOOF Home. 3.3 Linda James, Community Development Director, stated that she is in contact with the owner of the horses and is working on having the horses removed from this site. 3.4 In rebuttal, Harold Bivens stated that the local chapter has nothing to do with the horses located on site and will lease the land for the building from the state chapter. IV APPLICABLE LEGAL STANDARDS 4.1 City of Caldwell Zoning Ordinance No. 1451 4.2 City of Caldwell Comprehensive Plan 4.3 Idaho Code,Chapter 65,Local Planning Act V COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ANALYSIS 5.1 The proposed project is in compliance with the Comprehensive Plan as follows: 5.2 Cultural and Social Facilities—Policy 1. 5.3 Urban Storm Runoff—Policies 1 and 2. VI FINDINGS OF FACT 6.1 The Planning and Zoning Commission members accept the general facts and testimony as findings of fact and that no one spoke in opposition of the request. VII CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 7.1 The Planning and Zoning Commission has the authority to hear this case and to approve or deny; public notice requirements were met; the hearing was conducted within the guidelines of Idaho Code and City ordinances. VIII STANDARD CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 8.1 Based on the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, and for the reasons stated, the Planning and Zoning Commission, orders that Case No. SUP-40-98, a request by the Independent Order of Odd Fellows for a Special Use Permit to construct a building in which to hold meetings and social events located in an R-3 zone,be approved, subject to the following conditions: 8.2 The specific terms and conditions placed on this Special Use Permit shall run with the site and remain valid upon a change of ownership, or until such time that the Permit may be revoked, become invalid, or replaced with another approved use. The Special Use Permit is not transferable from the approved site to another site. 8.3 The Applicant, or future assigns having an interest in the subject property, shall fully comply with all conditions placed upon the Special Use Permit. 8.4 No changes in the conditions and terms of this Special Use Permit, as approved, shall be undertaken by the Applicant, or future assigns having an interest in the subject property, until the Community Development Director has reviewed the proposed changes and approval for amendment has been granted through the public hearing process. 8.5 Any violation of the terms and conditions of this Special Use Permit by the Applicants, or future assigns having an interest in the subject site, shall be deemed a misdemeanor and subject to the provisions set forth in Idaho Code, 18-113. Each day of continued violation shall be deemed a separate offense. 8.6 The Special Use Permit shall become null and void if building plans, as approved, have not been submitted to Community Development within six months and building construction has not begun within one year from signing of the Order of Decision, unless a six-month extension has been requested and approval has been granted by the Community Development Director. THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION AT A PUBLIC HEARING HELD AUGUST 13, 1998 APPROVED FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW,AND DECISION. WRITTEN FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW WERE APPROVED BY THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION AT A MEETING HELD AUGUST 27, 1998. 4/ William Roos, Chairman ATTEST: arles Murphy,Vice-Chairman Community Dev op ent Director CALDWELL PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MINUTES OF AUGUST 13, 1998 Call to Order-Chairman Bill Roos called the meeting to order at approximately 7:00 p.m. II. Roll Call Members Present: William Roos,Charles Murphy, Janie Archuleta Staff Present: Linda James,Bud Knickerbocker,Marci Perry Legal Counsel: Terry Michaelson III. Review of Proceedings-Chairman Roos reviewed the procedures for public hearings. 