The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About99-051 Rezone - denied/withdrawn F~LE COpy February 7,2000 Northview Development Corporation Attention: Jeffrey Gustafson 13241 Holasek Lane Eden Prairie, MN 55346 RE: Zone Change Request for the Property Located in Enivid First Addition Dear Mr. Gustafson: We have received your request to withdraw the above rezoning application. We have also begun to process a refund of the $330.00 application fee. You should probably receive this refund at the end of February. If you have any other questions, please contact me directly at 447-4230. Sincerely, ~ I ~o.. .()~ U~~~_~ansier, AICP Planning Coordinator cc: Neil Soderman DRC Members 16200 E~~I~)9~eTt9W~9g>~~ej!JI-l&~ke, Minnesota 55372-1714 / Ph. (612) 447-4230 / Fax (61'21~47-4245 AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER FtlE COpy I'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'."".'..'.'.".'.'.'.'.'.'.,.".,.,.,.,.,.,.,. .......,..,.,.".".;,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,..,.,.,.,...;.".;;...,.,.;.,.;.;.,.,.,;..;.".,.;.".,.".".".,.".,.,..,.,..;.,.,.".,.,.,.,.,.,...,..;."".,..",.,.,.,.,.,................d.d ..",..,.,.,.,.,.,..,.,."."."., ",.,.".,.,.,.,.,., .'.'.'."".'.'..'.".'.'1 FROM: Accounting Jane Kansier, Planning coordinato~ February 7, 2000 TO: DATE: RE: Reimbursement for Rezoning Application Fee cc: In July, 1999 Northview Development Corporation submitted an application for a Comprehensive Plan Amendment and a Rezoning. The Zoning Ordinance does not allow us to consider these applications simultaneously; therefore, we held the rezoning application until the Council made a decision on the Comprehensive Plan Amendment. The Council ultimately denied the Comprehensive Plan Amendment on January 18,2000. We are now returning the rezoning application fee to the applicant. Please process the following refund: Applicant: Northview Development Corporation Attention: Jeffrey Gustafson 13241 Holasek Lane Eden Prairie, MN 55346 $330.00 101-34103 Amount: Account Number: Thank you for your attention to this matter. Please let me know if you have any questions. 1:\99files\99rezone\99-051 \refund.doc 02/07/00 21:27 FAX 6129492683 JEFFREY GUSTAFSO ~01 NORTHVIEW DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION 13241 Holasek LlIDe Eden Prairie, MN 55346 Tel (612)- 949-1667 Cell (612)-710-7174 February 6, 2000 Via fax 612-447-4245 Jane Kansier City of Prior Lake 16200 Eagle Creek Ave. S.B. Prior Lake, MN 55372.17J4 RE: Correspondence on zone change request Dear Jane. It was my understanding that the zone change request could onl)' be acceptable upon successful change amendments to the comprehensive zoning map. J turned it in with the Application for a change in the comprehensive zoning map for you to hold in the file until such time as it would be appropriate to process it (in the hopes that the same radius report would be acceptable). Because of the inability to obtain these changes, as well as the age of the radius report, it is ineffective to request a processing of this application at this date. Please close all pending requests on behalf of Northview on the "Bodcnnan" property. It is my Wlderstanding that there is a full refund of the initial deposit, as no request to process the application has been in order. 1 thari.k you for the Stllff support I had on my applications throughout the process, and for you calliilg to my attention of this deposit. . , . ""-- -,............~.._.....,.-, .-'-!'-.'