VE-70-86
f -
ZONING AD4IUSTOR
SPOKANE COUNT4', WASHIMGrON
IN TxE MarTER o~ ~ELAXArIaN a~ FLANKING
STREET SETBACK REQUIREMENT. UN-70-86)* ~ FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS
ROBER7 COX ) AND DECISTON
SUMMARY OF APPLICATION:
The applicant p rvposes to pl ace a dwel1ing uni ton the lot, fronti ng on
Greenacr~~ ~oad and with 1 st 14rrenue as ~he f1 anki ng street. The design of th+e
hause would place it approximate1y 6 tv lfeet intv the flanking street
setback associ ated with 1st Arrenue. Section 4.04A.090 a. 3, of the Spokane
County Zoni ng Ordinance requires a20 fvot flanki ng street setback from the
pr"pperty l1ne 1n th15 i nStanGe (45 feet f rc~m ceCIterl i f1e 0f 1 St AVenue
Authority to cvn~ider and grant such a request exists pursuant to Secti ons
4.03,020 64. and 4. 25. 030 b. of the Spakane County Zon ing Ordinance.
LOCATION :
The s~uthwest cvrner vf 1st Avenue and Greenacres Road, approxirrately 400 feet
south of Sprague Avenue. fihe Assessors Parce1 # i s 19551 -l603.
DECI SI ON QF 7HE ZONING AD] USTUR:
Based upon the evidence presented and ci rcumstances associ ated wi th the
proj+ect proposal, the Zvni ng Adju~tor DENIES the app1 icatian.
PUBL IC HEARYhlG:
,~~~er exa1f11 n1ng all dYal ldble 1nfUmatl Clll of1 file w1 th the dppl1 Cat1 o[1 dnd
vi siting the subj t propert,y and surroundi ng area, the Zoni ng Ad,j ustor
con ~ted apubl i hearing on June 25, 1986s, and a wri tten deci si vn on
, 19 F I ND INGS OF FACT
1. The propvsal is genera1 ly 1 ocated on the sauthwest corner of 1 st
Avenue and Greenacres Road, about 400 feet south of Sprague Avenue, in the
northeast 1/4 of Section 19, Township 25, Range 45 and is further described as
Assessors Parcel #19551-1 603, bei rrg more +compl etely descri bed i nZoning
Atijus tor Fi l e YE-10-86 ,
2. The propasal consi sts of locati ng a "spec" propvsed h+ause and an
attached garage, whvse dimen~ions are apprvxianately 62 feet by 26 feet
(combined ),on a corner 1ot. The appl icant has chvsen to use Greenacres Road
as the front yard and lst Avenue as the fl anki ng street yard. The appl icant's
choice is to vrient the 52 foat dimensian on Greenacres, which i's the
narrowest dimensfon on the site. In order to accornadate a 5 foot side yard on
the south and a 62 faot bui 1+di ng 1 ength runni ng thQnc+e tv the north, the
appl icant's buf 1 di ng protrudes approxi rnately 6 to 7 feet i nto the north fl anic:
i ng street setback vn 1st Avenue, The flanking street setback is 45 feet from
the centeri ine of the r~ad or 15feet from the pr~operty 1ine whichever i s
greatest; the 45 foot setback is the standard, and the established is a
setbaek for the property 1 i ne of 20 feet. The applicant's dwel1ing woul dcome
to approximately 13 vr 14 feet from that property line.
