88SN0045
~4a~-~~;-X9$8-6P6
~et~~*-~9;-X988-6P6
Asgss~-~6;-X988-6P6
September 28, 1988 BS
REQUEST ANALYSIS
AND
RECOMMENDATION
88SN0045
Tedco Equities-Northgate
Clover Hill Magisterial District
Northwest quadrant of Hull Street Road
and Harbour Pointe Parkway
REQUEST: Amendment to Conditional Use Planned Developments (Cases 745021 and
85S002) to permit use exceptions. A shopping center and office
complex is planned.
PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION
RECOMMEND APPROVAL SUBJECT TO THE CONDITIONS ON PAGE 2.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Recommend denial for the following reasons:
A. The size, scale, and location of the proposed shopping center is
incompatible with existing area single family residential develop-
ment. Specifically, a number of subdivisions in Harbour Pointe, lie
immediately adjacent to the request site or immediately across
Harbour Pointe Parkway. Traditionally, development of less intense
uses adjacent to subdivisions has been encouraged, thereby accom-
modating an appropriate transition between intense uses, such as
community scale shopping centers, and single family residential
neighborhoods.
B. The subject site is located at the intersection of a major arterial
and the entrance into a residential neighborhood. Shopping centers
of the size and scale proposed with this request should generally be
located along major arterial roads at their intersections with other
arterial roads. Such locations provide convenience access to larger
service areas. Specifically, a community scale shopping center with
large tenants will attract customers from a community wide trade
area. Such centers should be located so as to promote public conve-
nience and easy accessibility.
C. The property is currently zoned Residential (R-7), Office Business
(0), and Light Industrial (M-1) and, through previous zonings, can
be developed for a number of commercial, office, light industrial,
and residential uses. Through the existing Conditional Use Planned
Development and schematic plan processes, sufficient controls exist
to ensure quality development, land use transition, and compatibil-
ity. Specifically, through the schematic plan review process, the
Commission may address conditions deemed necessary to mitigate the
impact that any current permitted use may have upon area residents
and ensure that development is of the quality desired along this
portion of the Hull Street Road Corridor.
(NOTE: 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.)
CONDITIONS AS RECOMMENDED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION
(CPC) 1. The following conditions notwithstanding, the plan prepared by
D.I. Design and Development Consultant, Inc., revised August
15, 1988, shall be considered the Conceptual Master Plan.
(CPC)
(CPC) 2. The development shall conform to the Corridor Overlay District
standards. (CPC)
(CPC) 3. A minimum of a 100 foot buffer shall be maintained along
Harbour Pointe Parkway and between the development and adjacent
residential zoning to the north. (CPC)
(CPC) 4. The gross square footage of B-1 and B-2 uses shall not exceed
125,000 square feet, exclusive of out-parcels. (CPC)
Staff would suggest that, should the Board wish to approve this request, the
Planning Commission's conditions should be amended and expanded to clarify
that the Textual Statement also be a part of the approval, the buffer and uses
permitted in the buffer, and the uses permitted in the M-1, R-7, and 0 Dis-
tricts. The suggested conditions are as follows:
CONDITIONS AS SUGGESTED BY STAFF TO CLARIFY THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S INTENT
(STAFF) 1. The following conditions notwithstanding, the plan prepared by
D.I. Design and Development Consultant, Inc., revised August
15, 1988, and the Textual Statement, revised June 20 and August
16, 1988, shall be considered the Conceptual Master Plan.
(STAFF) 2. The entire development shall conform to the Corridor Overlay
District standards.
(NOTE: This condition supersedes Textual Statement, C.
Proposed Conditions and Restrictions. 3.)
(STAFF) 3. The buffers, as shown on the Master Plan and described in the
Textual Statement, shall be maintained in their natural state
with the exception that underbrush may be cleared. Where
existing vegetation is not sufficient to provide year-round
2 ~88SN0045/BSSEP8/SEPT28L
screening, the buffers shall be supplemented with additional
vegetation, berms, ornamental walls, or other features to
provide year-round screening. With the exception of utilities,
pedestrian paths, and entrance/exits, which run generally
perpendicular through the buffer and ornamental features such
as fences or walls, there shall be no facilities permitted in
the buffer. In conjunction with a schematic plan review, a
conceptual plan depicting this requirement shall be submitted
to the Planning Commission for approval. Within sixty (60)
days of rough clearing and grading, a detailed plan shall be
submitted to the Planning Department for approval. The entire
buffer along Harbour Pointe Parkway shall be installed prior to
the release of the first occupancy permit. The buffer shall be
irrigated. (P)
(NOTE: This condition supersedes Textual Statement, C.
Proposed Conditions and Restrictions, 2 and the August 16,
1988, Textual Statement, Condition 8.)
(STAFF) 4. In addition to the uses permitted in the R-7, M-1, and the
Office Business (0) portions of the property by Conditional Use
Planned Developments 74S021 and 855002, Community Business
(B-2) uses shall be permitted in the R-7 and M-1 portions of
the property. The gross square footage of B-2 uses shall not
exceed 125,000, exclusive of out-parcels. The square footage
of other uses shall be determined by, and approved by, the
Transportation Department, based upon the traffic analysis.
All uses shall be designed to provide a transition between
Route 360 and the residential neighborhoods to the north. In
conjunction with the first schematic plan submission, an over-
all schematic plan for the entire property shall be submitted
for approval.
(NOTE: This conditions supersedes Textual Statement, C.
Proposed Conditions and Restrictions, 4 and 9 and the August
16, 1988, Textual Statement, Conditions 2 and 8.)
(STAFF) 5. There shall be no required parking provided on the Office
Business (0) tract to support the adjacent commercial uses.
(P)
(NOTE: The condition supersedes Textual Statement, C.
Proposed Conditions and Restrictions, 5.)
(STAFF) 6. The applicant shall notify all adjacent property owners of the
time and date of any schematic plan consideration. (P)
(NOTE: This condition is in addition to Textual Statement, C.
Proposed Conditions and Restrictions, 6.)
(STAFF) 7. All setbacks along Route 360 shall be measured from the ulti-
mate right of way line.
3 88SN0045/BSSEP8/SEPT28L
(NOTE: This condition is in addition to Textual Statement, C.
Proposed Conditions and Restrictions, 7.)
(STAFF) 8. Public water and sewer shall be used.
