07SN0372~~~ ti ~nn~ rnr
~w~F~oc TIAnAm~Ar 1 Q 7M'7 (~'l~(~'
!' ~ ~~ ~
~ -! +;
'! ~
j~ `l7 ~. , „/,
.:1RGSI~IP!!~ ~~~ ,
September 24, 2008 BS
STAFF' S
REQUEST ANALYSIS
AND
RECOMMENDATION
07SN0372
(AMENDED)
EwN Investments, Inc.
Clover Hill Magisterial District
Clover Hill Elementary; Swift Creek Middle; and
Clover Hill High Schools Attendance Zones
Northwest quadrant of Hull Street Road and Duckridge Boulevard
RE VEST: (Amended) Rezoning from Community Business (C-3) to Community Business
(C-3) with Conditional Use Planned Development to permit exceptions to
Ordinance requirements. Specifically, an exception to the rear yard setback is
requested.
PROPOSED LAND USE:
Except as limited herein, uses permitted in the Community Business (C-3) District
are planned. (Proffered Condition 5)
PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION
RECOMMEND APPROVAL AND ACCEPTANCE OF THE PROFFERED CONDITIONS ON
PAGES 2 THROUGH 5.
AYES: MESSRS. BASS, BROwN, HASSEN AND VVALLER.
NAY: MR. GULLEY.
Providing a FIRST CHOICE community through excellence in public service
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Recommend denial for the following reasons:
A. The proposed zoning and land use fails to conform to the Upper Swift Creek Plan
which suggests the property is appropriate for office/residential mixed use.
B. The requested exception to the rear setback further increases the impact the
proposed uses may have on adjacent residential development.
(NOTE: THE ONLY CONDITION THAT MAY BE IMPOSED IS A BUFFER CONDITION.
THE PROPERTY OWNER(S) MAY PROFFER CONDITIONS. THE CONDITIONS NOTED
WITH "STAFF/CPC" WERE AGREED UPON BY BOTH STAFF AND THE COMMISSION.
CONDITIONS WITH ONLY A "STAFF" ARE RECOMMENDED SOLELY BY STAFF.
CONDITIONS WITH ONLY A "CPC" ARE ADDITIONAL CONDITIONS
RECOMMENDED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION.)
PROFFERED CONDITIONS
The property owner and applicant in this rezoning case, pursuant to Section 15.2-2298 of the
Code of Virginia (1950 as amended) and the Zoning Ordinance of Chesterfield County, for
themselves and their successors or assigns, proffer that the property under consideration will be
developed according to the following proffers if, and only if, the rezoning request submitted
herewith is granted with only those conditions agreed to by the owner and applicant. In the event
this request is denied or approved with conditions not agreed to by the owner and applicant, the
proffers shall immediately be null and void and of no further force or effect.
(CPC) 1. Master Plan. The Textual Statement dated July 10, 2008 shall be
considered the Master Plan. In addition, the Property shall be developed
in general conformance with the schematic master plan entitled
"Schematic Master Plan Duckridge Place Clover Hill District -
Chesterfield County, Virginia" dated June 24, 2008 and prepared by
Higgins & Gerstenmaier (the "Schematic Master Plan"). (P)
(CPC) 2. Elevations. The Property shall be developed in general conformance with
the elevations filed herewith entitled "The Shops at Duck Ridge Place,
Route 360, Chesterfield, Virginia" and prepared by Freeman Morgan
Architects (the "Elevations"). (P)
(CPC) 3. Public Wastewater. The public wastewater systems shall be utilized. (U)
(CPC) 4. Hours of Operation. Uses shall not be open to the public between the
hours of midnight and 6:00 a.m. (P)
(CPC) 5. Prohibited Uses. The following uses shall not be permitted on the
Property:
2 07SN0372-SEP24-BOS-RPT
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
f.
n.
s.
t.
u.
v.
w.
Cocktail lounges and nightclubs as a primary use.