3. The applicant testi fied that adequate care was not gi ven by the
designer to adhere to the measurement between th~ ~ide yard setbaek ta the
south and the flanking street setback to the north,, thus resul ti ng i n a bui ld- ~
i ng which wrould not fit in thi sapproximately 55 ta 56 foot wi de remai ni ng
bui]ding space. -
,
~ • ,
FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS AND DECISION FILE VE-70-86 PAGE 2
4. The applicant obviously has a choice to rotate the house 90 degrees
and have it f ront on lst Avenue. In that case the setback would be 55 feet
from the centerline of the road. The flanking street setback would then be on
Greenacres Road and if the minimum setback was used would place the building
10 feet "in front of" the dwelling unit to the south (That is, closer to
Greenacres Road). Assuming this to be undesirable, the applicant could shift
the building 10 feet to the west, thus lining up its (east) garage side with
the front of the dwelling on Lot 4 to the south. Upon inquiry, the applicant
responded that this was undesirable because it would create only a 24 foot
wide "back yard", between the house and the south fence line and that this is
a"tough sell" to make. A house placed on a 55 foot setback f rom Greenacres
Road and running 62 feet to the west would then end up with a 42 foot distance
from the west end of the house to the property line on the west (the boundary
line between Lot 2 and Lot 3 of Block 2), The applicants objection is that
this would reduce the saleability of the house as a result of the narrow back
yard. Exhibit "A", contained in the file indicates the various options
available for placing the 62 foot by 26 foot house on the lot in question.
The location for the house last described (fronting on lst Avenue with a 55
foot setback f rom Greenacres Road) would allow the subject house to have a
fenced back-side yard of approximately 3,712 square feet, the majority of it
able to be enclosed with a 6' fence.
5. The adopted Spokane County Future Land Use Plan designates the area
of the proposal as URBAN and the proposal is consistent with the County's
entire Comprehensive Plan, including the Future Land Use Plan.
6, The site is zoned R-1 which would allow the proposed use upon
approval of this application.
7. The existing land uses in the area of the proposal include single
family residences and small acreage tracts, all of which are compatible with
the proposal,
8. Th2 dwEl 'li ng uri t pliacement proposed by the app7 i cant wou i d 1 ocated
driveway access on Greenacres Road as an alternative to location of the drive-
way on lst Avenue if the dwelling unit fronted on lst Avenue. The existing
dwelling unit on the opposite corner is oriented toward lst Avenue, including
its driveway. It is a generally acknowledged concept that where a corner lot
exists on a thru street and a cul-de-sac street the driveway access should
preferradly be on the cul-de-sac street. This creates less traffic congestion
on the through street and the coincident of lesser opportunity for pedestrian
or vehicular accidents associated with ingress and egress from the property.
Also, since there are no sidewalks in the area, the driveway and the street
frequently become the locations for playing children and these children would
be eminently safer playing on a driveway and a street without sidewalks if
they were doing so on a deadend street away f rom the through traffic.
9. There is also a sense of comradery and neighborliness that is always
hoped to exist on a cul-de-sac street. If a house is oriented so that its
back or side is to the cul-de-sac (as is proposed) this opportunity for
community and neigborliness is lessened by virtue of the orientation of the
house.
10. When the preliminary and final plat was established, this lot must be
assumed to have been approved 1n the public interest and to not have been
disadvantaged. The applicant chose to purchase the lot as it was platted.
The applicant's own actions resulted in a house design which does not fit the
site. The Zoning Adjustor is aware that the applicant has gone through the
laborious process of receiving FHA financing approval for the design in
question. However, there was no testimony that FHA would not approve the
financing of the house if it were oriented to lst Avenue as oppposed to
Greenacres Road or pl aced on another 1 ot.
11. There are at least seven other corner lots, five of which are on
dead-end streets nearly identical to the subject property and two of which are
on through streets. These are shown on the Assessors map contained within the
file. Of those lots on dead-end streets, three front, including their
driveways, on the dead-end streets. The other two front on the through
street, but the units, one of which is a duplex, are located in such as manner
as to apparently not need a variance. Therefore, the precedent in the area is
to either orient toward the cul-de-sac street or if not orienting toward the
cul-de-sac street to design a dwelling unit within the established setbacks.
'
FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS AND DECISION FILE VE-70-86 PAGE 3
12, The proposal is exempt from the provisions of Chapter 43.21C RCW
pursuant to WAC 197-11-800 (6) (b).
13. The applicant has been made aware of the recommendations of various
County/State agencies reviewing this project and has indicated he can comply
with those recommendations.
14. No one appeared to oppose the proposal nor were any written comments
adverse to the proposal received.
15. The proper legal requirements for advertising of the hearing before
the Zoning Ad,justor of Spokane County have been met.