However, should the Board wish to allow development, as requested by the
applicant, staff would suggest that the August 16, 1988, Textual Statement,
Condition 2 be amended to address gross square footage, as opposed to net
space to avoid potential confusion in the future. Further, the following
conditions would be appropriate:
CONDITIONS SHOULD THE BOARD WISH TO APPROVE THE DEVELOPMENT AS REQUESTED BY
THE APPLICANT
(STAFF) 1. The following conditions notwithstanding, the plan prepared by
D.I. Design and Development Consultant, Inc., revised August
15, 1988, and the Textual Statement, revised June 20 and August
16, 1988, shall be considered the Conceptual Master Plan.
(STAFF) 2. The entire development shall conform to the Corridor Overlay
District standards.
(NOTE: This condition supersedes Textual Statement, C.
Proposed Conditions and Restrictions. 3.)
(STAFF) 3. The buffers, as shown on the Master Plan and described in the
Textual Statement, shall be maintained in their natural state
with the exception that underbrush may be cleared. Where
existing vegetation is not sufficient to provide year-round
screening, the buffers shall be supplemented with additional
vegetation, berms, ornamental walls, or other features to
provide year-round screening. With the exception of utilities,
pedestrian paths, and entrance/exits, which run generally
perpendicular through the buffer and ornamental features such
as fences or walls, there shall be no facilities permitted •in
the buffer. In conjunction with a schematic plan review, a
conceptual plan depicting this requirement shall be submitted
to the Planning Commission for approval. Within sixty (60)
days of rough clearing and grading, a detailed plan shall be
submitted to the Planning Department for approval. The entire
buffer along Harbour Pointe Parkway shall be installed prior to
the release of the first occupancy permit. The buffer shall be
irrigated. (P)
(NOTE: This condition supersedes Textual Statement, C.
Proposed Conditions and Restrictions, 2 and the August 16,
1988, Textual Statement, Condition 8.)
(STAFF) 4. The applicant shall notify all adjacent property owners of the
time and date of any schematic plan consideration. (P)
(NOTE: This condition is in addition to Textual Statement, C.
Proposed Conditions and Restrictions, 6.)
4 ~8SN0045/BSSEP8/SEPT28L
~rr''
(STAFF) 5. All setbacks along Route 360 shall be measured from the ulti-
mate right of way line.
(NOTE: This condition is in addition to Textual Statement, C.
Proposed Conditions and Restrictions, 7.)
(STAFF) 6. Public water and sewer shall be used.
GENERAL INFORMATION
Location: Fronts approximately 2,856 feet on the
north line of Hull Street Road and approxi-
mately 2,448 feet on the southwest line of
Harbour Pointe Parkway, and located in the
northwest quadrant of the intersection of
these roads. Tax Map 61-16 (1) Parcel 2
and Part of Parcels 1 and 5 (Sheet 20).
Existing Zoning: R-7, M-1, and 0 with Conditional Use
Planned Development
Size: 53.0 acres.
Existing Land Use: Single family residential or vacant
Adjacent Zoning & Land Use: North - R-7 and 0 with Conditional Use
Planned Development; Single
family residential or vacant
South - M-1 and 0 with Conditional Use
Planned Development and A; Single
family residential or vacant
East - 0 with Conditional Use Planned
Development; Vacant
West - M-1 with Conditional Use Planned
Development; Industrial or vacant
Utilities: Twenty-four (24) inch water line located
along Hull Street Road. Twelve (12) inch
water line located along Harbour Pointe
Parkway and extends across the site. Use
of public water recommended and intended.
Located in Upper Swift Creek sewage drain-
age area. Eighteen (18) inch sewer line
located along northern boundary of the
Harbour Pointe development, with several
eight (8) inch extensions available to
serve the site. Several dry lines are also
located along Harbour Pointe Parkway. Use
of public sewer recommended and intended.
Environmental Engineering: Site drains north-northwest into Swift
Creek. No on- or off-site drainage and/or
5 88SN0045/BSSEP8/SEPT28L
erosion problems exist with the exception
of discoloration experienced by Swift Creek
during rains. Developer must submit plans
for erosion and sediment control to En-
vironmental Engineering. Such plans must
meet all standards set forth in the
Virginia Erosion and Sediment Control
Handbook (Second Edition, 1980).
Fire Service: Clover Hill Fire Station Company 4~7. At
present, fire service capability is good.
Provide County water flows, fire hydrants,
and fire lanes for fire protection purposes
in compliance with nationally recognized
standards.
General Plan
(Powhite Route 288
Development Area Land
Use and Transportation
Plan): Light industry and office
Transportation: While the applicant has agreed to limit the
commercial square footage to 225,000 square
feet, exclusive of out-parcels, there is no
limitation on the square footage for other
permitted uses; therefore, it is difficult
to anticipate traffic generation. Based on
a revised traffic report, Brandermill
Landing, consisting of 54,100 square feet
of general office space and 278,000 square
feet of retail space, will generate approx-
imately 15,309 average daily trips. These
vehicles will be distributed along Harbour
.. Pointe Parkway, which had a 1986 traffic
count of 920 vehicles per day, and Hull
Street Road, which had a 1987 traffic count
of 20,410 vehicles per day.
The Powhite/Route 288 Development Area Land
Use and Transportation Plan identifies
Route 360 as a major arterial with a recom-
mended right of way width of 120 to 200
feet. The applicant has proffered right of
way dedication of 100 feet, from the
centerline of Route 360, in accordance with
that Plan.
The applicant has proffered that this
parcel will be developed under the Corridor
Overlay District Standards; therefore, the
schematic and site plans must adhere to
those standards relative to access and
6 ~88SN0045/BSSEP8/SEPT28L
internal circulation. A revised traffic
analysis has been submitted for the re-
quested densities. The analysis addresses
a twenty (20) year projection on local
traffic, assumes traffic volumes for vacant
parcels within Harbour Pointe not included
in this request, assumes traffic volumes
for anticipated development south of Route
360, proposes modifications to the cross-
overs along Route 360 and other relevant
factors. The Textual Statement attached
hereto outlines the road improvements which
the applicant has agreed to provide. These
road improvements should adequately miti-
gate the traffic impact of the development.
The revised conceptual Master Plan depicts
three (3) direct access driveways to Route
360 and an additional access to Route 360
via Harbour Pointe Parkway. The
westernmost access to Route 360 will align
Deer Run Drive at an existing crossover.
