Loading...
12-03-13 Planning Comm Agenda PacketCITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING TUESDAY, 3 DECEMBER 2013 AGENDA CALL TO ORDER APPROVAL OF AGENDA APPROVAL OF MINUTES 5 November 2013 COUNCIL CHAMBERS 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD 7:00 P.M. ROLL CALL / (LIAISON) SCHEDULE DAVIS (Nov) GENG (Jan) CHARBONNET (May) GARELICK (Dec) LABADIE (Apr) MADDY (Mar) MUEHLBERG (Feb) 1. 7:00 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING — REZONE PROPERTY TO R -1C, SINGLE - FAMILY RESIDENTIAL AND C.U.P. FOR ACCESSORY SPACE OVER 1200 SQUARE FEET Applicant: Colson Custom Homes (representing Jeff and Colleen Johnson) Location: 5015 St. Albans Bay Road 2. 7:10 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING — C.U.P. FOR ACCESSORY SPACE OVER 1200 SO. FT Applicant: Bennett and Sharon Morgan Location: 5580 Woodside Lane 3. MATTERS FROM THE FLOOR 4. OLD BUSINESS / NEW BUSINESS 5. DRAFT NEXT MEETING AGENDA 6. REPORTS Liaison to Council SLUC Other 7. ADJOURNMENT CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 5, 2013 MINUTES CALL TO ORDER Chair Geng called the meeting to order at 8:01 P.M. ROLL CALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD 8:00 P.M. Present: Chair Geng; Commissioners Davis, Garelick, Labadie, Maddv and Muehlberg; Planning Director Nielsen; and Council Liaison Woodruff Absent: Commissioner Charbonnet Also Present: Mavor Zerbv and Councilmember Siakel (both departed the meeting after the first public hearing) APPROVAL OF AGENDA Davis moved, Labadie seconded, approving the agenda for November 5, 2013, as presented. Motion passed 6/0. APPROVAL OF MINUTES October 1, 2013 Davis moved, Garelick seconded, approving the Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of October 1, 2013, as presented. Motion passed 6/0. 1. SUMMIT WOODS PUD — CONCEPT STAGE (Continued from October 1, 2013) Applicant: Homestead Partners Location: 23040 Summit Avenue Chair Geng opened the Public Hearing at 8:02 P.M. (it Nvas continued from October 1, 2013), noting the procedures utilized in a Public Hearing. He noted that the Planning Commission is a recommending body oniv. He stated this evening the Commission is going to consider a request for a Summit Woods planned unit development (PUD) for Homestead Partners LLC to be located at 23040 Summit Avenue. He explained that when this Nvas considered on October 1, 2013, a lot of the time Nvas spent taking public testimony from residents living in the Cities of Shorewood and Chanhassen. This evening he Nvill briefly open the meeting up for additional public testimony because the Concept Plan for the PUD has been revised since October 1. In the interest of brevity, he asked those in the audience who Nvant to speak to this item to keep their comments to three minutes or less each. He stated that similar to the last meeting he asked that if a previous speaker has already addressed a point and the new speaker is in agreement he asked that the speaker address other points that have not yet been made. CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING November 5, 2013 Page 2 of 26 Someone in the audience objected to Chair Geng's requests because the information on this item Nvas not available until late in the evening on November 1 and people have had very little time to prepare. Someone else in the audience seconded this. Chair Geng clarified that the Public Testimony portion of this Public Hearing has not been opened. As a point of order, he asked the audience to respect that. He noted that he does not Nvant to be overIv formal and asked that the audience keep to the order. Geng stated during the October 1 Public Hearing on this PUD there Nvere a number of people in the audience applauding residents after they finished commenting on the PUD. That Nvas inappropriate. He noted he does not intend for that to happen again this evening. He stated his intent is to conduct this meeting in an orderly and business like manner. He asked people to refrain from demonstrations of approval or disapproval. Geng then stated he assumes the Planning Commission Nvill make a recommendation on this item this evening. If that happens, this item Neill be placed on a November 25, 2013, Regular City Council meeting agenda for further review and consideration. Director Nielsen explained that this public hearing is a continuation of the one held during the October 1, 2013, Planning Commission meeting to consider a Concept Plan for a proposed subdivision called Summit Woods PUD. During that hearing a number of concerns Nvere raised about the PUD by residents of Shorewood and the City of Chanhassen as Nvell as the Planning Commission. Based on the discussion during that meeting the applicant, Homestead Partners, has submitted a revised Concept Plan. The site is located at 23040 Summit Avenue between Summit Avenue on the Nvest, Galpin Lake Road on the east and MayfloNver Road on the north. The subject property consists of two parcels of land. The topography is challenging and extremely steep; it drops off dramatically toward Galpin Lake Road and Ma -, -flower Road. The developer originally came in Nvith a traditional plat. A plat that created lots that met the current R -1C, Single - Family Residential, zoning requirements which allows for half -acre lots. Staff met Nvith the developer and they decided that a PUD Nvould better serve the project. The developer came back Nvith a plan shoN ing six lots all of which Nvould be clustered up on Summit Avenue. As part of that proposal, roughly the back half of the lots Nvere to be set aside as conservation open space. As part of the PUD plan the developer had asked for reduced setbacks — 25 feet for the front yard setback and 7.5 for the sides. Narrower Nvidth lots Nvere also asked for. The developer had been asked to show what the houses may look like on the narrower lots. The developer had provided illustrations of how those lots might look. Nielsen summarized the proposed revisions, noting the developer's revised Concept Plan explains them in detail. The project has been reduced in size. The northerly of the two parcels that made up the initial Concept Plan has been removed from proposal. This Nvill remain as an existing lot of record and left for future development of a single - family residence. As a result of that, no conservation easement Nvill be dedicated over the northerly half of the parcel. 2. The number of homes proposed has been reduced from six to four. 3. The revised Concept Plan includes increased front yard setbacks. The houses Nvere moved back from the 25 -foot front yard setbacks that Nvere proposed in the original plan. The revised plan CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING November 5, 2013 Page 3 of 26 shows front yard setbacks from 40 feet for the southerly lot to 20 feet for the northerly lot. The required front yard setback in the R -1 /C district is 35 feet. 4. The revised plan asks for eight -foot side yard setbacks; the initial plan asked for 7.5 -foot setbacks. Instead of a ponding area at the bottom of the site near MayfloNver Road the developer is proposing to construct rain gardens on each of the lots to handle site drainage. 6. Staff has asked the developer to elaborate on Nvhat a traditional R -1C plat might look like, including the site alteration required to accomplish such a development. He displayed a copy of the revised Concept Plan, an aerial photo Nv th a revised Concept Plan overlay, a traditional R -1 /C plat, and an aerial photo Nv th a traditional plat overlay (a copy of each is included in the meeting packet). He revieNved the issues raised by staff. The removal of the northerly parcel and reduction of project area has positive and negative implications. Leaving the existing lot of record to future development eliminates anv conservation easement for that portion of the property. This is somewhat mitigated by the fact that oniv one house Nvould be alloNved on the northerly large lot Nvhich is a challenging site. That lot drops off substantially very quickly. 2. The elimination of one lot from the project results in only one additional home being proposed on Summit Avenue. The trade -off is two less driveNvays on Galpin Lake Road if the project Nvas simply an R -1C plat. Even more significantly, the value of the conservation easement proposed over more than half of the site cannot be overemphasized. The developer has moved the proposed building pads back, based on staff's earlier suggestions. Although the buildings are staggered, the revised plan still shows a relatively straight line of structures. Staff recommends the houses be pushed back further than the R -1 /C district requires. Staff recommends a minimum 40 yard front yard setback for Lots 3 and 4, a 35 foot setback for Lot 2, and a 20 foot setback for Lot 1. The City has excessive right- of -Nvay (ROW) in that location and Lot 1 has more of it than the other three lots. The advantages of the increased setbacks are as follows. a. The increased front yard setback increases the Nvidth of the lot at the building line, alloNving for compliance Nv th side yard setback requirements because two of the the lots are flared. b. Staff appreciates that the developer Nvants the lots to have some amount of backyard. Yet, staff feels there is an advantage to having larger front yard setbacks. Staff does not think having longer driveNvays is a bad thing. They Nvould provide more room for on -site parking. It Nvould also allow room for drivevmv turn -outs Nvhich Nvould allow for people to pull out on to Summit Avenue facing fonyard rather than back out on to a substandard street. c. The increased front setback allows more room for the rain gardens that are proposed as the drainage solution for the site. CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING November 5, 2013 Page 4 of 26 In addition to the recommended setbacks for Lots 3 and 4 exceeding the requirements of the Shorewood R -1C zoning district they also exceed the requirements of Chanhassen's zoning south of the site for Lots 2 — 4. The City has an 80 foot Nvide ROW in the project area. There is an old street vacation that reduces that doN -,n but it is located on the Nvest side of the street. The distance from the actual paved surface of the street to the houses is going to be 40 feet but there Nvill be another 20 or more feet between the property line and the paved street. 4. Staff recommends the side yard setbacks be no less than 10 feet. That complies Nvith the R -1C side -Tard setback requirements. This provides for standard drainage and utility easements along lot lines and should be relatively easy to accomplish in conjunction Nvith the front setback recommendations. 5. The ponding area in the earlier proposal Nvas not a very viable option. Conversely, as mentioned in the City Engineer's staff report dated October 28, 2013, the proposed rain gardens are the preferred means of handling drainage for this site. Rain gardens Nvill have to be done in accordance Nvith the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District (MCWD) requirements. The most significant element of the proposed PUD is the preservation of the steeply Nvooded slopes on the easterly and northerly portions of the site. It's proposed that 1.85 acres (over half of the site) Nvill be set aside as conservation open space. A conforming R -1C plat Nvould result in substantial site alteration (grading and tree removal) of that same area in order to overcome topography. Also, the homes that Nvould be built on Summit Avenue could be built at the 35 -foot front yard setback, closer than what can be imposed in the PUD. After considering the City s zoning and subdivision codes and the City s Comprehensive Plan, staff believes a PUD is a better N-,-a-,- of developing the site. Summit Avenue is a very substandard roadwa -,T. The developer proposes to Nviden it to at least the Fire Code standard for the portion in front of the plat. Summit Avenue is something that Neill have to be addressed by the City Council and perhaps moved up in the City s 20 -Year Pavement Improvement Plan (PMP). Staff is even suggesting the possibility of making that portion of Summit Avenue one That is something that Nvould have to come out of a traffic study, not part of this development proposal. Nielsen stated the developer has some slides he Nvants to show. He also has a flash drive from members of the audience that contains something they Nvant to show the Planning Commission. Chair Geng asked those members of the audience who Nvish to comment on the proposed PUD to state their name and address for the record. It Nvould be helpful if they Nvould spell their last name. Steven Bona, Nvith Homestead Partners located at 525 15`h Avenue South, Hopkins, stated Homestead has Nvorked hard Nvith City staff to improve its Concept Plan. It took into consideration comments and recommendations from staff, comments from the neighbors near the subject project and comments heard during the October 1 public hearing. Significant changes have been made as previously described by Director Nielsen. CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING November 5, 2013 Page 5 of 26 Mr. Bona highlighted concerns raised about the initial PUD Concept Plan. • Summit Avenue is a very substandard road. • The six houses proposed for the PUD made the area too dense. • The ponding area proposed for the bottom of the hill Nvas not an acceptable solution for managing stormwater. • Staff did not like the proposed side yard setbacks of 7.5 feet on each side of the six lots. • The potential tree loss Nvas a big concern. Mr. Bona highlighted Homestead's revised PUD Concept Plan. • The northerly parcel Nvas removed from the proposed project area. That one parcel is currently available for 1 building permit. It is possible that Homestead may build on that 1 parcel in the future. But for now, essentialIv 2 lots Nvere removed from the original proposal. • Removing the one parcel still allows for 4 lots on the other parcel. The average size of the 4 lots is 35,373 square feet which is larger than on the original Concept Plan (34,410 feet). That equates to 1.23 units per acre which is less than the density on the original Concept Plan (1.42 units). • There Nvill be a rain garden on each of the 4 lots. The ponding area Nvas removed. • The revised Concept Plan shows front yard setbacks of 20 feet for Lot 1, 30 feet for Lot 2, 35 feet for Lot 3 and 40 feet for Lot 4. The reason for asking for a reduced front yard setback on Lot 1 is because of the slope and to allow for some back yard. There is a very substantial ROW before the pavement on Summit Avenue begins. The house on Lot 1 Neill be setback a long N-,-a-,- from the existing roadwaN-. Homestead is Nvilling to adjust the front yard setbacks to staff's recommendations of 20 feet for Lot 1, 35 feet for Lot 2, and 40 feet for Lots 3 and 4. • Homestead replaced the 7.5 foot side yard setbacks Nvith 8 foot setbacks in the revised Concept Plan. It is Nu lling to increase the setbacks to 10 feet as recommended by staff. Mr. Bona highlighted some facts about the Murray Hill neighborhood. The intent is to show that what is being proposed fits in Nvell Nvith the existing neighborhood. • There are 13 existing lots on Hummingbird Road. • The average size of the lots is 1.05 acres. The Summit Woods site averages 0.81 acres. • According to tax records (which is generally lower than what the typical values are), the average market value of the 13 lots is $383,000. • Six of the 13 lots are large enough to be subdivided. Mr. Bona explained the largest contributing factor as to why Homestead thinks this plan is the best proposal, one that is very good for the subject property and good for the neighborhood, is the proposed conservation easement. The easement Nvould be 80,532 square feet in size or 57 percent of the entire site. The conservation easement is part of the tradeoff in what is being proposed instead of going Nvith a conforming traditional plat. The conservation area Nvould never be graded, large trees on the site Nvould remain and no buildings Nvill be constructed on that area. The tree preservation on the PUD proposal Nvould be 5 percent tree loss; it Nvould be substantially more for a traditional plat. Mr. Bona noted Homestead representatives have met Nvith the City Engineer and the Engineer stated that the increased number of trips on Summit Avenue per day that would be caused by the PUD plat is not concerning to him. The Engineer believes the roadwaN- could handle the increased traffic. CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING November 5, 2013 Page 6 of 26 Mr. Bona stated the proposed conservation open space area is substantially Nvooded. Looking up to the area from Galpin Lake Road and from MayfloNver Road a person sees the impact of the trees. It Nvill be important to residents doNsn beloNv to preserve that bluff. Mr. Bona talked about developing the site Nvith a traditional conforming plat Nvhich Homestead could do. • The site could be subdivided into 5 lots. • No variances Nvould be needed Nvith this type of plat. Therefore, Homestead Nvould expect the plat to be approved. • The average lot size Nvould be reduced to 28,198 square feet; about 7,000 square feet less than in the revised Concept Plan average size of 35,373 square feet. • The density Nvould be 1.54 units per acre; larger than the 1.23 units per square acre currently being proposed. • The side yard setbacks Nvould be 10 feet and the front yard setbacks Nvould be 35 feet. • There Nvould not be anv conservation easement. • The grading limits for the houses on the 5 lots Nvould require substantial loss to the bluff because of the amount of tree clearing that Nvould be done because of the significant grading that Nvould be needed. There Nvould be an approximate 60 percent tree loss on the entire project area. • The City Engineer has expressed concern about the additional driveNvays that Nvould come out onto a very busy road. Mr. Bona compared the view of the lots in the proposed PUD to the lots in a conforming plat. He stated the undisturbed area for the PUD Nvould be 72 percent; Nvork Nvould only be done on 28 percent (or 0.9 acres) of the property. Within the grading limits for a conforming plat 83 percent of the site Nvould be disturbed. Mr. Bona read a statement in the October 31, 2013, staff report. It states "The Sinnmit Woods project is exactly the type of project for which the planned unit development (PUD) tool was intended. It must be remembered that the property owner has a right to develop his property under the rides established by the City. In this instance, the PUD approach is considered to be far superior to traditional platting." Pete