.. ''',' F ~!.. [ ran,\~p y ~L lIU February 3, 2000 Northview Development Corporation Attention: Jeffrey Gustafson 13241 Holasek Lane Eden Prairie, MN 55346 RE: Zone Change Request for the Property Located in Enivid First Addition Dear Mr. Gustafson: On January 21, 2000, I sent you a copy of Resolution 00-05 denying the proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment for the property located at 4520 Tower Street. As you know, the Zone Change Application you also submitted for this property is still outstanding. As of this date, I do not know how you would like to proceed with this application. You can either withdraw the application or we will go forward with the hearing process. If you withdraw your application prior to publication of any notices, the City Zoning Ordinance allows us to refund up to 50% of the application fee. Please let me know what course of action you wish to take no later than Tuesday, February 8, 2000. If I do not receive a written request to withdraw your application by that date, we will schedule the item for a public hearing. Thank you for your prompt attention to this matter. If you have any other questions, please contact me directly at 447-4230. Sincerely, Q.~ ~anSier. AICP Planning Coordinator Enclosure cc: Neil Soderman DRC Members 16200 ..I:\9QfjI~\99r$zQ(1e\99.,o5!\prQCeed.doc Pj:!ge 1 cagle LreeK Ave. ~.c., t"rIor Lake, Minnesota 55372-1714 / Ph. (612) 447-4230 / Fax (61~) 447-4245 AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER JUL I 9 1999 I I ~ L_~._____ i ......---- WAIVER OF 120 DAYS MINNESOTA STATUTES SECTION 15.99, A COPY OF WHICH IS ATTACHED, REQUIRES THE CITY OF PRIOR LAKE ("CITY") TO APPROVE OR DENY A ZONING RELATED APPLICATION WITHIN 60 DAYS OF RECEIVING A COMPLETED APPLICATION. THE CITY MAY EXTEND THE TIMELINE BEFORE THE END OF THE 60-DA Y PERIOD BY PROVIDING YOU WRITTEN NOTICE. THE CITY RECEIVED YOUR APPLICATION FOR A ZONE CHANGE AND DETERMINED IT WAS COMPLETE ON JULY 15. 1999. ON JULY 15. 1999, THE CITY PROVIDED YOU WITH WRITTEN NOTICE THAT IT WAS EXTENDING THE TIMELINE FOR REVIEW AN ADDITIONAL 60 DAYS UNTIL NOVEMBER 15. 1999. BY LAW, ANY EXTENSION BEYOND NOVEMBER 15. 1999, MUST BE APPROVED BY THE APPLICANT. YOU HAVE REQUESTED/AGREED TO AN EXTENSION BEYOND NOVEMBER 15. 1999. THE REASON FOR THE EXTENSION IS AS FOLLOWS: The application for a zone change cannot be processed until the comprehensive plan amendment has been acted upon. BY SIGNING THIS WAIVER YOU ACKNOWLEDGE: A) RECEIVING A COPY OF MINNESOTA STATUTE SECTION 15.99; B) THAT YOU WERE ADVISED THAT THIS WAIVER AFFECTS YOUR PROPERTY RIGHTS AND THAT YOU MAY WANT TO REVIEW IT WITH AN ATTORNEY; C) YOU HAVE AGREED TO THE EXTENSION; D) YOU WAIVE ALL RIGHTS UNDER MINNES 15.99. TA TATUTE SECTION ;X ~f~ SIGNATURE OF THE APPLICANT: PRINT NAME OF THE APPLICANT: ..., DATE: ( v \ ,,-' \ t) I :\99fi1es\99rezone\99-051 \waiver.doc FILE COpy July 15, 1999 Northview Development Corporation Attention: Jeffrey Gustafson 13241 Holasek Lane Eden Prairie, MN 55346 RE: City of Prior Lake Review for Application Completeness for the Comprehensive Plan Amendment and Zone Change Request for the Property Located in Enevid First Addition Dear Mr. Gustafson: On July 15, 1999, the City of Prior Lake determined all of the necessary submittals for the above applications have been received. This letter serves as your official notification that the applications are now complete. The DRC will now begin formal review of the Comprehensive Plan Amendment. At this time, you are tentatively scheduled for the August 9, 1999, Planning Commission meeting. I will notify you of any changes to that date. The City review process can be substantially less than 120 days, and we intend to move this matter through the process in a timely manner which provides a complete, professional review. Occasionally, however, due to meeting schedules, it is sometimes necessary to extend the 60 day review period. This letter also serves as your official notice that the City is extending the 60 day deadline for an additional 60 days from September 15, 1999 to November 15, 1999. As you know, the City Zoning Ordinance, 91108.808, states Uno request for a zoning change for property affected by a pending request for a Comprehensive Plan Map amendment shall be processed until the request has received final action by the City Council or is withdrawn by the applicant". Therefore, we cannot process your application for a zone change at this time. You have two options available. You can either withdraw your application until after the Council has acted on the