Coin-operated dry cleaning, laundry or laundromats.
Convenience store.
Electrical, plumbing or heating supply sales, service and related
isp ay rooms.
Fraternal uses.
Funera omes or mortuaries.
Gasoline sales.
Green ouses or nurseries.
Hospitals.
Hotels.
Indoor flea markets.
Material reclamation receiving centers.
Motor vehicle sales and/or rental.
Motor vehicle washes.
Motorcycle sales, service and/or repair
Nursery schools and child or adult care centers and kindergartens.
Outside runs associated with veterinary hospitals and/or kennels.
Park and ride lots.
Recreational establishments, commercial-indoor.
Rest, convalescent or nursing homes and other group care
facilities.
Taxidermies.
Theaters.
Freestanding fast-food restaurants with drive-through windows.
(P)
3 07SN0372-SEP24-BOS-RPT
(CPC) 6. Building Height. No building constructed on the Property shall exceed
one-story in height, but in no event exceed thirty (30) feet in height. (BI
& P)
(CPC) 7. Maximum Square Footage. Buildings on the Property shall not exceed
43,000 gross square feet in the aggregate. (P)
(CPC) 8. Masonry Wall. A masonry wall a minimum of six (6) feet in height shall
be provided along a portion of the rear property line as shown on the
Schematic Master Plan. (P)
(CPC) 9. Loadin.~ Docks. There shall be no loading dock on the rear of Building C
as shown on the Schematic Master Plan. (P & BI)
(CPC) 10. Ri ht-of WaX. Prior to site plan approval or within sixty (60) days of a
written request by the Transportation Department, whichever occurs first,
one hundred (100) feet of right-of way on the north side of Route 3 60,
measured from the centerline of that part of Route 360 immediately
adjacent to the Property, shall be dedicated, free and unrestricted, to and
for the benefit of Chesterfield County. (T)
(CPC) 11. Traffic Si nalization. The developer shall be responsible for full cost of
traffic signalization of the intersection of Hull Street Road and Duckridge
Boulevard, if warranted, as determined by the Transportation Department.
(T)
(CPC) 12. Access. Direct vehicular access to Route 3 60 shall be limited to one (1)
entrance/exit located towards the western property line. The exact
location of this access shall be approved by the Transportation
Department. Prior to site plan approval, an access easement, acceptable to
the Transportation Department, shall be recorded to ensure shared use of
this access with the adjacent property to the west. (T)
(CPC) 13. Transportation. Prior to any issuance of certificate of occupancy, the
developer shall be responsible for the following:
a. construction of an additional lane of pavement along westbound
lanes of Route 360 for the entire property frontage;
b. construction of additional pavement along the westbound lanes of
Route 360 at the approved access to provide a separate right turn
lane; and
c. construction of additional pavement along the southbound lanes of
Duckridge Boulevard at the Route 360 intersection to provide a
4 07SN0372-SEP24-BOS-RPT
separate right turn lane. The exact length of this improvement
shall be approved by the Transportation Department.
d. dedication to Chesterfield County, free and unrestricted, any
additional right-of way (or easements) required for the
improvements identified above. (T)
(CPC) 14. Finished Floor Elevation: Finished floor elevations shall not be exceeded
196' . (EE)
(CPC) 15. Exterior Materials: Any building shall have exposed exterior walls of
brick, split face textured block, EIFS, textured "brick-like" concrete
panels, or cementitious (i.e. "Hardiplank") siding or a combination of the
foregoing. Smooth concrete block, painted or otherwise, shall be
prohibited. All roofs shall be "tilt up", not flat, and shall either be
comprised of standing seam metal or dimensional asphalt shingles. (BI &
P)
GENERAL INFORMATION
T ,n~atinn~
Northwest quadrant of the intersection of Hull Street Road and Duckridge Boulevard.
Tax ID 722-671-1285.