Knaeble, Nvith Terra Engineering Nvhich is the civil engineer and land planner for the project, stated Nvith regard to the four driveNvays that are proposed to enter onto Summit Avenue Nvith the additional setbacks and Nvider ROW it is estimated that the driveways Nvill be an-,-N-,-here from 65 to 80 feet long (from street to garage). That length is at least an additional third of Nvhat a standard driveNvay Nvould be. The drivevmvs Nvould accommodate additional off - street parking and the turn -outs Nvould allow for people to drive out on to Summit Avenue. He clarified that the PUD concept has less impact on the environment. It Nvould be safer from a traffic point of view especially for the houses that could be built along Galpin Lake Road. The positive impact on tree loss Nvith a PUD cannot be overstated. He stated he has been Nvorking on development for more than 30 Nears and high tree loss is basically unheard of. Mr. Bona stated Homestead originally came forth Nvith a proposal for 6 houses and it revised the proposal to 4. He noted another house could be built on the northerly parcel that is not part of the revised Concept Plan, so the overall reduction is 1 house. He noted the conforming plat Nvould allow 3 houses on Summit Avenue. He stated during the October 1 public hearing there Nvere comments from residents that they Nvould be okay Nvith 1 or 2 houses. The City rules allow for 3 houses to get built there. Homestead has asked to build 1 additional house and in return for that 1 extra house, Nvhich it thinks fits in very Nvell, it Nvill give a conservation easement over the entire bluff The project being proposed Nvould be a CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING November 5, 2013 Page 7 of 26 substantialIv better project. The neighbors doN -,n below Nvill be happy and the neighbors up above Nvill have to deal Nvith 1 more house. Homestead believes their request is very reasonable. Mr. Bona noted that he Nvould like the opportunity to respond to any questions the audience may have Chair Geng asked if any of the Planning Commissioners have questions for the developer at this time. Commissioner Labadie expressed concern that the driveways may not be Nvide enough for turn -outs. She noted that the draNvings show the driveways appear to get Nvider the closer they are to the house. She asked how Nvide the driveways Neill be. Mr. Knaeble clarified Homestead has provided schematics; not exact driveNvay and house design. Mr. Knaeble explained typically for a three car garage the driveway might be 35 feet Nvide at the house and then it Nvould taper doom, noting most cities don't allow a drivewav Nvidth of greater than 24 feet at the street. Homestead Nvould propose a separate turnaround for each drivewav in addition to that 35 foot Nvidth. That Nvould also accommodate additional parking on the lot. Labadie stated the revised Concept Plan draNvings reflect 8- foot -v de side yard setbacks. Yet, Mr. Bona indicated Homestead Nvill comply Nvith the 10- foot -Nvide requirement. Mr. Bona stated the side yard setbacks Nvill be 10 feet Node. Commissioner Davis asked if the four houses Nvould be custom built and Nvhat their square footage Nvould be. Mr. Bona stated they Nvould be from 2,400 square feet on the low side up to 3,500 for a fully completed home including basement. Davis asked Nvhat Homestead anticipates they Nvill sell for. Mr. Bona stated he thought they Nvould start at around $500,000 and go up from there, noting Homestead is not the builder. JMS Custom Homes Nvill be. Davis asked if someone Nvho Nvill pay $500,000 for a house Nvill Nvant to be on a substandard road. Davis stated her main concern is Summit Avenue. She Nvould Nvant a real street in front of her property. Mr. Bona stated he thinks the residents like the roadvmy in its current condition. If he Nvere to build his oN -,n home up there he Nvould like the roadvmv the Nvay it is; he Nvould not Nvant the City to increase its Nvidth. Mr. Bona stated from his perspective Summit Avenue is part of the character of the neighborhood. Davis asked hoNv long it Neill take to build the 4 houses. Mr. Bona responded he anticipates the houses Neill be built Nvithin 12 — 18 months. Commissioner Davis stated she assumes the developer uses AutoCAD. She asked if it has Auto TURN and if so has it run auto simulations; for example, how to get a flatbed truck up to the project site. Mr. Knaeble stated he does not anticipate there being any significant issues Nvith delivering materials to the site. Commissioner Maddv asked who is responsible for the design and installation of the rain gardens. Mr. Bona stated Homestead as the developer Nvould install the rain gardens on the front end and it Nvould coordinate that process Nvith the builder to make sure they are not disturbed after they are installed. If it Nvould Nvork better for the excavation of the area or framing of the house to be done before the installation of the rain gardens then Homestead Nvould do that. Chair Geng suggested residents be alloNved to comment on the revised Concept Plan. He opened the Public Testimony portion of the Public Hearing at 8:44 P.M. Chair Geng explained there are 3 stages in a PUD process — a Concept Stage (where the process Nvas in October and is this evening), a Development Stage and a Final Plan Stage. He noted this is not the last opportunity for residents to be heard on this PUD as it develops. As part of this 3 -stage process a lot of the technical details are addressed in the Development Stage. He stated if there are questions that are CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING November 5, 2013 Page 8 of 26 technical in nature that cannot be answered this evening that is okay. The questions should be raised so they become part of the public record. Sondra Travlor, 23115 Summit Avenue, Shorewood, stated she and other residents do not feel the proposed PUD fits Nvith the quality and character of the neighborhood. She then stated Mr. Knaeble indicated that he did not think there Nvould be a problem Nvith delivering materials to the project site. He must not know about the curve in the roadvmv. She commented that a friend who Nvas coming up the Summit Avenue hill vesterdav indicated she thought it Nvas breathtaking. She noted that Summit Avenue ends at the very high point of land, a point that could possibly be the highest in Shorewood or even possible around Lake Minnetonka. A person can see doN -,ntoN -,n Minneapolis and across to the City of Wayzata from the top of Summit Avenue. She stated the surveyor commented that the neighborhood is special. She then stated she cannot understand how the City Nvould permit a PUD up there. She commented that a person out looking for a new house Nvas driving up the hill when he decided that is Nvhere he Nvanted him and his family to live and he had not seen the house vet. She stated it Nvas all about location. The neighborhood is private and Nvooded Nvith old mature trees in a pristine natural setting. She explained homes in her neighborhood have deep setbacks, there are Nvide distances between homes, the lots are heavily Nvooded and they have narrow tree -lined roads. The neighborhood is beautiful, private and peaceful. The proposed PUD Nvith houses so close together and to the street does not fit the quality of the neighborhood. She stated during the October 1 public hearing a comment Nvas made about a drivevmy ascending from that steep north face Nvould be difficult to get up in Nvinter. She views it a safety hazard because the sun does not shine on it and therefore it can ice up. Chair Geng asked Ms. Traylor to v rap her comments up because she has 15 seconds left. Ms. Travlor stated there are 4 houses proposed to be built in Shorewood and 2 more in the City of Chanhassen. That Nvould be a row of houses. There is a drainage problem because the stormNvater Nvill flow doN -,n from the hard surface. She noted that on October 21 at 3:00 P.M. she stood at the intersection of Ma -,- flower Road and Galpin Lake Road and in 12 minutes 5 cars stopped there. The residents Nvill be using that intersection for themselves Nvhen they cannot make it up Summit Avenue because it is icv. Each Near Summit Avenue ends up Nvith many potholes because Nvater seeps into the roadvmy s surface. And then driving on the potholes exacerbates the problem. She elaborated on potholes and repairing of them. Chair Geng again asked Ms. Traylor to v rap her comments up because they are many others who Nvant to speak. Ms. Travlor noted the residents do not Nvant a new roadway and they do not Nvant it one Nvay. She stated the residents do not Nvant Summit Avenue torn up. She stated large trucks tear into the side of the hill around the hairpin curve. She displayed photos shoN ing what happens. She noted that long axel vehicles do the most damage to the hillside. They can barely make it around the curve. She stated she understands that Summit Avenue is so old, so narrow and so steep that if it Nvere to be damaged it could not be rebuilt easily because it Nvould not meet code. Ms. Travlor stated there is a problem Nvith radon at the top of the hill. She then stated houses built on the hill have to be constructed for the long term because foundations end up cracking because of the hill. (During her comments she displayed many pictures of various things). CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING November 5, 2013 Page 9 of 26 Jav Benson, 6271 Hummingbird Road, Chanhassen, read an email N ritten by his Nvife Krisan Osteberg to Council. ".... I am a planner and licensed landscape architect with over 30 years of experience developing sites across the country and in Minnesota. In addition I served on the Wayzata Design Review Board for over 10 years. My comments stem from the understanding of the standards that I am held to in other jurisdictions when dealing with similar issues and that I would consider a sound basis for weighing the merits of the Don Rix property." He distributed copies of the material that Nvas emailed to the members of the Council earlier in the day. Council Liaison Woodruff asked if the Planning Commission received a copy of the email. Chair Geng stated he did not think so. Woodruff suggested the entire email be read into the record. Mr. Benson continued reading the email. "After careful review of the drawing and text I cannot support or recommend this development. As a Planned Unit Development, it does not provide a larger community value that could not be otherwise achieved and that would warrant granting a variance to local zoning ordinances. My opinion is based on the following observations and concerns. Both the developer and the city planner reference the original parcel plat for the land created in 1926 and still present in Hennepin County Records dated 1980 available online. [He distributed a map that Nvas sent Nvith the email.] The total development density was I houses across more than I acres. This density and parcel size is consistent with the surrounding parcels adjacent to Galpin Boulevard, Murray Hill Road, Melody Hill Road, and Mayflower Road. It is also consistent with the environmental and circulation constraints of the property. The proposed PUD would allow up to S houses in a constrained area. The "Test Case " would allow up to 6 houses in potentially undeveloped areas. In both cases, this additional density applies to more recent codes suitable for flatter, open land to the detriment of the health, safety and welfare of the neighborhood and in favor of the financial gain of the developer. This revised PUD is basically unchanged in the number of units proposed for the larger 3.3 acre parcel. 2. Insufficient insubstantial detail is provided by the developer to answer key engineering concerns. a. No traffic study has been submitted to show the impact of increasing the end of the neighborhood from I to potentially S occupied homes in an area of limited sight lines, limited road width, no sidewalks, and steep grades Traffic impacts on both Summit and Hummingbird will include construction vehicles, personal vehicles, garbage recycling and other service vehicles that will magnify the impact of the homes In addition no recognition of the impact on adjacent Chanhassen streets is noted including the potential requirement for neighbors to pay Chanhassen assessed fees to upgrade Hummingbird Road. b. No detailed and convincing site grading plan has been submitted. Because of this, no credible stormwater management plan has been submitted. There is no engineering provided to assess the feasibility for the proposed rain gardens There is nothing to indicate that there is enough area or depth to handle year -round drainage from new roof tops and pavement. Erosion is already apparent at the base of the slopes on Mayflower Road. CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING November 5, 2013 Page 10 of 26 Stormwater runoff; meltwater and groundwater seepage already create dangerous conditions on Summit Avenue from November to April when ice occurs on the streets. There is also no specific engineering plan for how increased rrunoff'will be handled to prevent flooding on Murray Hill Road and adjacent properties. d. In addition, it is critical to understand that rain garden technology is intended to slow and filter precipitation, not prevent it from overflowing in significant storm events. It does not dependably function during snow- covered winter months or when the ground is frozen. In addition, rain gardens require periodic maintenance of native plantings. For that reason they are most properly used in locations where there is a knowledgeable and dependable party that undertakes the work. This cannot be guaranteed under private home ownership. No detailed and convincing roadway grading and layout plan has been submitted that demonstrates Summit Avenue will be made safe for vehicles and fire trucks 365 days a year. To achieve national and state standards, a 20 foot road of not more than 7% slope is required. This would require a concept plan from Melody Hill to Hummingbird Road with vertical and horizontal curvatures, along with cut and fill and required retaining wall, and feasible utility corridors Utilities would have to be routed on the south side of Summit as it ascends the hill to avoid the existing electric lines and poles In addition, no detailed design has been submitted that indicates how the proposed 20 foot width of Summit would transition to the current width ofHummingbird Road. f Without improvements to Summit, due to the impassability in the winter, additional traffic for all homes will voluntarily choose to use Murray Hill, Melody Hill and Hummingbird Roads further exacerbating problems of increased traffic volume, road degradation and temptation to speed on the relatively flat and straight sections of road. (He inserted that he has been a resident for 13 Nears on Hummingbird Road. He Nvorks at home and he is there almost all of the time. Because Summit is basically impassable due to safety from November to April that doubles the amount of traffic that goes doNsn Hummingbird for those months. Hummingbird is narrow and trees come right up to the street. SnoNv removal is Nvhat it is in those conditions. Because Summit is impassable garbage trucks backup the entire Nvay along Hummingbird Road to be able to service Summit and the entire length of Hummingbird. On some days there are three separate garbage providers and there are recycling vehicles as Nvell. Thev all back doNsn the street and when personal vehicles come along they have to Nvait and take turns. With the proposed density between Shorewood and Chanhassen that is likely to happen, the traffic during those months on Hummingbird Nvill probably triple.) g. No detailed soils and water table information has been submitted. There is no recognition nor concrete plan by the developer to deal with the ramifications of the buried lenses of water and seeps that are known to occur throughout the neighborhood. In the winter, these seeps contribute to icy roads. Zoning legislation was approved by the courts to protect the property value of surrounding landowners, protecting their health safety and welfare from unsympathetic development. The legal basis of zoning is not to maximize the value of proposed development for individual property owners. The origin of Planned Unit Developments is to provide a legal means for granting variances to zoning ordinances in exchange for gaining a greater community good CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING November 5, 2013 Page 11 of 26 or benefit that would not otherwise be possible especially for properties with distinct value or characteristics. Neither of these litmus tests appears to be true for this development. The proposed Conservation Easement does not add a new benefit to the city it recognizes a benefit that already is present on the land. Given the City of Shorewood Comprehensive Plan specifications limiting home development to 3:1 slopes, erosion control requirements, difficult soils, and tree preservation standards, the bluff line and trees are likely to remain on the majority of the site. Indeed, the entire area of wooded slopes is protected from development in Chanhassen through their Bluff' Ordinance. In addition, the conservation easement is an area without public access and distinctly private by virtue of lying in the backyards of the new homes. No identifiable or use parkland is created. I. The PUD provides no other substantive benefit to Shorewood. This includes the proposed extension of the existing Chanhassen trail along the west side of Galpin Boulevard. That trail would dead -end at either Mayflower Road or Old Chaska Road both of which are dangerous intersections for pedestrians, without linkages to other sidewalks, in low -lying areas that frequently flood, and would require cutting into the base of the bluff to achieve. The east side of Galpin north side ofMayflower does not connect with the existing trail and borders land that drops off into wetlands. In addition cars frequently slide off Galpin in this location because the road cross - section is not super- elevated to match the curve of the road (he added in winter). Recognizing these dangers and inconveniences, most pedestrians choose to walk through the neighborhood rather than stay on Galpin and Mayflower. S. Because the revised PUD is basically unchanged in the number of units proposed for the 3.3 acres, it still creates a totally new, uncharacteristic, and financially devaluing design. The resulting multi -story "track home " appearance does not fit the neighborhood character. The footprints shown for the homes including garages are clearly smaller than any along the