Comprehensive Plan, or you can sign the attached document waiving the 120 day period required for action by the City. If you choose to sign the waiver, we will start the 120 days upon the action of the City Council on the Comprehensive Plan amendment. j;\99.file~99cQml2am\9a-OJlO\6.Qdaylet.doc Pa~e 1 16200 t.agle CreeK Ave. ~.t.., Prior LaKe, Minnesota 55372-1714 / Ph. (612) 447-4230 / Fax (612) 447-4245 AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER .' Please let me know what course of action you wish to take. If you have any other questions relative to the review process or related issues, please contact me directly at 447-4230. Sincerely, ~Q.~ (Jane Kansier, AICP Planning Coordinator Enclosure cc: Neil Soderman ORC Members ~ 1:\99files\99compam\99-050\60dayletdoc Page 2 WAIVER OF 120 DAYS MINNESOTA STATUTES SECTION 15.99, A COPY OF WHICH IS ATTACHED, REQUIRES THE CITY OF PRIOR LAKE ("CITY") TO APPROVE OR DENY A ZONING RELATED APPLICATION WITHIN 60 DAYS OF RECEIVING A COMPLETED APPLICATION. THE CITY MAY EXTEND THE TIMELINE BEFORE THE END OF THE 60-DA Y PERIOD BY PROVIDING YOU WRITTEN NOTICE. THE CITY RECEIVED YOUR APPLICATION FOR A ZONE CHANGE AND DETERMINED IT WAS COMPLETE ON JULY 15.1999. ON JULY 15.1999, THE CITY PROVIDED YOU WITH WRITTEN NOTICE THAT IT WAS EXTENDING THE TIMELINE FOR REVIEW AN ADDITIONAL 60 DAYS UNTIL NOVEMBER 15. 1999. BY LAW, ANY EXTENSION BEYOND NOVEMBER 15. 1999. MUST BE APPROVED BY THE APPLICANT. YOU HAVE REQUESTED/AGREED TO AN EXTENSION BEYOND NOVEMBER 15. 1999. THE REASON FOR THE EXTENSION IS AS FOLLOWS: The application for a zone change cannot be processed until the comprehensive plan amendment has been acted up(;m. BY SIGNING THIS WAIVER YOU ACKNOWLEDGE: A) RECEIVING A COpy OF MINNESOTA STATUTE SECTION 15.99; B) THAT YOU WERE ADVISED THAT THIS WAIVER AFFECTS YOUR PROPERTY RIGHTS AND THAT YOU MAY WANT TO REVIEW IT WITH AN ATTORNEY; C) YOU HAVE AGREED TO THE EXTENSION; D) YOU WAIVE ALL RIGHTS UNDER MINNESOTA STATUTE SECTION 15.99. SIGNATURE OF THE APPLICANT: PRINT NAME OF THE APPLICANT: DATE: I: \99files\99rezone\99-051 \waiver.doc ", Article 18 DEADLINE FOR AGENCY ACTION Section 1. (15.99) (TIME DEADLINE FOR AGENCY ACTION.) Subdivision 1. (DEFINITION.) For purposes of this section, "agency" means a department, agency, board, commission, or other group in the executive branch of state government; a statutory of home rule charter city, county, town, or school district; any metropolitan agency or regional entity; and any other political subdivision of the state. Subdivision 2. (DEADLINE FOR RESPONSE.) Except as otherwise provided in this section and notwithstanding any other law to the contrary, an agency must approve or deny within 60 days a written request relating to zoning, septic systems, or expansion of the metropolitan urban service area for a permit, license, or other governmental approval of an action. Failure of an agency to deny a request within 60 days is approval of the request. If an agency denies the request, it must state in writing the reasons for the denial at the time that it denies the request. Subdivision 3. (APPLICATION, EXTENSIONS.) (a) The time limit in subdivision 2 begins upon the agency's receipt of a written request containing all information required by law or by a previously adopted rule, ordinance, or policy of the agency. If an agency receives a written request that does not contain all required information, the 60-day limit starts over if the agency sends notice within ten business days of receipt of the request telling the requester what information is missing. (b) If an action relating to zoning, septic systems, or expansion of the metropolitan urban service area requires the approval of more than one state agency in the executive branch, the 60-day period in subdivision 2 begins to run for all executive branch agencies on the day a request containing all required information is received by one state agency. The agency receiving the request must forward copies to other state agencies whose approval is . :!'equirtu. (c) An agency response meets the 60-day time limit if the agency can document that the response was sent within 60 days of receipt of the written request. (d) The time limit in subdivision 2 is extended if a state statute, federa11aw, or court order requires a process to occur before the agency acts on the request, and the time periods prescribed in the state statute, federa11aw, or court order make it impossible to act on the request within 60 days. In cases described in this paragraph, the deadline is extended to 60 days after completion of the last process required in the applicable statute, law, or order. Final approval of an agency receiving a request is not considered a process for purposes of this paragraph. (e) The time limit in subdivision 2 is extended if; (1) a request submitted to a state agency requires prior approval of a federal agency; or (2) an application submitted to a city, county, town, school district, metropolitan or regional entity, or other political subdivision requires prior approval of a state or federal agency. In cases described in this paragraph, the deadline for agency action is extended to 60 days after the required prior approval is granted. (f) An agency may extend the time1ine under this subdivision before the end of the initia160-day period by providing written notice of the extension to the applicant. The notification must state the reasons for the extension and its anticipated length, which may not exceed 60 days unless approved by the applicant. Section 2. (EFFECTIVE DATE.) Section 1 is effective July 1, 1995, and applies to any written request submitted after that date. I: \99fi1es\99rezone\99-051 \waiver .doc CITY OF PRIOR LAKE 16200 EAGLE CREEK AVE SE PRIOR LAKE, MN 55372 (612) 447-4230, FAX (612) 447-4245 RECEIPT # 34583 DATE: Received of the sum of for the purpose of -f/ .,.. dollars $ 07/),00 Invoice # ~m. , ~Pl! r --., ~'" ,=__J::: 7562 ~ ! 75-829/910 A 307041 ~.~ 7'-' l '1..'""<1 ~ c:5D $ ~3ZJ- !I ~I !I I I .- 1/. uv ~\..~ U. ~I'~ .~ "'Il~'~: r r.i~ /- ,1:' m=~ State Bank of Long Lake 1964 WESTWAVZATA BLVD. 473-7347 LONG LAKE, MINNESOTA 55356 M' :- 11[, ~ Lot 1, Block 2, Enevid First Addition; and. That part of Outlot A, Enevld First Addition, contained within the following described tracts: That part of Lot 1, Block 3, Brooksville Center 1st Addition, according to the plat on file in the office of the County Recorder, Scott County, Minnesota, described as beginning at the southwest comer of said Lot 1; thence North 00 degrees 04 minutes 17 seconds West record bearing, along the west line of said Lot 1, 300.00 feet to the south line of a roadway and utility easement; thence North 89 degrees 55 minutes 43 seconds East along said south line 51.99 feet; thence North 28 degrees 34 minutes 57 seconds East along the southeasterly line of said easement 247.34 feet to the south line of South Anna Lane, now known as Tower Street; thence southeasterly along said south line 105.18 feet, along a non tangential curve, concave to the southwest, having a central angle of 2 degrees 21 minutes 55 seconds, a radius of 2,547.98 feet and the chord of said curve bears South 75 degrees 28 minutes 12 seconds East; thence South 74 degrees 17 minutes 15 seconds East, tangent to said curve 39.82 feet; thence South 1 degree 30 minutes 45 seconds West a distance of 379.84 feet; thence South 71 degrees 30 minutes 13 seconds West 316.39 feet to the point of beginning. Together with that part of the south half of vacated South Anna Lane, known as Tower Street, which lies between the northerly extension of the easterly line of said property and the southwesterly extension of the westerly line of Lot 2, Block 1, Brooksville Center 2nd Addition, according to the recorded plat thereof. NORTHVIEW DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION 13241 Holasel< Lane Eden Prairie, MN 55346 Tel (612)- 949-2667 Cell (612)-720-7174 City of Prior Lake 16200 Eagle Creek Avenue S. E. Prior Lake, MN 55372 RI:: Proposed R-4 apartment use on property on Tower