Existing Zoning:
C-3
Size:
7.0 acres
Existing Land Use:
Vacant
Adjacent Zoning and Land Use:
North - C-3 & R-TH; Residential (Lakepointe townhouse development) or vacant
South and East - C-3; Commercial or vacant
West - A & R-TH; Single family residential or vacant
5 07SN0372-SEP24-BOS-RPT
T TTTT ,TTTF,C
Public Water System:
There is an existing twenty-four (24) inch water line extending along the north side of Hull
Street Road within an easement across this site. In addition to the twenty-four (24) inch
water line, an eight (8) inch water line extends along the east side of Lake Harbour Drive
opposite this site. Use of the public water system is required by County Code.
Public Wastewater System:
There is an existing eight (8) inch wastewater collector line extending along the southern
boundary of the Lakepointe development approximately 400 feet north of the request site.
Use of the public wastewater system is required by Code. Therefore, it would be
appropriate for the applicant to withdraw Proffered Condition 3.
ENVIRONMENTAL
Drainage and Erosion:
The subject property drains to the northwest across open land owned by the Lakepointe
development into Swift Creek Reservoir. There are currently no on- or off site drainage
or erosion problems and none are anticipated.
Water ualit
A BMP located within open space on adjacent property to the north is owned by the
Lakepointe HomeoMers' Association and is maintained by Chesterfield County
Department of Environmental Engineering. It should be pointed out that the 100-year
overflow for this BMP discharges onto the subject property. The northwestern boundary
of the property is approximately 100 feet from the edge of the Reservoir. A Resource
Protection Area (RPA) may encroach slightly onto this property.
PUBLIC FACILITIES
Fire ~Prvi~P~
The Clover Hill Fire Station, Company Number 7, and Manchester Volunteer Rescue
Squad currently provide fire protection and emergency medical service. When the
property is developed, the number of hydrants, quantity of water needed for fire
protection, and access requirements will be evaluated during the plans review process.
Transportation:
The property is approximately seven (7) acres and is located at the northwest corner of
the Hull Street Road (Route 360) and Duckridge Boulevard intersection. The applicant is
6 07SN0372-SEP24-BOS-RPT
requesting to modify proffered conditions per the previous zoning Case 97SN0151 which
zoned the property Community Business (C-3).
In April 1997, the Board of Supervisors approved a rezoning request (Case 97SN0151)
consisting of approximately 7.8 acres from Residential Townhouse (R-TH) to
Community Business (C-3). With that zoning approval, the Board accepted proffered
conditions relative to transportation that, among other things provided a maximum
density of 6,400 square feet medical/office with access to Duckridge Boulevard so as not
to increase the potential for a traffic signal at the Duckridge Boulevard/Route 360
intersection. During the plan review of the Hancock Village site plan, located directly
across from this property, the Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) agreed to
traffic signalization at the Route 360/Duckridge Boulevard intersection. With the
acceptance of a traffic signal at this location, the maximum density accessing Duckridge
Boulevard is no longer an issue. The applicant has proffered to provide full cost of the
traffic signalization of the Hull Street Road (Route 360) and Duckridge Boulevard
intersection, if warranted, as determined by the Transportation Department. (Proffered
Condition 11)
Based on the revised proffered conditions, this request will not limit development to a
specific land use; therefore, it is difficult to anticipate traffic generation. Based on
shopping center trip rates and a maximum density of 43,000 square feet, development of
the property could generate approximately 4,400 average daily trips (ADT). Vehicles
from this development will be distributed along Route 360 which had a 2006 VDOT
traffic count of 44,941 vehicles per day. On July 22, 2008, the Transportation
Department collected PM peak hour traffic counts along Route 360 between Woodlake
Village Parkway and Winterpock Road. Based on the new PM peak traffic volumes,
Route 360, in this segment, operates at a Level of Service D and accommodates the
volume of traffic it currently carries. This part of Route 360 is a four (4) lane facility.