surrounding streets The houses will require multiple stories to achieve the market value of the surrounding homes (He stated this is referring to information that had not been updated on the City s Nvebsite.) An 8 foot side yard 16 foot corridor between houses is clearly less than existing neighborhood standards. This also makes unresolved questions ofgrading more critical. The proposal claims that the homes will be staggered from the street No evidence has been provided that this can be substantively achieved and still meet tree preservation, erosion control, and slope requirements. In closing I urge the City of Shorewood to deny the PUD due to its complete lack of community value and numerous unresolved engineering concerns. Respectfully, Krisan Osterby- Benson " Mr. Benson clarified that the reason he read the email on his Ns fe's behalf is she is out of toNsn on a business trip. He thanked the Planning Commission for its time. Elizabeth Birldand Daub, 6180 Murrav Hill Road, Shorewood, explained on Wednesday, June 9, 2004, she placed an emergency call to the City of Shorewood. She reached a recording from Brad Nielsen, the city planner, and she ended up in Larry Broom's voicemail. In her emergency alert to them she let them know her property Nvas flooding. Her property is located at the base of Summit Avenue. The Nvater Nvas racing doNsn Murray Hill Road right on to her property. She noted she has pictures that validate this. She explained she did receive a call back and Nvas told they Nvould send an emergency creNv out to start to CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING November 5, 2013 Page 12 of 26 sandbag. That did happen. Two days later a lot more rain came so she placed another emergency call and let people know her basement Nvas flooding again. That time she Nvas told the City Nvas not responsible for sandbagging. The City had done her a favor the first time and this time she Nvould have to deal Nvith it. The sandbags had been destroyed due to the heavy rain. She stated she thought the stormwater flow Nvas a result of the construction that Nvas done up on Murray Hill Road when the footprint Nvas expanded. There is a lot of hard surface on the top and it overwhelmed the storm seNver system. She Nvas given $10,000 from State Farm Insurance for her damages even though out - off - pocket expenses for her to restore her property Nvere over $25,000. She routed pictures that Nvere taken for her claim. She noted that the radiant heat she had installed under the slate in the lower level of her home has not Nvorked since then. She stated her biggest concern Nvith the proposed project is if it is going to overwhelm the entire neighborhood Nvith runoff and rain. She then stated she thought it cost the City $300,000 to put in a drainage system in/along Murray Hill Road. She believes it Nvill be likely be totalIv overwhelmed Nvith the runoff coming off of Summit Avenue because of the hard surfaces that Neill be created by the PUD. She Nvent on to state there is no proof that things such as rain gardens Nvill be an adequate way to manage runoff or that the properties in the area Nvill be protected. She commented that Murray Hill Road the N-,-a-,- it used to exist Nvas in her yard; there is asphalt curbing there. She noted the residents had asked for concrete curbs on Murra -,T Hill Road and they Nvere told the City could not afford them. She expressed concern that asphalt curbing Nvill again end up in her yard. She noted the roadwaN- Nvas done in 2011. Dick Lane 6120 Murray Court, Shorewood, stated his property is located east of Galpin Lake Road. There are four houses along Murray Court. All of them overlook the bluff He then stated from his perspective the PUD is a far better approach than the conforming traditional plat. He commented that the bluff is realIv a deer run. During the Nvinter there are deer running back and forth all of the time. It is a Nv ldlife area. He stated that once the Nveather turns Nvarm in the spring Galpin Lake Road becomes a racewaN-. Motorcycles speed up and doN -,n the roadwa -,T. He then stated he thought it Nvould be dangerous for people, under a conforming plat, coming on to and going off of their driveways. He noted he supports further development in Shorewood. He stated he is not Nvorried about the development obstructing his view if done as a PUD. Jason Mills, 6281 Hummingbird Road, Chanhassen, stated he put together some pictures and aerial photos. He combined Carver County information Nvith Hennepin County information to show the neighborhood. From an overhead view people can see the homes. He outlined the homes as they sit on the properties. It provides a visual picture of the density, the distances from the roads, the distances between houses, the size of the lots and so forth and roughly what is being proposed Nvith the PUD. He explained there are 17 existing houses on Hummingbird Road, Summit Avenue and Murra -,T Hill Road. He explained he also took some measurements. He displayed a slide for one area that showed the average lot Nvidth is 168 feet, the average size is 1.14 acres, the average front yard setback is 129 feet, and the approximate average between the houses is 91 feet. He displayed a slide for another area which showed the average lot Nvidth is 168 feet, the average lot size is 1.14 acres, the average front yard setback is 89 feet including the ROW roadwa -,T which he thought is 40 feet from the center of the roadwaN-, and the approximate average distance between the houses is 91.6 feet (that is an average side setback of 46 feet). The numbers and pictures show it is a very unique neighborhood Nvith lots of room and privacy and there are lots of old trees. The neighborhood is a beautiful place to live. Thirty adult residents live in the 17 existing homes and 100 percent of them oppose the PUD and they are greatly concerned. He displayed some comparisons between the PUD and the average measurements he just presented. He explained that for the proposed PUD there Nvould be 62.6 percent less average Nvidth of the properties, the average size Nvould be 69 percent less, the front yard setbacks Nvould be 65 percent less, and the side distance between the houses in the PUD Nvould be 82 percent less. The narrow distance between the sides CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING November 5, 2013 Page 13 of 26 of the houses is very concerning to him. That narrow distance does not fit Nvith the character of the neighborhood. He stated the character of the PUD Nvould negatively affect the value of other properties in the neighborhood. The PUD Nvould stick out like a sore thumb from his perspective. It Nvould look like track homes. He displayed a slide shoNving the current value of the properties in the neighborhood. He displayed a slide shoNving the current properties /house locations Nvhen compared to the R -1C zoning requirement. He explained the existing average lot Nvidth is 68 percent Nader than the R -1C zoning requirement, the average lot size is 148 percent greater, the average front yard setback is 156 percent greater, and the average distance between the homes is 358 percent greater. These figures to him show the uniqueness of the neighborhood. He stated the neighbors have been meeting on this and they have put together a list of their names, addresses, phone numbers and emails. All of them oppose the PUD. He reiterated even* one of the 30 adult residents living in the 17 neighborhood homes oppose the PUD. He provided some printed copies of the overhead. Lena Petrosian, 23130 Summit Avenue, ShoreNvood, stated she is the newest member of the neighborhood. She explained based on her research a PUD is supposed to benefit neighborhoods by: 1) providing for more efficient site design; 2) preserving amenities such as open spaces; 3) lower the cost of street construction and utility extensions for the entire development, the developers and the city, and 4) loNver maintenance costs. Based on that she drew parallels of Nvhat the proposed PUD Nvould do to the neighborhood. With regard to more efficient site design, the PUD proposed five lots Nvith the houses to be located back together. That does not represent the neighborhood. The neighborhood has 1 plus acre lots Nvith a lot of open space. It is not a more efficient site design. With regard to preserving amenities such as open spaces, the neighborhood already has open spaces that Nvere created by nature. The beautiful hill Nvith a very steep slope Nvas created by nature to be self preserving. It is not possible or feasible to build a house on that site Nvithout completely destroying it. It is already protected by current zoning. The original plans that Nvere there from the beginning of the century have 4 lots. She surmised the original intent of the 4 lots Nvas to preserve the hill and its beauty. The PUD does not serve any preservation benefit. Conservation is not needed from her perspective. With regard to loNver cost of street construction and utility extensions, the homes along Summit Avenue are serviced Nth Nvell Nvater and the residents there are satisfied Nvith it. The gas and electric utilities are already in place. The PUD Neill not provide any extra benefits to those residents for utilities. The PUD Nvill not provide any benefits for street construction. If the roadvmy is Nvidened it Nvill create additional soil erosion issues, retaining Nvalls Neill be needed and the vegetation Nvill be destroyed. Changing the roadvmy Nvill change the beauty of the neighborhood. No matter how Nvide the roadvmv Neill be the slope problem Neill remain the same, the drainage problem Nvill be the same and soil erosion may get Nvorse. The issue Nvith ice on the roadvmy in the Nvinter Neill be the same, all the traffic Nvill continue move to Hummingbird Road during the Nvinter. From her vantage point she has a unique perspective because her parents live on 6300 Hummingbird Road in Chanhassen. The reason they bought that property is because they Nvanted the quiet and unique feel of the neighborhood. The additional traffic on that roadvmy Neill have an impact. With regard to loNver maintenance costs, she does not think the PUD Nvill result in loNver maintenance costs to the City because snow removal Neill be the same. In summary, she stated it is not hard to find a lot to build a house on or to find a house. It is hard to find a unique neighborhood to live in. She explained Nvhen she and her husband found this unique neighborhood With its unique terrain and van-ing houses they decided they Nvanted to live there. She noted she is against the proposed PUD for all of the reasons she just explained. CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING November 5, 2013 Page 14 of 26 Marilvn Foli, 6200 Hummingbird Road, Chanhassen, stated their property is just about directly across from the land that is to be developed in Chanhassen as part of the overall development. She noted she shoNved photos during the October 1 public hearing. She displayed photos of the property being talked about and noted it is a beautiful piece of land. She also displayed a photo of Hummingbird Road and noted that area is also very beautiful. She stated she could envision a small number of houses located avmv from the roadvmv that Nvould fit in Nvith the existing property and the rest of the neighborhood. That is what she is hoping for. Jon Rienstra, 23120 Summit Avenue, Shorewood, stated his property is located at the bottom of Summit Avenue. He expressed his concern about stormNvater runoff He explained he hired a company this past summer to repair and patch his driveway. He stated if a bunch of houses and additional hardcover are going to be stacked on the top of Summit Avenue he asked how much more that is going to exacerbate the runoff problem. He explained a couple of times a Near he has to clear 2 — 3 inches of dirt and road debris off of his driveway. Rick Bateson, 6180 Murrav Court, Shorewood, stated from his perspective if anyone oN -,ns land they should be able to develop it providing it Nvould be conforming. He suggested that the neighbors that are objecting to this come up Nvith the money to purchase the site. He stated he has a beautiful sightline to the subject property and regardless of if it Nvould be developed as a PUD or a conforming traditional plat he cannot envision anyone wanting to build a house that would cut into the hillside. There Nvould have to be a tuck under garage and there Nvould be a lot of tree loss. He noted Shorewood has a stringent tree replacement policy Nvhich he thinks is in excess for a heavily Nvooded property. He stated that from his perspective the City should change the garbage collection methods. The City has 3 refuse haulers and 2 recycling collectors. He encouraged the City to consider having just one hauler /collector. That Nvould eliminate a number of the residents' concerns. He noted that he favors the PUD over a conforming traditional plat. He reiterated the ovmers of the property should be able to develop it the Nvay they Nvant to providing drainage concerns and other issues are addressed. Charles Liedtke, 6231 Hummingbird Road, Chanhassen, stated his property is adjacent to the Ted Rix property [the subject property]. He lives there Nvith his Nvife and 3 children. He noted they are not against development. He does not think the other residents in the neighborhood are either. He stated people have expected development for many Nears. People aINvays thought that there Nvould someday be 1 — 3 new homes on that entire property. People anticipated they Nvould be very nice homes. People assumed the developer Nvould take the time to get to know the neighborhood and more importantly the neighbors. They expected a developer to come up Nvith a proposal that Nvould be a Nvin -N in for even-one. Not the Nvin -lose one that has been proposed. From his vantage point the revised Concept Plan for the PUD is marginally better that the first one. He noted that from his perspective it is a "false choice" to say it is either this PUD or the R -1C [traditional plat] because the residents think there may be inherent problems Nvith the R -1C (e.g., building on a bluff that should not be built on off of a county road). He does not think the R -1C Nvould be approved. He highlighted the gifts that Nvould be received from the developer. One is a conservation easement. Those are trees that the residents alreadv benefit from located on a historic bluff that one quarter of a mile doN -,n the road could not be developed because of best practice bluff ordinances. Another is the area Nvould get a trail; a trail to nowhere. From his perspective no one is asking for it; no one Nvants it. Another is there Nvould be 6 inches more distance between the homes. This evening people learned it Nvould be a little more. The average distance between homes in the neighborhood is 45 feet. He stated he does not consider those items gifts; to him they are tokens. CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING November 5, 2013 Page 15 of 26 He stated he understands that this is the Concept Stage of the PUD but at some point someone needs to decide if this is a good concept. He noted there Nvill be more traffic. Short term during construction and long term affecting safety, noise levels and the peace and quiet of the neighborhood. He asked how many more vehicles Nvill pass per day on Hummingbird Road and Summit Avenue short term and long term. An analysis of that has not been done. He stated many people of all ages and animals use the 2 roads. He commented that one day Nvhen he Nvas driving on the roadvmv he saw Ted Rix, the deceased father of the current oNsner of the property, Nvalking along throNving tree branches onto the road. He stopped and asked Ted Nvhat he Nvas doing. Ted told him that people Nvere driving too fast and the branches Nvere a natural speed bump; it slows people doom. He stated the likelihood of an accident Nvill increase because of the PUD. The roads in the neighborhood Nvill become more dangerous. He asked who Nvould be in favor of more dangerous roads. He asked how many additional pedestrian and /or vehicle accidents there Nvill be. He is not aNvare of analysis being done. He stated construction trucks Nvill be using Summit Avenue and /or Hummingbird Road and he asked how much they Nvill damage the roadvmvs. He asked Nvho Nvill pay to repair them. He stated long -term there could be up to 7 new houses. He asked how much the increase in traffic from the new residents Nvill accelerate the deterioration of the roads and who Nvill pay to repair that. He stated if there is one half inch of rain he asked how much more Nvill go doNsn Summit Avenue. He asked how many rain gardens there Nvill be and how big they Nvill be. How much runoff Nvill they prevent? He stated from his perspective the new houses Nvill be track homes, Nvhile noting he Nvas sure they Nvould be nice. The houses Nvill be on lots smaller than any others in the neighborhood. They Nvill be closer to the road and closer together. No one in the neighborhood likes the idea of track homes. Thev do not fit Nvith the character of the neighborhood. Thev Nvill affect the residents' Nvelfare. He stated his hope is that the discussion about this PUD ends this evening. Prolonging it Nvill not benefit the Nvelfare of anyone. He reiterated it is not between PUD and R -1C Nvhich cleverly pits people against people. There are more choices than that. Vicki Franzen, 6260 Hummingbird Road, Chanhassen, noted that Greg Fisher, 2340 Hummingbird Road, asked her to read a letter from him because he Nvas not able to be here this evening. The letter read as follows. "Dear Planning Commission members, ,Since the first proposal I have conducted extensive research on PUDs, consulted with legal experts as well as planning directors in other cities. I have learned something very important and significant PUDs were not designed to be imposed on mature neighborhoods such as ours. They are designed to allow for major developments where dozens or even hundreds of homes are to be constructed to support economic development and increased population density. PUDs are also intended to provide additional benefits to the neighborhood in lieu of zoning variances like community playgrounds, pools, nature area etcetera. The revised plan is suggesting that they won't remove trees and that is the benefit we are all supposed to appreciate. This is nothing more than a token ploy in my opinion. I believe PUDs are an important tool and use in the right place. Summit Avenue and Hummingbird Road are not the place for a PUD. It is important to note that Summit and Hummingbird are one in the same. Any impact on Summit directly impacts each