This entrance/exit should accommodate
through traffic movement directly into this
development. In addition, the planned
service drive, which will provide emergency
access for the residents of Harbour Landing
and access to adjacent property to the
west, should connect to this service drive
as a "T" intersection. The design shown on
the revised Master Plan is generally
acceptable.
Traffic signals are anticipated at the Deer
Run/western access/Route 360 intersection
and the Harbour Pointe/Mockingbird/Route
360 intersection. Due to the proximity of
the proposed middle access to these antic-
ipated signalized intersections, a traffic
signal should not be installed at this
middle access. Therefore, the project
should be designed and constructed to
encourage drivers desiring to turn left to
utilize the two (2) planned signalized
intersections. Modif ications to other
existing crossovers along Route 360 may be
necessary.
Access to Harbour Pointe Parkway should
also be provided so that trips to the
development from the adjoining neighborhood
will not be forced to use Route 360. The
exact location of the access will be
7 88SN0045/BSSEP8/SEPT28L
determined by the Transportation Department
at the time of schematic plan review.
At the time of schematic plan review, staff
will make specific recommendations regard-
ing access design and circulation, plus
permitted densities for this project, based
on proposed roadway improvements.
DISCUSSION
On May 8, 1974, the Board of Supervisors, upon a favorable recommendation
by the Planning Commission, approved rezoning with Conditional Use
Planned Development to permit a mixed use development on the request
property and adjacent properties to the north, east, and west (Case
745021, Brandermill). With this zoning, a village center, to include
office, retail, and residential uses, an elementary school site, and an
office/light industrial complex, were planned. Subsequently, on February
27, 1985, the Board approved a rezoning plus an amendment to Case 74S021
on portions of the request property and property to the east (Case
855002). With this zoning, the elementary school site was eliminated and
an office/industrial complex with conference center and supporting com-
mercial uses was approved. The Residential (R-7) property, which was to
be occupied by a portion of the elementary school was zoned to allow
residential uses. The current request is for amendment to Cases 74S021
and 85S002 to permit a shopping center on a portion of the request
property.
The current zoning and Conditional Use Planned Development (Case 745021
and 85S002) permit the following land uses on the request property:
A. On the Light Industrial (M-1) portion of the property:
1. All Light Industrial (M-1) uses.
2. Recreational establishments (indoor and outdoor).
3. Contractors offices and display rooms.
4. Boat sales, including outdoor storage and display
provided that not more than five (5) boats shall be
visible from a public street.
5. Carpenter and cabinet shops.
6. Electrical, plumbing and heating shops, sales and
service.
7. Radio, television and other home entertainment, sales
and service.
8. Appliance store.
9. Savings and loan institutions.
10. Furniture store.
11. Philanthropic and charitable institutions.
12. Schools, colleges, libraries, and museums.
13. Churches.
14. Veterinary hospitals, boarding kennels, or clinics.
15. Motor vehicle sales, service and repair, accessory
stores.
8 )88SN0045/BSSEP8/SEPT28L
~/
16. Maintenance buildings associated with the operation
and maintenance of Brandermill, including storage and
servicing of trucks and earth moving equipment,
workshops, greenhouses, and material storage, provid-
ed that all exterior areas shall be visually screened
and there shall be no offensive operation of said
facility as covered in Section 21-5 (2) of the
Chesterfield County Zoning Ordinance.
17. Hospitals, clinics, sanitariums, medical and dental
laboratories.
18. Building materials, storage and sale.
19. Contractors' shops and storage yards (if such storage
yards are at least one hundred (100) feet from any
public street and not visible from any public
street).
20. Electrical machinery equipment and supplies man-
ufacturing.
21. Furniture and fixtures manufacturing.
22. Ice manufacturing.
23. Other fabricated metal products manufacturing not
otherwise specifically listed in the Chesterfield
County Zoning Ordinance.
24. Mass transportation.
25. Transportation equipment manufacturing.
26. Textile mill products - manufacturing.
27. Tobacco manufacturing.
28. Truck terminals.
29. Wholesale greenhouses.
30. Restaurants.
31. Telephone booths.
32. Paint and wallpaper sales.
33. Telephone exchanges.
34. Automobile service stations.
35. Tire recapping and vulcanizing.
36. Commercial storage yards and/or buildings for boats,
buses, large trucks, campers, travel and utility
trailers.
37. Hotels, motels, or motor courts.
38. Convention center or exposition hall.
B. On the Office Business (0) portion of the property:
1. All Office Business (0) uses.
2. Public and private profit-making clubs and recre-
ational facilities (such as health club, tennis,
etc.).
3. Child or day care centers.
4. Medical and dental laboratories.
5. Indoor and outdoor recreation facilities (such as
pool at hotel, jogging trails, picnic areas, boat
docks, tennis courts, health clubs, etc.).
9 88SN0045/BSSEP8/SEPT28L
6. Private and public schools, colleges and museums,
including commercial, trade, music, dance, business,
vocational, and training school.)
7. Art school, gallery or museum.
8. Artistic material and office supply.
9. Bank.
10. Barber shop.
11. Beauty shop.
12. Book or stationary store.
13. Brokerage.
14. Catering establishment.
15. Cleaning, pressing and laundry pick-up.
16. Curio or gift shop (including candy, etc.)
17. Delicatessen.
18. Florist shop (cart/stand).
19. Libraries.
20. Newspaper and magazine sales.
21. Optometrists sales and services.
22. Post office (pick up station).
23. Radio and television broadcasting studios and offices
exclusive of towers.
24. Restaurants, including quick service and carry out,
but not drive-in; both as part of office buildings
and freestanding.
25. Savings and loans.
26. Telephone booth.
27. Printing shops (as an office service offering blue-
printing, xerox, etc., type printing).
28. Cocktail lounges, dining halls.
29. Hotels, motels, inns.
30. Convention or conference center including, but not
limited to, meeting rooms, auditorium, entertainment,
dining, overnight accommodations and other related
facilities.
31. Fraternal, philanthropic or other charitable uses.
C. On the Residential (R-7) portion of the property, residential
land uses are permitted.
Conditions were imposed to address concerns relative to the screening of
loading areas and other outdoor activities, buffering of uses from area
residents, and provision of open space.
As previously noted, the current request is for an amendment to permit a
community scale shopping center/office complex on the request property.