Between Swift Creek to Winterpock Road, Route 360 was recently widened to six (6)
and eight (8) lanes as part of a public proj ect.
The Thoroughfare Plan identifies Route 360 as a major arterial with a recommended
right-of way of 120 to 200 feet. The applicant has proffered to dedicate 100 feet ofright-
of way measured from the centerline of Route 360 in accordance with the Thoroughfare
Plan. (Proffered Condition 10)
Access to major arterials, such as Route 360, should be controlled. The applicant has
proffered to limit vehicular access to one (1) entrance/exit along Route 3 60 and provide
an access easement, acceptable to the Transportation Department, to the adjacent
property to the west. (Proffered Condition 12)
Mitigating road improvements must be provided to address the impact of this
development. The applicant has proffered to: 1) construct an additional lane of
pavement along Route 360 for the entire property frontage; 2) construct a separate right
turn lane along Route 360 at the approved access; and 3) construct a separate right turn
7 07SN0372-SEP24-BOS-RPT
lane along Duckridge Boulevard at the Route 360/Duckridge Boulevard intersection.
(Proffered Condition 13)
VDOT's "Chapter 527" regulations, dealing with development Traffic Impact Study
requirements, have been enacted. On July 1, 2008, VDOT enacted access management
regulations along principal arterial roadways. This regulation will impact access along
Route 360. Staff has been meeting with VDOT to attempt to understand the impact of
the regulations. At this time, it is uncertain what impact VDOT's regulations will have
on the development process or zonings approved by the county.
At time of site plan review, specific recommendations will be provided regarding access
and internal circulation.
T ANTI TTCF.
Comprehensive Plan:
On June 25, 2008, the Board of Supervisors adopted amendments to the Upper Swift
Creek Plan. These amendments addressed levels of service standards for schools, fire and
emergency services; road infrastructure needs; water quality; and a growth management
boundary.
This application was filed prior to the Board's adoption of the amended Plan. As such,
staff's evaluation of this request is based upon the previous Upper Swift Creek Plan in
effect prior to these amendments. This previous Plan suggests the property is appropriate
for office and residential uses of varying densities. The Plan suggests that commercial
services should be provided at major intersections with transitional uses, such as office
and higher density residential between those commercial nodes.
Area Development Trends:
Property to the north is zoned Residential (R-TH) and is occupied by the Lakepointe
townhouse development or is vacant. Properties to the south and east are zoned
Community Business (C-3) and are occupied by commercial uses or are vacant.
Properties to the west are zoned Agricultural (A) and Residential (R-TH) and are
occupied by single family residential uses or are vacant. It is anticipated that a mix of
office and residential uses will continue in the area as suggested by the Plan.
Zonin H.~X:
In 1997, the Board of Supervisors approved rezoning of the request property (Case
97SN0151) to Community Business (C-3). Conditions of approval limited uses to those
permitted in the Neighborhood Office (0-1) District and a restaurant. In addition,
conditions addressed drainage, public utilities, architecture, pedestrian and vehicular
8 07SN0372-SEP24-BOS-RPT
access, maximum building sizes, hours of operation, limitations on alcoholic beverage
service within the restaurant and right of way dedication.
Site Design:
A strip commercial development is proposed. Proffered Condition 7 would limit all
buildings to a maximum of 43,000 gross square feet.
The request property lies within an Emerging Growth District Area. The Zoning
Ordinance specifically addresses access, landscaping, architectural treatment, setbacks,
parking, signs, buffers, utilities and screening. The purpose of the Emerging Growth
District Standards is to promote high quality, well-designed proj ects. Development of the
request property will be subj ect to these Ordinance standards except that the applicant has
requested an exception to setback requirements, as discussed herein..
In addition, the request property is located within the Route 360 Corridor West area. Within
this area, the Zoning Ordinance addresses architectural styles for projects, requires buildings
to be compatible with residential architecture incorporating design features such as
articulation of doors and windows ornamentation, use of residential materials such as brick
and/or siding for walls and prohibits visible flat or shed roofs. In addition, architectural
compatibility of all buildings within the same project or within the same block or directly
across any road, as determined by the Director of Planning.