and every resident on Hummingbird from a safety, traffic, road use and quality of life standpoint The residents on the Carver side Chanhassen side of the street deserve to be heard equally and treated as such. The vast majority of traffic flows down Hummingbird to the north toward Summit especially in the winter when navigating up the steep slope of,Summit CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING November 5, 2013 Page 16 of 26 I have read and understood the City Engineer Paid Hornby's comments as they relate to the proposed PUD. It is a sound and objective summary in my opinion. There are still many technical, environmental, safety and engineering questions that need to be answered. On the contrary I have also read Planning Director Brad Nielson 's memorandum dated October 28 [actually dated October 31] regarding the Summit Woods Concept Plan. I understand that Mr. Nielsen is a long time City employee and part of his job is to work with the builders. However, when I read his report it is written in a tone favoring the developer and I don't understand this. City employees work for the people and is it not the Planning Director's duty to enforce the City's existing zoning regulations first and foremost Does the Planning Director work for the developer or does he represent the people of Shorewood. Shoiddn't his recommendations and comments be objective and based on facts and data? The last paragraph of his memo states the following "The Summit Woods project is exactly the type of project for which the planned unit development (PUD) tool was intended. It must be remembered that the property owner has a right to develop his property under the rules established by the City. In this instance, the PUD approach is considered to be./br superior to traditional platting. " Mr. Nielsen contradicts himself in the concluding paragraph where he references individual property rights afforded under the rules established by the City. This is what we are asking for. Is it Mr. Nielsen 's opinion that the proposed PUD is far superior to traditional platting? Is this the Planning Commission's opinion? The people who actually live here disagree. I vehemently disagree with the statement that the PUD tool was intended for this type of project I strongly agree that property owners have the right to develop their property under the rules established by the City as stated by Mr. Nielsen. The rules should not be changed for this proposed development. Again, I respectfidly request the Planning Commission reject this latest PUD and strongly consider the people's voice. The people who actually live here deserve to be represented. It is your duty as elected officials to represent your constituents appropriately. I ask you to consider how many constituents are in the room tonight who are in support of the PUD. There is nothing logical about the PUD other than it maximizes the profit of the people who will never live here. I knew Ted Rix. He was a kind respectfid man who cared about the neighborhood and people who lived here. There is a massive tree trunk- still lying in the backyard of his home. I offered to cut it up for him once. He said he wanted to keep it the way it was While we can't expect anyone who owns the property to keep the things the same we can expect the changes to be respectfid and abide by the existing rules I am quite certain the PUD is not the legacy he envisioned for his property. Sincerely, Greg Fischer" Commissioner Labadie stated that for the record she asked Ms. Franzen to give the address of Mr. Fischer. Ms. Franzen stated his address is 2340 Hummingbird Road. Lea Foli, 6200 Hummingbird Road, Chanhassen, noted that he had not realized that the Planning Commissioners volunteer their time. Thev do not get paid. He thanked the Commissioners for what they do. He stated he had knovm the now deceased Ted Rix; the former oNsner of the subject property. He commented that when he first met Ted Rix when he and his Nvife came to look the vacant lot that they ultimately built on Ted introduced himself as the crudest person in the neighborhood. He stated he thought that if Ted Rix Nvere present this evening he Nvould have more forceful opinions than those heard this evening. From his perspective Ted Rix Nvould be really disappointed Nvith what is being proposed. He does not think he Nvould have agreed that the significant 1.85 acre tree conservation area Nvould be a lasting legacy from the Rix family to this neighborhood. CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING November 5, 2013 Page 17 of 26 He explained his home is 5,600 square feet in size and it has every conceivable upgrade in it. He stated if he Nvere to put his home on the market and if he Nvere to tell a person interested in is property* that the proposal is to build six new homes across the street from his property he thinks the interested partv Nvould take pause. He then stated it is his opinion that what is being proposed Nvill probably reduce the value of his property by $200,000. He does not like the thought of that happening. He asked who oN -,ns the subject property now. Someone in the audience responded Don Rix. He stated if that is the case this is an open ball game. He noted that he hopes the PUD is denied. He stated from his perspective the easy N-,-a-,- to develop the lot north of the county line is to build 3 beautiful houses a long N-,-a-,- back from the road. Evervone Nvould be happy. Chair Geng closed the Public Testimony portion of the Public Hearing at 9:42 P.M Commissioner Labadie stated the copy of the Concept Plan included in the meeting packet indicates 9 trees Nvould be lost. If the proposed houses Nvould be setback further from the road she asked if substantialIv more trees Nvould be lost. Mr. Bona responded they Nvould be. Commissioner Davis stated her main concern continues to be the road and the drainage. From her perspective they are astronomical issues. She noted that she does not believe to the slightest degree that the rain gardens Neill control runoff She also noted that she does not think a 50- foot -long delivery trailer can make it around the corner of the road. She stated there is construction going on near her home and sometimes construction vehicles make it difficult to use the roadwa -,T. She then stated the proposed development Neill contribute to an already horrible drainage problem that should be solved before more houses are constructed in the area. She Nvent on to state Summit Avenue is just not Nvide enough. Mr. Bona stated Homestead plans to address all of the concerns the City Engineer listed in his memorandum dated October 28, 2013. It Neill do all of the analysis that is required for the drainage as part of the preliminary plat. He noted that the City Engineer Neill not allow more stormwater to flow down Summit Avenue. The site Nvill have to be designed in a N-,-a-,- that it Neill retain the stormwater in the rain gardens. Commissioner Labadie stated Mr. Rienstra had indicated that he had to replace his drivewaN- and that debris Nvas in the drivewaN-. She asked if the contractor who replaced the drivewa -,T thought the damage Nvas caused by the erosion issue or Nvas it because it Nvas an old drivewa -,T that Nvas in need of replacement. Mr. Rienstsra stated the person who repaired his driveway had indicated the rest of his driveN-,aN- Nvas in excellent condition. His drivewa -,T only had to be repaired doN -,n by the road. Commissioner Garelick asked Director Nielsen if it Neill ever become mandator`* to Nviden Summit Avenue to at a minimum comply Nvith the Fire Code. Nielsen stated for this proposed development staff is recommending the road be Nvidened to at least 20 feet (which is the Fire Code standard) in front of the plat. Staff has also talked about the fact that the City Nvill likely have to advance its study for the remainder of Summit Avenue going doN -,n the hill. Nielsen noted that Shorewood cannot dictate what happens in Chanhassen to any degree. Garelick stated when the City makes improvements to the road he asked if the City Nvill pay that cost or if the property oN -,ners Neill pay it. The developer Nvould pay the cost to Nviden Summit Avenue in front of his plat. Nielsen noted that Shorewood does not assess for roadwa -,T improvements at this time. Therefore, additional improvements would be paid for out of City funds. Ms. Foli stated from her perspective there Nvould be plenty of room to move the houses further back on properties without impacting trees a lot. She then stated yards could be on the sides of the houses. CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING November 5, 2013 Page 18 of 26 Chair Geng noted that he is also concerned about the substandard roadwa -,T and stormNvater runoff He stated he agrees that the City should move up consideration of making improvements to Summit Avenue. He then stated that it is his understanding that rain gardens can be designed to Nvork Nvell and that they do Nvork Nvell if maintained. He expressed concern that private individuals may not be committed to doing that forward. He asked is some type of covenant Nvould be acceptable to the developer. Mr. Bona responded yes and explained that is typically how Homestead solves that type of problem. He stated maintenance of a rain garden is complex and there needs to be rules each property oN -,ner Nvould follow. Geng noted there is some precedent for this type of thing Nvith other PUDs in Shorewood. Mr. Bona stated Homestead's two PUDS it recentIv developed in the City of Minnetonka each had rain gardens and there are recorded covenants to ensure they are maintained. Commissioner Labadie stated she shares some of the same concerns about the rain gardens and the maintenance of them even Nvith a covenant. Relying on rain gardens in Minnesota could prove to be tricky during the spring when the snow is melting on the hill and the ground is still frozen. She questioned where that stormwater Neill flow. She noted she is extremely concerned about drainage. Chair Geng noted that drainage is a problem no matter what when the ground is frozen. Labadie stated she is not sure that having only rain gardens is sufficient. Commissioner Davis agreed that drainage is a major concern and stated stormwater is part of road construction. Chair Geng stated drainage Neill be addressed during the next stage. Heidi Welbig, 6291 Hummingbird Road, Chanhassen, stated N idening Summit Avenue Nvould not be an ordinary undertaking. It Nvould cost a tremendous about of money. Mr. Foli stated there has been a lot of discussion about trees. He pointed to something on the screen and noted there Nvas a large tree in two different spots and he thought they could be 50, 60 to100 Nears old. If the houses are constructed further back on the lots those trees Nvill not have to be removed. Commissioner Maddv stated on a conceptual level all of the site's challenges can be ignored (e.g., drainage management and trees). They will have to be dealt Nvith in the next stage of this project. He suggested the discussion be focused on the PUD. Some think a PUD is not appropriate for this site. He thinks it is. The PUD is consideration of one gift to the City (a gift of conservation open space) for the relaxing of a rule. He asked if the building of 1 extra house as part of the PUD up at the top of Summit Avenue Nvould be Nvorth it (a conforming plat Nvould allow for 3 houses to be built). He noted he has difficulty *ustif -,Ting that because of the cost to build on the site. He stated he does not think the PUD at that grade is Nvorth the City relaxing its rules. He asked if 1 extra house is actually the issue at hand or should be Planning Commission be delving into things such a drainage, erosion and trees. Chair Geng stated the public hearing is about the appropriateness of the Concept Plan being proposed. It is not about a traditional plat. The public hearing Nvas noticed as a PUD. The focus needs to remain on the PUD. He noted there Nvould not be a conservation easement Nvith a conforming traditional plat and there Nvill be 1 less house. Commissioner Maddv stated he just Nvanted to understand the actual Nvorth of the conservation easement. He then stated the zoning in the area is different than the actual conditions of the site. He questions if this is the place to relax the rules. CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING November 5, 2013 Page 19 of 26 Mr. Bona explained if Homestead Nvere to come back Nvith a conforming plat similar to Nvhat Nvas shoN -,n earlier this evening it Nvould be a 3 -lot layout up at the top of Summit Avenue. It Nvould also come back Nvith a house plan for the bluff Homestead is going to build on top anvvmy, at least 3 three houses. Building on the extra 2 lots Nvould be an added benefit. Homestead's choice Nvould be not to do anything on the slope and instead do something on the 2 lots. He noted that he agrees the issue this evening is the 1 extra lot on the parcel being discussed. He acknoNvledged that there are a lot of other issues. He stated the conservation easement is very substantial. People take for granted that Nvhat is there now Neill be there forever. But, the property owner has the right to develop the property the Nvav Homestead has shoN -,n and the oN -,ner hired Homestead to make that happen for him. The oN -,ner is in full support of Nvhat is being proposed. Council Liaison Woodruff stated the Planning Commission is being asked to make a recommendation to City Council that the PUD is or is not an acceptable solution. Chair Geng stated the question at hand from his perspective is if the PUD is appropriate for this site. He does share concerns raised about drainage, the substandard nature of Summit Avenue and so forth. He is still not convinced that Nvhat is being proposed is the right solution from an aesthetic perspective. He thought the revisions the developer made to the Concept Plan are substantial. He noted that he understands that Nvhat has been presented in the Concept Plan is not meant to be a certain type of architecture for the houses. He stated he understands the houses Nvould be much closer together than others in the neighborhood. Commissioner Garelick noted that he has been in the real estate business for more than 40 years. He stated it Nvould be helpful if Shorewood Nvere to have a definition of neighborhood. He commented in some areas in the City of Minneapolis residents take great pride in their neighborhoods. And, they make an effort to preserve their neighborhoods including the value of their properties. He expressed concern that the addition of the houses as proposed, including being so close together, Nvill change the character of the neighborhood. He did not think it Nvould be appropriate to change such a unique and beautiful neighborhood. He questioned if it might be Nvorthwhile to go to the next stage in this process in order to be provided Nvith more detail. He stated at this time he supports the residents and keeping the character of the neighborhood. Commissioner Muehlberg stated he is not N ild about the PUD. He noted that a traditional plat may become a reality. He asked if people can live Nvith the traditional plat. Alex Petrosian, 23130 Summit Avenue, Shorewood, stated based on information presented this evening he stated there Nvere originally 4 lots on two existing parcels on the site. He asked whN- that plan is being changed. He then asked whN- it Nvould be alloNvable to put two houses on the bottom to begin Nvith. He stated there Nvas never a plan to have more than 4 lots on that subdivision. He asked if it is a new City rule that Nvould allow an extra 2 houses on the bottom. He stated he Nvould be okay if just 3 houses Nvere built. A property oN -,ner has a right to build on their property and the 3 houses Nvould be conforming. He noted he does not think the area next to him could be built on. In response to a question from Council Liaison Woodruff, Director Nielsen explained Mr. Rix oN -,ns 2 parcels of land in Shorewood and another 1 in Chanhassen. Woodruff stated three residents have stated that the loNver parcel Nvas to be 3 lots. Nielsen noted he is not aNvare of an -ahing that indicates that. The plat shows it as one lot. Mr. Foli suggested a compromise. He stated from his perspective it does not have to be framed between the PUD and a conforming traditional plat. He then stated residents do not need the threat that if people CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING November 5, 2013 Page 20 of 26 don't go Nvith the PUD then it Nvill be developed under a conforming traditional plat. He thought there is a middle ground. He noted people are not against a PUD. They object to the PUD in this form. He asked the developer to come back Nvith a different PUD. Someone in the audience expressed her objection to the PUD. Chair Geng asked where this application is in the 60 -day rule timeframe. Director Nielsen responded it is approaching the second 60 -day period. Nielsen explained if a recommendation is not made this evening the City needs to send the applicant a letter that this consideration Nvill take longer than 60 days and up to 120 days. Geng stated recognizing that this proposal is in the Concept Stage and that detailed engineering Nvork Nvould not be done until later on in the PUD process he asked if there is any information the Planning Commission needs at this time before it can make a recommendation. Commissioner Muehlberg stated he Nvould like to hear more from the engineer about how drainage Nvill be handled. Drainage is a big concern to him. Chair Geng stated that is typically handled in the Development Stage. Muehlberg asked how the Planning Commission can make a recommendation either Nvay Nvithout knoNving enough about this. Director Nielsen explained the waN- a PUD is handled through the 3 stages (Concept Stage, Development Stage and Final Plan) Nvas designed to raise the issues for the next level of review (e.g. the preliminary plat, the Development Stage). A developer cannot prepare detailed plans for every concept that comes along. There has to be some acceptance or denial of the Concept Plan. If there is acceptance it can be accepted Nvith a direction that they have to address the drainage issue satisfactorily. He noted those questions Nvere asked during the October 1 public hearing and they Nvere addressed by proposing rain gardens instead of the pond below. The rain gardens Nvould have to be sized to Minnehaha Creek Watershed District standards and City standards. To delay this for information that is provided during the Development Stage may not be the appropriate thing to do. Chair Geng clarified he Nvas not suggesting this be delayed for that reason. He stated the engineering questions Nvould be addressed during the Development Stage. He then stated this proposal is somewhat unusual because of the topography of the site. He noted that he does not recollect there being a PUD proposal that is as challenging as the one being discussed. Labadie moved, Maddy seconded, recommending denial of the proposed Planned Unit Development for the property located at 23040 Summit Avenue. Commissioner Garelick stated he does not think the Planning Commission has enough information to make a definitive decision on the future of the proposal. He then stated he agrees that it should be an unfavorable recommendation at this time unless information can be provided that shows the concerns Neill be dealt Nvith. Chair Geng reiterated that type of detail is provided later in the PUD process. He stated he did not think any developer Nvould provide that type of detail during the Concept Stage. If the developer cannot provide answers during the Development Stage then the project may die at that point. Motion passed 511 with Geng dissenting. Chair Geng stated the Planning Commission recommends Council not approve this Concept Plan. CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING November 5, 2013 Page 21 of 26 Chair Geng closed the Public Hearing at 10:27 P.M. Chair Geng thanked the members of the audience for coming this evening and sharing their vieNvs Chair Geng recessed the meeting at 10:27 P.M. Chair Geng reconvened the meeting at 10:30 P.M. 2. 