16. Any conclusion hereinafter stated which may be deemed a finding
herein is hereby adopted as such.
From the Findings, the Zoning Adj ustor comes to these:
CONCLUSIONS
1. To grant the variance would in effect be to recognize a zoning
exc~e~ption, and not a variance as set forth by law; and hence be detrimental to
and not compatible with the public health, safety and welfare.
2. To grant the variance would be in essence to grant relief to and
acknowledged designer error when there is a viable alternative for a
reasonable use of the site. The land is not disadvantaged; therefore to grant
a variance would set a precedent which would be detrimental to and not
compatible with the public health, safety and welfare.
3. The subject property is not deprived of privileges commonly enjoyed
by others in the same vicinity and zone and the granting of this variance
would serve rc purpase toward Memedyirg an-a'llEdqed difference in privileges.
Numerous other parcels in the area, some with similar dimensional character-
istics and others without similar dimensional characteristics have con-
struction which did not need variances.
4. The granting of the variance as requested by the applicant would be
the grant of a special privilege inconsistent with those privileges enjoyed by
other properties in the vicinity and zone.
5. There appear to be no special circumstances applicable to the subject
property which when the standards of the zoning ordinance are applied render
the subject property without a reasonable use and/or deprive the property of
rights and privileges enjoyed by others in the area and under identical
zones. The granting of the variance would be materially detrimental to the
public welfare because the principal of granting a variance without adequate
justification could be repeated throughout the County, thus destroying the
integrity of the entire zoning ordinance with regard to setbacks.
6. Any finding hereinbefore stated which, may be deemed a conclusion
herein is adopted as such.
DATED THIS DAY OF July, 1986.
/
,
1-'homas G. Mlo e, A
Zoning Adjustor pokane County
~ Washington
. ,
,
f
~ ' ~ •
FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS AND DECISION FILE VE-70-86 PAGE 4
FILED:
1) Applicant
2) Pa rties of Record
3) Spokane County Engineers Office
4) Spokane County Health District
5) Spokane County Utilities Dept.
6) Spokane County Dept. of Building & Safety
NOTE: ANY PARTY AGGRIEVED BY THIS DECISION MUST FILE AN APPEAL WITHIN TEN
(10) CALENDAR DAYS OF THIS DATE.
0061z/6-86
. ,
SPOKANE COUNTY ZONING ADJUSTOR PUBLIC NEARING
AGENDA: JUNE 25 , 1986
TIME: As set forth below
PLACE: Spokane County Planning Dept., N. 721 Jefferson St., 2nd floor hearing room
3. VE-54-86 RELAXATION OF SIDE YARD SETaACK REQUIREMENT
Located easterly of and adjacent to Liberty
(This item will be heard Drive, on the west side of Liberty Lake in the
at 2:00 p.m. or as soon SE 1i4 of Section 22-25-45. Address: S. 1301
thereafter as possible). Liberty Drive.
PROPOSAL: To allow a two story single family
residence to be located 5' from the
side property line (south) whereas
Section 4.06.020 and 4.05.110 a.2.
of the Spokane County Zoning
Ordinance requires a 10' side yard
setback for a two story structure
in the R-2 zone. The existing
residence will be replaced with this
new structure.
SITE SIZE: 6,000 sq. ft.
APPLICANT: R.D. Brady, c/o Al Katzenberger
4. RELAXATION OF FLANKING STREET SETBACK REQUIREMENT
Located on the southwest corner of Greenacres Road
(This item will be heard and lst Avenue in the NE 1/4 of Section 19-25-45.
at 2:45 or as sovn
thereafter as possible) PROPOSAL: To allow a single family residence to
be located 13' from the flanking
street property line, whereas Section
4.04A.090 a.3. of the Spokane County
Zoning Ordinance requires a 15' set-
back from the flanking street property
line (lst Avenue) in the R-1 zone.