1V. Poll Members for Conflict of Interest-Chairman Roos polled members for conflicts of interest: there were none. I V. Old Business A. Approve Minutes of July 23, 1998 — Motion: Commissioner Murphy. Second: Commissioner Archuleta. Approve as written. Passed: Unanimous voice vote. B. Approve Orders of Decision for the Following Cases: None. C. Approve Recommendations on the Following Cases: Case No. SUB-17F-98 (West Valley Estates No. 4); SUB-26F-98 (Sunridge Subdivision No. 3). Motion: Commissioner Murphy. Second: Commissioner Archuleta. Approve the recommendations for the referenced cases as written. Passed: Unanimous voice vote. VI. New Business -Hearings A. Case No. SUP-40-98 (IOOF), a request by the Independent Order of Oddfellows to construct a building in which to hold meetings and social events. The site of the proposed new building is located on 16th Street, north of the intersection of 16th and Elgin. Testimony— Bud Knickerbocker presented the staff report, and Exhibit PZ-1000, a copy of an Assessor's map showing the subject property and surrounding zoning. Harold Bivens,Applicant's representative, stated that the local chapter of the IOOF had sold their building and needs a place to build. They will start building when they get their permit. Leo Holmes testified that he was not opposed to the proposed building but he is concerned with the number the number of horses located on the parcel with the IOOF Home. Linda James,.Community Development Director, stated that the she is in contact with the owner of the horses and is working on having the horses removed from this site. jZ - 4 In rebuttal, Harold .6.lens stated that the local chapter has nothltvg Lo do with the horses located on site and will lease the land for the building from the state chapter. Public Testimony Closed—Chairman Roos closed the public testimony. Comprehensive Plan Analysis — Moved: Commissioner Murphy. Second: Commissioner Archuleta. The request is in compliance with the following Comprehensive Plan policies: Cultural and Social Facilities, policy 1; Urban Storm Runoff, policies 1, and 2. Passed: Unanimous roll call vote. Findings of Fact — Motion: Commissioner Murphy. Second: Commissioner Archuleta. Approve the general facts as findings of fact and include the fact that no one spoke in opposition of the request.Passed: Unanimous roll call vote. Conclusions of Law—Motion: Commissioner Murphy. Second: Commissioner Archuleta. The Commission has the authority to hear this case and to approve or deny; public notice requirements were met; and the hearing was conducted within the guidelines of Idaho Codes and City ordinances. Passed: Unanimous roll call vote. Order of Decision — Motion: Commissioner Murphy. Second: Commissioner Archuleta. Approve the request with the standard conditions. Passed: Unanimous roll call vote. Public Hearing Closed — Chairman Roos closed the public hearing and stated that anyone wishing to appeal the decision of the Commission is to contact the Community Development Director. B. Case No. SUP-39-98, a request by Freddie Lane to locate a church and conduct church services within an existing building. The existing structure is more commonly known as the IOOF building and is located at the northwest corner of the intersection of Cleveland Boulevard and Kimball Avenue. Testimony- Bud Knickerbocker presented the staff report and Exhibit PZ-1000, a copy of an Assessor's map showing the location of the site, and Exhibits PR-1, 2 and 3, which were respective letters approving the use of parking spaces for the church. Pastor Freddie Lane,Applicant,testified that the building has been used by the Church for several weeks because the building in which they had been conducting services has been sold. The Church currently has 15 members and they are anticipating growth. There are approximately 50 off-street parking spaces that are available. Valorie Hubbartt, Church member, spoke in favor. Public Testimony Closed—Chairman Roos closed public testimony. Comprehensive Plan Analysis — Moved: Commissioner Murphy. Second: Commissioner Archuleta. The request is in compliance with the following Comprehensive Plan policies: Commercial Categories,policies 1 and 4; Cultural and Social Facilities,policy 1; Historic Areas, policies 1,2, 3,and 4. Passed: Unanimous roll call vote. Findings of Fact — Motion: Commissioner Murphy. Second: Commissioner Archuleta. Approve the general facts as fmdings of fact and include the following facts taken from testimony: the Applicant has secured additional off-street parking spaces; the Church has been located within the City for four years and is not a new endeavor; improvements to both the interior and exterior..