8:30 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING — INTERIM CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND SITE PLAN REVIEW FOR A BICYCLE REPAIR BUSINESS Applicant: James Steinwand Location: 5680 County Road 19 Chair Geng opened the Public Hearing at 10:30 P.M., noting the procedures used in a Public Hearing. He stated this hearing is for an interim conditional use permit (C.U.P.) and site plan review for a bicycle repair business at 5680 County Road 19. The applicant is Jim Steinwand and he is present this evening. He explained if the Planning Commission makes a recommendation on this item this evening it Nsill be placed on a November 25, 2013, Regular City Council meeting agenda for further review and consideration. Director Nielsen explained that during its June 4, 2013, meeting the Planning Commission held a public hearing to consider a request by James Steinwand for a conditional use permit for a bicycle repair and auto detailing business at 5680 County Road 19. After a number of issues Nvere raised about that application the Planning Commission decided to continue the hearing to its next meeting. Mr. Steinwand took issue Nvith a number of staffs conditions listed in the staff report dated May 30, 2013. After the meeting he indicated that he intended to Nvithdraw his application. Mr. Steinwand had explained that his use Nvas likely to be short term and that he did not Nvant to make the investment in a long -term site plan. During the hearing, staff suggested another approach that may Nvork for the site which is an interim C.U.P. The interim C.U.P. is a tool in the City's Zoning Code that allows for uses of property that may not be consistent Nvith a long -term plan for the area but are a reasonable use for the property until the property is developed or redeveloped. One of the stated purposes of the interim C.U.P. is "To allow a use that is presently judged acceptable by the City Council, but that with anticipated development or redevelopment, will not be acceptable in the fixture; or ... ". When the application Nvas first being considered the applicant had objected to the condition of having to remove the driveway on to County Road 19. He also objected to having to remove pavement that Nvas non - conforming under current code and to put curbing around the entire parking lot. The interim C.U.P. allows the City to make those exceptions on a short-term basis. Based on the analysis of the case, staff recommends an interim C.U.P. be granted subject to the folloNving conditions: 1. The initial approval should extend for three years, after which the property Nvill be revieNved for its relationship to redevelopment activity in the SmithtoNsn Crossing redevelopment area. If redevelopment is not imminent at that time, the permit Nvould be extended for an additional two years, after which the nonconformities listed in the May 30, 2013, staff report Nvould be brought into conformance or the use Nvould be removed from the site. CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING November 5, 2013 Page 22 of 26 2. BST the time the City Council revieNvs this application, it Nvill be too late to do any paving. It is recommended that the applicant obtain a bid for paving the gravel portion of the parking lot and removal of the small area of bituminous mentioned above. From that bid, a letter of credit or cash escroNv for one and one half times the amount of the bid should be required in order to ensure that the Nvork Nvill be done no later than June 1, 2014. 3. Similar to Item 2, landscaping Nvill not be able to be done until next spring. Again a letter of credit or cash escroNv should be required to guarantee that the landscape plan is implemented by June 1, 2014. 4. Any proposed signage for the site must comply Nvith the requirements of the ShoreNvood Zoning Code. 5. No outdoor storage, display or service is alloNved on the site. All service Nvork is to be performed Nvithin the building. Parking or storage of commercial vehicles or trailers is not alloNved on the property except inside. 6. The proposed use of the property is subject to the provisions of Section 1201.04 Subd. 4. of the ShoreNvood Zoning Code Nvhich sets forth the interim C.U.P. Nielsen noted the applicant has submitted a landscape plan that Nvas prepared by a professional landscape firm. The plan is consistent Nvith Nvas discussed the first time around and it is generally consistent Nvith the Countv Road 19 Corridor Plan. Chair Geng asked Mr. SteinNvand if he has anything to add or respond to Jim SteinNvand, the owner of MST Car Guy and the applicant, stated he has contacted an asphalt contractor and he has received a bid from them. He also has received something from Mom's Landscaping. He noted he can enter into a contract Nvith both companies to get those things done in the spring. Each Nvill require him to put 25 percent doom. He stated he Nvill be as excited as anyone to get those two things done. He stated he is new in business Nvith his MST Car Guv business. He questioned the need to provide an escrow or line of credit when he alreadv has to put money down Nvith those two companies. He noted he is anxious to get the bicycle repair business started. Commissioner Garelick asked Mr. SteinNvand if he Nvould be running the bicycle repair business. Mr. SteinNvand noted he is alreadv doing bicycle repair in the MST Car Guy building. What he is requesting now is basicalIv an extension of that business. He clarified that in the new location he Nvill be doing bicycle repair, rental and sales. He noted that is stated in his application. He explained the infrastructure Nvill go through his existing computer system at his MST Car Guy building. The individual who used to run Area Wide CNTcle is his pseudo bicycle repair manager now and he Nvill be staged in the building located at 5680 County Road 19. He stated because the two buildings Neill be so close he Nvill be able to go between buildings at any time. Commissioner Garelick stated the bicycle repair business is something the area needs. Mr. SteinNvand stated he thought it Nvill be fun. There are a lot of local people that Nvill be excited about it. There are bicycle groups that are excited about it. Chair Geng opened the Public Testimony portion of the Public Hearing at 10:39 P.M CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING November 5, 2013 Page 23 of 26 LoNvell Dav (Boone), 25 Pleasant Avenue, Tonka Bay, and a representative for the American Legion Post 259 located at 24450 SmithtoN ,,n Road, noted the Legion oN -,ns the 5680 County Road 19 property. He stated he thought that for the interim everyone believes this is the best solution for this property. With regard to curbing the parking lot area, American Legion representatives and Mr. SteinNvand have discussed that if Mr. SteinNvand's bicycle business goes Nvell curbing Nvould be installed before the five Nears is up and maybe Nvithin three Nears. He then stated Nvith the approach proposed he believes everyone Nvins and the site gets cleaned up. Commissioner Garelick asked if the utilities in the building are in Nvorking order. Mr. SteinNvand stated they Nvere when the building Nvas closed up a few Nears ago. Commissioner Maddv asked if Mr. SteinNvand intends to connect to power, Nvater, gas and other utilities. Mr. SteinNvand stated he does. Commissioner Davis stated that lot is used as a cut through off of County Road 19. She asked if Mr. SteinNvand is going to put a stop to that. Mr. SteinNvand noted he Nvill; it is dangerous. Chair Geng closed the Public Testimony portion of the Public Hearing at 10:43 P.M. Council Liaison Woodruff stated the information in the meeting packet does not clearly state the use the Planning Commission is going to make a recommendation on. He recommended the motion explicitly state what the use will be. He stated he understands that information Nvould have been provided last May but he has not seen it. He then stated the copy of the landscape plan included in the packet indicates screening between the 5680 County Road 19 building and the American Legion building. He noted that he does not think the City should dictate screening between two properties ovmed by the American Legion. Director Nielsen stated the County Road 19 Corridor Studv talked about having a backdrop of landscaping behind the commercial businesses along County Road 19. Council Liaison Woodruff stated from his perspective if the American Legion Nvants screening the Legion should Nvork that out Nvith its tenant Mr. SteinNvand. He noted he Neill make that comment when Council considers this if the landscape plan stays the same. He stated if the City Council approves this application the permit Nvill be issued immediately on the basis that some Nvork Neill be done next spring. The City needs a guarantee that the Nvork Nvill be done. That is the purpose of the escrow. Chair Geng asked if a letter of credit is onerous. Council Liaison Woodruff stated he assumes the City Nvill accept a non - revocable letter of credit. Director Nielsen noted a cash escrow or letter of credit is fairly typical. Geng asked Nvhat a letter of credit costs. Director Nielsen stated it used to be 1.5 percent but he is not sure Nvhat it is now. Geng stated Nvith regard to the staff recommendation that the interim C.U.P. be for three Nears and then be reevaluated and if redevelopment is not imminent then the C.U.P. be extended for another two Nears. He asked whN- it is important to define how long the extension Nvould be for at this time. Nielsen stated an interim C.U.P. should have a deadline on it. Nielsen clarified he is not saying the bicycle repair, rental and sales business can't be a long -term use for that area. Nielsen noted that for now the City is waving requirements that everyone else has to comply Nvith. Geng clarified he is fine Nvith the three gears but he does not Nvant to tie Council to a two -Near extension. Nielsen clarified it is for up to two Nears N ithout having the improvements made. CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING November 5, 2013 Page 24 of 26 Commissioner Muehlberg asked Nvhat kinds of signage Nvould be alloNved. Director Nielsen explained the applicant is alloNved three signs on the property, two of which can be Nvall signs and one can be freestanding. He thinks, but is not entirely sure, that the existing freestanding sign on the sight is based on the size of the alloNvable area. The bicycle business could use the pylon sign if it Nvants. The amount of signage that is alloNved is up to three signs, Nvith the total area based on 10 percent of the building silhouette. Because the property is a corner lot they can use both the south and east elevations. Maddy asked if the signs have to be for the bicycle business. Nielsen responded yes and noted offsite advertising is not alloNved. Mr. SteinNvand noted the legal name of the company is My Car Guy and he has checked Nvith legal counsel on that. He stated he has a couple of other companies that are an extension of that. The bicycle business Neill be My Car Guy doing business as South Lake Cycle. He then stated based on his calculations the freestanding sign is the sign limit. He explained he envisions the top square having the My Car Guy logo and the second saying dba South Lake Cycle. Davis moved, Garelick seconded, recommending approval of the interim conditional use permit for a bicycle repair, rental and sales business for the property located at 5680 County Road 19 subject to the conditions in the staff report. Motion passed 6/0. Chair Geng closed the Public Hearing at 10:54 P.M 3. DISCUSS ATTENDANCE Chair Geng explained that he had asked that the topic of attendance be placed on this agenda. For the October 1 meeting there Nvas not a quorum of the Planning Commission for almost one -half hour. Unfortunately, for that meeting there Nvere quite a few people in the audience. That reflected poorly on the Citv and it is an embarrassment for even-one. He noted that in the code of ordinances it states that if a member of a Commission attends less than half of the meetings in a year or if they miss four consecutive meetings that is considered their resignation. He suggested that going fonvard people email Director Nielsen and him and copy the rest of the Commission if someone cannot attend an upcoming meeting or if they are going to be late. If people know during a meeting that they Nvill not be able to attend the next meeting that they bring it up during the draft next agenda topic. Commissioner Muehlberg noted that he Nvas the guilty party the last meeting. He explained that he drives bus part time and he got delayed bringing the children back because it Nvas an overtime situation. It Nvould be helpful if there Nvas a phone number he could call Nvhen situations like that come up. Director Nielsen stated he Nvill give all of the Planning Commissioners his cell phone number and he asked them not to give it out. Chair Geng noted he did not bring this up to single anyone out. Commissioner Maddy asked if it Nvould be better to let just Director Nielsen know. Chair Geng stated it Nvould be nice if all of the Planning Commissioners know. He noted that he had asked staff to put a reminder in the email that is sent out Nvith the meeting packet. 4. MATTERS FROM THE FLOOR There Nvere no matters from the floor presented this evening CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING November 5, 2013 Page 25 of 26 5. OLD BUSINESS / NEW BUSINESS Commissioner Maddv stated that the City of Chanhassen has a hill/bluff zoning regulation. He asked if the Planning Commission should know more about that. Director Nielsen stated the Commission could review that and noted that it is probably similar to what the City has for its shoreland district. The City has a bluff section for riparian lots. Maddv commented that the City is a pretty flat town except for the Summit Avenue hill. 6. DRAFT NEXT MEETING AGENDA Director Nielsen stated there are two relatively simple conditional use permits (C.U.P.$) slated for the December 3, 2013, Planning Commission meeting. One Nvill require a rezoning in order to get the C.U.P. the applicant is requesting. The Commission has to schedule a neighborhood meeting for the Galpin Lake Road trail segment and the Mill Street trail segment. He anticipates the open house meeting Neill be late November or early December. He suggested maybe having the open house from 5 P.M. — 7:00 P.M. before the December meeting. Commissioner Muehlberg asked if there is anything new N ith the trail budget. Director Nielsen noted that Council has pushed the Mill Street segment out for at least a few Nears because of the expense and the lack of right- of -Nvay on the County road. He stated Hennepin County is really disappointed Nvith that. He then stated as of now it appears that the Galpin Lake Road segment Nvill move forward. Commissioner Davis asked if the Mill Street segment being talked about is the trail to nowhere. Director Nielsen explained if from the City of Excelsior to the City of Chanhassen is nowhere then that is the one. 7. REPORTS Liaison to Council Council Liaison Woodruff reported on the October 28, 2013, City Council Nvork session and regular meeting (as detailed in the minutes of those meetings). None SLUC Other Chair Geng stated the Planning Commission needed to establish Council Liaisons for the next seven months. Council Liaisons Nvere selected as folloNved: November 2013 Commissioner Davis December 2013 Commissioner Garelick January 2014 Chair Geng February 2014 Commissioner Muehlberg CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING November 5, 2013 Page 26 of 26 March 2014 Commissioner Maddv April 2014 Commissioner Labadie Mav 2014 Commissioner Charbonnet Council Liaison Woodruff asked if any Planning Commissioner terms are up in 2014. [Commissioner Charbonnet's and Commissioner Garelick's terms are up in February 2014.] Commissioner Davis stated from her perspective a person has to do one term just to figure things out. Then in the second term they can make more of a contribution. 8. ADJOURNMENT Muehlberg moved, Maddy seconded, Adjourning the Planning Commission Meeting of November 5, 2013, at 11:10 P.M. Motion passed 6/0. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, Christine Freeman, Recorder CITY OF SHOREWOOD 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD . SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA 55331 78927 • (952) 960 -7900 , FAX (952) 474 -0128 • www.d.shorewood.w.us • cityhall @ci.shorewood.mn.us I MEMORANDUM TO: Planning Commission, Mayor and City Council FROM: Brad Nielsen DATE: 26 November: 2013 RE: Johnson, Jeff and Colleen — Rezoning and Conditional Use Permit for Accessory Space in Excess of 1200 Square Feet FILE NO. , 405(13.12) I BACKGROUND 1 Jeff and Colleen Johnson own the property at 5015 St. Alban's Bay Road (see Site Location map - Exhibit A, attached). They propose to demolish the existing home on the site and build a new j home with an attached garage, keeping the existing detached garage on the property also. The current R -1D /S, Single- Family Residential /Shoreland zoning of the property limits the total amount of accessory space to 1000 square feet of floor area, which precludes keeping the existing garage: Staff has suggested that the owners apply for a rezoning from R -1D /S to R -1C /S in order to accommodate their plans. Since the. total amount of proposed accessory space will exceed 1200 square feet, they have also applied for a conditional use permit: The subject property is shown, with the location of the new house and garage and existing garage, on Exhibit B. The property contains 28,559 square feet of area. It is characterized by a small hill in the northwest corner of the site which drops off, as much 'as 12 feet in elevation, in all directions. As mentioned in the City Engineer's Memorandum (Exhibit C), dated 18 November 2013, the property drains primarily to the southeast, to a landlocked low area on the lot next door. The proposed home, shown on Exhibits D and E, contains 4556 square feet of floor area on two and one -half levels. The proposed garage will have 971 square feet of floor area. Combined with the area of the existing garage (672 square feet), the total amount of proposed accessory space is 1643 square feet. ®�® PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER Memorandum Re: Johnson — Rezoning and C.U.P. 26 November 2013 Exhibit G shows the current zoning pattern for the neighborhood in which the property is located. As can be seen, lots to the west of the site are zoned R -1D /S and lots to the east of the property are zoned R -1C /S. As indicated in the Applicants' letter, dated 7 November, their property is considerably more consistent with the size requirements of the R -1 C/S district than the current R 1D /S district. ANALYSIS/RECOMMENDATION A. Rezoning. When Shorewood did its first Comprehensive Plan, in the early 80's, one of the first things done was to adjust its Zoning Districts map to make it consistent with existing and proposed development. The R -11) district was created to address numerous older, smaller, lots that existed in several areas of the community. This district allows lots as small as 10,000 square feet in area, with correspondingly reduced setback requirements. It eliminated a significant number of nonconfolmities and even allowed many of the homes in those areas to be expanded to some degree. Similarly, the R -1C district was originally created allowing homes to be built on 20,000 square -foot lots with somewhat greater setbacks: The Applicants' lot, as mentioned in their letter, is much more reflective of R -1C requirements than R -ID, In fact, at 28,559 square feet, it is considered ample even in the R -1C district. At 113 feet of width, it also exceeds the minimum R -lC width requirement of 100 feet. This request is considered to be a logical extension of the R -1C /S zoning district. B. Conditional Use Permit. While the R -1C zoning district requires greater lot size and setbacks, it also allows somewhat more accessory space —1200 square feet versus 1000 square feet in the R -11) district. The Zoning Code also allows accessory space in excess of 1200 square feet, by conditional use permit. Following is how the Applicants' request complies with the criteria for a C.U.P.: 1. The total amount of accessory space (1643 square feet) does not exceed the total floor area above grade of the dwelling (4566 square feet). 2. The total amount of accessory space cannot exceed 10 percent of the minimum lot size for the zoning district in which the property is located. The minimum lot size for the proposed R -1C /S zoning is 20,000 square feet (.10 x 20,000 = 2000). 3. The property must comply with setback and hardcover standards (assuming rezoning, this would be R -1C /S. The existing garage and proposed home with attached garage comply with R -1C /S setbacks and proposed hardcover is 23 percent. The Zoning Code also precludes site drainage from adversely affecting adjacent properties. In this regard, the City Engineer has recommended that the additional rate and volume of runoff resulting from the redevelopment of the site be addressed with the grading of the property. He recommends some sort of infiltration basin or rain -2- Memorandum Re: Johnson — Rezoning and C.U.P. 26 November 2013 garden for this purpose. The conditional use permit should include long -term provisions for maintenance of that feature. 4. The accessory space must be architecturally compatible with the dwelling. As can be seen on Exhibits D and E and Exhibit F, the accessory structures are consistent with the proposed home. The rezoning request is somewhat unusual in that, typically, a property owner is looking for zoning with lesser setbacks or lot size. In this case the Applicants are willing to abide by higher standards in order to be able to have somewhat more accessory space. As mentioned in the preceding, the proposal is a logical extension of the R -1 C/S zoning district. Assuming the City concurs, the C.U.P. is consistent with the requirements of the Zoning Code and approval is recommended, with the stipulation that drainage be addressed pursuant to the City Engineer's I recommendations. j Cc: Bill Joynes Paul Hornby Tim Keane Larry Brown Jeff and Colleen Johnson Rodney Colson -3- O F•� � oa N y �•Ov4 a C� b '�-"aq— r— NML I'm 'r0-,e-'N r'�� ffilm r H A V EN 1 0 300::C .00 �I P'1,1 vw`� `� U I I S 4. L 12 LL 1 T Feet 1 Sprin 2 St Al SITE PLAN SURVEY FOR: / Property located in Section 25, Township 117, Range 23, COLSON CUSTOM HOMES 993.4 Hennepin County, Minnesota. / 997.9_ \ — ° �j Property Address: 5015 St. Albans Way Bay Road �(o i 9973 994,0 / \�ti 1000.6 / / S ?6.40,OJ"E 789 4g =S. ��0ah'/ l/ / ,f/°a�`° 9919.5 I g9� / /rie /8g 9p /at o c \ — Ewi � — \ J.8 X1.7 / 1 I / %'� — / / / l5 \ 95 \ / win "map/ — / rb lT\ The Gregory Group / I 0 / � �o �' 14 \o war Pole ( C �^ / 2 / /i 9 ��a d.b.a. Z6��'� LOT SURVEYS COMPANY, INC. ,a'� J• '� / / / �a� \ °° , l,�Ba• / o� ��a (1 Established in 1962 r , /" a LAND SURVEYORS �r,' ,' �� / 989. ��� j REGISTERED UNDER THE LAWS OF STATE OF MINNESOTA / ° � (� � I � � „ � / , � � �, �'� °-� "� A � 7601 73rd Avenue North (763) 560 -3093 / i°� Minneapolis, Minnesota 55428 Fax No. 560 -3522 l( ' 5 , // Surveyors Certificate \ ^ / / / / is / 9. 994.7 /i 0 ry `1 ! \ 3 s 78' 2 "maple./ —6p ` \ �\ 9 1.3( o / `986 y "% e \ l \ 99 �O �� \11 \ 9 0� , \ ` � l Proposed Hardcover �O 9� ,4 maple/ ( Residence = 2397 sq, ft Porch = 131 sq, ft 4 Deck = l 40 sq. ft 992.5 /2 0 \ — — — — / Garage = 670 sq. ft °3.9 " � \ Dave * Walks = 3236 sq, ft 99 7/— \ / 994.7 \ 9SBy l Total Hardcover = 6574 sq, ft manhole 0 \ /� R Area of Parcel = 26559 sq. ft rim =992.3 �Q \ �� `� Percentage of hardcover = 23.02% rnv= 982.00 —� 992.0 � vy � y�3 1 � � a dower Pole \ \ 995.0 \ \ Rev. \ /ko9 11 -5- \ Lots 25 and 26, Block 3, MMNETONKA MANOR Hennepin County, Minnesota. The only easements shown are from plats of record or information provided by client. I certify that this plan, specification, or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed land Surveyor under the laws of the State of Minnesota. Surveyed this 9th day of October 2013. Signed Gregory R. P a h, inn. Reg. No. 24992 ld deck Drawr '- I house E 5' Exhibit B File IN PROPERTY SURVEY Mm- INVOICE NO. 81939 F. B. NO. 1070 -58 SCALE: 1" = 30' • Denotes Found Iron Monument t,\ O Denotes Iron Monument Ij J ------------ Denotes Existing Contour x000.0 Denotes Existing Elevation Basis for 000.0 Denotes Proposed Elevation bearings is �— Denotes Surface Drainage assumed 998.6 Proposed Top of Block 999,0 Proposed Garage Floor 990.4 Proposed Lowest Floor 989.8 Proposed Lower Garage Floor The Gregory Group / I 0 / � �o �' 14 \o war Pole ( C �^ / 2 / /i 9 ��a d.b.a. Z6��'� LOT SURVEYS COMPANY, INC. ,a'� J• '� / / / �a� \ °° , l,�Ba• / o� ��a (1 Established in 1962 r , /" a LAND SURVEYORS �r,' ,' �� / 989. ��� j REGISTERED UNDER THE LAWS OF STATE OF MINNESOTA / ° � (� � I � � „ � / , � � �, �'� °-� "� A � 7601 73rd Avenue North (763) 560 -3093 / i°� Minneapolis, Minnesota 55428 Fax No. 560 -3522 l( ' 5 , // Surveyors Certificate \ ^ / / / / is / 9. 994.7 /i 0 ry `1 ! \ 3 s 78' 2 "maple./ —6p ` \ �\ 9 1.3( o / `986 y "% e \ l \ 99 �O �� \11 \ 9 0� , \ ` � l Proposed Hardcover �O 9� ,4 maple/ ( Residence = 2397 sq, ft Porch = 131 sq, ft 4 Deck = l 40 sq. ft 992.5 /2 0 \ — — — — / Garage = 670 sq. ft °3.9 " � \ Dave * Walks = 3236 sq, ft 99 7/— \ / 994.7 \ 9SBy l Total Hardcover = 6574 sq, ft manhole 0 \ /� R Area of Parcel = 26559 sq. ft rim =992.3 �Q \ �� `� Percentage of hardcover = 23.02% rnv= 982.00 —� 992.0 � vy � y�3 1 � � a dower Pole \ \ 995.0 \ \ Rev. \ /ko9 11 -5- \ Lots 25 and 26, Block 3, MMNETONKA MANOR Hennepin County, Minnesota. The only easements shown are from plats of record or information provided by client. I certify that this plan, specification, or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed land Surveyor under the laws of the State of Minnesota. Surveyed this 9th day of October 2013. Signed Gregory R. P a h, inn. Reg. No. 24992 ld deck Drawr '- I house E 5' Exhibit B File IN PROPERTY SURVEY Mm- e vP, CITY OF SHOREWOOD 5755 Country Club Road • Shorewood, Minnesota 55331 •952- 960 -7900 Fax: 952- 474 -0128 • www.d.shorewood.rmus • cityhall &i.shorewood.mmus DATE: November 18, 2013 TO: Joe Pazandalc, Brad Nielsen FROM: Paul Hornby RE: Site grading review — 5015 St. Albans Bay Road (Lots 25 & 26, Block 3, Minnetonka Manor) I have completed my review of the proposed site grading plan, dated with revision November 5, 2013, prepared by The Gregory Group (Lot Surveys Company, Inc.), for the referenced project and have the following comments: 1. The proposed structure, existing garage, and associated impervious surface area (hardcover) summary is provided on the survey. The survey also needs to show the existing structures on the plan, with the associated impervious area summary tabulation. 2. The property proposed for redevelopment primarily drains directly to an adjacent landlocked (low area) basin. The requirements of the Surface Water Management Plan will apply to this proposed improvement. The storm runoff discharge rates and volume cannot exceed the existing rate and volume. This can be performed by a number of current practices such as rain gardens, filtration/infiltration, pond basin or other acceptable means. The Conditional Use Permit (if applied required for the accessory structure for this project), should require annual maintenance of the surface water system designed and performance review to ensure the system is working as intended. 3. The lowest floor elevation and lowest opening elevation need to be provided on the survey. The top of foundation, garage floor elevation also need to be provided. 4. The proposed driveway grade is 9.2% from the edge of the existing pavement to the 996 contour, increases to about 13% to the 998 contour and 5% to the garage. 5. The retaining wall proposed along the south side of the new driveway (997) does not correspond with the contour elevation of 998 immediately to the southwest. Please contact me if you have any questions or need any additional information regarding this grading plan review. Exhibit C ENGINEER'S MEMORANDUM ---------- - ------- - -- - - ------------ ------------ -------- ------ - - ----- K16KOUT FLA5HIN6 TO BE INSTALLED A5 NEEDED - ----- EXTERIOR WALL FINISHER TO VERIFY KICKOUT -------- FLASHINC7 15 INSTALLEP PRIOR TO FINISHING - -- - -------------- -- -------- --------------- -------- - -- - -- ---- - ------------ -- -------- - CARPENTER TO FLASH ALL EXTERIOR WINDOWS AND 120OR5 -- - ----- PER TO MN. & 113C COPE REQUIREMENTS - - -------- ------ — - -- — ------------------- - -- - ---------- 8" FRIEZE 13P. ------- ----- ------- ------ J-T.A.-Bi I ------- !I !L 1 L J, -- - - - - ---------- - ----- - ------ -`T T—T — - ---- L -------------- - - _ I _ ` 1 11 1 L 11 J 11 - --- - ----- - ------------- __- _= __= _______---- __ —_____ --- 11 t I --- _j J 11 � 11 :i - L I JL T ------ - - - - -- --- -------- — ---- ------- - - --- ----- --- ------------ - ----- I Ti-I ---- ------------------------------------------ ----- — -------------- - --- - - - ----------- 06 TRIM YP. ------- HARO I LAP -- - - ----- -------- ---------------------- - --------------- .--- ---- - - 51PINO ---------- - - ------------ - - - -- ------- 6" TRIM ------- ------- 6 YP. -------- -- UJ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - I I . - - - - - . --------------- - -------------------- - II ---------- - - - - - -- - - - - i JU Tin V� 4J ---- --------------------------------- II� NEI -il ---------------- 16"XI6" BOX61? COLUMN ON 24"X24" MANUF, STONE I3A5F_ =1 = I = APPRIE-56 STONE FRONT ELEVATION SCALE. 1/4" = I'-Oil IST FLOOR 1,425 60. FT. 2ND FLOOR 1,751 50, FT. TOTAL 3,176 50. FT, BASEMENT 1,348 50. FT. FIN. TOTAL 4,524 50. FT, MR Exhibit D PROPOSED ELEVATION - FRONT \2 ||0 ( ' ________ P6R If 510 C7 RAILI OPNO'5 LF-55 THAN 4" R16HT ELEVATION- } a r fl >3Y ,�' s ho T s ', ,, itr "r ,u V V t`�' ' .,� i } S § i J -Ir 4 � k1k, :v w � CITY OF SHOREWOOD 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA 55331 -8927 • (952) 960 -7900 A% lab FAX (952) 474 -0128 • www.ci.shorewood.mn.us • cityhall @ci.shorewood.mn.us MEMORANDUM TO: Planning Commission, Mayor and City Council FROM: Brad Nielsen RE: Morgan, Bennett and Sharon - C :U.P for Accessory Space in Excess of 1200 . Square Feet DATE: 27 November 2013 FILE NO.: 405 (13.13) BACKGROUND Bennett and Sharon Morgan are in the process of designing a new home for their property located at 5580 Woodside Lane (see Site Location map - Exhibit A, attached). As explained in their request letter (Exhibit B), they propose to create garage space on two levels of the home, the total area of which will exceed 1200 square feet of floor area. A survey, showing the location of the existing home on the property is included on Exhibit C. Exhibit D contains a site plan for the new home and attached garage space. The applicants have requested conditional use permit,'pursuant to Section 1201.03 Subd. 2.d.(4) of the Shorewood Zoning Code. The property is zoned R -lA/S, Single- Family Residential /Shoreland and contains approximately 39,302 square feet of area. The garage areas are located on the southerly end of the proposed home (see Exhibit 'C) and contain 1134 square feet of area on each of the two floors for a total of 2268'square feet. The proposed home contains 4376 square feet on two floors (not including the basement).' Exhibits E and F show the floor plans for the two levels on which the garages will be located. As can be seen on Exhibits G and H, the upper level garage faces northeast, while the lower level garage faces southeast. ®� � ®0® PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER Memorandum Re: Morgan Conditional Use Permit 27 November 2013 ANALYSIS/RECOMMENDATION Section 1201.03 Subd. 2.d.(4) of the Zoning Code sets forth criteria for granting conditional use permits for accessory space over 1200 square feet. Following is how the applicants' plans comply with the Code: - a. The total area of accessory buildings (2268 square feet) does not exceed the floor area (4376 square feet - not including basement) above grade of the proposed home. b. The total area of accessory buildings does not exceed 10 percent of the minimum lot size for the R -lA/S zoning district (.10 x 40,000 = 4000 square feet). C. The proposed house and garage comply with R -lA/S setback requirements., Also, since the lower level garage occupies much of the same footprint as the existing home, tree removal and site disturbance is minimized. Hardcover on the site will be 25 percent. d. Since the new garage is an integral part of the proposed house, architectural compatibility is not considered to be an issue. As previously mentioned, the overhead doors for the garage are located on two different elevations of the building (see Exhibits G and H). Based upon the preceding analysis, it is recommended that the applicants' request for a conditional use permit be granted as proposed. Cc: Bill Joynes Tim Keane Bennett and Sharon Morgan Mike Sharratt -2- N a CO 0 350 700 1,400 Feet Z° Noble Rtl Subject ls�and_V�ew R a Property ao Pine a CD a J�` Marsh - Pt Arb Lake Minnetonka Woodside Road Marsh-Pt polnte Cir et iKathleen lnmawrLP_1 �Q Ct C a 2E y a ° CO, !q9e m m awberry C o Rd BoAer_Cir �, V yr tt �� B.e�erly D'rJJ Map r a a Mapl Ave Virginia Cove Ridge U � a W 62nd St U za Applicant: Bennett & Sharon Morgan Address: 3920 White Oak Lane, Excelsior, MN 55331 Site: 5580 Woodside Lane, Shorewood, MN 55331 P.I.N. 31- 117 -23 -13 -0016 Description: This zoning application is for a Conditional Use Permit to exceed the maximum accessory building /garage space allowed by the present day Shorewood, MN zoning code. Due to a very lengthy /deep site and the respective long driveway, hardcover is a primary control. The project, as proposed, will meet the 25% hardcover control. Due to the owner's requirement to develop additional garage space, a stacked garage concept is proposed with the lower level, which is entirely on two walls and partially on two walls, subterranean. Thus, the lower garage will create virtually no additional building mass beyond the initial 1% story home construction. A 10' overhead garage door with an end access is part of, and integral, to this proposal. The proposed project drawings attached illustrate the above description and reason for this request. Exhibit B APPLICANTS' REQUEST LETTER Legend —x —x — Fence --o-0` Slit Fence T Overhead Telephone UT Underground Telephone STS Storm Sewer SAN Sanitary Sewer WTR Water GAS Underground Gas o Telephone Pedestal ® Square Catchbosin O Manhole H Power Pole QDeciduous Tree Coniferous Tree X900.0 Existing Spot Elevation —900— Existing Contour • Denotes Iron Monument Found o Denotes Iron Monument Set EASEMENTS SHOWN ON SURVEY: *SANITARY SEWER EASEMENT PD. N. 122 * SNITARY DOC. NO.E10 68011 R . * DRAINAGE EASEMENT PER OF WOODSIDE. S DE. ry0' A /LO I ry. =$m fig• �'� \ \ \9g SURVEY FOR: SHARRATT / E / S ak 'k o�t tu'/ DESIGN 20 0 20 40 SCALE 1 INCH = -V FEET Area of Lot 4 from Ordinary High Water = 39,302± Sq. Ft. Site Address: 5580 Woodside Lane, Shorewood, MN 55331 PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: Lot 4, Block 1, WOODSIDE, Hennepin County, Minnesota. BENCHMARK: Tof of M.H. 14' Southeasterly of the South Corner of Lot 4, Block 1, WOODSIDE. Elevation = 950.50. NOTE: The location of all utilities shown are from plans furnished by the utility companies o0d are approximate. Utility Companies should be notified for exact location before doing any excavation. +e "' ti`. +a•J I hereby certify that this survey, plan, or report was prepared by 9484 ".. me or 'under my direct supervision and that I am a duly registered +; Land Surveyor under the laws of the State of Minnesota. PFD p9. W. BROWN LAND SURVEYING, INC. 949.2 .