Street near Duluth Street In 1997 we analyzed the property adjacent to the daycare fiJf the highest and best use of this commercially zoned property. We could not come up with any prospective commercial users, and aller studying the location and needs in the community, we realized an apartment use was the highest and most suited use. City Stair conculTed with this, and concept plans were developed. We did not fi:lresee any neighborhood opposition, as residential apartment units have historically made more compatible butTers between single family homes and commercially used land than any commercial uses. The neighbors did, however, o~iect, and the Planning Commission and Council agreed that before some ofthe limited, remaining conunercially zoned land in Prior Lake was allowed to be zoned residential, commercial use possibilities should be exhausted beforehand. This land was always part of a larger part of the Brooks Hauser commercial parcel, and had this commercial zoning classification for some time- while all sUlTounding land was still farmland. We feel that as the sUlTounding land was developed, the commercial zoning on this particular parcel became grand fathered to it, and that if it were presently zoned residential, it would not be allowed to be reclassilied as commercial at this time. This land is remote from the highway lor both exposure and access, and atl.er the adjacent bowling alley and bar was allowed to be reclassified to R-3 to allow daycare use, the flavor ofthis entire back block became more residential rather than commercial in use. Over the past 18 months various uses were considered. The City has not been able to refer any commercial users our way. A mini- storage business was reluctantly contemplated, which led to the actual location ofthe placement of sewer and water lines across the property. This location became ditlicult for the storage facility design, as it basically utilizes a large footprint. Aller more analysis, we kept coming back to the realization that the highest and best use for the property is apartments. (As far as the location orthe utility lines, it is coincidental that, the present location does not interrere with a proposed R-4 building location, as it would with most commercial multi-tenant configurations. The lines tilll within what would be realistically acceptable: utility easement boundaries lor an R-4 apartment site plan). Two years ago the neighbors has several concems. -They did not really foresee a need in the City !(lr more apartments. Recent studies now show that there is need that our project would lill. -They did not want to come home to see hecklers on decks looking down at them, and view people multiplying like rabbits before their eyes. This would not be the case. The homes would view the end of the building rather than a longer front elevation, and is considerably quieter and less intruding than most commercial structure users. We worked with our management company to eliminate some of the exterior decks on some of the upper floors to eliminate the possibility or anyone of any age looking down at the existing rear yards. Apartments are relatively consistent in occupancy loads. Family do not usually grow in numbers of household numbers and stay in the same b'lilding. We asked the neighborhood what use for our land they would like to see. Although they represented that they lelt that any commercial use would be both a better use that apartments, and that any commercial use would not be objectionable, the only suggested use olTered was that of the continuing use as a play area for their children- where then played then and would like to continue to be able to do so. While we can be sympathetic to this, it is somewhat unrealistic. Our experience is that people are alraid of the possibility of ruture change, but readily accept it when it happens, and are more content once no additional change is possible in the ruture. The site plan could ofTer reasonable butTering between our proposed building and the residential yards It could