The applicant intends to develop approximately 225,000 square feet of net
retail space, with several large tenants, plus several office buildings
and retail pad sites along the Hull Street Road frontage (see the at-
tached Textual Statement). The gross square footage of retail space is
expected to be somewhat larger than the proffered net retail space. The
size, scale, and location of the proposed shopping center. is incompatible
with existing single family residential development in the area. Specif-
ically, a large number of residences, in several subdivisions of Harbour
10 ~8SN0045/BSSEP8/SEPT28L
Pointe, lay immediately adjacent to the request site or adjacent to the
site across Harbour Pointe Parkway. Traditionally, the Commission and
Board have encouraged transitional types of development adjacent to
subdivisions.. A smaller, neighborhood-oriented shopping center incor-
porated into a mixed use development with office/warehouse, office,
and/or high density residential uses between the shopping center and area
subdivisions would represent an appropriate mix of uses and provide
transition between the Hull Street Road Corridor and existing residential
development in Harbour Pointe. In addition, a neighborhood scale shop-
ping center would serve the immediate neighborhoods without attracting
traffic into the area from the larger community. A community scale
shopping center would serve community-wide trade areas rather than the
immediate neighborhood.
Shopping centers of the size and scale proposed with this request should
generally be located along major arterial roads at their intersections
with other arterial roads. Specifically, a community scale shopping
center of the size proposed, having large tenants, will attract customers
to this portion of the Hull Street Road Corridor from a wide trade area.
Therefore, community scale centers should be located so as to promote
public convenience and accessibility.
It should be noted that the nearest existing arterial intersections are
located at North Spring Run Road, approximately 2,500 feet to the west of
the request property, and Old Hundred Road, approximately 4,500 feet east
of the request property. Community scale shopping centers have either
been developed or are planned for construction at these intersections
with Hull Street Road. In addition, zoning for a regional scale shopping
center has recently been approved for property in the vicinity of the
Hull Street Road/Route 288 interchange (Case 875134, E.M. Engler
Associates).
The request property lies at the intersection of Hull Street Road and
Harbour Pointe Parkway, and serves as the only entrance into the subdi-
visions of Harbour Pointe. Recently the Commission has recognized that
entrances into subdivisions should be reserved for less intense uses
which provide neighborhood services and provide a more attractive en-
trance into the neighborhood. Specifically, the Commission has recently
recommended approval of a neighborhood scale commercial tract at the
intersection of Hull Street Road and Deer Run Road, which is a major
entrance into Deer Run Subdivision (Case 88SN0066). Previous conditions
of zoning permitted light industrial and heavy commercial uses on the
property. However, the Commission has recommended deletion of these
intense uses and approval of a mix of commercial uses that have tradi-
tionally been recognized as uses serving primarily adjacent neighbor-
hoods. A similar mix of uses would be appropriate for the intersection
of Hull Street Road and Harbour Pointe Parkway, at the entrance to the
subdivisions of Harbour Pointe.
As previously noted, the property is currently zoned Residential (R-7),
Office Business (0), and Light Industrial (M-1) and, through previous
zonings, can be developed for a number of commercial, office, light
industrial, and residential uses. However, through the Conditional Use
11 88SN0045/BSSEPB/SEPT28L
Planned Development process currently applicable to any development on
the request property, sufficient controls exist to ensure quality devel-
opment, land use transition, and compatibility. Specifically, through
the schematic plan review process, the Commission may impose conditions
deemed necessary to mitigate the impact that any permitted use may have
upon area residents and ensure that development is of the quality desired
along this portion of the Hull Street Road Corridor. Specifically, the
Commission may impose conditions designed to ensure adequate setbacks;
prevent sign proliferation; control access; require screening of mechan-
ical equipment and loading areas; reduce the nuisances normally associ-
ated with site lighting and noise; provide for pedestrian access; and
ensure that site and parking area landscaping and architectural scale,
quality, and massing are compatible with area residential development and
of the quality desired along this portion of Hull Street Road. In addi-
tion, the Commission may impose buffers that it deems necessary, based
upon the intensity of any use proposed adjacent to Harbour Pointe Park-
way, to protect area residents from potential adverse impacts due to
noise, lighting, and traffic.
It should be noted that, given the current zoning and Conditional Use
Planned Developments that apply to the request property (Cases 74S021 and
85S002), a mixed use development, to include office and office/warehouse
uses, could be developed on the property. In addition, through the
current rezoning, the Commission and Board can approve additional uses,
to include a small, neighborhood scale shopping center and high density
residential uses, and impose conditions that further ensure that any
development on the request property is of the type, scale, and quality
desired at the entrance to the subdivisions of Harbour Pointe. Given
these considerations, the property owner should be encouraged to market
the property for the mix of uses discussed herein and seek to zone the
property accordingly.
CASE HISTORY
Planning Commission Meeting (5/17/88):
At the request of the applicant, the Commission deferred this case for
sixty (60) days to allow the applicant an opportunity to meet with area
residents.
Planning Commission Meeting (7/19/88):
At the request of the applicant, the Commission deferred this case for
thirty (30) days.
Staff (7/20/88):
The applicant was advised in writing that any new information must be
submitted no later than July 25, 1988, for consideration at the Com-
mission's August public hearing.
~ 12 ~ j88SN0045/BSSEP8/SEPT28L
~~ ~ ~/ f-~~' ~ ~~
~~ ~ ~ I
- ~_ ~ ~. -I
-~ ~ l
~ ~, ~~.,,
~. ~••~
~ ~ ~ 1
. ,~ Y '~1
.~- / ~
.J
a
1 t ~, ~_
~!
.~ '=
~, O Y~,
~.i
f ~
~~_,.~
_ 3'
~ , , r . _ .. ~~~, ,
~~.. ,. ,
~~y
i ~ ~~~ ~',
I
.. ~''
~r_^..~ . _. _~
~~ ~ ~ ~ ~
" _ Il
1 ~__~
` ~,^.
~ ~cCL 4s~
,/ ~ / yFu
~~~wL
J I
v.~.
~ . ~~ ,
~:
i e Y
O
.~
I ~
. ~
.s
I,
( ,
C
c~
z
~~°-~
~( r
~~.x2r.:F ~ '~ ..-
y ~~ ! a/ i 1 ~~' n
a ~, ~ ; -
~ I1y
r - _ . ~ G~ + ~~eYi
~i _z t~ ~ I .?I
o~ ~A' ~:
O1 i ; ' i ~ ; ~~ i ~Y
~`~)
V ~ ~ t~`~~
o, ~
a.~a~ ~ ~ I ;:; ;
-y ~ ~ ~:-~
~ ,.