SITE SIZE: 5,000 sq. ft. (approximately)
APPLICANT: Robert Cox
5. VW-73-86 RELAXATION OF ROAD FROtVTAGE REQUIREMENT
Generally located south of 17th Avenue and west
(This item will be heard of Royal Road, in the NE 1/4 of Section 27-25-42.
at 3:00 p,m. or as soon
thereafter as possible) pROPOSAI: To allow a single family residence to
be located on a parcel of land having
0' of County road frontage, whereas
Section 4.04.040 of the Spokane
County Zoning Ordinance requires 100' of continuous public road frontage in
the Agricultural zone. Access is
proposed by means of an easement road
approximately 25' wide whicll extends
southweste rly from 17th Ave. to the
site.
SITE SIZE: 2.35 acres
APPLICANT: Arthur Overman
_ 2
SPOKANE COUNTY ZONING ADJUSTOR PUBLIC HEARING
AGENDA: JUNE 259 1986
TIME: As set forth below
PLACE Spokane County P1 anni ng Dept. , N. 721 Jefferson St. , 2nd fl oor heari ng room
3. VE-54-86 RELAXATION OF SIDE YARD SETQACK REQUIREMENT
Located easterly of and adjacent to Liberty
(This item will be heard Drive, on the west side of Libe rty Lake in the
at 2:00 p.m. or as soon SE 1/4 of Section 22-25-45. Address: S. 1301
thereafter as possible). Liberty Orive.
PROPOSAL: 7o allow a two story single family
residence to be located 5' from the
side property line (south) whereas
Section 4,06.020 and 4.05.110 a.2.
of the Spokane County Zoning
Ordinance requires a 10' side yard
setback for a two story structure
in the R-2 zone. The existing
' residence will be replaced with this
new structure.
SITE SIZE: 6,000 sq. ft.
APPLICANT: R. D. Brady, c/o A1 Katzenberger
4. VE-70-86 RELAXATIO:J OF FLANKING STREET SETBACK REQUIREMEN7
Located on the southwest corner of Greenacres Road
(This item will be heard and lst Avenue in the NE 1/4 of Section 19-25-45.
at 2:45 or as soon
thereafter as possible) PROPOSAL: To allow a single family residence to
be located 13' from the flanking
street property line, whereas Section
4.04A.090 a.3. of the Spokane County
Zoning Ordinance requires a 15' set-
back from the flanking street property
line (lst Avenue) in the R-1 zone.
SITE SIZE: 5,000 sq. ft. (approximately)
APPLICANT : Robert Cox
5. VW-73-86 RELAXATION OF ROAO FRONTAGE REQUIREMEN7
(7his item will be heard Generally located south of 17th Avenue and west
at 3:00 p.m. or as soon of Royal Road, in the NE 1/4 of Section 27-25-42.
thereafter as possible) pROPOSAL: To allow a single family residence to
be located on a parcel of land having
0' of County road frontage, whereas
Section 4.04.040 of the Spokane
County Zoning Ordinance requi res 100' of continuous public road frontage in
the Agricultural zane. Access is
proposed by means of an easement road
'approximately 25' wide whicii extends
southwesterly from 17th Ave. to the
site.
SITE SIZE: 2.35 acres
APPL I CANT : Arthur Overman
-2-
OFFICE OF COUNTY ENGINEER
SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON
Dote , 19
Inter-office Communicotion
To. ,
From - ,
Sub ject
t:.: C Lv, . b ~1Cii. Sl `Jll._ IiG.:\:.
t the applicanC shall provide a8urveyad easement whicn htts beeti recvr'.
h the Spoksne County Auditor. 7'he easement locatfon shall be accc,rbtel-
i f:.-(1 f'') T t"t-- ~I ? r; t t2 T'('f, .)7'`r cr.;lr,-T-iAn - .,i, 1 ..T..:1i t Tcypical or thRt tound in rurat areae. The applicant hes ChGgen tU emj7loti
St easement wiiiCiY is the width typicelly used within che urban area. Et :
-omn,anded thac the appticant widen the easement irom the present 30 reet z
ween 40 and 60 feet. This will allow for roa.iway conetruction (cutting a.,,-! ,
ling), as well as snow removal.