-the building have been and will be undel... en. Passed: Unanimous roll call vote. Conclusions of Law—Motion: Commissioner Murphy. Second: Commissioner Archuleta. The Commission has the authority to hear this case and to approve or deny; public notice requirements were met; and the hearing was conducted within the guidelines of Idaho Code and City ordinances. Passed: Unanimous roll call vote. Order of Decision — Motion: Commissioner Murphy. Second: Commissioner Archuleta. Approve the request with the standard conditions and include the condition that the Church will have to secure additional parking spaces beyond the approximately 50 that are now available if increased membership exceeds those required by the Zoning Ordinance. Public Hearing Closed — Chairman Roos closed the public hearing and stated that anyone wishing to appeal the decision of the Commission is to contact the Community Development Director. C. Case No. SUP-41-98, a request by Robert and Nancy Chris to convert a single-family residence into a duplex (two-family dwelling) located in an R-1 zone. The site is more commonly known as 3116 Ponderosa Place. Testimony- Linda James presented the staff report and Exhibit PZ-1000, a copy of the Assessor's map showing the subject site and surrounding zoning. She also reviewed the background information as noted in the report. Robert Chris, Applicant, testified and noted that his family had resided in the residence since 1991. He stated that he had obtained the building permit for the apartment in good faith and had not been told at that time that the apartment could not be rented. His intent when the addition was constructed was to rent it and he paid additional water/sewer fees for the apartment. He noted that there are two parking spaces in the garage, four spaces on the pad in front of the garage, and two spaces along the side yard if needed. Mr. Chris presented the following Exhibits: PZ-1001, a petition of support signed by the property owners residing at 3108, 3124, and 3126 Ponderosa Place; PZ-1002, a copy of the restrictive covenants for the subdivision outlining acceptance of single-family and duplex homes; PZ-1003 through PZ-1010, photographs of the apartment and parking area. Rolf Bitsch, Bill Campbell, and Paul Alldredge testified as opposed. Concerns expressed included parking in the street, and the apartment would create a nuisance to the neighborhood. Sallie Bradshaw Palleria signed up in support but did not speak. Jim Nelson signed up as neutral but did not speak;Pamela Bitsch,and Juan DeLuna signed up as opposed but did not speak. Public Testimony Closed—Chairman Roos closed public testimony. Comprehensive Plan Analysis — Moved: Commissioner Murphy. Second: Commissioner Archuleta. No policies in the Comprehensive Plan apply to this request, either in support of or in opposition. Passed: Unanimous roll call vote. Findings of Fact — Motion: Commissioner Murphy. Second: Commissioner Archuleta. Approve the general facts as findings of fact and include the following facts taken from testimony: at the time the Applicants obtained the building permit for the apartment their intent was to rent and addi,. ,ial water/sewer connection fees were paia*„.._parking situation on the street does exist but the street is a public street and is not restricted to no parking; it is an extraordinary case and if it had been heard by the Planning and Zoning Commission in 1994(when the building permit was issued) there is no way of knowing what the decision would have been; the construction of the apartment was done in good faith and was done with City permits. Passed: Unanimous roll call vote. Conclusions of Law—Motion: Commissioner Murphy. Second: Commissioner Archuleta. The Commission has the authority to hear this case and to approve or deny; public notice requirements were met; and the hearing was conducted within the guidelines of Idaho Code and City ordinances. Passed: Unanimous roll call vote. Order of Decision — Motion: Commissioner Murphy. Second: Commissioner Archuleta. Approve the request with the standard conditions and include the condition that only one of the dwelling units shall be permitted to be rented and/or leased, and one of the two dwelling units