~ ~ i' " ' ...~ 2
~~ ~ ~,
~ ~ ,~, r
/ ' ~
^_s ~ • r o
~ • Ij ' -
't
Y ,
p6r ~ J ~~ Y
G O ~ ~`
.~f~4
I.l
t
~~;
i ~,
~~~
.,.
~~~
~~
1~
1~
i
a
H
a
W
z
0
U
88 SN oo45-Z
Staff (7/28/88):
To date, no additional information has been submitted.
Applicant (8/16/88):
The attached amendment to the Textual Statement dated August 16, 1988,
was submitted. Further, a revised Master Plan, dated August 15, 1988,
was submitted.
Planning Commission Meeting (8/16/88):
The applicant did not accept staff's recommendation. There was oppo-
sition present.
On motion of Mr. Warren, seconded by Mr. Kelly, the Commission recommend-
ed approval of 125,000 gross square feet of B-1 and B-2 uses, subject to
the conditions on page 2.
AYES: Unanimous.
Applicant (9/21/88):
A thirty (30) day deferral has been requested to the Board's October
meeting.
The Board of Supervisors on Wednesday, September 28, 1988, beginning at 2:00
p.m., will take under consideration this request.
13 88SN0045/BSSEP8/SEPT28L
ALAN O. FLEISCHER
JAY M. WEIN DE RG
RODl AT A. COX, JR.
EVERETTE C. ALLEN, JR
MILES GARY, JR.
L. CHARLES LONG. JR.
ALLAN S. DUFFCNSTEIN
RODERT S. PARKER, JR.
CHARLES F. WITTHOEFFT
DARRY A. HACKNEY
MAH LON G. FUNK, JR.
GLENN A. MOORE
KEITH D. DOYETTE
JAMES W THEODALD
DANIEL M. SIEGEL
PlTER L. TRIDLE
ALEXANDER C. GRAHAM. JR.
JOHN R. WALK
JOHN W. VAUGHAN, JR.
WILLIAM R. DALDWIN. III
OF COUNSEL
EDWARD S. HIRSCHLEA
STlVEN P. SETTLAGE
RODlRT R. KAPLAN
HIRSCHLER, FLEISCHER, WEINBERG, COX £3 ALLEN
A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION
MAIN STREET CENTRE MICHAEL H TERRY
629 EAST AMAIN STREET
P
O
BOX 1Q MICHAEL P. ,REZONE
.
,
. RoDERr r. DILLINCSLEY
RICHMOND
VIRGINIA 23202 ANITA G. VAUGHN
, JOHN C IVINS, JR.
TELEPHONE (804) 771-9500 TELECOPIER (804) 644.0957 JOSEPH H GARRINCTON
DAVID F DE LKOWITZ
JOHN W. STEELE
STE Py EN L. JOHNSON
HANOVER OFFICE 0.05E LEEN P. RICK
C. THOMAS GREEN III
5960 CHAMBERLAYNE ROAD LOUIS J. AOGE RS
P
O
BOX 578 PAMELA B. BEC KNER
.
. W MARK HILLSMAN
MECHANICSVILLE, VIRGINIA 23111 RAN DAL M. REAVES
(804) 77)-9570 PAUL H. DAVENPORT
SARAH D. PUCH
LAWRENCE E. LUCK
DANA D. SYKES
WRITER'S DIRECT DIAL NUMBER R WEDD MOORE
PAULA SIMPSON
CHARLES H. AOTHENBERG
GUY C. CROWf,EY
771-9513
August 16, 1988
Mr. William D. Poole
Planning Department
Chesterfield County
Administration Building, 2nd Floor
Chesterfield, Virginia 23832
Re: Tedco Equities
Case No. 88SN0045
Dear Bill:
Please find enclosed an A.-nendment to the Textual Statement
previously filed with the above-referenced case. This Amendment
reflects various transportation matters approved by the Transpor-
tation Department as well as a limitation on retail density. The
Revised Master Plan is also enclosed which has been amended to
reflect a reconfiguration of the westernmost access point at the
request of the Transportation Department.
Ver.~z-,truly yours,
l .
il~r
James W. Theobald
JWT/kcm
Enclosur
cc: Mr.
Mr .
Mr .
Mr .
es
Ted C. Ginsberg
Gary W. Fenchuk
Arthur S. Warren
Michael J. Kelly
~• ;
:~, 1~
I :.
~, , :~ ,1~~s '>
1\J V
~Z'
i ~~
- 1.- The Revised Master Plan shall be considered the-Master__Road
Plan. Access to U. S. Route 360 shall be as generally depicted on
the Revised Master Plan. Approval of the plan by the County does not
imply that the County gives final approval of any other particular
road alignment or section.
2. The maximum density of this development for net retail
sales shall be 225,000 square feet exclusive of outparcel development
or equivalent densities as approved by the Transportation Department.
3. Condition No. 8(a) shall be amended to read as follows:
"Dual left turn lanes shall be constructed along eastbound U. S.
Route 360; 1) at the entrance road near the western boundary of the
Property; and 2) if warranted, at the main access near the middle of
the Property."
4. Condition No. 8(b) shall be amended to read as follows:
"If warranted, one-half the cost of signalization at the entrance
road near the western edge of the Property and the intersection of
U. S. Route 360 and Harbour Pointe Parkway, and the full cost of
signalization at the median break on U. S. Route 360 near the middle
of the Property as shown on the Revised Master Plan."
5. Condition No. 8(c) shall be added as follows: "Additional
pavement shall be constructed along U. S. Route 360 for the entire
frontage of the Property to provide an additional through-lane (i.e.,
third through-lane) and a separate right turn lane at each access lo-
cation."
6. Condition No.~B(d) shall be added as follows: "Additional
pavement, curb and gutter shall be constructed along Harbour Pointe
Parkway to provide left and right turn lanes at the access location
and dual left turn lanes at its intersection with U. S. Route 360
when warranted."
7. In conjunction with the development of the shopping center,
the road improvements to Harbour Pointe Parkway as and when required
by Condition No. 8(d) and the additional pavement along U. S. Route
360 from the westernmost access to the shopping center to the east-
ernmost access to the shopping center to include an adequate right
turn lane shall be constructed. The remainder of the U. S. Route 360
road improvements may be provided in conjunction with the development
of the remaining Property by the owners of parcels adjacent thereto.