~ul.d the variance application ae approved the applfcan[ shall c-- 1- ' , v r. ~ _ ' 'i ' 1 ~ ~ - : 1 . . ? ~ . . n : . Y r . . 1.' i ~ i , . T' - i. ^ r- f r : • . ' r ~ , , ? . - . ; t : ~ I
ring Eacamxneer (:ormnittee anprotred the preli_minary plat or Broadwgy Yroression-
Center YLI. As a condition at approva3 for the Nlat [ha County Enginee-
.sted a tifteen ioot wide easement along ttie weseerly plaC boe:nciary. 'i'a ~ment is to be designated as e"Tract X future :►ublic righ[-of-way trac
Lill y easement wi lI permi t a connect Iun to be tnade wi th the Robie Road rigri. ~
v which terminates at the North property line of the plat. The requ'
"'Tract X" easement brfngs about the need tor Lhe requested varianc,
e attached a copy o£ the finding8 and order for the preliminary p. .
. icgnt has coc.,nPr::t-f-! with rhe Covrtx* snd, ir, mS' nrinion, is makfrtr a qor',
th c-rrirt ro
~t:t4:oy :ivt.:lllA4_ is I,~i guuu L:d1L14- L.:Ctuli:.~v►: Lki,- %sic:~.
raet X" eaSelileAL ib need,}cl Co malce Ctzis eoaneetion. ?az applicazit will
• ar.cegs t4 Lhe private roaci an.d a feiice wil,_ eeparate the easement f rom L-ht-
1- r T. ~ .7 . T: ~ 1, T'i n, l] 1_ . ~ '1 t. ~ (1 . 1 t f ~'1 : . . . t il r r T ~ i c G' n
I
AaLioridl rloou Insurancc eragraut ara appiicsule to this Fruper[y. ir.&ur
_iie commencemenc of any cGnscruction, excavatioti, fflllng or reniovnl uf matty
,ff t . - . . , . : , . - . . . , •
~ ''~..s ~ ~ ■ J
s
L
Z
T OfC
~ Fl
V ~ ~ 1
r i rr
@
_
0p?
9 ~ P ~ ~ • Q ~ ~
0
r
FIXT
~ ~yyy111
t t ST 4c
dt
0N C} A~ E
~ ~ d d ~ -
Ga
: ~
~
U R T
. F OUCZ TH 14VrL
w ~F
~a•~~ V~ VEw7o=86
~ ~
4UD
~
' V ~ E. ! G Fi T H AV F-
i
, -
OD
~
. ~
•0oo
I
li.!
<
v
T. _ _ _ - i ~ - - - - -
~
7.
.
♦
1
,
~
~
,
~ ~ ~
~ ~~PLIcATtoNs aEFORE THE zoNIirG AaJusTaR/BoAuD OF AaJuSTMENT ~
Certificate of Exemptian ARplieatiorr
Narre of Appl icant: _ CXD~
street Address: ~ $'C) Pq A, ~ el Home:
Ci ty: 0--Q pj) 1i L -e State : VJ ~ Zip Gode: 37 Phone:Work: 3~1,~ ~
iV ame o f P noperty Owne r(s): C-,L4 0~
REQUESTED ACTIC}N(S) (Circle Appmpri ate Action): ,
1- ~
C-Variance(s) ~ Carldltioreal Use Permit ~Cvn-Confa~ing LotJ~Js~
Wai ver of ya,al atiori Temporary Usgf Structure Other: .
~ FOR STAFF USE OIVLY ~
*Cite Ordinanee 5ection; ~ ald
*Secti orf Tawnship Range ~ P roperty Si ze *
~
*Ex istin~ ~ ora~r~~: F. L. l~ . P. Des i gr~ at iv r~ 0.~X"1~
_i
*PSSAt N UIA: (fY~ N ASA: Y~ N FIRE DIST. : LEGAI. CHECKED B'l:
*Hearing Oat, `*5taff taki rs9 i r7 A 7icati on : ~
Existing Use of Property: '4 /v
: ~qA,1 ic: D Iz - ,I~e 16r ~ ~ • ~ ~e
C ri be Intended P roRas al _p
D ~
be k2 u , L L QA_
Street Addr^ess oT Praperty: ~ ~ "es,
Legal Description of Property (Irticlude easement if applicable):
~3 r`~ L k:_
Parcel ~~C-3, 5vurce of Legal:
7otal amount of acjoifling 1 and control 1 ed by thi s owner/sponsor: _Ze,-00 .