•:" n x950.6 • 619 M rjr .SOP. =949J ,.1 Woodrow A, Brown, R.L.S. MN REG 15230 t9;HAiCn •••, Dated: • �O x95D.9 a- - - -� Exhibit C PROPERTY SURVEY - EXISTING 453.9 t \ ®� \ `i`" v e4 / / $ FRONT ENTRY =945.9 TOP OF BLOCK =952,8 GARAGE FLOOR =951,9 ` \ ro 106.3 rA o CEDAR TREES uy CED TREE In ° ° .. _ v \� I j -S4 35 55. E 342.10: � Y 04 X 0' ELM 15"' BU I (ERNU 0 Q � t���l u� O Q+5 �� � .oh�� _ � �g �' ,+;���..:•. 'gCc�• J�.S g�'1h I +� � �• :. �'• LIT Cc°''e:' _ I _- r 6 .:.6�• p1 Sp UCE TF? ES:- ;alt 4- .al7gl riG• 11 51;L �• •• %'�+ _'• ,. /INN - l`d',~��p� .::i''' ..-`� ��• Xv - - -. _.mod' �� _ � - _ - Z11' � �• t �- -- •Q tt _ i I,1-- 1�^''_•, r � � -I " �• " f . Q� k ;- a,• � 2�'}'I`� _ �r+-il <7 Y do ( :+9 �• '1 �...- � --��.• `{ 1j�_{_j4! � ��% • ^�° "i`�, O!`1" - '. it I aniy I ft ' ! ,r I : r �. :'P l - �s • p N/r GAS �ro ( ,l .. i.. 1i`i. r :z. ^il rn `off �o FR c� _i' T • �1 O � • 81t1� �Lf' : - �� I ' 1 '• Ir :...CG• :..raP�Qo°'• ��'� �\�. �--� !04. -���' °'� � � �• � k�� -f-g �6� _ - .,..:. -• g g �o g �g,�g• .� r ego k q,�' ter—. _• � °j - g°� �Cb, x a4"� b°3582-6 '1 � 7'4 EA o co BITUMINOUS DRIVE; i' f y CO •, g2,� w w I y g o \\¢ d � Co rn LLJ Co Ld N;f no gg } f;JJ o 'c o� IL I I / `�• Q g Exhibit D _.�... _...._....- ..._._......_ ..:...._._... _.__;:_::'___- PROPOSED SITE PLAN I I , ,-, - ,;..-'-. J, ''A'' .... ., — , , - .Is . . . :..:. -� ... :.,, .., , . : - , .. * ,� - -� ". ---,� , . . , : . - ." .. " ". - - � .,,., ..--. - I's " , I I ? , , . � I T � ., :-""",�-,:�:*.-'�'.t'�,":;�t",Z�"*;I�,, -, " . . � ,.,:., . " -%, , ,'.I..- - ,,,.:,t�:,-.- -,-iT-S:,!:,`t -A.'�."..1, - -- - , -I ,:"�",, . ;,, :.* 'I. .'-*. % - - '. -:z-, , , ,v , .. .. . , . I . Y ".. '-'.-'.*.-,.-Y..:,.:.:" .... .. .: .. I, - .-., t . . , - . . �,,- - '. ... .. , , .....'. ,Z"",:,t,-.' ;I..,,,.".,- -,.� , , . ", ., - -.�.-�-.�.-;,!,-- I J, ,,, " " *.' . I - . , - - . , �"b .. --,'-.*.f�,;,w- . . , . .... .1 - .. . I ' �.'- - �. . . ... - ... --.r , . :.",.� ".,�:,ff.1 ", , -',,,-,.*� 07-fl:*! :,,,1--yIl-%4l;z-1 . , :.- -� ` , :-"--v.� .. -;-;Al�---,,.-4 . . , ., 6,A , '* I - .-..*-I - '. - , T ', . -e I .... . � ... . 't ,"-.:", - ,- -. - . "Y' A-n ...... cy : ;- - *..-, - - - " .... . . , - - "'A . . - I, . .1. ,.,--":I-4 -.-.-ri,�J�'s:4-,s,:-,,: ", I . . . , ." . . . .: --,*.:-.,."!*.l."--,Al,-. ,- .'..' "'s-'-ff..", ...."I"'. i 1, �. ..., .;. , ";, "At, -,-.- - .;4 -*'.i' N 0 , , - - - � ..,;. ,-.j.-,:- I-," -...g !, %-Zl-1 -..�,,�,-.-.,t:-�,�',��,-p',,- - ill-( .- W"s .x -q $. , ... - : -% 7 '" ;'K; , , z , s.: I - ��41 4W . . - � - . , ,--,a---.-- . , f, ;;I: V. 11 . -.0'. -- , I -;� . 4 " , - . g. ,"W'. .". - !.- �--,;,,g-,x-;ta;v,:--�l I I -1, r.;. 115 -, -Pv, 2 , , .. .. zij-,,:.�,.,n�,:41, ;:1`--.,--,.l"l ,'.- , - , ... *. -.'�, . "... - . . . . - ,� !. -, - -1 ... -.1. I I I ,-�-,�,* - . . . - - , . - - . L��-,- . :' - �- -.", - "'-- l.,-.l.;.';--.;-,, - - - :�Y M1,-,-.---.:;" ��' .IS"". - . � - . ', !, ,..,., . tAV,TA,�i,,--,W, : v a.i .. ,,, ... . .jl"'.. _-_'.,t,,:s.,, . pl�., 1.!WAi.�;': . C� , ; . - ;��- ,,--�j .-Tj-,'��- - I .,.,. .--,,,-,-.",�.1,---' 1. I - ... -1. . - " ", , , I I:: -.1s, . . - ll.r._- -.... s 11 . - -- -I.,.. ;.,A i 3..:-: :, . -r. - -.1 - t,."- - - . " - I .: , . 'ti-��-':-:�;-�;O�"'­'�:' - -!i I - , t4. .: . . . , - ,-'t-tU -- I-'-- -7,1 - A ".."'. ?,�,'&-:t'l ",-,,--':�- . ; .. . ,;. . - _4 j , ... .1.1 4 . . '.: - .. , . � ;7, _�,',V' I .. . I I . ., , - 6 .. I '. - . - F.tg�- .. s. i,lz . ,� .1 ;%.L�;, %- '�--.-,T,—ji,�; :-5. - K: 1 , *V . . . , 4..-lp � . '41 � -'.-7,- �q-.',%w ,f-?�:;--,-�?�., �X� . , - .. , -- �.,., " .. l,k��'��,!,.4"6-.,�:.�.z,,"'�...,;� . : , :% t%T. ��4, ;;N.,..., � , , . , .,-,-x�K�;lnN:,--,?-w---R! 4 --�,.- C, .1 - g- r, . , N -i 4 . it!'O"ll"" " 41-1, i. m - N - . " , - "' . : . ,sl �-1144`� *Al..? ic.f , U."t-I'Ald . t . , - - , -�---��5 7r, �, z � . . I , I ----� . ..g.q " 4 . - V. -� - I -.�i ,�� '. , I � " ,- -,-r. It �, ... Ili . -,, . 1, M, A - I ". ., -- , -- � . I 1, - -1 1- ; ..s.'sh, - .D.., �il;,-W.l lj,;�`�k��'f;j,-:nl �,Tj-*.My, -1s"-* - .., I 5 0 ,, Z4! �---,�. . .. �;-!,n ;. ��.;-.-.-�l�4"�'-.�.��'�i.t'!"---�',--;i.!-,�-.-��.�*."-*-'?""�&-""', �Wtls�2� ..:�*Y--f s, - U -11 . '4 -1 �1-4-� i, -",.,Cf9i,.-`.'t�3,:l--,51" i .1T.-I.- At."T -, . , ", ,; -- Xo V- I A; " "'I'- -T! . " -� -, -.- -, -� . M ;X-2i si, mg .4, - . I , .,,,*--I,r. 't,-,�4"�,te;,j"13,�il-",,5�i',��l�.�,,,�,�-�t�,.--�,,�I � .. --- � !�;,;.-. .- -, -. .. - - �- I --g, --,--� -,c,42�� --'�',i � i T"'.4 . "i , -. -'-,,-.-,-.,K, j! r�, r _.;. -1,4, �,`��, ,.,�. I :, ., . .�.:r I -. , ,- �. - - - I ,-�,--,-- - ... I '.. :.Wal�-,: , ..,-K 35U. .. z---%!-VT', t - - , ; z . Clt--,�-L - - -, .. � ... .. - ... I - .1 ��= . ... . ,-� . . . -- I .. . ---- I . I . , - , hRg - . - - ,t'�..'�7���lm.-z"...,�,:,'�-J'.4 ... .. - - ,..��. --- .- i.?�� , , --.V - --.,a.- I ,* I .,-,, � - s. , . -,� % I . �f ,- .- - ", - , I �--1�11,1 -- - I . � , .." 4� -4'-N-'.,.* �"" " - �! �-'.*-Rtc,'-,,�:��,3-0'.-" Wt�', I � - '��,---'­- 'j:', . I ,,.�, r .. 4'-� '...-i�-'rZ_II,f.��j, i; V:il,'i -,F:� -!� y'.1"', .-r'l, I 'r, I � .. �r-,,,�(*5�.-. :,l-'.-!'-'4-.'�� "" . . . �, ,,�,f -11 - 4--"`,--'�er,;-- 4-�,----",.( * -, . L,--- � e. .1 - -,- -,�," - - - .... , ._ .. : .... . 1%, ...-K .% I ", i� , I .. . I - - , . . .. I .,r - . ,, n p '. . � I , , 14 � - , 14� .mm . . : la . ;,)",4,.,l-:%, : -'�,�j"::'t-,:�-4.:,"!.r. ..!?, - *..t:*. .;. .. . , . - . ..'I ,::L, 1-i ." ,%'.., -, , �.-,, - ., S:'; . - - . , ,;:r% , ',-,,* '..-.!-":*. � . .a.., -;.", �, -,�c - .-"-",. .. ". % . - ... . , .A... " .., " I "t "'.... i- , - ,,, . '. .., * I L;Y-;t..*-.*.'llll'! -1-c ;:."*. ";�.'-'... I .A'..': -.'�: i:-:-.*�,'-,- '.'. ..".11!...".., . * . . - * - " .�.-.',` '!'-*dl - .-'- . , .." . -%N.- .."..".. .; �,,, -.I �' , **.,' : . .;,.� '-, ,(.".*: .V".:.., '...�,:'.., , 1 " I " ,,,,,, �' ­zs'! ",-.% . - ."", ';,.'.'.. ., '.,:I'..,.".,- , -'� - -�,, .. , , . - - -" , - :. !..!'I,:; " C, V - .'-Z... ."-.,. i I , , � ,�..--.� ll��:, �.;' - -I , . . . ,-.* ., --,� - -'-'.*-�,-,q.�:,� ".." ,"'. - - , -" '"""'', , - "", , I. -1 *`­--� * �"---, . � ,:-I,-;-� I ,.A.-..,:J..:. .. I.rl .. �- :,,,'�- . . "i" - ... -',.- 2-,; P.- e ,*4 ,,-, :.,-.,.�,....�..-:-,:-..",.*:*.,�'�-,*,,.,,'- . . - � - "v...-I .... . .- ". ; *-, , *%'�,�,:.-',--�.,"":.�,:-".�., "".1., , .I ...-" - . 4. "', ', - , - , , , '�!', - -.2." , , , ,'. -, - "'.� ' . 0�"--, ----z., " ....,,;-., , ".. 1"i.- ..., ., -, --f" . ,Q -!"-,-.,!.lZ_-' .", , a.. '..". ..'r I ";"; -,.--.-".:., - . ':,,�-- , , , �--,*`-, - - - --,:A.----��-i%�,.� ,d, 1. - . --l- - . -W -�,"'I'-- , " ;,. .. , ` -, . -,-, . , -, ... "�'.*.� -, .":-,.j-�:,..y"%t,*.. . , , - , ... ., 4z �' " ...., ,4L�- 'J'..Ya:.-'-,*,,�,,,,, . . -�- _ , -,", .1 ,,, � -, , --�, -I.. -----.:",..Zr!'-, , A, � . . . " .. . ,,:,,.-t,-.*,- - 1. ­ . � I ." -- 111,111A.7 -l;-�'l,'-,, ..:.N. , - - . , - -�.-,"., . . . , .. .,.. . --��-;, "::;,!" "o I. ., � .,"r.* ... I . . . . , .11. . C­ -, I. !, , . ...... . '.. � . .%�! , I I . - � I I. . . .�.- I.: -;.*;- -* ti f. ... - --;.7,:�..---.,,.-.,.s � . - . "rt '. - , -�., . - i - " ---, , -, ." '!�..�.:.. . ... -, - - . �'t' * . � - ,� * I - - :.. -' . fi - . - -, .-.,--,,:,-gT , -.1 :*-,�!,. '!:Z-*�;?. -'.14P-� , -, -,---,--",-6,, '. .1�;:-;-,,,-.-';.!, f-, -" .,;; ." " , ;`� ,"'>, "--'!� ..:, I -;-:,� ,,.,:! ';-,'� -, , - . .. ." , ,- - t--,. -:��, -`-�,-','.'-,%', ". . I,,'*- -s - - � ... I , , I - ., '. ". .. , . . , . � ..,,- . - - lo. , .�- . .4, -1- - - * - '- '�,- .. %;� -, .-:- - - J!I, . - �:,, , 1. , . - I I "t - - - - - .1 - ,. ', " I . t, t.:-- - .. .. is. X .. ..., -s,* -,.-* ; -;� �; A s.. 3*tf, :,*",* ", , "' ...M - - 11 � ... �` .11 j.'.. % 'i, '4� .... -!- . ". -, " ,, i"." �-V,,.*.,;.'lk4,-;- "; ll-�." �-; �'- " -'. :-'.'! �",��, ":';".- %,:.,' �'1�4*. ,'i';,'j'--.,',i; .!,, , -ite; -- ".r -e-",-l.�t-.-,.,,.." . - , --.- 4. i,.7,:-,.-: �, I !. . .., - - ." . j - I j . , , �: .., -, :�� ":6....... � ,�--v,;.---.r kl;,., . . . - .. '... .. knl� -,.,.. . .�,-.'. z . , I ,;--.,!:".-, - . n .. , ". . -.I- "'.. , . .�. ,:'T, , %-.1, " N - '-- . )-*,*,*,, � "-.,;� -i�. ,.-,�!,-,�-.*':,tj' ..';,," ,", %-I.".;--,e"'.�. - - ?;�' . I... ....-.. v . , - - tZ;;�s--A -�� . ... ... . . �-------, zmi, * ". . -% - � "'. . " ..'s., .:.., :,- ."..%,-. ..." '. Y _ - , - 1. I - ....'r j�-,-i-%?,, ......... . �- , ..-,,.-,. I I . .. �',.'..'�I-*.-t,�-.-.--�, - - .'A'. "', '41�,', 14 1/v�i�' gU I *�,. -��*'-!�*e��",*,:,f�-.,..."*��,-.,g.p ,-k-'..w, - �&V 1 1 - ' "�;'t",'.h*.l,�;'j'.!', -1- '.;.7".', . . � � .. &, . . ol. '. - ��:­.,.-. I, - Is - - ,z'I'j". ';l .%-.4-..,. I',& ,., I. - iv�,;';'.., $�., ,A-..;i � LQ.-j, g', - - . . .-­ . , , I ,��,!�.",.?,.,�-.', � --� - i�z,-.-.-.11- . - - I.; - I ---- --� eA-,-;?, A .. , I , - - lr .... -, - ,--'. . , . . , , i -.- - - -.-. I '... - -..- ;i� -" '. " -- V�r,"�, , . ';�*,'�l -.� -,-�-,.-.., , �� ::"..-�t,;. ....,7- .1 -, ., .:.*,. ll.L, . ,-W� , � - ----- - -I...,-,-, I - -A ll � - -'- " --- . w.,-,-:,13�i��---.*-- �, . - . 4 -�'-t .�.�-! I 1. 'A ,.,..I.c '<x INA'. :,--.,-'F, ".. v - , ik -, " ? , 1'. � . - , . :.4 �. - - �;�,,i., �.� , :!M", " � . I .. - V, -...l;,..'.l-,.�,l"l-,. ",.,.,;., ,*;,%s,',-, --- -.,,, - --si,; 4 � - - I - - I I, I , .;� . -- - 'A . :�` '. 'N '-,`�*"-',tl:",-f-�l*-. , - -1. - � '... . , �i "6' - , , -r�,L- .1, -.";�,-1,;.l',,ss,-;t,'�--,'. k '­";.-­ ,.-el.-4-1,1-,�. --M.. " ,.:, ,t(4 I,j � � ,'-P"-v,."l-l'�.-1,;,.. �! I-. -'i'- -, T', � ., :'. -:j" L':Z,' - *, Ip �,,,, , V", ,-3*,-- - , v- J A-.-, -L, ix rg,-��, .- , *t'- " J.-.6'..? ---�.' tv:.*!,*f.,-, . . . . . -1 " 14"' .. a -- . " � ' . . -, � W. -,�, s .- .., . , .. . . - , x13, � I. '11;,�* 1-K.-W, -..� 4 - , - -K,:.. "A./, a. t � I ­,, I .." , '. �� 1 , --l.- - s, - . -.A . . ; . i , . . '1z " - t. �., jf�-�-M'-�-�, .N -:,�,-,--,,--, - , ,6,,M,�l -i,;�-� -.w ;42'.'�*-P,il- I"' jil -'.I' -1 v --.; -;%S- -, '. - '. . .- ,."., - I- 1�ft-.- I " — --, .... ­ " " . - -, 's!;'t.,-..,' " - ,'l,I..-l-,l-,.l . - - - , ;, ' r .4.1 . .;,w '. - I ...� . .4.1 . . . ., M .. . .k - - '. . , ,I .. . . .. . . .. . . .. .. -1 FA i-.w. ..-k -, "-:� ,il, . .. . � � - - "--,Z-Q 7A -, ol-, �, t I ,.-,� . .. ".'.'.1,A�-�kME.; ,,,-,.y,**�','J,'l'- *-ee.-"i-",;:!,.;,;-��,ivi-�-; . . , R . . - , , , - -, EaW-�,;'N;h-"A� 1-1 ---,N�,�!j-:"). - . , ,-.. p ., - � I . , .. . . 1 �M�?. o, . - "' ,'� K r: 115 -,-� -;;,-1,,-�-`V-;,.,!,' --re"'ss-'e�%'e.;- s, . ,�, .... -e, -, -,;, 't - V I .. N- - I � A� -,j,:r,-Wl'!,.',-": '-eV,-P,Y.;f.s,-l' " 1. s,,W- -.1; - " - -, - ' . - ­ '�­-`--I---",'*,',�� Z -� Y-V7. - .. . iy .�4.,ip.*,v -,�j ,'I! �,,V--�% ��.,. t, . i � ,!�- i . t,.,. - . , --�v,-.14,�,- .-.-, -,- - - -.-q- -�' '�,! ,j .... z . g, t, ��,: ;.I k-mA, g, v - . �.!X'7t�,' '14j:,';%,"�'.74� -,--,Lv-K ..!. �;,iLq-gg-wof s,v-4, W I � - -("� --I -i - . . , � ._ " '. - . - � , V - " �,m Vlz�.�,*-,7�,�,4-!;--,-, -,,,,,,_-, Z� .1j.'s. - � I 1 7.- '! . -Nil-, !��I-'lwi"!--:-�'�-'�f IV.96*1 , ,:,�. , m - , -,---,*--,-- -- -- . . , �.,a �. - , ,,..L. .,. z .., . � � iii, (,W:. %, . :. ., ;,, - "l- -11 V%l. z- � I l!"..":�E'Ni f sl, ., g , . 7- , . .. ., ;" . i. ? ill . - - rf -,� e-f- %v6:F- -��--%-.--(.wife-:-*� ... P,1��-..".�,7v.--.�-,! ..-'f!o.-'lj-. ! , �.i!!.,!:�..�,��,-.It.,.,.".�'.*f�7,-'�.', :-;�,0�--iMl,-;ms.zx.n--r . -:V.; , - h CIM, .. . . - - ", .. ,,�-` .4 ;, -� ,- 4 , � J� . , 'M -, t�-.:��,.-.v."���!,'��,!,!V...,!ii-", - " - -� �-.? - I , : RN 4-4-MI-K wF,-�77y-, �---,--;�, yg - - :: : ti . . Nl'."":�r-�K,� . w- -1 I- , '..,I -N-0 --k -..,, j.",,�;:�'t,'.-'.'-,' , jr- ,3, - - -- -1 . " , , k, ,Ztw.--n -e�- ,�, N -%Z -1-1-1-As"'... I --v -11 ..... ... �., , - -,. " , - - -.1 �!F, , -,:-.W.:- L , ii,-, .:-.. "f5i,". O., . lil- ;txrc --lj;�%,-'-�-.% . 51, I KA - - -1:5;i, -r-, .c ��3�%-- . - .'V 'v � Me ,,�Ji�J -1 V � .---- -, -.11.4 .. - -1 " - " -*,.-.'lv.l.M-'lA- LQ f --W .'P.T1- ,, .�V�wy;;., Xq�- ) "N'. m I i ".M. �Wt.,.jr-M ., -� . ,ii, .�', ,'C'N-'.�--� -% .-.��4,;--�;,S,i�:",�:V�;,;,:�*�,tt--, -%4� -, eg4 wgi�� ---- - ,%fp,-e&<Yi, , , �, v,-,--.v--4 -- Y�. -- -.'p 1:�il"��.u-i-ll�:".�ellfillr,� - .qg ,&� .... � . --.,,:,.z- " z, P . , - 's , y '! ; q '. r,g ...... - . -�' - - --gg - -a-,X . ,��, -t­',h,E--,;*"--F; ,.�..;pr�-r;�,,�l*"Af�?.*.-'��.��-,,, 1 01-11401 a,V'ON ZM�,;�', "-.E-91..-��-'Al-��--%"Ijl;,4f�r - 4�- . -.1 i-.1-1.1p -I-,. '-,,'j,4----;A��k;--, , - - , I . '�wj,,-, .","i 7- g!;,zt��,-Av;g�. � -� mxlQ-Z6l-.l-v '.4-1 � �...-,�.,.,.--3�"",14;,:-i�,-�*.!��'i $� - X , -! -.� .. 'If .. . " �,'� �" -),3-A-�j-W""l , A , Z Nm�i�,MM j -, .. .Qr., ,-.,,--., -jy�.;,-, g - ; I -)a �r.-�,-_,tv�!,t� ,F, .--��, , 71M '. . .J�,-A,--'V;i,,-.l' " ,w .H an ,.�,, -A -;, -, -v- g 4,91-S Enwff,p-,�y"is,if--gi--, yal - . � R - - - . -�p--W'��-, � I . M- - i��, , -1. .yj, -7�4.% m � ,� .... .... 1--, 6;�111-i , ,- , ,;�!g-, . , W I WA-1, �.,*--t, , _;,, T-li ; - , p g�., I - - I I . IN-11-1- , . ". -4"g., . w w I �� . -�, p � - ; " L.4,;,-; - - .,. . - � 1911,1110-1 IS-11-1000, e, -- - c . . . . . . . -* ---� , , . �, -, - - �� - - --- -4%,- IMAIMIWOR I i : -7 , , I- I - �.. - - , - . "-, "OURR., , " Axl -,� .!p, 3�-7-..""�-�tt�.i,.-,;-"�",.'-- , ��y - mg , ,_r-4m . - ",r.-",,- - - - :k6ll%v.- -. ,W-.-,�r,�,-!4��-r�--"-...-��.-,,,,, x Z" " -I -, - . ?.;-�llrk-1 -� " .1 -Rtll- r � _ ;; W.R. - .-, � .1 ll.kl s ff, 11 I - - 4-- --'l,7t:Aoii?i . : �-- ��� - . s, ! -...di,w��C�-;J- - ., §.K � , ". . 0 � gw�. � -.9 - . � I . �111--. I; .4 � --- ". . . � .l.. . . -- - " -, -'ReA., " I t---;,, - , i � IZU--,�� . . I , sis, ... .-.;4'-',', ..", . .-�,�,'-'t�4 . . , . -.1. � -- ul--�gg, ". *' . I , I - .k .� --W !t �. ..f. , �-V , .,� '. - .f* ". " i T., .. F, I- 1 -- . - ., I Al .11 , � I . I ;; - - �1, q I k . . .. ., - . . . - I I � . . . . . . . . . . . , i m ` �� . " "* , . , - . , r, " I ,��I,* I . . I I ....... -." I . . -1,+g-.,s� ...- I 4%4�-, - .... - . . a " I ' fl . " - . J 26 la""w Is wit "I . � I . - - � ,r,- I. r, ,�� , .-, g . I - -------:, 11 mas"r ----? - . -1---, :. - 0 m4 - � - - . . ,4� it --4-1 I I 1-d r4lV r-! !: LARN. . : � I I �- �,s , . � , .� ! I A I I % I +-- -/ ol - -, " I . I I ,::r , I p a ..'� . � . . . .,� : ,/10 . . i . , - I - .10 � . �i' . I 1, (t�,OAtil,,OPZ) ' � . - , jl— I — .. .. I .. �z 1. . ; p -f I - --,--,." -- , �'z . . '. . - V - i�� All ��- ... . ! I 1 1 --- - !j *t�; � I t I w - - —,- . - ,-- — - -_—, .f- �-,-- --. - V. - sO , I , wr-O - mf4g. . . . � . - - '... — T!2—CY -- -- —v, k— %. ; � ..- I \ , . i - .11 st- ��, - .. . .1 --� . .. .. * - , � . I I I , . - -1 �. �� . p .'-,4.' 1 10 , - , , I 11 - 1. 1 U . , 11 P" I A .If I -- . - ... ,-I \ I - . 14I�A.-'�,_. 4 - -1,6m I I I , . -ir - - It / 3, i -4 - '� - - -- . - - , . L - - . . , I . .... I .-- I Ll� , � . -J i - - - ,-- .), —j 1. " * - i�---- - -'st .. . .,�! ., I I I .1, .. - . 9 I A:( '. 1 � 11! "' - , -r*-*,_ - . . �cl -. �� a . .. -.1 . . .1 , !s:l- i. . It - V r - . — — � , . . ".W, 4 . 1- s, %� , , Z, . . � I I .- k " * * *,.-p,42,4G* I I Avj::;, (" I I . J1 , - � df .. I' -1 � I . — . x 14 )Z-)K I " ! I v :P, %�,! s. I % . I :: . !:- Pa: ; ­.1, .. � . I -s - 1, . . I - ��- --� �,--, 1-1�4ilz- " � . . ,zk I / ,I I I .. I I , laft-Plele I . .., .. ,� . I ,�- I wee . � 6 it . ,11'41'11-i;111.5-�, . . I I . / - �.:.", " .1 . 4Q, -i(vjr ...." .�I�L!';�. , - , . . I A�V, I I - 1-j . . .11.1 -- . -.1-1-1 . , .. �e-'-, V, %:,�,%- , - !.,.. .l..".411.4 ft. . . "­'.5 �" 'm . " . . . � � ,M,M-U%,- . --. �,,��. - -- " , -_�= I . " t I q 4nn.'%�5 1', - % ., . It 1� -` P� *11; - - . -- . - - t., . .1 I -f7l',.�4T.,��l:-!t�!7-;.f"—.�.�'I ,..-.,I-...-. . T � - 1�me "" 3-47- " -�`-- r" ,-" ., q, - O.-S Ill a -ip,f - ----?q--gz ugmqgq, wff,�-KUL V.f,lP--;!, %..,.,; " ... . " , -,:!,-z 'Y" -is . - I , :- ;-, 4�,- , It 1 -02- " " ;, X, s , zjg�t.� W; �,, �j? V4 .. g!" " - -- �� I I.' - ,t.�,g,,!O*�-'� -F-WMARN, M, I 'A�.*,-:;o-,--;,;-,-, .. , - "11, - --"- ', � I . --�,.�-,--*, ?*.".",..-.�:*f,.%".., ... - .. .. � � - ;, - � .%-I. ".11"O " -1 .. " I .... . , , ,"-"., -,q :,,.-., .-:',, ,.:,,,*-i,.,., .."', -". I's --;,.'l:v-",;,-., .­"", *. . ...;".;, '.11. ,,:�,.:A"i,.,il;�*,".,,.;,."*..*Z.".".". .1-P., ... .. ;- . ! �' ... . ". . -"., . . . " , , . ' .." . , ",*,.".��',iz',�;�".."..."-"I..;.,...i.., . N . , . , . . ..W. . -,I,: ,-, ,., - -...;;.,. ", .*,'., , -;' *%:. ..., "�..-',. -- , 'I '�; f 7. - , '.- ,.'-,., V.z 4", .. , . ... .. , - - "', ;-, s-, "; -,!,,. 4, ', I.;, . , . , s, , . , . u . ..... .... . ..,. ,:, .1 , . 'I',, . 1. I . �,---- �1:�-','-". - 41614*1AS-1 ,*- li r I 4�-'..,. ... 'i --.lM-bc7ll.1,v,-..- �A%i�-Wt f" A :Al---.' I.f , .. - A- - .-,r,l,,- ,;,", -� ­,�..';l. 1- - I � . I - , '-' ��. 1119-4 .Cli I . . , :�. . , � , ,,� g '. j -ffl.'j? I .e - Z- 91 . . i, , t�;.j -, . - . - I s, V , � , - "T"" 'I'lo-vir , -- , �� . ; -,� A, , . . - - .. -. - . , K, I , ---,�.� ,-.�- J- -S L ,( M-3 91 FRI. 1, � . ;�f 1;-.:-;�-,�L%v . e . � � A-12 I u V.-lor--AMR, - R , . V� - .1 ,, ... - - K, 13, . I- . , -:! , � . m- .. vAm - �,� .. -27-- - - �-- ,�- I . A .04 � .4, .1 -1 .. 1� , - .5 V--!F.�:. T . � r ,� Oil if" .. - - "V,N i ! I -, 'y-j- , --- -% V - I-.- it, - a -I. o ', .. . al R -- - M -r . � � . P,! . V , I F. P, � , - , � MIM-IM" ffl-,%-'.";".p-- ,-.,,--_,-,,-,-, , �, .. L - zz.C� - gg ,-- q- - -, 4 A 1 4 � 9- i e-FN �l ff & 1-1-1. -.--.* ... -1 . I .. I - -g- � -t � --- .1-1 .1 I . IN ". '.... Y� -,.-­.-, , I . - I 'S 1, -g.----",-.'- ... ...1--l- --g. -, - - .,f -i - .1 - . D� W. . y - . P, ii . - � �W�wj�� .� -- , - .11 --;i?-;r .. sg".l.- --- ; -- S", - --,O. - \ .. . ;�� , .g g -- - - ". - -- -- - . .i. - - I 1 z5- L- v - -- -- .- -T .� , -, liwilx ,., i, .1 gg ,-4�Ampg,,� , - S:j-'.,li� - - � k k I I �rg A- ; I - ft- - - � " - ., ,;�.. I p"Tikre', ?'M . '. ,6: '. 2S - " " - - - ZI, -.1, MT, �! .., '�4 k ". A*'. j I . q� ;-jg-gjym.-q--su� ------- - ,,, M.; , I ,.-. s -�ejz-e -; jj ,45M,, M *?-,P:,k lk .... - -..-le I - . -51- �� & I -tv,z-��.-'!-L-:iP,il"VA WTP I � �, � , I . � , - "R ..I"-. -- V- . * - � - - - " - ,sf,j , ., i ,Z ,.,. A , l'I'Ll N , - , " ., I �t; 174 F- I a - ,"�, -,-i"-,-,----,-, ---pz.--j, - -1, - -.----, -'A�V- - --l%-tt,,'A., p"-,- . �k jv�jn, ,,."- '"l',--;�-,j,l--,,.-R,l,'.l - �.- , -,,,�� ,4qr, , f - * -, rl�ly , 'd 5,7-1 1 ---, . 11 I .. �--, , 4:!N-*e�, -j , M . i I , '05 - ff�, 7g - �".,;'-'-, - t;q 1, � : g5q" , ��-'- -- . .. — =---- . , . I, .; , ! .�--.� s, � *,-. ;- . — Ar -J= 4-L "., IN --I- -Y,..4', v .:;� .-- -, I . vt4 .1 r, ,� ­ - ," , 'A . - q -iii ----.-- -, ll'ajy-(�Z: K�� ..-;.,�, v-'. I -. . , . . ."-, ,-.; ig -,�t� -, - �.: mg� , W', . ,�. . - - -�, - , . . t, ; , .. - W*RNTZ, . ..---g.� f .e;.,-,-j ,,, 1 A it ,,- - I t , �!