8. The first sentence of Condition No. 2 shall ~e amended to
read as follows: "A minimum buffer strip of one hundred (100) feet
shall be provided along a portion of Harbour Pointe Parkway as shown
on the Revised Master Plan."
--
:~ ..
,~ --
_~ ~ _-..
~5 -
_: ~:'
-~
. ~,
l __ ~.._
HIRSCHLER, FLEISCHER, WEINBERG, COX F3 ALLEN
A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION
ALAN G. FLEISCHER MAIN STREET CENTRE
JAY M WFIN BERG
ROBERT A COX. JR 629 EAST MAIN STREET, P.O BOX 1CL
EVEAETTE G. ALLEN. JR.
MILES GARY, JA. RICHMOND
VIRGINIA 23202
L. CHARLES LONG, JR ,
ALLAN S BUF FE NSrEIN TELEPHONE ($04) 771-9500 TELECOPIER ($04) 644-0957
ROBERT S PARKER, JR.
CHARLES F. WITTHOEFFF
BARRY A. HACKNEY
MAH LON G FUNK, JA. HANOVER OFFICE
GLENN R. MOORE
KEITH D. BOYETTE 5960 CHAMBERLAYNE ROAD
JAMES W.THEOBALD P.O. BOX 578
DANIEL M sIEGEL
PETER L. iAiBLE MECHANICSVILLE, VIRGINIA 23111
ALEXANDER C. GRAHAM, JR ($O4) 771-9570
JOHN R WALK
JOHN W. VAU GHAN, JR
WILLIAM R. BALDWIN, III
OF COUNSEL WRITER'S DIRECT DIAL NUMBER
EDWARD S. HIRSGH LER
STEVEN P SETiLAGE 7 7 1- 9 5 1 3
ROBERT R KAPLAN
March 14, 1988
as revised
June 20, 1988
MICHAEL H. TEARY
MICHAEL P FALI.ONE
ROBERT T. BI LLIN GSLEY
ANITA G VAUGHN
JOHN C IVINS, JR
JOSEPH H. CARRIN GTON
DAVID F. BE LKOWIT7
JOHN W. SiEELE
STEPHEN L. JOHNSON
AOSE LF EN P. RICK
C. THOMAS GREEN III
LOUIS J. ROGERS
PAMELA B. BE CKN EA
W. MARK HILLSMAN
RAN DAL M. REAVES
PAUL H. DAVENPORT
SARAH D. PUGH
LAWRENCE E LUCK
DANA B SYKES
A. WEBB MOOAf
PAUL A. SIM PSON
CHARLESH ROTHENBERG
w
BY HAND S J ~ ~ c}~~p 1d
• ~ ~:~
N2
Mr. Thomas E. Jacobson, AICP, P.E. ~ ~, ~G°~wy; ~~~ ~
Director of Planning cFq•9?Z~ ~T ; -
Chesterf field County ~~ ~ -
County Administration Building
Chesterfield, Virginia 23832 "' ___ ~ '
Re: Brandermill Landing Shopping Center
Amendment to Conditional Use Planned Development
Dear Mr. Jacobson:
Tedco Equities - Northgate (the "Applicant") hereby submits an
application for an amendment to Conditional Use Planned Development
criteria with regard to Case Nos. 85S002 and 745021 as they affect
the Property described herein to permit the development of a total-
ly planned and integrated first-class community shopping center to
be known as "Brandermill Landing" (the "Application"). This letter
is being provided to you pursuant to Items 4 and 5 of the Land Use
Amendment Application filed herewith and in compliance with the re-
quirements of Section 21-34(f) and (h) of the Chesterfield County
Zoning Ordinance (the "Zoning Ordinance").
A. Introduction and Description of Proposed Development
The Applicant is requesting that approximately 53 acres of
land (the "Property") located along the northern line of U. S.
Route 360 west of Harbour Pointe Parkway, to be known as
"Brandermill Landing", be subject to the existing Conditional Use
v
Mr. Thomas E. Jacobson, AICP, P.E.
Page 2
March 14. 1988 (revised June 20, 1988)
Planned Development as amended and restated in accordance with the
terms and provisions of the attached Application. The Property is
currently zoned Light Industrial, Office and R-7, all with Condi-
tional Use Planned Development. The Applicant seeks such amendment
to permit the development of a high-quality shopping center facili-
ty with such additional uses as may be incidental thereto,
including first-class office space on certain out-parcels.
The current CUPD affecting the vast majority of the Property
permits the development of a variety of manufacturing, industrial
and commercial uses without the necessity of adherence to the com-
prehensive standards for landscaping, aesthetics and other criteria
as now required by the Corridor Overlay District Standards. The
possibility exists that the Property could be developed by numerous
users in an unrelated, piecemeal fashion, resulting in numerous ac-
cess points from U. S. Route 360 and Harbour Pointe Parkway. The
Applicant proposes a superior use of the Property through an inte-
grated and interdependent large tract development that is explic-
itly controlled by the conditions stated herein. The Applicant has
voluntarily agreed to adhere by the Corridor Overlay District Stan-
dards and has proffered certain other conditions regarding
screening and buffering so as to minimize the impact of the devel-
opment on the Harbour Pointe residential community. The Applicant
has also limited the types of uses that may be developed on the
Property. To insure that the development will be complementary to
both the Harbour Pointe community and Chesterfield County, the Ap-
plicant has engaged The D.I. Design Group of Baltimore, Maryland,
an internationally-known and award-winning firm to produce a plan
for Brandermill Landing which successfully advances the development
goals and objectives delineated in a comprehensive plan which is
both consistent and compatible with the land use and building qual-
ity of the surrounding area.
B. Development Team
The following professional firms have
team, by the Applicant to assist in the de
Brandermill Landing. Most members of this
sively together on similar projects in the
uals listed below are available to discuss
posed development and the Application.
been assembled, as a
velopment effort for
team have worked exten-
Richmond area. Individ-
the details of the pro-
DEVELOPER; TEDCO EQUITIES
Ted C. Ginsberg 215/968-0400
Ted A. Drauschak 215/968-0400
Mr. Thomas E. Jacobson, AICP, P.E.