~ ~ ~
~!h at i rite re s t da ~rou haldin the p rr~pe rt,~ . &A
Please list previaus Planning Departrnent actions involv;ng this property;
IAI-Y 7Y
_ ~
I SWEAR, uI~DER THE FEPIALTY OF PERJURY, 7M,~T: (1 )1 A~'1 T~IE OWNER QF RECDRD OR~.~~;~Op~~ .
ZE[~ AGENfi FOR THE PROPOSED STTE; (2) IF HOT THE OWNER, WRITTEh~ PER1~1I55IDh F~O~i ~AId -
ABOVe
O4JNER AUTHORIC ING MY AGTIONS pN HIS/HER BEKAI.F I5 ATTACHED; AND (3) ALL 077HE~ ~
I~ESPOl~SES AND T~i0SE ON S1]PPDRTII~G DOCUMENTS ARE MADE TRISTHFULLY AI~D TO T~1~-BESs4
MY KNOWLEDGE. - •
. ~J~4ell
51 gne d.
Address:
Phane No.: ~Iq J7 _ Date.
~
6'r1~
N{'~ VTA~'yFS Ixi+ SEAL• Il~Yr L~~ ~ F ~
aate:
~
(over)
~ ~ ~
/
~
i
>
" BURDEN OF PROOF
1t i s necessary for the appl i cant or his/her representati ve to establ ish the
reasons why the requested proposal shoul d be approved and to 1 i teral ly put forth ~
the basi c case. Accordi ngly, you shoul d have been gi ven a form for your requested
action (variance, conditional use, etc. ) designed to help you present your case
in a way which addresses the criteria which the Zoning Adjustor must consider.
Please fi 11 the form out and return it wi th your appl i cation. If you di dn't get a
form, ask the Planning Department personnel for advi ce on how to proceed.
B. SIGN-OFF BY COUNTY DEPARTMENTS
*COUNTY HEALTN DISTRICT
4aAreliminary consul tati on has been hel d to di s cuss the p roposal . The appl i-
as b no rme d f re re ts an d s tan da rd Wgn-. `
ture (Date) S aived)
(z.>OUNTY ENGINEER'S DEPARTMENT
A preliminary consultation has been held to discuss the proposal. The appli-
cant has bee informed of requi rements and standards. ^/o ~~E
/s ~G
Signatu (D e (Sign-off Waived)
(3- COUNTY UTILITIES DEPARTMENT (Waive if outside WMAB)
POIOO'A preliminary consultation has been held to discuss the proposal. The
appl icant been infornied of requi rements a►id standards.
nature) (Date ) (Si gn-off Wai ved)
~ The applicant is requi red to discuss the proposal with
to become iriformed of requi rements and
standards.
.
(Distri ct Si gnature) (Date) (Si gn-off Wai ved)
4. WATER PURVEYOR (Wai ve i f outsi de CWSSA) NAME : p/s,7;
a) The proposal OZs not 1 ocated wi thi n the boundary of our future servi ce area.
b) The proposal~is not located within the boundary of our current district.
c) We ~~are not able to serve this site with adequate water.
d Sati factory arrangements have~iave no~been made to serve this proposal.
~
(Si gnature) ate (Si gn-off Wai ved)
, IL
~
~ • . _ + 'f - m
APPLICANT' S FORM
#
NAME: ~8 COXP
I
FTLE -70_ ~
~ %
VARIANCES The County Zoning Ordinarice, Section 4,03,020 (64), clarifies
tha~ variance is an adjustment made to a "tdimensional " regulatian.
Websters New Collegiate Dictionary (1979) defines "dimension" as a
rmasure in one di rectivnjand therefore includes "area"), _
A. State taw C36, 70, 02Q (14) RCW)... Is the subject prvper-ty depri ved of
privileges camxnonly enjoyed by other properties in same vicinity and zane and
does the varian~e remeo the di fference in pri vi leges? If sa, what privi1 eges?