shall be occupied by the owner of the property. Public Hearing Closed - Chairman Roos closed the public hearing and stated that any one wishing to appeal the decision of the Commission is to contact the Community Development Director for assistance. D. To hear concurrently Case Nos. VAR-11-98 and SUP-42-98, a request by Marilyn Jordan for approval of a 10-foot setback from Sunset Street and approval of a 12 foot 3 inches set back from the rear property line, and approval to convert a single-family residence into a duplex within an R-1 zone. The site is more commonly known as 123 Parkhurst. Testimony— Linda James presented the staff report and Exhibit PZ-1000, a copy of the Assessor's map showing the location of the site and surrounding zoning; and PR-1, a response from Caroline and Jack Chaney, 114 Woodlawn in which they note they do not oppose the requests. Mrs. James briefly reviewed the report pointing out those sections related to the issuance of the building permit, which specifically disallowed the use of the structure for dwelling purposes. She noted that Attachment A of the report was a statement signed by Mrs. Jordan and the contractor. The statement was to the effect that Mrs. Jordan and the contractor understood that the building was not to be used for dwelling purposes; said statement was signed by both parties on April 15, 1998. The statement also included the word"kitchenette." When the contractor was told no kitchenette could be included in the building,the contractor lined the word out, initialed the amendment and dated it April 20, 1998. Marilyn Jordan,applicant,testified that she had relied upon the builder to obtain all the necessary permits and to comply with the requirements of the building department. She stated that she did not know there was a problem until the building was almost completed and she was ready to move in. When questioned by Commissioner Murphy about the statement she had signed on April 15, 1998, she stated that the contractor had told her he could take care of it and that it wouldn't be a problem. Mrs. Jordan also testified that the contractor had written the statement for her to sign and that she was not aware that the contractor had lined out the word "kitchenette" after she had signed it. Mrs. Jordan submitted the following Exhibits: PZ-1001, a letter of support from Carol Grassi; PZ-1002, a letter of support from Eric Abbott; PZ-1003, a letter of support from Jerry Jackson and Carl Christensen; PZ-1004, a petition of support signed by signed by 19 persons living at 14 respective properties in the subject site neighborhood. Harold Briscoe, contractor, signed up at neutral but noted for the record that he was in support of the requests. He testified that his partner had handled all of the building permit paperwork and that he was not aware there was a problem. Commissioner Murphy noted that it was apparent someone had tried to circumvent the building permitting process; Mr. Briscoe stated that he didn't know what happened because he wasn't involved in the process. Tony Ford, 410 Parkhurst, testified in favor of the requests. He responded to Commissioner Murphy that he was not a relative of Mrs. Jordan's. Donna and Susan Schumaker, 123 Parkhurst, signed up in support but did not speak. Public Testimony Closed—Chairman Roos closed public testimony. Variance Procedure — Motion: Commissioner Murphy. Second: Commissioner Archuleta. Given the extraordinary circumstances, all five criteria for this particular variance are found to be true. Passed: Unanimous roll call vote. Comprehensive Plan Analysis — Moved: Commissioner Murphy. Second: Commissioner Archuleta. No policies in the Comprehensive Plan apply to this request, either in support of or in opposition.Passed: Unanimous roll call vote. Findings of Fact — Motion: Commissioner Murphy. Second: Commissioner Archuleta. Approve the general facts as findings of fact and include the following facts taken from testimony: the contractor signed the permit application and Mrs. Jordan was not involved in the process; the word "kitchenette," on the statement prepared by the contractor regarding building not to be used as a dwelling, was lined out, and initialed/dated by the contractor but was not initialed by Mrs. Jordan; it is a situation that carries some potential danger