Proffered Condition 1 would require development to conform with the Textual Statement
which would permit a reduced rear setback. In addition, the Proffer would require
development to be in general conformance with the "Schematic Master Plan". It is
important to note that while this "Schematic Plan" suggests no buffers will be provided, and
that landscaping will be provided on adjacent property, it should not be construed that
acceptance of this "Schematic Master Plan" indicates the Commission maybe inclined to
grant a waiver to buffer requirements at the time of site plan review or that any other details
of this plan supercedes Zoning Ordinance requirements for development as noted above. In
addition, landscaping on adjacent property is not guaranteed.
Proffered Condition 2 requires the property to be developed in general conformance with the
elevations entitled "The Shops at Duck Ridge Place, Route 360, Chesterfield, Virginia." It
should not be construed that acceptance of these "elevations" supercedes Zoning Ordinance
architectural requirements, as discussed above.
Uses:
Except as limited by Proffered Condition 5, uses permitted by right or with restrictions in
the Community Business (C-3) District would be permitted.
9 07SN0372-SEP24-BOS-RPT
Other Development Standards:
Proffered conditions limit times uses may be open to the public, prohibit loading docks
on the rear of Building C as shown on the "Schematic Master Plan", and require a
minimum finished floor elevation. (Proffered Conditions 4, 9 and 14)
Buildin~g_ht:
Proffered Condition 6 would limit building heights to one-story and a maximum height of
thirty (30) feet.
Setbacks and Buffers:
The application includes a request for a reduced rear yard setback. A reduction in this
setback requirement increases the impact the proposed uses may have on adjacent
residential development. Proffered Condition 8 would require a masonry wall be installed
along a position of the rear property line. It should also be noted that the Ordinance
requires aseventy-five (75) foot buffer adjacent to residentially zoned property to the
north and west. It should be noted that even if the setback exception is granted, the buffer
will still be required unless modified by the Planning Commission at the time of site plan
review.
The applicants have indicated the intent to request a buffer reduction. As previously
noted, the "Schematic Plan" suggests no buffer will be provided, however it should not
be construed that acceptance of this "Schematic Plan" or approval of a reduced setback
indicates the Commission my be inclined to grant a waiver to buffer requirements.
CONCLUSIONS
The proposed zoning and land use fails to conform to the Upper Swift Creek Plan which suggests
the property is appropriate for office/residential mixed use. In addition, the requested exception
to the rear yard setback requirement further increases the impact the proposed uses may have on
adjacent residential development.
Given these considerations, denial of this request is recommended.
CASE HISTORY
Planning Commission Meeting (8/21/07):
At the request of the applicant, the Commission deferred this case to their October 16,
2007, public hearing.
10 07SN0372-SEP24-BOS-RPT
Staff (8/22/07):
The applicant was advised in writing that any new or revised information should be
submitted no later than August 27, 2007, for consideration at the Commission's October
16, 2007, public hearing.
Also, the applicant was advised that a $250.00 deferral fee must be paid prior to the
Commission's public hearing.
Staff (10/2/07)
To date, no new or revised information has been received, nor has the deferral fee been
pai .
Applicant (10/3/07):
The deferral fee was paid.
Planning Commission Meeting (10/16/07):
At the request of the applicant, the Commission deferred this case to their December 18,
2007, public hearing.
Staff (10/17/07)
The applicant was advised in writing that any significant, new or revised information
should be submitted no later than October 22, 2007, for consideration at the
Commission's December 18, 2007, public hearing.
Also, the applicant, was advised that a $250.00 deferral fee must be paid prior to the
Commission's public hearing.
Staff (11/28/07):
To date, no new or revised information has been received, nor has the deferral fee been
pai .