I 47
r ~ - •
u f
45
.
CL,~ A
B. Becd!#se 0f SpeCidl c1 !"cl!liZStdllces applicdble to subject p1''0p£1"`t]I', 3f1Cl1Jd7ng
size, shaRe, topography, locatian or sur°roundings, does strict app]ication of
the dimensional regulatian deprive the subject praperty of rights/privileges
enjayed by ather properties in vicinity under IaENTICAL zones? If yes, what
specia] circumtances exist?
y ~A / S 'o I4d 4-a-~ 4.A~
- '1}
~ ~ .
r C-(-
~ ~
~
~
~ ~ ,k,4 ~ E
. U 4 .
C. Wil1 granti ng of the rrarian ce be material l,y detri mental to pub] ic wel fare OR
injurious tv prvperty vr imprvvements in the vicinit,y and zane in which the
s ub,j ect p rro perty i sI o~ ca e d?
~
A A-
i
; r
~
fJ ra 6~~
~ ! /~.y{ ~ i -j-- r • ~ ~ J
, ~ , I ' ~ ~ ~ _ ~ ~ ..~_i ~ ~ ~ •
/ - - ' ' ~o' - ~ ' - - ~
; ~ - , - ~ ` ~ - ~ - ~ - ~ a - .
~ ~ _ ' . ' - - - ~ i ~ ~ ~ - ~ ' - - - j - ~ - ~ ~ 3 ~ ( ~ ~ S
-L ~ _p
j - - -i i , , ~ - - I , --t - + - - : -
. _ - - - - - ' - - -p ~ ~ - ~ - - * ~ ~ -
~ / e t ~ I' ~~i ~ I I ~ ' ~ 7 ~ ,
~ - ~ •--9 _ ~ ~ ` ! ~ ' ~_I_. ._i.._ - - ' ' • ~ ~ ~
TFr ~
~ ~ ~ 4• ~
su - • - ~ - ' ! ~ ► ~ ~ 16m 6A~--
~EP~lc-
- ~ - ~ I ! --i--~..o T/AIVr-~ • - ' - - - --I-~'-- ! ~ '~i.
' . - - - - - C~ t - - _ ~ ~ i ~ - ~ • ~ - - ~ ~ ~~.4~ bt ZO
~ _ ~ -~'~'f-f ~ . t ~ , ' 3 , ; ~ . , ~ : /
, 6 i ~ ~ . . ~ • i , t ` , • ~
- , -i 1 . _ -
' i
_ ' _ ~ f i ~ i ! - ( • ' - ; i o t ~ 6 - - j
' ' ~ - I i-- ---i-
' .e Y ~ • --I ! ' li ~ I t ~ ; 1 ~ , " ~•1•
A4,47( ~C? , , r~ /r~ ' ' ~ ~ r' - - - - - - - ~ - - - - - i ~1
- - - - t- - - j - - - - ~ - ~ -1 t- - ~ - - - j-' - • - --t--- - • - - - ~
- - • - - . . ~ - - - • - - _ _ - - -
~CUYb 1
; _ _ ~ . - - ~ - - - I - S 1-P~1r/-a~~ - _ _ ~ ~ ! - 7- - ~ - - , • ~
~ - - - -~-----f- ' - ' ~ - - - - ~ 4 - t . .
7--
I - - • - - _ ~ ~ _ _ ~ ' _ ' _ ~ ` _ ~ - ~ ' ' ---E
~ - - - - ; ~r-
_Z
` -„fLi - I----:- - '
~ r ' -f- - - - ; • - ~ ~ ~ i 1 {
; , , - ~ _ - • -F I • s ! - I-- i ~
~ ~ ~ ~ I ` - . -1- • ~ - ~ - - i - - ~ 1 :
'(z- F
~ . - - - - s- _ - . c - - ~
; E
I[= I il--.
A'
L-f41-1497 , ~ = t '0-• - ~ , ' - - - - - - - - ' ' ~ - - -
~