Page 3
March 14, 1988 (revised June 20, 1988)
DESIGN:
THE D.I. DESIGN GROUP
Roy H. Higgs 301/962-0505
CIVIL ENGINEER:
TRAFFIC CONSULTANTS:
GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANTS:
ZONING ATTORNEY:
J. K. TIMMONS & ASSOCIATES, INC.
James F. Hayes 794-3500
Harley Joseph 794-3500
WILBUR SMITH ASSOCIATES
Thomas E. Flynn 643-6651
Diane M. Linderman 643-6651
SCHNABEL ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES
Richard H. Wargo 649-7035
HIRSCHLER, FLEISCHER, WEINBERG,
COX & ALLEN
James W. Theobald 771-9513
These professionals bring substantial experience and expertise
to ensure the highest quality of development for Brandermill Land-
ing.
Tedco Equities, a general partnership ("Tedco") was formed in
1977 by its principals, Ted C. Ginsberg, David H. Gill and Ed
Rulnik. Since its inception, Tedco has participated as owner,
joint venturer and managing entity for the development of numerous
and varied real estate properties. Tedco is nationally experi-
enced, having engaged in real estate development throughout the
Midwest, Eastern Seaboard and New England areas. Tedco's principal
commitment is to selective, high-quality projects in metropolitan
areas. Current work in progress exceeds $100,000,000.00 including
the development of hotels, office buildings, mixed-use urban proj-
ects, shopping centers and residential developments.
C. Proposed Conditions and Restrictions
The Applicant proposes that the conditions enumerated below be
imposed as the amended and restated CUPD to ensure the high-quality
and orderly development of Brandermill Landing:
1. Brandermill Landing will be designed and developed
as an integrated whole in substantial conformity with the pro-
posed land use plan entitled "Conceptual Site Plan" submitted
herewith (the "Master Plan"), prepared by The D.I. Design
Group.
{
Mr. Thomas E. Jacobson, AICP, P.E.
Page 4
March 14, 1988 (revised June 20, 1988)
2. Buffer strips shall be provided along Harbour Pointe
Parkway as shown on the Master Plan. If sufficient vegetation
exists to provide adequate screening, buffer strips may be
left in their natural state; however, if sufficient vegetation
does not exist within the buffer strip to provide adequate
screening, or if a buffer strip is not left in its natural
state due to improvements, said buffer strip shall be planted
and/or bermed in accordance with a landscape plan approved by
the Planning Department.
The following improvements may be allowed within the
buffer strips subject to the approval of such landscape plan:
(a) Pedestrian paths.
(b) Regulatory and information signs.
(c) Screening fences or walls.
(d) Utilities and storm drainage facilities.
(e) Roads and Drives which are intended for emer-
gency ingress and egress, and from the Property.
These buffer strips shall be noted on any final site
plans, and on any final check and recordation plats. At the
request of the Applicant, the Planning Commission may modify
these buffer strips and provide for additional uses to be per-
mitted therein at the time of preliminary site plan review.
3. The Property shall be developed in accordance with
the Corridor Overlay District requirements as set forth in
Division 11.2 of the Chesterfield County Zoning Ordinance, ex-
cept as set forth in Condition 7 hereof.
4. The following uses shall be permitted on the R-7 and
M-1 portions of the Property:
(a) All uses permitted as a matter of right in the
B-2 Community Business District.
(b) Drive-In establishments.
(c) Cocktail lounges and dining establishments.
(d) Outside storage.
f
Mr. Thomas E. Jacobson, AICP, P.E.
Page 5
March 14, 1988 (revised June 20, 1988)
5. The following uses shall be permitted on the
0 portion of the Property:
(a) All uses permitted as a matter of right in the
0 Office Business District.
(b) Banks, including drive-up facilities.
(c) Parking and access for uses permitted on the
remainder of the Property.
6. The Applicant agrees to notify the Manager of the
Brandermill Community Association of its filing of any request
for schematic plan approval by the County.
7. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, one hun-
dred (100) feet of right-of-way measured from the centerline
of U.S. Route 360 shall be dedicated by deed of dedication to
Chesterfield County free and unrestricted; however, all set-
backs shall be measured from the boundary line of the Property
as it exists prior to such dedication.
8. To provide for an adequate roadway system as a re-
sult of the development of Brandermill Landing, the Applicant
shall be responsible for the following improvements:
(a) Dual left-turn lanes from east-bound U.S. Route
360 at the median breaks located near the western bound-
ary of the Property and near the middle of the Property,
such median breaks being substantially as shown on the
Master Plan.
(b) If warranted, one-half the cost of
signalization at (i) the entrance road near the western
edge of the Property, (ii) the median break on U.S. Route
360 near the middle of the Property as shown on the Mas-
ter Plan, and (iii) the intersection of U.S. Route 360
and Harbour Pointe Parkway.
9. No "fast food" restaurants shall be permitted on any
outparcels east of the main entrance road near the middle of
the Property. For purposes hereof, a "fast food" restaurant
is hereby defined as an establishment whose principal business
is the sale of foods and beverages to consumers in a
ready-to-consume state and which foods and beverages are usu-
ally served in paper, plastic or other disposable containers
or wrappers for immediate consumption either within the res-
taurant building or off the premises.
t
~r ~'
Mr. Thomas E. Jacobson, AICP, P.E.
Page 6
March 14, 1988 (revised June 20, 1988)
D. Transportation Considerations
The Applicant recognizes that a development such as
Brandermill Landing cannot be professionally implemented or commer-
cially successful unless traffic is efficiently and effectively
handled. For those reasons, the Applicant has retained the ser-
vices of Wilbur Smith Associates, internationally-recognized traf-
fic consultants, to prepare a comprehensive traffic study which is
included in the Application. The results of the traffic impact
study indicate, and the implementation of its recommendations in-
sure, that the required transportation system will be in place to
effectively handle the traffic generated by Brandermill Landing.
At the request of the residents of Harbour Pointe Subdivision,
the Master Plan has deleted the extension of Harbour Pointe Park-
way. This has resulted in a significant increase in buffering and
allowed the main shopping center to shift further away from the
residents of Harbour Hill.
E. Conditional Use Planned Development Standards
The Applicant will comply with all of the standards required
in the Zoning Ordinance for the Planning Commission to recommend
approval of the Application and for the Board of Supervisors to ap-
prove the same. Those standards are summarized as follows:
1. The establishment, maintenance and operation of the
proposed conditional use will not be detrimental to or endan-
ger the public health, safety, morals, comfort or general wel-
fare, inasmuch as the Property will be developed in substan-
tial conformance with the Master Plan, the Corridor Overlay
District Standards and the other restrictions applicable to
the Conditional Use. Furthermore, hours of operation and de-
livery schedules will be controlled to minimize the impact on
the adjacent residential neighborhood.