even include playground type areas in this area acceptable to their family members as well as the building residents if desired. This is not totally uncommon. Our project would till a need in the City. Our project would add the key amenity of professional on site management and caretaking to the property. Our selected third party management company spends their entire ellort toward managing apartments for owners. They do not have any ownership themselves. Managenient is a full time business. Our buildings are designed for ease of maintenance and management. We do not want to own a project that is hard to keep maintained or di!l1cult to manage any more than the City would want a project that deteriorates and is not manageable This is not the case with our design. For the past two years we have continued to keep Staff support for our suggested highest and best use, and again request a new review of our plans. We request an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan Map and an amendment to the O!l1cial Zoning Map to allow R-4 apartment use on this property. I L-____'' 11 II II ii I ""-1~t(J'8~:;C;'ti~~~~ .~ .. I'''''' ." '" ~:l '" ~ ~"... S !---r=-;"""" - ~l i-~;~;~Od~;-J--~-N3f~3'~3C ;:;Hl~CN i I j ; l \- I :. '". ". "I ~--- -, "":ll i:' .,2 I ~ I, ' ,I ;;:u ,,: .'; ,,~'": ,," ,," I, AHl{nS ::JIHd'tllDOdO.L .._ '1'1\ II, ~ fj_~_[i _ ~~ :.:..:,c.; ,."_JL---__ . I, \ , ", __~_Q~~6~~1 . g. ~........ I '<" ') . '~.;.L _.~_-_,.----L..., /':----'" :'!' ~-'~ I , t.~,-l i!xJ} l~ "M' ,"I! ~ j ~+;T ii. 'I ///i,1 ,( \ 'if' 'i "'1p;--7--~ ~ ( .'1~'" " ;, lJJ, '"I ~_ ',/ i 7]"', 1, ( I "l ~90l)Ov N: ,,;0 H.W S ~ . ,I- 'lIilr~----------------------------,p."L I't,tl ~, ~,,-<.. ~ ; ~ ~ jf'" \. ~ : jcr c-'ll' '~.; , ;c--r-'--1 :. " lilt;; fdrl~ ~4~ (' "I" I.[.f.."".....; \1\ '.' '" .) - - - -.. ~ 11 . ~ ~ ~-r I I I I . iirtl. _ <. \~< ~ "~l..~,.- ~-!f1 "..\o.;nC\\'...C" ,'C ..,"~V"',...[, -,,___ '".' 'IIIz , ','\ \~~~\~;:, :; \\~_ ~", ; - . _~ ~ -.~ ~ ~\I ~_ ~ _." . I I \........ \\\~'l-'('\ .\ .' _ $1;0.' ..,1 1111 ~ I .,\\ !\\ \'i.~~_ :,--=-:-- -":./ ~_.:. - -- ~ " ~: " ':;, 1 L, ' ~ , . "'\..-\' '->~='-""=.~, -'-~-~1l .. , 7_:~;;.~:"~r\~~t~--'J~~-' :-~i: ~i->:~'~~~~'.r '\ ~':'--,-. J:0~,~~/j-:~1 :---- _:,:,)('::\,~_~\\~\,\",'.,_\~;,:'" >/<c' '. \.. - ';:~"':- . , \\\ \ \ \ \ J. r r"g....q:r.~ON \ . ,\~\I ;~~ . I, ..-j~d ' \1 ~:.hX\ 1,\ , .:~~I,~jV ^' ,; \\ \ ' \. ' '\' ~_ ______~- ,~> \~i : \;" -.._~ __ _-:s t-J I rnno_.........__ ~' ~\\~ \ ----- - ---- ''\0 ~.\.\ '. ..."~ ~ i \ " " i \ ~,\ I . ;~\\ _\ . \ \ \ i; /:,':;\ ,\-q\,... . i ~\',: \ \ ';\ '" .,' I ..1\ ";1: V/} i " c o ~ lt~ m it",,! ~~Q -".- ~~~: !;~ ~ l 1 il Ii!: iii m I~ I Ip!i i s I~ ; 'J, Jm ,~I!.,!H .---. I! I i I \1 I I II I i\J I ~ s: J i ~{ ~ ~ s.~ I I . I ai f_..,""...~. Ii Ii : : 1 \0 0 U-C"='''O 0 @ -- -- -------- -- --- -~- ------- -- ----- -- --------- -- :- ---~~-- -~- -~. - -------- ~- ----- -~ ---------- . . . . .. .0-,01 " z i: ~ 0.", '0 ~~ \. ~tn \ \ Z,... \ \ 0111 --~---,-------- ----------- , ' , ' , ' , \ \\~ . .111 . =1 i 'I ,: o!! \~ I I I . ~--------------------------------U;;i~-~..~;.r~----------- ---- , I I I I I , I I I I ,.' I " "I l: i: J: I: .1 .1 ,: ,: ! ~ i ~ i ; ~I ~I Ii I -: -1~:;A I I I I ~ :: I -------~---~------~ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ________.L___J ~ J r ! 1 f :I ! ) l .. . i & ~ ~ ~ ~ I . i ~i~II ~all~ ",(NU( QULUiH i" I I -I ~ I- I * III iA; -j4 It S I !l! i ~I! II ji!1 ~ !. ,~~ L"~.~_ ~ ~1 ~ I J ~ 51 I~~ i'< I L I ~ I Ubi. J ~ J 1 ~ . I ~ 0 0 . . ~ ~ ~ - - - ~ ~ ~ ; ~ ~ ~ i ~ ~ ~ ell C') ~ I I L ~ . ~ il ; ~ Ii ; ~ ill I il~ !l it;1 · .11 ,~H l i ~ I : j I r ~ ~ ~ ~ 1 I s I ~ i~ I IL"~.~. Jili:J~'; I " ~ ., 8 ~ .. ~~u a I ill.. If " 111\115 I 8 '" " ~ 0" '" .. 8 <> "' '" I 0 o .. ~ '" .. "' " ~ ~ .. = 0 ill .. S ~ 8 ~ "' ~ ~ ~ ~ :" It ~ ~ '" .. "' [( ~ ~ " ~ ~ 8 ., '" 0" " ill .. a ~ 8 8 ::t 8 " '" 8 8 ~ "' 13 .. 0 " '" .. ~ . "' ~ 0 " a 8 " 13 .. 8 '" .. "' '" c) ! ., 0" 0 II '" N ~ "' 0 ~ lllV15 " " " ~ 8 8 ill '" '" ~~ "'0 ~ ~ill "'S' " S' .... L