to the City. If approved, someone else may try to come forward and do the same thing;the property owner was caught in a situation because she wasn't paying close enough attention; the remodel is an improvement to the neighborhood; no one came forward to oppose the requests. Passed: Unanimous roll call vote. Conclusions of Law—Motion: Commissioner Murphy. Second: Commissioner Archuleta. The Commission has the authority to hear this case and to approve or deny; public notice requirements were met; and the hearing was conducted within the guidelines of Idaho Code and City ordinances. Passed: Unanimous roll call vote. Order of Decision — Motion: Commissioner Murphy. Second: Commissioner Archuleta. Approve the request with the standard conditions and include the following conditions: The two dwelling units (primary house and remodeled structure) shall be attached by a method approved by the Caldwell Building Official that will make the two structures into one,two-family dwelling (two dwelling units in one structure). Plans shall be submitted to the Building Official no later than two months following the signing of this Order. Construction shall be completed within 6 months following the signing of this Order, or a 6-month extension request shall be presented to the Community Development Director, who shall approve or deny the request. The secondary (remodeled) structure shall not be occupied until the Building Official has given final approval and a Certificate of Occupancy has been signed, and only one of the dwelling units shall be permitted to be rented and/or leased; one of the two dwelling units shall be occupied by the owner of the property. Passed: Unanimous roll call vote. Public Hearing Closed — Chairman Roos closed the public hearing and stated that anyone wishing to appeal the decision of the Commission is to contact the Community Development Director. VII Discussion on Planning Issues — Linda James informed members that the City Council had denied the proposed ordinance for manufactured home developments as recommended by Commission members. She also noted that the Council has requested a joint workshop to be held and that the general public will be invited to attend and offer input. VIII Adjournment—Chairman Roos adjourned the meeting at approximately 9:15 p.m. MINUTES APPROVED AT A REGULARLY SCHEDULED MEETING HELD AUGUST 27, 1998. 7 \ ' ATTEST: Chairman William Roos acji.l...._ Community Dev op ent Director (,/i I( Vice Ch.' •.an Char es Murph ' ROmIS ' - '°--'- I �IfuYY!! 1 976 y `602989 /' 687601 `O id a 02988 a�e 602999 1 / g Roma Romer I 1 002978 ,,„ 125 ' R02990 L ,eR03000;11 3$IXIEE.Cl 125 y' 6 - 1 T �rlt.n 601558 \ Romtwm � '02992 683001 tO—,I 0 -1 r112.a"02995 iq 603002\ Rn 3119' 1 1«6%e �' p P T ad,rt3r-y' �3 n , R0m13 6 = + , 'R02985 R02984 4=kRuu 97 �2 996 Z k 603003 I I' ' AOMO7 — — -— — 3 {ILK_L_IO15Tl-. Ta.a r, 635174 vilq -- -.n-61-4712-3rSe-IE-� -41 11 R35171 - --311.Oi' .OP .n' d.nr21L1- 4 T dtaC ad h a >; F/ �' T -1351/3 d& ,p� & & /� I T d5 _OA' - Alt' c H .OP 1.07'7 R3511,510Fd r ge H -/� - _f_-_t_ I L_ 4'- J.an,_ un'.... ''_.un'... 31.31. _6 Ast -- -- -- - — _ _ a- r- .....- I Irtn:eo- ,-nor 7 >r, , .Td' , 'Tm m , m- m� d a AD26d6 _`-R02490 I I 07033 607034 QOM ld RO2�5 .� I 110'., , w 19: o o I I � 'k';'., al ■ �4a107036 607035 : I ,I'1� R02N1 , 1 IS-In. <"07055 ‘1p'6\ if l - 07056 , 4 1 pR07037 R07038 CARI^ 118 w 2 S . 602613 p a it 1ta602 turn, gf0RCLE 61 .'`GRTER 2 i 011 T M.i«x« _•y,y;®A 75p807040 607039: L.., >_ R07057 I ; nc« n'- 10 54-31.' 91W56-A p '94• 017 1 'R02649 __ 6 1 A.607041 607044 4i W r ill"' jr I I T m ,• �- e TTm7t'-4:, 007059 ' -•p10 -' -R0 ' , i61RS �� 607044 607043 a �� _ .s" dI1 ; ,, v�r, R07060 I I*• �,I T 2M1 _ \ d/,, 07045 14 /4�, _y 10—'I - : \- . '07046 13._ "kz466:� 602648 .4 163,., _._.. $1r' 7Lor 4' 4 .,,,,p 313, L fn \ /' o i9' 1 w4.,k R02655/ #a r 2 417 NN. MOW 1 \ 602654 \ T! b t0 035065 R35t169O10 �'\� T 44 TA ® \ P • �� 802653 • 1 'iMT t R02657 - - - laT.PMN 3167 ,m )55"/` A R35150 g ;, j � o t R35141010 t tt ,c.- id D7' e R43.13 • „ar. a I \ B� R35142 R35145 / / "\N \ I 635149 ';� ,i"�' \\ ` 1 T I$ .\ T I T IA 1 10 440 . / 'c a \ 135Oa S Lk PIM 4/0 se 94t19)1°51°' \,I �\ 1 Rao6n o� 9Ot56d II ` / , 2 /: 'I i e j" _4 635141011 _ R31 • . itild ip-A•k a 3 M R35141 t 62 T 95255 7 95217 1