-,S,'-! ,� W, $ 'I'Mr.; gilmp,;,%-�,� -�!, . �- "V.r ,., ,. I v - . �- ki,,t�y'PA��-,;�M- � -- ��,6,-�� ,'N�1!�� ----,---R'L �,��,,,y . , ;%U.'�-,,,�,AsA; %',H-�-, I , , .�� . - Nff,l-,.'ffi,ffi;-'g-,j - - -- - � . -q '� I I # . !.., m R , � ClRg "' V--,�, -q NA?�U5; -,'z-W,,2� �gg I --' � ,'AM-'U7"f.,M"*;,M,A - " " , . ! - - - , - , . A ,-, -E��",,'-Y-'., '-iA-,*,, w g , -, -,. . . - Mll le -;,w-;�!,;-�-.. . �. el - " j-,p-,;C,a N LM, -1 -- ,., � -All , � ":;�-111.., V,-., * . . . . . . . . . 115y5 - -- . - 7x--�. 09 , , , - .; .1 1, - -.-., , - I =. -V L, . . , " 0- - -m-'. .. --r--, 'R g�,,. . 11,9Z., . . , ". . , - L- - , - " ,- �,,� ,4 � � , *A' *�* L- L- L- L- L- � ­ %,,,� .. . � .. � - - j." . , - . - - * - - � W . - * �, N'R.-111,101, 471.tav,z. ��.-�,.;L�:.�'�,�&'Z'-,'i',-7�.f;,:�).;-�'�.-..'�-�r�.s; -,V-s, ..'. -"G'-'.'--,r-',;� -,z--,'.`-'-!�*lt-,-', - .: . . r� . E I - . , & " - MR, --,".15 . I � . q*!z4s� 'i,% - k g:- 4 ., RM ... .. - , g ? - I -, '. � - , I � � 1p bW W--� - � � -.. ,��-.-,-. L-. . ... .1 -i -, . . 3.;, .; �, 1 lflllfi� .� Ri - ,4i,!,O,-�,��-v,.-���:,-,-,�..),.,��1--�,� ". I . . , , 'Z— N . t t -- . Am , , �� M -1-1 -y--, t "ss— "". ,�A.',� ---.i ", - , , , . fi ..%;".�,- iN , , �9,vlt' -!gS-,--,v-%,--Ml � .... � '40 1 / � .. . 01 'F�l � ., - - - � - - v-, - .. . T--C- . . �, , .. , � :K.I.-I�, MMI. -.,-,.�- . , - .., .. , ,--,kl� - ... ----- --,- -, - . R, . - ,-� ---§ - -#- '. - ,:. - - M - --j; -g- .�- --.! '. 'g� .r,-,- - - .., m %�f,-.'---:' ��g � �,-,. , lk--o * - - '--W--"� , ,,it��l�'ll'..'Ol,!r'f�,,�,�A,��.- � . � �, -,---v% , �%2,:--1 ,.,- �, , ", I - - -1— �0. � :S "i . . rilfi�h - - - -----. -- 0- " �;, qgrzt I a ,, , -�. - '�."- ----- --..-- I. --- —= -9 -,� M�MAA Vo'- -,�i'Z�-.,4�-,:!Y,-v,.�.,?..-.,4�,�1?7,4�,'_Z- ' - f —2611A--��'--�--� —��--.- ,;**!-� -i,rg 1.7-z"..,".---.,;I-,...Ir,,�r-�;-'-'�,�-,-, '�:.I�'---',�-.�'!�---,,--,zwr-.�-.�'.4i.f,:v4.,;�;,:zlt� I _7 --- --- . ---- - -- 6'.t,�-,-W�X,;,'.�- � . I .� -'...- -%-, . . �. '% - ---- -, "... - — : --, --�`,V,Z�� � IS i*:. pil.1-1 . �i� z4�A' - - MM *� -." 3..,;,-, ;,4�,q....i�.,4.--T..,"-.--'z'-�7��Wi-"A�, oq--,t,-.-f- -g . t� . " - - - - - - -,,,-- - _1_4�--.' g_;' ,j . imy"MUTA, " - E RY---�,-,i"--'-0 : NX ��,� . '. I I . .. I w le, RA .." �v , , R gi " s, R s , . ­WK& -.l'..'.l-s,T,..,.-.W--Q �"", L,J"M " , ", ,,A�, ,,,1�,k,-,-.'-'Il-r , '� - , '-P ,--X� `2� !�--,�---;' -it Ull � I -- 4:A,.-. "I.- - M- pm,,�' '-',",%v-,--R A �-1,.�.-..-,Ig.�,,:,-i�---L..�-�-- , .,.; . I ,., - '. m .'y ' -�;, ',.i7-y,,7-.-.�rr4- i - . -:.- ,-,�F.*.-.ii*�� ! liz-A-, I� z -21M M , - , , ; ': .;51)4 - �� & I - �-.NNTF W.: - '. . T- -1 141. - . - , , ' ,� " -E -.,--.. i .. . - 71 �,':. �-� .,.- . 'i -, -.'�SF-", 'v , --- - .0 , W .�.--- . kir . - —11 . , N, I - - .11, . - !- , - -mv --mg ,I * - , "i, *� -- I.i;-; VIII.- , � �,�.0 '��l - "'-'�'f ­_-� -.-- M ,- .- ii; m - �- if-.!� -,-q--- -"--.,c.7 .. f- - &'N'M:i--l-lli5rl�-P"` �,;�-114�-,- - Z";t� .... . - - N %IV-1 ..... . ,.,'.-K'l;,.- J, ', — . - - ,klP;��-R% �-,� - M," R-%�7% i *�-,,, -'s, I., - .1. _:� ....;.1-21 , -7 _ I ,. , --- ---- .I.- .1.1 .,----� AM -t - -1 " 2t)'A" 4 fi,-�s, ..; :.,.Alii-;�-�,.P i.- , , -- .., , - -- - "I � ,t,�S , �. . yo . F, � , ---.,-,,.-�,.-z<:" .1 "I't, - I ,%Is IN y ." P4 .. ,,s; -"6�;, -5",!r?'�,,;� .m. -f.",�. --,.W.�:gk,gi , i�KA'-,-"j, '!�-, .. -� - - . fi,l - , . a -, 1". . .;� 61 K r -.??V" w Z4 'I. I; -,�-, IF "-,r�zt-,;--.-.--,,i,,--rp,,�,��; -N : V --, � - - , -� - , -- -- l,f-Y'-",ls,,�.--.-, - - `�4 "t - - . �... .I.-, ,.­.- - .. . .. �, - -..-. '�;M,�� - , . a .. -, - r,! ,�,, -, - ;.-i----�i,.�e�-.,.,��-.�-.�..'.-.-,�...�-- - .-;----.-z--,, """,9",,� � 41;N�. J'e-�'f .1, -�'��T- �; �.-.,1-4-' 1. - . lsk� - _ - 'L%'t----,,%,q;. E -�- ,-�i� - ,- ., am g�-,-,,a :w.,-;,,;-3",;A . Mll w . t � 5!:�, - .'o 1 .%,. .. . ,�- , I . . ,:w, � N . ,,'-,.,.;-s- --,-,,.,6?.�..s,v:: i�---s,,, -; , , -, � , ""' - , I. % '.. W,N- , AM—M"M5 v".142 . - -,)-; -,---*T..,yv,j- "-,;�, - 16 -� "' .; - ---;., _5 .� - ,:,�-,--.,S;f,'-3-pngv--- , .. --- - �- - - -- ---��., i?��,7�&�,"-w j1p ; ., - .�J.?,- -:41 , - -- !- .. �, I I 1� -N "I -11%ltzm v, , V,j �-- , " , - -S"i'li. 1- , - , �";�s,j,,;%',--,,----.�, , . . . . . . * '- - - - -- -� _ - * , *',.' .,---;-;,--;--,MPN A ... - � — — / -L, —L—Lill, Lu,wg , ,,�� �-- . � -�,�.'�� -g-u .,-, - sl.---,-,��, R,5f4w - s "z _,! A� ,;..,-.p - 1 .4 I --Ax-,� -R:,.f;*:,; I .1. - -- ,­ - - , - -� - " - . --� - I , - - - - - '� " !'W�Ma ,,-,�. - - Il ,�,*-"!i"f rei-M.,41'? �--.--.,-;]��,T.�,-,-,.��.5--�-,,%,?-�,4"����;---et,:-�"i�l!"�A�t,�;4-cl�!- ;�o.y!---;---,S.,--gli. g5v,-,-T �----t.�.I--,; I.- . —V- — - � .,',�..;i;"-,-,lvj� -t�-'C��-Z. . - . ,,.,.,I , ! -, D, -- .X..,,. " ' -� ,- � — � , , . F�,;j.,-.1�".t.,&.'-,-.- . �,. . . ,( " . ,­ I " -,""'. rl-,:�_-,.",; - - I . 6".--.�,.e.5,.,;,.T--;., r, -- . , . -ii - -� -,e,- ---, - -,�� , ;,..t;l k>:3",---- 1 ... v'��;, J:, . *. - - f .. . -,L,,,-., "."Joi, ".., P..,..-- ..", I, - - '. - - - , . e,-.-%-�,',�,z I, i-� -� '-;,t' -'-� . ;:..r -:- " .. - - -*-'�l-.",-�z*-.;'�"-'-.'��-,:.�.'�.�l",�--'� -- I - ---,;,---7-"i: . , �, - '. p.,V .. - V-:�,--- ------(--,--- �,.Ml j. -� '-Aw.�J.?,�l �, .. -�,i.. -,:t .. !� .� -1 ,� .., ."- --'.-��ep, .. �.;� -� . RN"N , :, -,-t-. �, if, p--,s.---...,-. 4- ,�.P�. ,.� ".,j�,�,&� - - .1 - . -1 " 4 " , -'-", " " - ... M. -.1.1 ..�i - �;§%- . . . . il"?Rgc- � I : - M.* -.-V!,�'� -r'^i'?;' *."-�.-.":-;;;%7-,i� ,:%*, ----,.��-.-;�, , . .:,Z;�P-e,�'--Vr. -----t"-" kt ,.',�� -, s . .-- � -V-� ,' B �--- �.. -, '** -', " ',',.� .,:., - - - 13 B& , ss;f - ---- ,R�EV-,,�- .,- - -, s- - -,'�&",f'..- .",-:,�j. .4%; -�'.TVIK4L�"�-�i' .,� . . . . . . '..".....'.5c.", !,� �,--,-j-. - I ij.;�.;,,�-,.-7,�,K'..-,�i:.,,,,i�:�,.�.t"�.�-6--:���r�-- -I,f,-7,! * f . .. - .. 4"it l*!,:--,�n:,.,'; �� _j"', .�q. w.- -,g lv-,. - ,-� ii ,- .,. i . ., , - - -- - * -,- - , -M's , -, -,, , . !k.-g; ;--:,,;��-. " .'..�,'*.�*".,,",'.�ki'.-'�;'�"Le�!,.,����;'�i--,-�,- .. -', �."-L .. - ;�-�ssr.--Zs-jt -, .---- . . , �)"qv. - g -'-"' . "'I'l ,--,l"-V-",l',,-.--� �;.;,. v , , I , I ,,, -'.M� P., ��110�..'ffi --- '�,-,.,-4,jr,�W&��.--,,-.,,�.�i,, -,,;.;'. -,-, -, - ; , , . . " - S, L -.1 -1 - W N -,-.-.-- �-o-;-�3�,!,!�.-", -,. - - - 3 -;-;--,t�e-�;P--� --,A.A!",:. .. -, - . . , - .le rn-n-t- IA!J,.J. !L:,e�ve f -",.-,--- ..`.�ll A -`�,(.11,12 - . , -,-c �M-, �� .. ,,,A- "M, ." --- -- --;�� .t?, " - " 4-:-��,.e.;.7.,.!X&ill' p W'K -11-7-1--vu.-, .. . �.� , - � -4 ., . � ; . p 3 .... I -;i,-�-,-M;--v.:: !`� -e � g --- -,-., T,'. - -:�.-,�", .-..,-, 2 -.1 -,.,,i,,i,��'i..-"�.�..--i'i�.i� --.' ." ,,q,.,.,. , . '41 f�l - -, 14�', �-. --,',� -'Y. -*,�.'..",.- e, ! I , - .e . . , . .2�2-,-Z.At-,N X-,,--,-,v.."N -, � M-!Pl, 7�,jl� , . � - -, T - ., -�,Z.,l n, I; "I' -, - . , . - , �";,, - K, !k 'f i;.; tsc"."j.,.�-,-h' q,- . -5-6w - 14�71lt . I , ,- M . I 9-3 - 'l'4-SMl5--i,-;- -'. .- .. - c"s , ..iM- -� 1. - ,T F. - - ----- - j. ,�� !, L -. .- is , V: ?" i;." ;�.�, I,.- , :. - - - - ," - A . �- Ai .- -- - , ,� . .. "-" -I ;, - - I � j i.i. ..'.,; . , : I . C..-s -- . �,� L�,s M.. , .1. I ,- f , �.: , , . . . . - - ` , -, - . .,.?.-;, ` I- � R ,-'�- . r .P'T., - ., , , -- . . - - ', �'. ."t. �,�-t§',�_v, "�.*-*',��,�;�i"-.7�-i-".7-t.'.�'."-.'�-;-,,'.--,,.'."45, .. W 1-J.U. I'-- 1--,.-.,.,!, . ,:, , 15, �l .r . Ur �- ox��R, � , . 's , -'--�--�-,-*,. .*, , A � .1 7 -ID4-'��-�.-.' :.*-*t!' ,�"!� - . - 9 V&,x4��a;f�'EiR ,�,- % ir "�, d-R . s, ; . � . . �,�t,y,,,r -F .� � . .�;�X%z,.�.§�,',,, 411�lv .Y.0 -l;..-- --- - , ��,, 14-)Y�f , -2� - , I -- �g---k-,Rsll 7-�,4 - .1 I.,, %,�l 22 1 . .-..---- . I .. ,i!..,.��... ,Z;",.: 4's", N ,r,;-l--!;.,a,-, , .A I �.,., I 1-9 "' .. � . - " '**"** *"-' g" -'-'-';" 1-5W - &;w A ,s.,!.. I* - . E-1%11-fc-tkli.� 1-110 4-",r�--',.-. ,�:,. �-"-?, -.,,., 0A5:,fW,l,,.,A -�'--K'-y .s?,,--.--- ,-�r- -, el - - -'-- ,.M,A'2T,.t-.,,.� -V, -.-, ., .". 'a�c '21s CTO ` . - L - . �� --- . L�-,,. , 'TV-,V --T-"�M,,�-*�,X.;,., t�. . - - --ty:i"..."nfl-'��-.3i, . ,Jl.-,,, . . :".1, k" 2`:-, ��'� ., " -�' -'t' '. * ` ' - � . .. ". "') g---4----- --,)�n,��, - 74.19--. , - ., .i� �, y "P . t*wo �� 13ll!�, , -P -� ( Is " �!, .�� .? J. w-V-$--;m%�,�� - - - .111, . %-�,--* r�.-,?--Z'���-'!��-z,��c"r.;,e.�t.:; � -��tgq�4.'�', - - t It , , , ., P ,, ,fw; .�!� .! ,,, - :- .1"t . s, 4.1 ....,-.-�.....'�-,O.*.,,-,,,,,,�....-.-.:.�,�L.".,- . 'W',-, Vl�?,: t -� - s, 'Xi'l�"C.-�f.." . - - *,-��,.,-- .,a,..w; . -.... 2- - � . ,T-- - " s, ,- - -R---!,.,l. z U. ,"..0 -;. ss.�� . ." --.,�,,,, F '..'""J�:1. - . - - 9 '- , -'X�*�!-.,4;,;,.!,� --,�:.-,-� . .. I� -r ---,,�,pt - . opyl. .'PALf,g �;Z-%T,4&7.:A f ,zv-,,,.-,;-l7,,,,2? , .. -. -!��, -,9 . ,N,: . . , �. NyFsss�,,&�.-.; . 9��, -,s� , I.- " - , -,, W. 4, ;Rvnz� E.�.14A.:Al - � 1-1 W s, . - .. , - � R. ., s. ., " A55�. e - lk !r -- � ? - X � .�, " � -:,* . i-t-o­;- I 'j�e,;-,,;--. -lr-.-sr,,.--_- j;,'..". -:I.,.,;. I.3.,-.... I I . 14-1 ASPIN !m t . - . ,.rl.l ..-,.,-" - A"", . . ",�-; 'T-. '": ,�-*.-,17', . V., � ,-,. ----O.,!-,,,' - - .. - * 50"4, , - -,,,-,;,, -M.-M. M,A ..- -- - . ---! �� ,� � . .�;; ---�z*Ad - - - I . . �7 - ,:; t-, .. -1,.,5-:u . " - �,,, :D�'e - --�b",.,:-,-- --- - , - - - ", .� ��.,' .. "" . ..", - P., I., - -�--,' " X �.., .�! -,W 1- s - Z's6-----:, - - - , - - 1 6&c> %, - -*- 5 L'� OR .. ht��','�. -'��*--'T�,.�-*,�';',.,'-,-�'��.,..,�-I.- sl-.�-il .- - - I - - - .: � , ." -P - - .. .---.9 .. ,A..,� I . - I . . .. 4 - " -;�-- .. " ,�. :."�"INV,�.i.l�;` A2. - I . . JP'. ,,, 11 -,", -, - - - - , m. n'-�-'J".i" --,--� -'O.',.-5�'�,.-",-.-,..4".-t.. ,�n- . --- - 15,-.g�ce 1:7 - � * - A. " -, ", - .,-L--- ,-,,.- .- -U��%, .1 -Rill, -q�,--, w-r-Is, -.-,.-.",.,., ,--...!-,:7, "- - '.,�.!;', . .?;--!-�;-,,v. --�L_jit!, .. , kgy� � I '-,.':g--,-zt ",.-R., �:'R��.-- .',l.'�-,'-'. ,I. el -, - , . -, -gn,� l-.lgP---.p,-�-,?-.-.i .",. .- - & 1. I . -, ,- . , - - , - *�-- ,;-,:--... I ". 1- V-, ^ - - . , .J. . I - - - - - - - I -, - :�."*.",'�!`.t 'Aht"""'. -L,� -1 - �- -,'*- I .. .. * "'. . - . - , " -A, ., � ', 1,�� �ft ,.,- a tv . r. &0;1.;� . -, - Jr- .3'. ,2-4-,- ,.,�gi , -, 'I,?;- -�XF�- Q` I .. 1-1 �, ."'! . - ".1, :st-t .. ... 1� ".."V I.- - � . - � L� 1-I . . :51NY';Mfi*t� �'W- �- . --.. j � --'.� :, - . " " � "� - XNWV-5 , "I "j, v,,�','l -* ".", --#� . , �, f-K$4 . - ". I -!�-l'...;-, ---j-.--,-,J- , -r -g-it� !'.� -'.!,", ., - . 1, . , , , . � -�, " - , - le, .1, - . .,*t '19, -21� ta .� -.k4�-� .- .--vb------ ZY ......... , , f'X ,-'T-jK�,,,4q-',,:?-.'.i- --, ",,i�,,-.r",W,;- Vlv'%"�'m -1-1." " - i "�',*.,-�� W . Q . . - i 65-.'s,.-cR n !��-.i - ,, �A-r.,.-4,Q' I �'�.- ,.'-,-, . i, �ip,-l-.-%.-'-, - . .1-1 , A-5; - ; , ,-� �kV',�K-'�,-,N-,,. � — IN . ;`*,- " .- , . .1, - -- . - , . -. -s", , ", 41-M, -., jj�: ., . 'j, -,*,N* � - -- �k - . .. ,- . _?_� _ .I-.- IP'NO 11-1 W- -,-,�*v 49?..9., --Fm---� ---A---�,,� - .,,,%--.. --- .N.-k�0A,'u-MIT ", . -, ; - I i , #6 ,PX. , .� ', . . . EK - � .,. A- . ., ...,: , _ , .. .... V v% - I ';;�,% . M- ,.'-, .11 .. D!11�-q�-:M I "*"" ' - " - ; - - - �-l-l-ftls--1. , , -",-" -j.-O'. -- �-,*---l'!--. -::r.. - - , ,-110V . i�-Jg- � - - -.;. '7'i��,',,'�:'�.-;-.'--.'.,,';';.� ,,-,�-,�-,,:` - ;' .. -- - . - - . - -.,--. - . .. � � a 1. --- - �-;..r,"k-,.. ::s. � I e,'..W.11 --a-X �:f. . , .'!.�-�.'ta�-;5 t . -i:-.0,�!,',j'�','-,i,4l," . , Az ,P,.,.,:-, ., , .,Tlnnl'� . . . - -� 'S, m .. � -"�W�-� -." A , . :;n2-,A-!; -- . - -w-S .- - '. 7.--'-- .. - -�-, -, , -*.:.. - q. -I-- , - . .1 c. ": , , - " --�-;,, r,.i:-4;,! � I . - .. - I-- - - . � -.,�-.-" , ,:'-,-,_-�W.li�-;'- - ',�: , '. . .. � ONIS ,;s '. 's- - I I I - x , - -" .,. KV.:, -,�:s! 1. 'g . ,�-,;,. . . . - I --- 1. -.- I- , "g, V- , ,- . . 'Z7".'!,"�'�'�'.'-?i�.'-�.i-.','I�-',�.- ��,' . , r a .:'.'T,R 6 -1 -, -, . ::'= -- � Rol ;-�,;! -� . .. � - , z-.. 1;7."rz.s-,.-',,�.��-:� -.e.-�. " .4 , , , i.l. � I A- , 4t, 5 , 2 -.,g -st -go- - --A, . -- � "'ev'P�'. , I , , - - - ... ., . -wt-�.-ps , j 11 - -'. -;;�m,'.'.�,,:�, .,�.,, Is— . . ; - ti:?, �",'.,"'.-, 'C'l-'�'."­.*.4 , -.,!"e-j'-s,,�,;�,-, --.-- .. . -� -- - ; . ?71�1...�. � . - -!q - -�T . " .-, W- .01 .'j� ""- �.I.-�A.�i,�,F�,��-'.t-.��'.�',�le"�...-�-�ti. � -�-.' �f--,;-O. 0,; i� , ��.--�02n---&%Ys, .. P., - , .;:-:: ---4-4 � - * . . - n._-,; -0.0""'., . " MM �T -�.' ;3 - .. 1 �,,j7� ., . _ _. _ ; . . V . M .), N* ..'21, - , -- 1"'il . .,� - ,-�e ,� , . -.1, '--..;.,. �--- .f. - .. , 'l a..;,Kwr 4 -,.%,r, � .... . - ", -; �": : ,� "" .1 . '- .1 --- - 0,;N-4�11 � - I '. . ,4 � - . f-,l;-;'*`,';-.l2l;,ii�.*! ... - -: �, �--,: ..", -:f�; 1. .. " - , Y '� - - -- �, , � � , . � _ __ . .,� . 'O.", - . . . . . " ,� - ;-- is. V *- -, , . , I - .,; I . 12K i�",Vp,� Vi I .. , t'K-%?", T.';O .1".YZ - . .. a ! :i�,�,-' I i --N - ,-'-"Y� .. - 7 �,.", . , I I ?�;�l�;,i-�,,,-��..-��,-�-...��-�;�,�f..-..j-v-.,'.?;A.---.�--��-.-l.- .. -, z%l ...".. t�. , . ..-,. - . . j ,I .... * -,-,..,v- -,-,-'A.,��-� " R - .. .- . --. I'll. " reffi!�-Z,mm,zo -- - I ll� "�, . ,..:. . - -.. ... - �,� . *-WnyP�,,,,,h'v 't ... ; -� . - , V---�.",A- - - � *--EEI, - : .. ..... e - -.'-. '-. I 7 ,- - , . I . '.. .. . I - .. -1 -�. . I ,.0 ',� O , M . - :, " . , . � I .j ti,:":��,4:-t*i . 8rA ;� -- V, -��;�,!:,A . -W, - �-�,;,;�:-*!,��,A - --1 ­ - ,.'. � -U." - - .,.-:.". * ; �'. . ,- sr-, W%Nt"M6i�c zl'.li� RX ,.-,-.---,-.,. - -- - - - -C.- - " , - - . :' ....." !.'Lss, .r t�; .., . N'. , -, I - - ... -,,*&: '... �> '17 . x-,�!, .:,4" � P,-,-� z ..i - , . .., " ,:, �-` s UP! , - --�, -,:,)----l--;-q-"-, A; , ,;� - I . - Wcz,z,� ii! -N -- - , e -, .*--2�,-,i�';,. .., � -? -i�� -� , , ` 1-0 li-i-I �' ` -,. ,--:� An 'x,,'Y��t,,N,,""., .---.',,:'--77..; ,':-,',,'---_C-j�� � n ",I .1.1 _,,,, ! -- I - .!.-�c'.." . ; ,� 1, ` ,- 14 , .., - "Y ,,.,x, . . I . I � s .k t �- - . - " g�.-yg - - - '* " ��CIN,ls- . - ,� '71- 1 1 - - �" I :,; - - ;- ., , - - - - " "", - I . '! "', x--,---,--41V -0-EMY 0s: As - - .., ... I .. I f�'. -�c?-,..,;.,;-z;,,�.-i..;�,�4..---� r= -, ... . . *:,;;,','is*,:,�A, ,--., � ...'e.,�x.3�-',V-�.-I.--*;;..-,-.,', 'C 2- . I - . . .. �"i - - ., .,-, "..".- - ,; , .. ..i " .. . . , ""I - , , ....... ,.,:. , - -1 I � � �— -1 -` - - - -11 - -� .. , I ,-� .. . - . ... ": ... 11 . R '. "I ,-,,..,.,...'r t�: L.Z'JMt I Asi � �- , ,.. I ..: .. - - 11 !�.; -­­.--'- .4 - s-- I - ---,--�� �,-- *�t .. . - -:-7 -I.' AM- E --- ,..� -,--;. . .. -A�J6-"�,-%.`�,;�,�,�- 1 .1 . 'i . .�,., , .t ,ml �' --, , ,,�--,, .. i'-.' .. . . ;:-.I'..-- -c---- , I, - -:"4 .v z - - - `- - -- *,: . �: �� - ..'s - . ` *-,*,.X- rM -- - .." -- I Ax A I - .. .1-- r-.i�-:�-I,ZV.t'C-i�-.It$l��;,��-I ,4, , .... , ;..", .".144-11 --,',-:,; .*, _4-.,�:'5 !�� n I-A , , , ,,o-, . ,_,--=ep io - I - , -. - gr% t� j'-_1--­- . - ,.�/ M."ll., �'- -'-lM,-,--N-z� .7'..t.,1:4...�....�t" ., .4. . . . . ,7�-S;�-Z,K� -,%:�"..k':,�8. ';� -R'��:-- 6'. I '. * -1-1-, I - R,w- . g,Yr-�,�.. I ,-, . .�":O:� ........., .. .� ! ,,, . - - -_-.- -- , u- . . .. - -1 s- I 0- '. .. 4"'. - ..", 'I., . . . . .. ,�. M. . , - , . -- , -: . - . - , - - -t"� - =.. �.. Af�. -.;r�-,5-:,l.l,- S, � - , " - "I - Is "', , , * , r.f.�,,,-�r--�;4,-",---."-,*",z,�,--*.:"e.�..,.r"--,.�. -,-"--vn,,.-ig� ,]��-�'.I, -, t; . - ,-.. f.. -'* , ***;, ". -.,�: "-:.-'--,*.4��--.%...: .... '. . *.,,','.*.*..- - - " * . . p 111DAE "'.'"', . , AlJ7;,-,----,�-:1-r�l* -'..... ,L fl. �i,�(jjl�,�;,�',,"-_! 'i, � -,... , , ." . P.;.. -. t; - - . . I ,-�,yl ":- . .. .,. , - - tl,','i�".-,.":�,, * ;.. .. , , , 6 *�: - , . - .. '. . - I -, , - .".. ", ,--�- - .-,. -4, , tN--.� - - - k-- - - ... , - , , , , -,� 4, , -...-.. . - . .. I . . - t.— - :., . , , , . - .. - ! - ---.- -'. - - -, .....". .,.... . - I 11 . --:---;,!--,":-K.Z%.--,, -- " - - t.-- I ���� I I I.... ,,, .."r-,,'�l,st, . 5., ..... - - . * I - --,f---!: w,---,---l�- ....-.,.--.* �*, - '! . 1. . . . I . . . ... . 111, 1' ,;,�, .- .. '. � .. - . -1. ,,,,.' I . - , . - I 3 �. �t� . . . . . .1 . .. '. . w ., , n'. u _- -... - I` IV .... , . X,A, .Q.�x I - T FLOOR PLAN -- ,. .�� I --, � , I '. O , , _ A&# r..!,.,.u- --;'';i -- �,IL,jsvgwe. �1��-.,... " � FIRS 1 , 1'4s " : - . I ., -.� F - , ��.,, ��... .. 11 . - , , -, -... -­ -" ". -- . - .. .. . . . . I .�, �.k4s'�� , - , . ;,.�, *:-,..'.- :",A. . . .I. - . : . ... . .. F S*!._ .,. ,.!.�� _* . * , . , -"I- a. ,�,'--. * Or, - � . , .. " - . , ..:*, ,..*, " ", pw-, -- �,, " , , " - - 11 ,�: �1-ltl -N *' "-,*;-, F *�'O'. OA, . ft - , . " 1. .., - " ;- ,2��- -!, --�-- . . P.: - * ""...; . . - -�- - ,�., 1 --z- -.; - - -% - - - - 1. ,; , .. � - z ,;.. . .. -.,.".,%",,. I . .. , t, -- -j'Z X�'e'.",�,"�'.",'Z*p " - 1., >'-';-,!�,S-A,.-4X-:-: .,. 1-1�,,-�IA'Tl Nl�;' - 't* - w" " 4- - I I - - -: , . - : il..*. . . .. . . ., '. -. - e I., is5i-,f-li"�l:,--.l'-l-", . .7,11 - ..", I-, .i.e. -,---?X"T`-.-' ." -, - .., " , ,'�" * , , *' "'I... I I I . - - . . , - _ *� , � , t, .. I - �FJ7.;�� ,A I "-� - . �-, - 2 .. .�� .,p. . . A I.r -.0,. I :� "I : - .. - - '�.N.*:l;l .'' I . :, . ` - I I ... ;� `r� . , . , .s-;..:., I ,,-?.,&,�,& i-r �V,X..., . . . ... ... . .%. - -,:,.,. -1. ;" *:.. .% .. ..r, '. . , ex"."Mita�ta?, I 4 .. .,.,...,:,. -.-, , "T !... �. - . r- , " '-.Z,,",ttZ,'- 11 M'l� - -' � - :.,. . . . .. . . 1� *� :-��Mw 'i, , ", --,� . MR . -.: - , - ,,�,, ... i. ��, , ��. .. p. �,,.- . . * , .. . - X.,5..: - . . I . I? ,.-:--,-�.---.,-.--,,; ,-,! . : . -, - * ,.� .: .. I-- - .� .. - . - - - Zs ... : .,*.* Ap .".. JKIZZ ,--�?:"?? --- .., -.' --,. -.';k,., � .: - , ,*.., : " * --, '. . - - - I . .3 -,e -1, ---i!, -..--!.-' - , - - -, .- " - , t ; .., ly * �:',, i",.-.*,-. "?.,'- ... ,�V i. -..-., I ,--,.-. . :. �.�. - , . � . . .-. . , - I ... � - . .." - 'i -, .1 , I- -, - - (b - , . ,.: I 5".. W, -, - ." .b � . , . .. - , - - 1-1; I ,- - I ... - .1 . - ', . . . . , .-- - ". . - - - e�,"; � f �- ;�- , . . ., , - i - -,;s : ... - - 1 -, - t,,,� �,,,, - - ..., :: " ,%;-,p -.- --, ---s;;: - .... . . . - . .. I . . - ., .. , , .. I , I . . .. z �L,4 . I �-- , ,7 - -i! - t s -------V,---, �'.-, -..-, �---,--;l.--. . N .1", ( - , " .. I , , I., r � - .1 V, .--:.. -.-,,-,, ; ,,, - *.%I- . ,*: �; - . . - . - .--, ... . , , - , . . . I - - - --,.'--;.%�"-.';-'�,;';,;�,*.,'.k , , .. ."I. yl*"�411. v V;1-17 P-12� I , *-- 1; - ..Is - I a : ... . ,.- - ,- i, s .." -: . ...., . , , . .:.. . . .., . "I" -.4- - - .. e- , . I .... ol ; . - - . --b"ni,�..... ..." - -.;� . . I .. .. . ."* : - - '! -,,,,%--iv--,,v, . v �. ", ,.,. . . .. . ----..... ".. . ol t Q OYlL 11f- WPS C_ AoAj 1* ,� � � • f ',f .E I � � � i r•O • j Fes' / _ _ f • ' -- - - - • - - .. �- � _ ��.� �.. _ l� � �••���._ "� ° -- -ate - - - -- � ��►.a � • - ---- � —_-�' %� 1��� _�-r' �� FPM t°i' (zw�' E7 ►�. d .- -,� Exhibit F LOWER LEVEL PLAN r� �0 �r -;.�� � ^ I.` .\ , `\ I a CF , Exhibit H SOUTH ELEVATION