2. The proposed conditional uses will not be injurious
to the use and enjoyment of other property in the immediate
vicinity for the purposes already permitted, nor substantially
diminish or impair property values within the surrounding
neighborhoods and in fact will provide for a more controlled
and much higher quality of development than is permitted under
the present CUPD affecting the Property. Manufacturing and
industrial uses would be precluded as a result.
3. The establishment of the proposed conditional uses
will not impede the normal and orderly development and
Mr. Thomas E. Jacobson, AICP, P.E.
Page 7
March 14, 1988 (revised June 20, 1988)
improvement of the surrounding property for uses permitted by
the Zoning Ordinance because of the care and quality inherent
in the proposed development. It would further enhance the or-
derly development by guaranteeing a one-time disruption far
construction, eliminating the possibility of multiple access
points on Harbour Pointe Parkway, and permit the master grlan-
ning for storm water drainage for the entire site in a coordi-
nated fashion.
4. The exterior architectural appeal of Brandermill
Landing will cause an increase in the property values within
the area over that which would result from development as per-
mitted by the existing CUPD.
5. Adequate utilities, access roads, drainage and other
necessary facilities have been or will be provided for the en-
tire site in an integrated manner.
6. Adequate measures have been or will be taken to pro-
vide ingress and egress designed so as to minimize traffic
congestion within the public road system and to protect the
adjacent residential neighborhood.
F. Benefits to the County
The Applicant respectfully requests that the amendment to the
Conditional Use as requested by the Application be granted in ac-
cordance with the provisions hereof, for the following reasons:
1. Brandermill Landing will provide high-quality
shopping opportunities to service the expansion of nearby res-
idential and office development.
2. Brandermill Landing will be a well-planned, inte-
grated and aesthetically pleasing development that will result
in the highest and best use of the Property.
3. It will provide for large tract development of an
approximately 53 acre parcel of land located on a major arte-
rial highway in a coordinated and well planned manner and
eliminate the potential for piecemeal development.
4. The Applicant and the Development Team have exten-
sive experience in accomplishing high-quality development
projects in a manner that is consistent with the high stan-
dards set by Brandermill and by Chesterfield County.
Mr. Thomas E. Jacobson, AICP, P.E.
Page 8
March 14, 1988 (revised June 20, 1988)
5. Brandermill Landing will provide a major increase in
the real estate tax base of Chesterfield County and will also
cause a very substantial and beneficial "ripple" tax effect
for the County by increasing employment, business, sales and
other taxes.
6. Brandermill Landing will provide an economic balance
with the concentration of residential and office development
in the area.
7. Brandermill Landing will not adversely impact the
County School System or other public services.
G. Conclusion
For the reasons set forth above, the Applicant respectfully
requests that the Planning Staff and Planning Commission recommend
approval, and that the County Board of Supervisors so approve the
request as set forth in the Application.
Respectfully submitted,
HIRSCHLER, FLEISCHER, WEINBERG,
COX & ALLEN
a Professional Corporation
~1 ------
By: ~ ! , _... ;~, ~ ~ ~ ~~:..
James W. Theobald
Attorney and Agent
For Tedco Equities-Northgate
JWT/kcm
~~
~~
•!~ •.•
,•~
~ , Imo,';l ,•••.•.'.
'.'~f• ;~~••• .'.
••~Y.•. .•.~
m ~ ~ ~ Z~~ 'IHARBOUR HILL ~;•:~.'.•.
C ) ~. .
/~ . ; HARBCvRW00D' , ~ NA •~~•~~..~•• ~ ' . Q..:.~• ._ •:~:~;v ,'.`~
° ~ I I CT. ~{~~IllilllH' • ~~~ R i 1 ••'. ,'~~ ., .
s•WATCH HILL .,~.:`•`::••;:;.:.;•:::::.,:..;.•; ;'•f:':;.•;;r•;•;;';:'•;:: •'• ~~ ~:q
.~.
. ~:::::.: ~'• ~'r.
. •
~~ .r •` t rr; ••y~~F~ ;/.'. NSF
.~. .:~{
.~
~ i _
'•~:
-~S/~.
•
'ti •••• •,••', • •••,••,• •• •••••• ••••• ••••'••• • •••• • • •.
S
~.
•~. •1 ~. •
•\\
'~
.;~, .
,~•
\ .~• ~/
P
' y' Q'
••~•.,. ;. a ~~;
~ ~4 ~ ~ '
• ~ . !L. •,.,•, sue' ~ '~
.~... ~. .
~`~~,` •.'~•'.:•.. •~*;~ .. .. ~ '. DEER .RUN •.
•. ' W i P
~+ N
T / Op
~. ~ a
• . ' `~~ . ' • l ~ pPL~ .
i``• •• ,: .: ~•yr V ~ ~ • GULL ~. \ \1~
:.~,.:.•.::•:.~~•:•:•.•:•:••.•.•:~'.~.:.•:•.':•:•::•:_:.~~..:.:.~;~;.:.,••:~.:•.:•.:~.~•~.:~.:~•- /2 ~,~• ~ 88SN0045(AMENDEC
. .:.:.~,::..~..•... ~ ..... .. .. ~ ~ ;AMEND C.U. ~•.
.•. . ~. ~
• ~- ~. • .
~-
. ~ , .~~ m-..w
'._s~. ~.•.~ r i' r
:~
i
~~
.~~~,,
~~~
. ~.~~
:•.~
-•--SEWER LINES
885N 045
1~ -
,~~w
c ~~w.
/ ~~~~L'
,/ ~ / 4Fu
l ,
~ ~~~w4
~.~,
~ ~ ,
,:
i~
o
i ~ ~.
~ ~ < <-; .
~\ ~ \` ~r
~ ~ ~) ~~ ~ 3
G~ I
\. ~ ~, ~, l y ; $
\.\\ \.~ `~. 4t h
~~ -~ ' psi ~;. ~~ `~ ~ ~ ;'~ ~ a
a M ` ~ ~af ~ ~~ ~
.~` ~ ~ ~
r~`~y[1 ~~. 1 .l li
11y ^~• ~ 1 ~ t` ~I I
\/)
I II 3 ~~ . ~ ~~;~r ~ _ ,
r
~~^• r
i~- .. o
\~ .J ~Y ~~
r ~'
.,y~-- _ o
`~
,,/, , ~ T ~ ......~~~4
~/ - I
. ~- R--~ j_.. .f ~
--~
88sNoo4s-Z