11 07SN0372-SEP24-BOS-RPT
Planning Commission Meeting (12/18/07):
At the request of the applicant, the Commission deferred this case to their regularly
scheduled meeting in February 2008.
Staff (12/ l 9/07)
The applicant was advised in writing that any new or revised information should be
submitted no later than December 26, 2007, for consideration at the Commission's
February 2008, public hearing.
Also, the applicant was advised that a $250.00 deferral fee must be paid prior to the
Commission's public hearing.
Applicant (1/l l/08):
The deferral fee was paid.
Staff (1/14/08):
To date no new or revised information has been received.
Planning Commission Meeting (2/19/08):
At the request of the applicant, the Commission deferred this case to their April 15, 2008
meeting.
Staff (2/20/08):
The applicant was advised in writing that any new or revised information should be
submitted no later than February 25, 2008 for consideration at the Commission's April
15, 2008 public hearing. In addition, the applicant was advised that a $250.00 deferral fee
must be paid prior to the Commission's public hearing.
Applicant (3/18/08):
The application was amended to withdraw the Conditional Use Planned Development
and Textual Statement and revised proffered conditions were submitted.
12 07SN0372-SEP24-BOS-RPT
Applicant (4/14/08):
The deferral fee was paid
Planning Commission Meeting (4/15/08):
At the request of the applicant, the Commission deferred this case to their June 17, 2008
public hearing.
Staff (4/16/08):
The applicant was advised in writing that any significant, new or revised information
should be submitted no later than April 21, 2008, for consideration at the Commission's
June 17, 2008 public hearing.
Staff (5/14/08):
To date, no new or revised information has been received.
Applicant (5/19/08):
The deferral fee was paid.
Planning Commission Meeting (6/17/08):
At the request of the applicant, the Commission deferred this case to their August 19,
2008 public hearing.
Staff (6/18/08):
The applicant was advised in writing that any significant, new or revised information
should be submitted no later that June 23, 2008, for consideration at the Commission's
August 19, 2008 public hearing.
Also, that applicant was advised that a $130.00 deferral fee must be paid prior to the
commission's public hearing.
13 07SN0372-SEP24-BOS-RPT
Applicant (6/18/08):
The application was amended.
Applicant (7/14/08):
Revised and additional Proffered Conditions, a Textual Statement and revised elevation
and Schematic Master Plan were submitted.
Planning Commission Meeting (8/19/08):
The applicant did not accept staff's recommendation, but did accept the Planning
Commission's recommendations. There was support and opposition present.
Those who spoke in opposition to the request expressed concerns relative to increased
commercial uses, lighting, traffic, run-off, and maintenance of the BMP to protect the
reservoir.
Those who spoke in support of the request stated that the developers have offered
conditions to address neighborhood concerns relative to permitted uses, building heights
and quality of the development and noted that neighborhood enhancements would be
provided with the development.
Mr. Gulley expressed concerns relative to traffic on Hull Street Road and Duckridge
Boulevard; failure of the proposal to comply with the recommendations of the
Comprehensive Plan; and that more intense uses would be permitted adjacent to the
Reservoir and neighborhood.
Mr. Hassen stated that the suggestion of the Comprehensive Plan that the property be
reserved for office/residential uses not appropriate given existing commercial
development surrounding this property. He added that the traffic impact would be the
same if the property was developed under its current zoning.
Mr. Waller agreed that the proposal was acceptable indicating that the office uses would
be permitted under the proposed zoning.
Mr. Gulley motioned for denial. The motion failed due to a lack of a second.
On motion of Mr. Bass, seconded by Mr. Hassen, the Commission recommended
approval and acceptance of the proffered conditions on pages 2 through 5.
AYES: Messrs. Bass, Brown, Hassen and Waller.
NAY: Mr. Gulley.
14 07SN0372-SEP24-BOS-RPT
The Board of Supervisors, on Wednesday, September 24, 2008, beginning at 6:30p.m., will take
under consideration this request.
15 07SN0372-SEP24-BOS-RPT
TEXTUAL STATEMENT
July 10, 2007
This is a request to rezone approximately 7.0 acres of the property (Tax ID 722-671-1285) (the
"Property") under consideration from C-3 to C-3 with CUPD, subject to the following:
1. Rear Yard Setback. Rear yard setbacks shall be aminimum ofthirty-four (34) feet.
EwN INVESTMENTS, INC.,
a Virginia corporation
By:
James W. Theobald, Attorney-in-Fact
Date: July 10, 2008
#2070040 vl 030211.00004
f ~ ~ ~
~ N ~ ~
I N (~
~ ~ U ~ I ~~
=~ U ~ ~~
N
~ ~*%~
~- ~ U
~~
~ I
~ ~ M ~ Q
b I I ~
~ ~' ~` I N
~~' , I
~ cv ~ U
.~ ~ 1 ,
~s ~~ '~ U
~ ~ ~ ~~
i ~
I ~ ~
t ° 1 ~ ~ ~`
~~ ~ ~
1 Od K ~
~~ ~ ~
1 1 ~~ ~
MI M M x ~
~1 I ~ 1 I ~ ~.~\
C~ U
~ ~ /
1 ~~. /
M --- N
I ~~~~~~ .R~° I
.... v ~ U 0
~. 1 N a
rt ~ ~ ,~ 1
1 B vo _ ~~.
~~ ~o ~
o ~ 1 ~% 1
Q ~ ~ .: r
~ 1 0 ~
~~. ~ ? :::::::::: Z
~_ ........... oC 1
t ~~ ...........
~ `W 1
~~ ~~I , ":::: 1 ~ W J
~' S • :::. N= Q
.. Z , ~%rt
~~~~ ~ ~ ~ w ~~°_
1 Q ~
~ %~~~~~ ~
~.
~. ~
U
~ `~
~~~
~ .,.:~.
..:..
~_%% ~ ` t
r ~ 0 1 ~ •, W
~C~ z , ~ • z
~ , I I ~ d ~
~ ~ a U ~ a ~.~~ ~ b ~ ~ ~
~ ~ ~ 1 ' b ~ ~
~ ?
a ~ `~ ~ ~ ~ W
l~ ~, ~
w ~ ..~~ p M
~ • ~ ~ ' ~
W ~~ 1 ZV.
% ~ o E PKW ~ 1~ W a
I ~... ~ 0
c ~.~ ~ ~. Y a ~ ~
U ~~ ~ ~ ~
U Q O
o' ~ `-' M V
°° ~ I ~ ..... N ~
~ V V ~ o
~ I~ ~ .. ~
~ I 1 c~ ~,
xk°% 0 ~ ~ ~ p N
x
`~ • 1 ~ Z ~
~, 1 M ~ ~ O
~ ~ I ~ o
Q 1 (~ ~
~~ 1 ~ o
Q N
,J I 1 ~
> > 0 /~ 1 t
1~~~
II
~~
{
f{
!Y
4
~4 r.
~'Si ,
~~
~'
.~
r.
~- .. ..
1n.
~ ~_~
i
f
f
f7
k
n L
~'
r
S i _
4
-~; _
4
~ .. -
I
v v ~ .
f ;
z
_ :~
` t°
. 1. ~l . .
_ ~
h
b~ ,
{~
~~ - ~ ~- ..
r=
k
U}
t
r
.,
k
'I
i.
I
{
f
~=
- ~~
. ~._:
i
- . v.
'~ ~ T.
~-.
r
r5
i L
^
1
~i.
Iy~1~
. i •.
FI
~.
I
~~
~~~
~I~
. 'i'
1
S1 ++
. 3
.y
II
.~
t'
T.
F 7' I
i
~ F
1
i
i*'
I. F
~'
} I
.~
y _ i~
-- - ~ d F
5_ ~~.
~ r~'^'~
v>;~~: