The URL can be used to link to this page

02-26-04 References - New Urban CommunitiesOctober 14, 2003 S. B. Friedman & Company ATTN: Park Ridge RFQ 221 North LaSalle St., Suite 820 Chicago, IL 60601 -1302 Dear Sir: The Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA) of the City of Ft. Lauderdale has worked with New Urban Communities and its principals, Mr. Kevin Rickard and Mr. Tim Hernandez on the development of their East Village Project located in the heart of the redevelopment district. Their East Village project is helping to revitalize a targeted area of the City where redevelopment efforts have been concentrated. We have recently supported this project with streetscape improvements and found Mr. Hernandez willing to accommodate our requests regarding the development of his site. They have found a successful niche in the area of infill development and revitalization of the inner city. Mr. Hernandez also sits on the CRA Advisory Board and has used his experience and background in redevelopment to assist us in planning for future growth and guiding the revitalization of the area. Should you require more specifics about our relationship with New Urban Communities, Kevin Rickard or Tim Hernandez, please feel free to contact me at 954- 828 -4514. Sincerely, Kim Jackson CRA Director NORTHWEST / PROGRESSO / FLAGLER HEIGHTS COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY 101 N.E. THIRD AVENUE, SUITE 300, FORT LAUDERDALE, FLORIDA 33301 PHONE:(954) 828 -4514, FAX (954) 828 -4500 EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER. Wy wxi.fOft-Iauderdale.fl.US PRINTED ON f2 ECYO LED PAPER a ®` IV e DELRAY BEACH COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY October 16, 2003 S.B. Friedman & Company ATTN: Park Ridge RFQ 221 North LaSalle St., Suite 820 Chicago, IL 60601 -1302 RE: New Urban Communities To Whom It May Concern: The purpose of this letter is to provide a reference for the development company New Urban Communities. As Executive Director of the City of Delray Beach's Community Redevelopment Agency, and as the City's former Planning and Zoning Director, I have had the opportunity to work with New Urban Communities on numerous occasions. The company was one of the first to build new housing in our downtown area, redeveloping an abandoned bank site into an upscale townhouse project. Based upon the success of that development and their ability to design innovative urban infill projects, they were selected by the CRA to develop 4.5 acres of land that our agency had assembled in the City's West Atlantic Avenue Redevelopment corridor. Known as Atlantic Grove, the project is a mixed use development consisting of retail, offices, townhouses, and condominiums. Atlantic Grove has succeeded beyond any of our expectations, selling out in a matter of months. The fact that the development includes an affordable housing component and a partnership with two local nonprofit agencies is a testament to New Urban's commitment to civic involvement. . I have been employed in the public sector side of the development industry for nearly twenty years, and have dealt with hundreds of developers, architects, and contractors in that time. New Urban Communities has been one of the best companies to work with, because they understand how to create projects that satisfy their buyers' needs while also enhancing the surrounding community. They are not afraid of challenges, and have been pioneers in South Florida's urban ill movement. The principals, Tim Hernandez and Kevin Rickard, as well as the whole New Urban staff, are professional and stand by their word. I highly recommend them for any development project you are planning to undertake. incerely, Diane Colonna Executive Director 104 West Atlantic Avenue • Delray Beach, Florida 33444 561- 276 -8640 • Fax 561- 276 -8558 500 Greynolds Circle Lantana, FL 33462 -4594 (561) 540 -5000 Fax (561) 540 -5009 www.lantana.org Mayor David J. Stewart Councilmembers Louis MVeanter Tom Deringer Ronald S. Edwards Elizabeth Tennyson Town Manager Michael Bornstein "Lantana, an old Florida Community of Friends, Families and Neighbors. " October 27, 2003. S.B. Friedman & Company Attn: Park Ridge RFQ 221 North LaSalle St. Suite 820 Chicago IL 60601 -1302 Re: New Urban Communities To Whom It May Concern: The purpose of this letter is to provide a reference for the development company New Urban Communities. As Town Manager of the Town of Lantana, I have had the opportunity to work with New Urban Communities on their Lyman Village development in our town. The project was extremely successful, and if other opportunities open up in Lantana, hopefully Messrs. Rickard and Hernandez will bid on them. I found Messrs. Rickard and Hernandez to be beyond reproach and thoughtful in their planning and development of the project and immediate area. If you should require any additional information in regards to our relationship, please do not hesitate to telephone me at (5 61) 540 -5010. Sinc is ae o stein Town Manager October 28, 2003 a, �LA�NN:IN� ■y7 x - 1 S.B. Friedman & Company Attn: Park Ridge RFQ 221 North LaSalle Street — Suite 820 Chicago, IL 60601 -1302 Subject: New Urban Communities 'Vw. To All Concerned: In my eight years as Executive Director of the Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council, I have had the opportunity to work with dozens of public and private sector investors /developers in the 53 cities and towns of the Treasure Coast Region and beyond. Without exception, when it comes to the science and art of urban infill and redevelopment there is no relationship I value more and no group I would rather be working with than New Urban Communities. While everyone else is talking about doing it or drawing pictures of it, Tim Hernandez and Kevin Rickard are actually building it. In addition to their long and successful track record, my confidence in them is born out of their knowledge of constructing authentic building types; their ability to blend the often difficult conditions of public policy, financing, and the market into good results on the ground; and their commitment and true belief in rebuilding cities and towns. If you are interested in delivering high - quality, authentic urbanism and infill in your city, it is without reservation that I would recommend New Urban Communities. Sincerely, Michael J. Busha, AICP Executive Director MJB:lg "Bringing Communities Togetber" • Est. 1976 3 0 1 E a s t O c e a n B o u l e v a r d - S u i t e 3 0 0 - Stuart, F l o r i d a 3 4 9 9 4 Phone (772) 221 -4060 - SC 269 -4060 - Fax (772) 221 -4067 - E -mail - admin1ktcr1Rc.org d y Bankof America. October 17, 2003 S.B. Friedman & Company Attn: Park Ridge RFQ 221 North LaSalle St., Suite 820 .Chicago, IL 60601 -1302 Dear Sir or Madam: Bank of America Private Bank FL5- 411 -01 -02 1001 East Atlantic Avenue Delray Beach, FL 33483 Tel 561.279.7670 Fax 561.279.1294 Please be advised that New Urban Communities Inc. has been a valued client of Bank of America since 1999. Bank of America currently has a low eight -figure line of credit facility available for New Urban Communities Inc. for their business needs. All account activity has been satisfactory to the Bank. Also, with the guidance of Kevin Rickard, Tim Hernandez and their team, New Urban Communities Inc. continues to be well respected in the communities they do business. Please feel free to contact me with any additional questions or comments. Sincerely, Joseph P. Silk Senior Vice President (561) 279 -7638 USA 2000 2004 AmSouth Bank 2255 Glades Road, Suite 324A Boca Raton, Florida 33431 (561) 989 -5451 October 10, 2003 S. B. Friedman & Company Attn: Park Ridge RFQ 222f,North LaSalle St., Suite 820 Chicago, IL 60601 -1302 To Whom It May Concern: AmSouth Bank is pleased to inform you that New Urban Communities and its principals, Mr. Kevin Rickard and Mr. Tim Hernandez, are valued and highly regarded customers of our bank. We recently completed a significant loan transaction with the company for a mixed use development in Jupiter, Florida, A' which includes both residential and commercial units. I have known Messrs. Rickard and Hernandez for over four years and have provided in excess of $38 million in financing for various projects in South Florida while at .,AmSouth and another financial institution. I have found Messrs. Rickard and Hernandez to be honorable, easy to work with, and their integrity is beyond reproach. They are seasoned real estate developers who have been extremely successful in the South Florida market and have been the subject of numerous favorable articles by the local media. It is. my pleasure to provide you with this letter, and without hesitation I would recommend New Urban Communities for consideration in the subject project. Should you require more specifics about our relationship with New Urban Communities, Kevin Rickard or Tim Hernandez, please feel free to contact me at (561) 989 -5450. Sincerely, ..r Joseph C. Erwin Vice President Commercial Real Estate SunTrust Bank 501 South Flagler Drive West Palm Beach, Florida 33401 October 27, 2003 S. B. Friedman & Company ATTN: Park Ridge RFQ 221 North LaSalle St., Suite 820 Chicago, IL 60601 -1302 RE: New Urban Communities To Whom It May Concern: Our banking relationship with New Urban Communities (the Company) and its principals Messrs. Tim Hernandez and Kevin Rickard dates back to 2000, at which time we provided a project financing package totaling in the Low -Eight Figure range for land acquisition, development and construction financing and letters of credit for the 146 - unit Osceola Woods town -home project located in the Abacoa PUD in Jupiter, Florida. In 2002, the Bank provided similar loan facilities in aggregate Mid -Seven Figure range for New Urban's 32- unit town home East Village project in Ft. Lauderdale, Florida. In early 2003 we provided total facilities in the High -Seven Figure range to finance land acquisition, development and construction for the Company's 60 -unit town -home project known as Belle Isle, located in Wilton Manors, Florida. To date, the Company has met all of their financial obligations with the Bank in a timely and consistent manner and has in all respects performed as agreed. In our experience, the Company is well managed and is staffed by capable professionals who turn out a quality product. We value our relationship with New Urban Communities and its principals and would welcome the opportunity for additional business. If you have any questions, please phone me at (561) 835 -2629. Real Estate Fwancial Services FL6001 200 East Broward Boulevard Suite 200 Fort Lauderda,c, FL 33301 October 20, 2003 km:. 9 /' S.B. Friedman & Company --,Attn: Park Ridge RFQ 221 North LaSalle St., Suite 820 Chicago, IL 60601 -1302 RE: New Urban Communities To Whom It May Concern: Please be advised that Wachovia Bank, N.A. ( "Wachovia') is familiar with many of the Florida projects being developed by New Urban Communities C"NUC' ). In particular, Wachovia along with a non- profit participant, is financing the acquisition, development and buildout of Atlantic Grove, a mixed -use project in Delray Beach, Palm Beach County, Florida. Upon completion, Atlantic Grove will consist of 55 townhouses, 20 residential lofts, and approximately 52,210 square feet of office and retail space. Total credit exposure for Atlantic Grove is in the low 8- figures. Mr. Timothy Hernandez and Mr. Kevin Rickard, the founders of NUC, are extremely qualified real estate professionals as detailed in their respective resumes. They are highly qualified to take infill, redevelopment and traditional neighborhood development projects from the.conceptual stage to final buildout Tim and I are board members on the City of Ft. Lauderdale's CRA Advisory Board for the Northwest - Progresso-Flagler Heights area. This area is in the CBD of Ft. Lauderdale. One of NUC's projects, East Village, is located in this area and was a success from the beginning. East Village is considered one of the anchors for the redevelopment of the Northwest- Progresso - Flagler Heights area. Based on our experience to date at Atlantic Grove, Tim and Kevin's real estate expertise, and their overall success in the marketplace, Wachovia would seriously consider financing additional projects for New Urban Communities. Please do not hesitate to contact me if further references are needed: Albert Fils Office: 954- 467 -4160 Senior Vice President Cell: 954- 684 -0498 Wachovia Bank, N.A. Fax: 954467 -5164 200 E. Broward Blvd., 2nd Floor Ft. Lauderdale, FL 33301 Email: albert.fils wachovia.com Sincerely, Albert Fils Senior Vice President Cc: Tim Hernandez (via fax 561- 272 -3951) STATE OF FLORIDA DIVISION OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS • DEPA R'i %IE�iT OF CONtNt :N'ITY AFFAIRS. Petitioner. vs. DOAH CASE N. O. 97- 49474GM CITY OF SOUTH MIAMI. Respondent. STIPULATED SETTLEMI ENT AGREEM; ENT Petitioner. Deoartment of Community Affairs (Departme'nt), and Respondent. City of South Miami (City), hereby stipulate and agree as follows: GENERAL PROVISIONS • 1. Definitions. As used in this agreemen t. the following words and phrases shall have the following meanings: a. Act; The Local Government Comprehensive PIanning and Land Deveiopment Reguiation Act. as codified in Part II. Chapter 163. Florida Statutes.. b. Agreement: This stipulated settlement agreernent., C. Com rehensive Plan Amendment or Plan Amendment: The comprehensive plan amendment adopted by the City on August 19. 1997, by Ordinance No. 20- 90-1641. d DOA H: Tne`Fiorida Division of Administrative Hearinss. e. In comriiance or into cornviiance: Consistent with Sections 163.3177, 0 163.; i 4 and 16--,.--! 91. Fionda Statutes. Section i 8 . =01. riona statutes. the applicable re2ionai eoiicy pian.:. ^d Chaoter 9J 171-o n Adrr,inistrauve Code. f. Notice: The notice of intent issues by the Department to which was attached its statement of intent to rind the aian arnet:ament not in compiiance. g. Petition: The petition for administrative hearing and relief filed by the Department in this case. h. Remedial Action: A remedial plan amendment. submission of support document or other action described in the statement or intent or this agreement as an action which must be compieted to bring the plan amendment into compliance. i. Remedial Plan Amendment An amendment to the plan or support document. the need for which is identified in this agreement, including its exhibits, and which the local government must adopt to complete all remedial actions. Remedial plan amendments adopted pursuant to this agreement must. in the opinion of the Department. be consistent with and substantially simiiar in concept and content to the ones identified in this agreement or be othen ise acceptable to the Department. j. Statement of Tntent: The statement of intent to find the plan amendment not in compliance issued by the Depanment in this case. k: Sumort Document: The studies. inventory maps, surveys, data. inventories. listings or analyses used to develop and support the plan amendment. 2. Entire Af2reement. This is the entire a?reernent between the parties and no verbal or writte. ^. assurance or promise is effectiti•e or binding unless included in this document. 'N. Apvmyni by ( oveming Eodv. This agreement has been approved by the Ci -tv's ,2ovemina coax• at a oubiic eanniz aciverusea in an adve^:se:nent published at least 10 days prior to the hearing in the manner prescribed for adv,en semerts in Section 163.3,184(15)(c), • Florida Statutes. his agreeTe :r has been executed by the appropriate officer as provided in the Citv's charter or other reguiations. 4.. Changes in Law. Nothing in this agree.zent shall be construed to relieve either parr from adhering to the law. and in the event of a change in any statute or administrative regulation inconsistent with this agreement. the statute or regulation shall take precedence. 5. Other .Persons Unaffected. Nothing in this agreement shall be deemed to affect the rights of any other person under the law. 6. Attornev Fees and Costs. Each party shall bear its own costs. including attorney fees. 7. Effective Date. This agreement shall become effective upon the last date of signing by the Department or the City. 8. Purpose of this Agreement: Not Establishing Precedent. The parties enter into this aereement in a spirit of cooperation for the purpose of avoiding costly, lengthv and unnecessary litigation and in recognition of the desire :or the speedv and reasonable resolution of disputes arising out of or related to the plan amendment. The acceptanc -e of proposals for purposes of this agree:^ent is part of a negotiated agreement affecting manv factual and Iegai issues and is .not an endorsement of. and does not establish precedent for. the use of these proposals in anv other circumstances or by anv other local government. 9. Denarrr lent Pnwers. The Department is the state land planning agency and has the power and duty to administer and enforce the Act an to determine whether the plan amendrne^t is in compiiance. • 10. Exhibits. FY.hibits A and Bare aere_i-y incorporated by reference. 11. Neectiation of Agreement. The Department issued its notice and statement of intent to find the plan amendment not in n compliance: and filed the petition in this case to that effect. Subsequent to the filing of the petition the parties conferred and agreed to resolve the issues in the petition. notice and statement of intent through this agreement. It is the intent of this agreement to resolve fully all issues between the parties in this proceeding. 12. Dismissal. If the City completes the remedial actions required by this agreement. including the rescission of the - pian.amendment as set forth herein. the Department shall issue a cumulative notice of intent addressing both the compliance agreement amendment and the initial plan amendment subject to these proceedings._The Department shall file the cumulative notice of intent with the DOAH along with a request to dismiss this proceeding. 13. h Filine and Continuance. This agreement shall be filed with DOAH'by`the, Department after execution by the parties. Upon the filing of this agreement. the administrative proceeding in this matter shall be staved by the administrative law judge in accordance with Section 1633 184(16)(b), Florida Statutes. 14. 'Retention of Right to Final Hearing. Both parties hereby retain the right to have a final hearing in this proceeding in the event of breach of this aareement. and nothing in this agreement shall be deemed a waiver of such right. The Department or any other parry to this agree:rient may move to have this matter set for hearing if it becomes apparent that any other party whose action is required by this aQreernent is not proceeding in good faith to take that action. 4 Descr. ^tt�n of ?� ^� isions nor in Comt,iiance and Remedini .� ctions: Lezai Erfec: • of Agrcernenr. EY.hioit A to this aeree^ient is a copy of the staterne. ^.t of intent, which identifies. the provisions not in compiiance. Exhibit B contains remedial actions needed for compliance. This agreement constitutes a stipuiation that if the remedial actions are accomplished_ the plan amendment will be in compliance. 16. Remedial Actions to be Considered -for Adontion. The dry agrees to consider for adoption by formal action ofits' governing body all remedial actions described in Exhibit B no later, than the time period provided for in this agreement. 17. Adoption or Approval of Remedial Ptan Amendments. Within 60 days after execution of this agreement by the parties. the City shall consider for adoption all remedial actions or plan amendments and amendmentsto the support documents. This may be done at a single adoption hearing. Within 10 working days after adoption of the remedial plan • amendment, the City shall transmit 5 copies of the amendment to the De artment as provided in p p p Rule 0,J -11. 011''(5), Florida Administrative Code. The City also shall submit one copy to the regional planning agency and to any other unit of local or state government that has filed a written request with the governing body for a copy of the remedial plan amendment and a copy to anv party granted intervenor status in this proceeding. The amendment shall be transmitted to the Department along with a letter which describes the remedial action adopted for each part of the pian amended. including references to specific portions and pages. 18. Acknowledgement. All parties to this agreement acknowledge that the "based upon' provisions in Section 163. 3 184(8), Florida Statutes. do not apply to the remedial amend.:Zent. 19. Re vievv of Remea:ai A nencn:ents ar.c `:ntice of Intent. Within 45 days after receipt of the adopted re:nediai clan amendments and Support documents. the Department shall issue a notice of intent pursuant to section i 63.3 i 84. Florida Statutes. for the adopted amendments in accordance with this asreement. . a. In Comniiance: If the adopted remedial actions satisfy this agreement. the Department shall issue a cumulative notice of intent addressing both the plan amendment and the compliance agreement amendment as being in compliance. The Department shall file this cumulative notice with DOAH and shall move to have this proceeding dismissed. b. Not in Comniiance: If the remedial actions are not adoofed. or if they do not satisfy this agreement. the Department shall issue a notice of intent to find the plan amendment not in compliance and shall forward the notice to DOAH for a hearing as provided in Subsection 163.3184(l 0), Florida Statutes, and may request that the matter be consolidated with the pendi g proceeding for a single. final hearing. The parties hereby stipulate:. to that consolidation and to the setting of a single final hearing if the Department so requests. 20. Effect of :amenament. Adoption of any compliance agreement amendment shall not be counted toward the frequency restrictions imposed upon plan amendments pursuant to Section 163.31.87(1), Florida Statutes. This agreement contains all the terms and conditions agreed to by the parties. 6 In witness «-nereor. the parties hereto have caused this aureement to be executed by their undersigned officiais as duly authorized. DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY :AFFAIRS CITY.OF SOUTH MIA1r1I B� Charles Pattison. Director Title Division of Resource Planning and Management Date Date Attest: City Clerk Assistapt General Counsel City Attorney I STATE OF FLORID,"" DEP ART ,M-.NT OF COMMUINT1 i i AFF IRS IN RE: SOUTH INUAMI) COMPRF.I SI'Z'E PLAIND AMDMUENT ADOPTED BY) DOCKET NO.97- 1ER- N'OI- 1:2?- (A) -(I)(N) ORDINANCE NO. 20 -90 -1641) ON AUGUST 19, 1997) STATEMENT OF INTENT TO FIND COMPREFIENSWE PLAN AMENDMENT NOT IN COMPLIANCE The Florida Department of Community Affairs ne cby issues its Statement of Intent to find the City of Sourh'Miami'Comprchensive Plan Amendment 97-1 ER, adopted by Ordinance No. 20 -90 -1641 on August 19, 1997 Not In Compliance, The Department finds that the plan :v amendment is not "in compliance," as defined in Section 163.3134(1)(b), Florida Statutes (F.S.), because it is not consiste.n with Chapter 163, Part iI, F.S., the State Corn re he ^live Pl the South Florida Comprehersive Regional Policy Plan, and Chapter 9J -5, Florida Administrative Code (F.A.C.), for the following reasons: I. AMM MME T TO THE ? :'ZANSPORTATION ELEMENT A. Inconsiste nt provisions. The inconsistent provisions of the plan amendment under this subject heading are as follows: 1) The amendrmer:t Is i31C:Onsislent because the amendment did not include an adequate analysis of the projected inte.^nodai deficiencies and needs such as terrainais, connec: ons, high occu"Ll" ' e!zici !anes..- ;rx- and - ;de lots and other faciiidcs. i ne City's r.--.iv was not responsive to the ORC objection or the rule requirer^e. ^.t. Descrang the City's proposed shuttle _ EXHIBIT " i SVSiem Is not an ana1VS1S of projected intermodal defic:e. ^.cies and needs. Without providing an • analysis of the intermodal deficiencies. the City cannot adequately address the needs component of the analysis. [Section 163.3177(6)6)5., F.S.; Rule 9J- 5.005(2)(a); Rule 9J- 5.019(3)(e), F.A.C.] B. Recommended remedial actions. These inconsistencies may be remedied by taking the following actions: 1. The assessment must look at areas related to ridership and modal split in order to determine if there are any deficiencies with the intermodal facilities. This information. should be available through the Metro -Dade County Transit Authority or Dade County. The City must conduct an analysis of intermodal deficiencies and a needs assessment and consider appropriate policies, programs, and activities to correct identified problems. 2) Ile amendment is inconsistent because the City did not provide an adequate analysis of the projected transportation system levels of service and system needs based upon the land use categories, including their densities or intensities of use as shown on the Future Land Use Map (FLUM), .and the projected integrated transportation system. The analysis did not demonstrate integration and coordination among the various modes of transportation and did not address the need for new facilities and expansions of alternative transportation modes to provide a safe and efficient transportation network and enhance mobility. [Chapter 163.3177(6)G)8., F.S. Rule 9J- 5.005(2)(a) and (5)(a); and Rule 9J- 5.019(3)(f), F.A.C.j. B. Recommended remedial actions. This inconsistency may be remedied by taking the followine actions: 2 T-he City snouid ::Wvze • e F? U�J de=-- ;- ,.:ntens ties and r,.ixed use patte ys against :. ~e tes::ods re�.:ired :o sucport :-isit. ne C;-, x::,01110 CO:I1t7c�.rC t�°, �Xist73I2 I LU designations within the transit corridor to a professiora:iy accepted source which. has aralvzeA densities and intensities which support =..asit. One such decurne nt is the Dade County MPO document "Transit/Land Use Relationship Reoort." Where incompatible uses occur, an analysis should be conducted that assesses FLLTM alte..natives:that would be compatible. This analysis should be comuieted prior to the Dade County MVO Long Range Transportation Plan Model Update so that alternative land uses can be submitted to the 1v1PO. The City should also create a policy w•nerenv it comrruts to completing this analysis uppn completion of the Dade County Metropolitan Planning Organization (DCMPO) Long Range Transportation Plan Model update. The City should coordinate with Dade County regarding the submittal of land use data to the NIPO. The Department notes that the City has added Transportation Element Policy 1.6.4 which states, that the City will continue to update the Citv's Plan as specific information becomes available iiom the MPO, Dade County, and the State of Florida. While the Department believes that the genes i intent of this .policy is moving in the .right direction, the language is vague and should be revised whereby the City will submit this analysis by a date certain subsequent to the N20 update. 3) - The amed=ent is inconsistent because the amendment does not adequately analyze :e compatibility of the transportation system needs with the Florida Department of Transporation (FDOT� Adopted Work Program, long range transportation plan and plans of the Dade C� .:,ty MPO, and the cor::patibiliry with the noiicies and guidelines of these ;.cans. The response :s inadecuate ---cause;, does not de::cnstrate neuher the Citvts systern ne_rs are i conslste :t 'NI'Th the JOT Adopted `work Progr= = -:- ionz- .:nge �-�. SDOZ'=iOrl . i I a nci pians of the Zade Coua ''I TO. (Section 163._ :77(6 IU j_. F'U' °J- 5.005(2)(a); and Rule al- 5 .0 19 (3) (g), F. A.C. B. Recommenced actions These;- irconsi:.en c:es may be remedied by taking the following actions- 3. Provide an analysis which demonstrates whether the City's system needs qLre consistent with the FDOT Adopted �Vork Program and the long range transportation plan and Plans of the ivIPO. Furthermore, the Dade County MPO is now in the process of updating their five -vear work plan. and the Depa.ra=ent is working with the MPPO, FDOT- District 4, and Dade Counry on ensuring coordinated transportation pianning as part of the development of the County Transportation Element. The Department recommends that the City participate in this process. 4) ,' II he ame..t:nlent is inconsistent because the analysis does not explicitly address and document internal consistency of the plan. especially its provisions addressing transportation, land use, nd availability of facilities and services. While the City's response speaks in ge"crai terras of how the t- ansportation ele^:ent is corsistent with other growth management goals of the comore hersive plan, it does not explicitly explain how the policies and programs of the transaorr=ion eke :ent support and further objectives and policies of other comnreaerzive aian components. [Section 163.3177(6)0)5, F .S.; Rule 9J- 5.005(2)(a); and Rule 9J- 5.019(3)(i), F. A.C.] B. Recomr.:enced nzmedial actions These i ^-consistencies may be remedied by taking tee following actions: The Citys analysis :. ust explicitly e:;piain o%v the policies and programs of the ..n: por'�ation eiemewt sL ro:t d :,, rte objectives a -d poiia es of other vompre ersive pian • cotnpauen;s. The City's anaivsis s :Quid exartzir:e consisterc�r suca as. but not limited to, whether tae FT UM supports the transportation systew .1,vhe•. -•^.er p iLlc•:iar caoimi improv emen•, are needed.: �d wne•�•e: the transportation system supports innil deveiopment. 5) The amendment is inconsistent because the City did not adequateiv analyze the growth trends and travel carte= and interactions beiween.Iand uses and transportation, and the compatibility between the future and use and transportation element. The City has provided a genes -ai description of how growth and the transportation system interact based upon general observations. This ove ^'ie :v, however, does not satisrr the analysis requirements of the rule, nor would it support specific c re omme ^,cations for policies and programs to ensure greater compatibility between the transportation and future land use elements. [Section 163.3177(6)G)5., F.S.; Rule 9J- 5.005(2)(a); and Rule 9J4.019(3)(d), F.A.C.] B) Recommended remedial actions. These inconsistencies may be remedied by taking the :;.flowing actions: 5. As stated in Item No. 2, the City should anaiyze the FLUMI densities, intensities and mixed use patterns against the thresholds required to support transit. The City should Compare the emsting ELTYM designations within the tr=it corridor to a professionally accepted source :v'uch has analyzed densities and intensities :which support transit. This analysis should be completed prior to the Dade Counry ,NQO Lone Ranze Transportation Plan vIodei Update so that alte- :ative ?and uses c ;,-1 cc submitted to the MP0. Upon cornaieti -on of the Dade County MVO Long Range 71 =spormtion Plan ;yiodei update. the Ci must an iyze tthe compatibility • between -1-t rutune i-a use =d ==or-,ation eie:nen".. Tae C: Y� should utilize :.:e Dade Counrr IWO update to project :.:n:re roadway canac -,-cs =.:d - =s u"� -=wit rideanip and utilize me plan to project vnerc growth will occ,, . T:ic City could t'ae de:er::..ae the of ecs of growth on the transportation system and vice versa. As recommen.._J in Item No. 2, the C tv should add a policy whereby the City will submit this analysis by a date certain subsequent to the MPO update. 6) The amendment is inconsistent because the City did not adequately analyze how the City will maintain its adopted level of service standard for roads and transit facilities. The analysis does not show projected traffic and transit le :-e;.s over the, nest rive years and identify where LOS standards are e.xmecxd to be exceeded. (Section 163.2177(6)0)5., F.S.; Rule 9j- 5.005(2)(a) and Rule 9J- 5.019(3)(h), F. A.C.j B. Recommended re- nedial actjorns. These inconsistencies may be remedied by taking the following actions: 6. Provide an analysis which shows projected traffic and transit le reis over the neat five years and identify where LOS standards are expected to be exceeded. The analysis should also include other methods of maintaining LOS standards such as, but not limited to, Capital Improvement Element improvements to prevent LOS failures, changes in land use, or making the transport-ation system more efficient. The amendment , is inconsistent because the following objective and policies were m not inciuded in the plan: Rule 9 ? -S.O l9(4)(b)4. Address the provision of efficient public tmnnssit services based on eYistitig and D•oDOSed ^ene atorsiannictors. safe and convenient public transit te.=irais. land u -ses. and accommodation of the special neens of the transportation disadvantaged; 6 ° Rule -° T- 19(4)(c)3. i establish p ;.rkizz to promote =zspor-aron goaisiooiect:ves: Rule 9T -; .� 19 (4)Cc) . establish l�ti i�.:- asd a n Wbe ve SYste e ; • safety; Rule 9T -5.019 (4)(c)9. establish land use and a and building design guidelines for deveiopment in exclusive public transit corridors to assure the accessibility of new development to public transit; Rule 9T- 5.019(4) (c) l0. establish numerical indicators azainst which the achievement or mobility goals of the community can be measured, such as modal split annual transit trips per capita. automobile occupancy rates; Rule 91- 5.019(4)(c) 11. establishment of strategies, agreements and other mechanisms with applicable local govern-me.-Us and regional and state agencies that demonstrate the area-wide coordination necessary t9 implement t-he transportation, land use, parking, and other provisions of the transportation element. B. Recommended rernedial actions These inconsistencies may be remedied by taking the following actions: 7. ji Include the objective and policies ide nom: pied above. The objective and policies must be cased on appropriate analyses as discussed in precedime sections of the Statement of Intent. 8) The amendment is inconsistent because Transportation Eleme :t Objective 1.2, which seeiz to achieve coordination of the -.?=e Land Use elan and the Transportation Element, does not insure Lhat future land use, population densities, housing and employment patter::s are compatible z S iransportat on modes and services. -[Section 163.331-776-0)5., F.S.: Rule 9}:;.005(=)(x); srzd Rule 9T_5.019(4)(b)2., F.A.C. B. Recor.. -- e- dPd - c.- .Ad;al actions. 7.aese i ^consistencies may be.re^:edied by taking t e following actions: . `. 8. The City sl".cuid ..raivze the F%U;vi - densities, iyte =hies and mixed use patterns • alai: t the tl,.resaolds ree•:i: ec .o support =-zsit. Where u;carrpati`rle uses occur. an analysis should be conduced that assesses FT U14 alternatives that would be compatible. The City should compare the existing FLU,'Yi designations within the t.—nnsit corridor to a professionaily accepted source which has analyzed densities and intensities whith support transit. This analysis should be completed prior to the Dade County MPO Long Range, Transportation Plan Model Update so that alternative land uses c= be submitted to the MPO. As recommended in item loo. 2, the City should add a policy where-"y the City will revise this objective and add policies, if necessary, by a date ce ^, in subsequent to the Dade County MPO update.- ""ie`objectives and policies must be based on appropriate analyses as discussed in preceding sections of the Statement of Intent. 9) The amendment is inconsistent because Transportation Element Policy I.I.I. which establishes the roadway level of service standard, did not include specific reference to the LOSS for transit facilities. Furthermore, the City did not adopt the LOSS established by r'-DOT for facilities on the FiHS. [Section 163.3177(6)0)1., F.S., and Rule 9J- 5.419(4 )(c) I., F..4.C.j B. Recomnae ^ced rzrned;al actions. These inconsistencies may be remedied by taking the following actions: 9. Revise the ; rnendme nt to include the LOSS for mass transit and adopt FDOT's LOS standard for facilities on the FiHS in the City. i Q) The amencr.:ent is inconsistent because the City adopted a Transportation Contuse ncv Exception ..l- ea (Tc,- ) but did not adeaf. a=;v address the provision to establish policies Which specif,_ p:cgranas to address transportation needs of the i CE.A.. [Section • 8 163.: 180(5)(b) and (c), F.S., and Rule 9J- 5.0055(6)(c), A.C.I. F • e a 7 se c • ncies may be remedied by B. Reco..........c�d . ,. ...aI actions. 1..e.. osis�e takinc The followina actions: 10. The Demartmeat believes that if the .C' Mr adds the objective and policies as identified in Item No. 7 as well as establishing objectives and policies based upon the additional analysis requirements as discussed in 'preceding sec ions'o -rthe Statement c: Iat: nt the transportation needs of the TCEA will be met. 11) The amendment is inconsistent because the Future Transportation Map did not include rarking facilities that are required to achieve mobility goals; TCEA; and intermodal terminals and access to such facilities. [Section 163.3177(6)0)1., 2., and 3., F.S.; Rule 9J 5.005(5)(b); and Rule 91- 5.019(5)(a)I.e.; (5)(a)4;'and (5)(a)9., F.A.C. B1. Recommended remedjal actions. These inconsistencies maybe remedied by taking the f6howing actions: 11. Include these items on the Future Transportation Map. IL AME`70MENT Tn THE 7_77= LAND USE ELEMENT A. Inconsistent ^rovis:cns. The inconsistent provisions of the plan amendment under this subject heading are as follows: 1) The amendment is inconsistent because it includes a new mixed use FLUM category, Mixed Use Commercia Residential (Four Story), but does not include a minimum and Maxima:.:: r. ge percentage of land use distribution among the mix of uses, and the density for reside .ntizi uses. While the City has established a Floor Area Ratio (F. s .R.) appropriate for non- i 9 reside i � es. a F.,.R. cannot cdec�,. •e�v r^� ^�t;.r° -�s:den al densities becaI� c;veii= units C _ vary ii. size �xhich makes it dirL�Wt o dete �'ze of units that could be mowed. at i 63.-,177(6)(a), F.S., and Rule °J.-- .006(1)(c) and (4)(c), F.A.C.j B. Recommended rcrntdiai actions These inconsistencies may be remedied by taming the following actions: 1. The Mixed Use Comme:ci UReside^tiai (Four Story) category must be revised to include the .,n nimum and maximum range pence ntaQe of land use distribution among the mix of uses and include a residential density based on dwelling units per acre. U1. FUTURE LAND TJSE MAP AME +DNiENTS A. Tnconsister.; provisions. The in provisions of the plan amendment under this subject heading are as follows: 1._ The City has adopted 4 FLUM amendments which involve converting Land uses to the • Mixed Use CommerciaMesidential 4 Sto ' category. As the Department has determined that ( ry) the Mixed Use ComrnerciailResidentiai (4 Story) category is not in compliance, these 4 FLUM amens. c= are also not in compliance because of the problems associated with the land use categor, . Listed below are the subject amerdrrents. (Section 163.3177(6)(a), F.S.; Rule 9J- 5.005(5)(a); and Rule 9J- 5.006(i)(c) and (4)(c), F.A.C. Ame ^d. :.ent Total Acreage Existing Designation Proposed Designation Amens -ment NO. 1- 2.41 Singie- Family lies. Mixed Use Madison So•uare Neianboraood Retail (2 Commerc aL/Residend al Story] 10 Ame.^.c.:.e t No.2- 14.21 Charre::e Tco Gotnrntrciai Office Use, Mixed Use Comrne:c: i Retail. Commercia- Residentiai Public i _nrutionai. Singie r' iiy Res. and Vacant Amendment No.5- 1.46 M Low In=ity Office (2 Mixed Use Commuairy Center I w Storv' Commereiai/Residetnial Amendment No.6- 40.6 Specialty Retaii/Res (4 Mixed Use Hometown District Story), Neighborhood Commercial/Residential Remii (2 Story). Residentia office (Z Story), and Medium Density Multiple (4 Story) B. Recommended remedial actions. aese inconsistencies maybe remedied by taking the following actions: 1. Upon revising the Mixed Use Comme.- ci:.ilResidentiai (Four Story] category pursuant to the recommendation contained in Amendment to the Future Land Use Element Recotnme. d�a 'on No. 1, these F %UM amendments will be found in compliance. IV. AMENDMENT TO THE HOUSING ELEME ?1T A. Inconsis*.ent Droyisions. The inconsistent provisions of the plan amendment under this subject heading are as follows: 1) The amendment is inconsistent because Housing Objective 1.3, which states that the City will create and :a3intain affordable housing for ail current and anticipated future resident of the City, especially providing for households of very-low income. low - income, and moderate- income. is not measurable because it lacks a target by which the identified deficits in affordable housing :viil be reduced. 7 e associated policies, while establishing programs which could result in the ccnstruction of affordable ^cusing, do not establish. the target by which the City will 11 • 0 0 red::c° -p shown ^.. c.,.�:, 7(61 I.d.. F. S.. and Rule cJ- the cer ,,tudy. (Sect: ^^ i ;.010(3)(b)3., F . A.C. B. Recomrr:e ^ceo re^ eciai actions. i ese 1—is.e pees may cc remedied by taking the following actions: I . Revise Housing Objective 1.3 to include a me :s' rabiz target such as, but not limited to, number of affordable housing units to be built yezriy. V. CONSISTENCY lvrm THE STATE COMPREHENNSIVE PLAN A. Inconsistent provisions. The inconsistent provisions of the plan amendment under this subject heading are as follows: 1. The comprehensive plan amendment is inconsistent :pith the State Comprehensive PIan goals and policies; including the following provisions (Rules 9J- 5.021, F. A.C.): a) Goal S, Housing and Policy 3 b) Goal 16, Land Use and Policies I and 3 d) Goal 13, Public Facilities and Policies 1, ? e) Goal 20, Transportation and Policies 2, 2, 4, 10, 1 and 15 B. Recommended remedial action. These inconsistencies may be remcdied by taking the following action: I. Revise-the pian amendment as described above in Section I.B. through V.B. VI. CONSIS i rNCY IVM-1 THE STRATEGIC REGIONAL POLICY PL 4N FOR SOUTH FLORIDA A. Inconsistent nmyisipns. The inconsiste provisions of the. plan =enG'.^.i°.�'dt l3IlC1Cr uhis subject heading are as follows: 11 i 1. The comnrehe ^Wive cicn :.*men �e ^: is inconsistent mtn the Strategic Reaionai Policy Plan for South Florida P! an Qoais =d poiicies, Inc' xding the ffolloNving provisions (Rule 9J- 5.02 1. F.A.C.): a) Goal 2. 1, Land LTse and Public Faci hies and Policies 2.1.1, 2.3.6, 2.17, 2.3.8, 2.3:14, 2.3.18, and 2.3? I ; b)Goal 4. 1, Economic Deveiogment and Policies 44.5, 4.1.10, 4.1.11, 4.1.12, and 4.1.16 d) Goal S. 1, Regionai Transoom -pion and Policies 5.1.1, 5.1.3, 5.1.5, 5.1.6, 5.1.8, 5.1.10, 5.1.11, 5.1 -14, 5.1.15, 5,I 27, e) Goal 6. 1, Affordable dousing and Policies 6.1.1 and 6. 1.2 B. Recommended remedial action. These inconsistencies may be remedied by taking the following action: w 1. Revise the plan amendment as described above in Sections I.B. through V.B. •1 13 CON CL TI-: S'ONS 1. The pian 1^.d� ^.er.^.:.e ^: is not ccnsiste ^t •xitlh e Strategic Re2ionai Policy Plan for South Florida. So 2.; The plan amenamera is not consistent with the State Compre^.e.^sive Plan, 3. The plan amendment is not consistent with Chapter 50J -5, Florida Administrative Code. 4. The plan 'amendment is not consistent with the requirements of Section 1634.3 177, Florida Statutes. 5. The.pian amendment is not "in compiiancc." as defined in Section 163.3184(1)(b), Florida Statutes. 6. In order to bring the plan amendment into compliance, the Clay may complete the recommended remedial actions described above or adopt other remedial actions � that eliminate the inconsistencies. p Esec• -,ted this 7'LA day of 6,6W.111A 1997, at Tallahassee, Florida. les G. Pattison, Director -'C Division of Resource Planrnns and Management Department of Community Affairs 2555 Sh=ard Oak Boulevard Tallahassee, Florida 32199 -2100 0 1 4 3 The foilowine remediai amendment lanstuaQe is proposed as an addition to the existing goals. • 4 policies and ooiectives of the City's adopted and amerced Transportation Element as follows: ,5 6 Policy 1.6.6 Interim Poiicv: The City of South Miarni shall comaiete the followinu 7 tasks within three months of inserr elate here. in order to be found in 8 comviiance by the Florida Decartment of Community Affairs- 9 10 An analvsis of the existing, transportation system. levels -of- service and 11 service needs. based upon existing design and operating Capacity, most 12 recently available estimates for average and daily peak hour_ vehicle trios. 13 existing, modal split and vehicle occupancy rates, existing,a public transit 14 facilities,' including ridership by route, peak hour capacities and headways 15 population characteristics including transportation disadvantaged. and the 16 existing characteristics of trio generators and attracrors. The City will 17 coordinate with FDOT and Dade County MPO to comiete.the analysis. 18 Said analysis must show that the system is functioning, and will identiry 19 needs,which will correct existing deficiencies of the transportation system. 20 21 Policy 1.6.7 Interim Policy: The City of South Miami shall complete the following 22 tasks within six months of inserr date here, in order to be found in Z3 compliance by the Florida Deflartment of Community Affairs: 24 �25 An analvsis of the availability of transportation facilities and services to 26 serve existing land uses: and. 27 Z8 An analvsis of the availability of transportation system to evacuate the 29 coastal ooaulation prior to an impending natural disaster and 30 31 An anaivsis of the growth trends and travel patterns and interactions 32 between land use and trans orration and the comparability between the 33 future iand use and transportation elements: and. 34 3S An analvsis of the oroiected transloorration system level -of- service and 36 system needs based upon the future land use cate_ories. inciudins=_ the 37 intensities or densities. and the cmiected intesrated transportation system. 38 3 9 • The analvsis shat) consider *: ^.e oroiects planned for in FDOT's work 40 program. the long, range transportation oian and traffic imr)mvernent 41 rogram i TTP) of the Dade County N PO and the Metro Dade Transit 42 Authcrity: and. 43 44 The analysis shalt demonstrate how the City will maintain its adopted 45 level -of- service standard for roads and transit facilities: and i - txJztbit A n. P ✓ 3 5 6 7' a 9 10. 11 12 13: 14 is - 16 17 18 19 20 23. 22 23 24 O5. 26 27 Z8 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 �r • The anaivsis shall address internai consistence, of the clan: esaeciaily its provisions addressing rransnortation. '.and use. and the avaiiabiiitv nf facilities: and. An anaivsis which identities land uses and transponation management Programs necessary to promote and su000n eublic transportation systems in designated transportation corridors. II. AMENIDMENT TO THE FLrTURE LAND USE ELEMENT The following remedial amendment language is proposed as an addition to the existing '_oals. policies and objectives of the City's adopted and amended Future Land Use Element as follows: Mixed -Use Commercini/Residentini (Four- Story) The mixed -use commerciailresidentiai land use category is intended to provide for different levels of retail uses. office uses, retail and office services. and residential dwelling units with an emphasis on mixed -use development that is characteristic of traditional downtowns. Permitted heights, densities and intensities shall be set forth in the Land Development Code. Regulations regarding the permitted height density and intensity in zoning districts for areas designated as mixed -use ccmmerciallresidential shall provide incentives for transit- oriented development and mixed -use development. Zoning regulations shall reinforce the "no widenings`• policy set forth in the TrafAc Circulation Element by encouraging use of Metrorail system- to the recommendation by the Department of Community AfTairs to include Floor Area Ratio (F.A.R.) in the Comprehensive Plan. the City adopts a F.A.R. of 1.6 for this land use category Which is the existing F.A.R. in the Land Development Code for the corresponding zoning district. In addition. the City adonis a maximum residentiai density of 24 units per acre.- In order to ensure a mix of uses, the City reouires that a minimum of two of the above uses must be developed within this category For residential oroiects at a minimum the first floor must allow retail For retail proiects. at a minimum at least one floor must contain residential or office For office proiects. at a minimum at least one floor must contain residential or retail 39 III. FLrTURE LAWN USE �,1AP AMENDMENNTS 40 41 No language changes or map changes are proposed. as it is understood that the amendment 42 which is proposed in the previous section. if accented. will satisfv DCA. re_ardins this section., 43 44 45 0 Ezliibit A 1 lV ENDMI ENT TO THE: HOUSING ELEMENT 2 3 The following remedial amendment lansmase is proposed as an addition to the existing coals. 4 policies and objectives of the City's adopted and amended Transportation Element as follows: 5 6 Policy 1.3.6 Interim Policy: The City of South Miami shall ccmniete the following 7 tasks within three months of inserr date here. in order- to be found in 8 comniiance ov the Florida Deoartment of Community Affairs: 9 10 Housing Data and anatvsis. and associated policies and obiectives. based 11 upon the Affordable Housintz Needs. Assessment by the Shimberg Center 12 for Affordable Housing. University of Florida. 13 - 14 15 16 17 V. CONSISTENCY WITH THE STATE CONTREFIENSIVE PLAN i8 1.9 No language is proposed, as it is understood .that the. aforementioned amendments together, if 20 accepted. will satisfy DCA, resardinsz consistency issues. 21 22 23 24 Vt. CONSISTENCY WITH THE STRATEGIC REGIONAL POLICY PLAN FOR SO FLA 025 26 No language is proposed. as it is understood that the. aforementioned amendments together. if 27 accepted. will satisfy DCA, regarding consistency issues. 28 29 30 31 32 Esiiibit A February 14, 2003 CITIZEN'S REPORT CRITIQUE AND ALTERNATIVE PROPOSALS FOR CITY OF SOUTH MIAMI 62ND AVENUE CORRIDOR CHARRETTE DRAFT REPORT INTRODUCTION The goal of the Charrette, "To define a community vision that enhances the SW 62nd Avenue Corridor and preserves the livability of the adjoining residential neighborhoods" was not fully achieved in the University of Miami Charrette Draft Report (UMCDR). This is a citizens summary report on the findings of the UMCDR. Endorsements for this report from many Charrette participants and residents of the Cocoplum Neighborhood are attached. Good governing principals dictate that major infrastructure and zoning changes in the city should only be considered when a community consensus opinion can be obtained in favor of them. If a consensus opinion cannot be obtained, then no change should be made. The city should not take the position that all proposed changes that have significant opposition must have a compromise solution. For example, if an area is zoned for a maximum of two stories and a proposal is made to up -zone the area to four stories, that there must be a compromise at three stories. Such an approach is unfair to the community because it provides a mechanism which assures success to any who would ask for an increase in zoning, be it in height, density or use, that mechanism being to ask for more than you want and compromise to what you really want. The purpose of this report is to critique the UMCDR, to present alternative proposals that are more rationally based and will be more acceptable to the community, and to initiate a process that will result in a true community vision. The report addresses the following six topics: • Factual corrections to the UMCDR • 62nd Avenue redesign • Alley • Market analysis and existing transitional zoning applied to the 62nd Avenue corridor • Proposed mixed -use transitional zoning • How to deal with existing buildings • Suggestions on how to proceed FACTUAL CORRECTIONS TO THE UMCDR The following important factual corrections must be made in the UMCDR: • On page 26, Charrette Drawing, Table 2. The results of the work done by Table 2 are not accurately reported in the UMCDR. The first statement, "No retail," was not made. In fact, this group reported that the buildings should be designed for a flexible range of uses including retail, office, and residential. • On page 26, the second statement, 'Live-work ok up to three stories up front and maximum 33 feet deep" was also not made. In fact it was clearly stated that the buildings should have a two story limit. • On page 1, paragraph 4, it is stated that the building heights allowed by the City's Zoning Code (2 -story) conflict with the allowable heights (up to 4 -story) in the Comprehensive Plan. We believe it is clear that there is no conflict, as the relationship between the Zoning Code and the Comprehensive Plan are clearly explained on page 21 of the City's Comprehensive Plan. A copy of this page is included as Attachment #1 of this report. 62ND AVENUE REDESIGN The avenue redesign was thoroughly discussed during the Charrette with most participants having similar ideas. From 64th Street to 70th Street, the redesigned street section from west to east is: 22 feet sidewalk with canopy trees, 8 feet parking lane, two -11 feet travel lanes, 8 feet parking lane with canopy trees, 10 feet sidewalk. From 70th Street to Sunset Drive, the redesigned street section has a landscaped median to reduce the street to two travel lanes. Two points about the avenue redesign need to be emphasized: • The desire for extensive street landscaping was indicated by most of the Charrette participants. The UMCDR shows a continuous (as continuous as possible) row of appropriately spaced canopy trees along both sides of the street. • The intersections at 64th Street and Sunset Drive could both,be redesigned to function better. The 62nd Avenue -64th Street intersection is an intersection of two residential feeder streets. Yet both of these two -lane streets widen to four lanes at the intersection, inviting more commuter traffic than they were designed to handle. These streets should be narrowed to no more than three lar►es at the intersection. A redesign of the 62nd Avenue- Sunset Drive intersection has been studied by Marlin Engineering and implementation should be pursued. ALLEY The alley is a 24 feet wide publicly (city) owned secondary street that separates commercial properties from single - family residential properties along the west side of the 62nd Avenue condor. The alley is unpaved and unkempt. It has not been used by either the commercial or residential properties for a long time. Except that there should be an adequate vegetative border shielding rear parking area from residential property, there was little discussion about the details of the alley at the Charrette. The UMCDR gives the following proposal for the alley: Keep the existing rear public alley as service and parking access for adjoining commercial and residential properties and add a landscape buffer in the alley as additional screening for adjoining residential districts. The landscape buffer would include mahogany trees at 30 -feet spacing and a hedge of Cocoplum planted in front of the trees. The UMCDR proposal is insufficient for the following reasons: • The landscape buffer in the alley would occupy at least 6 -feet of the 24 -feet right -of -way, leaving an 18 -feet wide road. • Mahogany trees, which form a high canopy, may not be the best selection for the alley buffer. A better choice may be to follow Section 20- 3.6(0)(1) Supplemental Regulations, RO Restrictions, of the City's Land. Development Code, which gives suitable trees and spacing for this kind of buffer. • The issue of who will pay the cost of construction and maintenance of the thoroughfare (alley) needs to be addressed. Construction costs will certainly run into a few hundred thousand dollars. • Based on the below points, it seems clear that this type of thoroughfare is not adequately addressed in the current Land Development Code. A new category of roadway needs to be defined using the below noted criteria as a basis. • The alley landscape buffer must be in addition to other buffers required in the City's Land Development Code. These buffers are absent in the UMCDR. Section 20- 4.5(D) (11) Landscaping and Tree Protection Requirements for All Zoning Districts, Parking Lot Buffers, states: "All parking lots adjacent to rights -of -way or private streets shall be screened by a continuous planting and /or three (3) foot high wall with a seven m foot landscaped strip incorporating said planting and /or wall on private property..." And in Section 20- 3.6(0) Supplemental Regulations, RO Restrictions, it states: "A decorative wall or fence of masonry, reinforced concrete, pre -cast concrete, chain link, wood, or other like material that will be compatible with the main structure, five (5) feet in height shall be erected along all interior property lines, including the rear property line; provided,. however, that in the event that the rear property line abuts a secondary road, said wall shall be set in ten (10) feet from the official right -of -way of the secondary road, and said ten (10) feet shall be landscaped; provided, further, in the event that he interior side property line abuts the same or more liberal zoning district, the requirement for the wall along said common interior property line shall not - apply..." • The option of the city abandoning the alley and splitting the property between the two adjacent property owners should be considered. If this is done, then the required perimeter landscaped buffer should be the same as described in Section 20- 3.6(0) (1) Supplemental Regulations, RO Restrictions, of the City's Land Development Code, which states: "In addition to all other 3 requirements, a continuous visual buffer shall be provided whenever an RO use abuts or faces directly (within fifty (50) feet) a property zoned for single - family residential purposes. To accomplish this, the normally required perimeter landscaped buffer shall be increased from five (5) to eight (8) feet in width and trees from Table 20- 3.6(0)(5) shall be planted according to the spacing listed. These trees shall be a minimum often (10) to twelve (12) feet tall immediately after planting." MARKET ANALYSIS AND EXISTING TRANSITIONAL ZONING APPLIED TO THE 62ND AVENUE COMMERCIAL CORRIDOR The present commercial zoning designation for the west side of the 62nd Avenue corridor (from 64th Street to 70th Street) is Neighborhood Retail (NR). This is one of three zoning districts that are used in the city as transitional zoning between single - family residential neighborhoods and more intensive land uses or major roads. The other two existing transitional zoning districts are Residential Office (RO) and Townhouse Residential (RT -6). All of the transitional zoning districts are designed to be compatible in development intensity and building scale with single- family residential districts. Existing transitional zoning districts are a viable option for the 62nd Avenue corridor. There are existing Townhouse Residential and Residential Office zoning districts close to the 62nd Avenue Corridor on Sunset Drive and on 62nd Avenue south of US -1, which have proven to be compatible with singe - family residential neighborhoods and are economically feasible. The only transitional zoning which does not work is Neighborhood Retail (NR). The few examples in the city are marginal businesses at best. The retail component of any proposed alternate plan for the area must be considered in light of the poor performance of this activity type. In order to give a larger possibility of development possibilities for the 62nd Avenue Corridor, a change from Neighborhood Retail (NR) to any of the other transitional districts would be reasonable, as all of the existing transitional zoning districts are compatible with the proposed 62nd Avenue street redesign. In this way the 62nd Avenue Corridor could become a mixed -use area (mixed -use does not mean that all buildings contain mixed uses). Unfortunately, use of existing zoning districts was not considered at the Charrette. Clearly, existing transitional zoning regulations is not the reason that the west side of the 62nd Avenue corridor has remained largely undeveloped. In fact, except for the 62nd Avenue Corridor, there are no transitional zoning districts in the city that have vacant land or empty buildings. The location of this underutilized land adjacent to the CRA area, which has a history of high crime and blight, and speculative landowners are likely reasons for the present lack of development. Although most residents seem willing to consider a new mixed -use transitional zoning district if it allows similar building intensity and uses as in existing transitional zoning districts, it is clear that PROPOSED MIXED -USE TRANSITIONAL ZONING The Charrefte focused on creation of a new mixed -use transitional zoning district. This concept has possibilities, especially to replace Neighborhood Retail (NR), which generally does not produce the most attractive building frontage (parking in front) or building types, and based on the few examples of NR zoned businesses in the city is not commercially viable. However. the UMCDR proposes scale of buildings and buildina intensity that exceeds what is reasonable for transitional zoning what most Charrette participants indicated would be acceptable and which would undermine existing good transitional zoning throughout the city. Below is a description of proposed mixed -use zoning that is an improvement over Neighborhood Retail (NR) and also is compatible with single- family residential neighborhoods. Comparison with the UMCDR proposal is also included. The proposed mixed -use transitional district may allow commercial property owners a somewhat higher allowable floor -area -ratio (FAR) and more flexible uses of the property. The nearby single - family neighborhoods would get stricter building, parking, and landscaping requirements which would protect and enhance their neighborhoods better than current Neighborhood Retail (NR) zoning. This new mixed -use district would only be applicable to replace Neighborhood Retail(NR )in areas where there is a wide (minimum 20 feet wide) sidewalk, with extensive street trees to replace a landscaped front yard Therefore, a change to mixed -use zoning should only be considered after the street is reconstructed or reconstruction is certain. District Purpose Statement A suggested District Purpose Statement for the proposed mixed use transitional district is given below. Proposed Mixed -Use Transitional District: The purpose of this district is to provide suitable sites for townhouse residential and commercial /residential (live above -work below) in attractive low profile buildings on heavily landscaped sites, architecturally similar to and compatible with nearby single - family structures. The district should serve as a transitional buffer between established single - family neighborhoods and major traffic arterials or more intensive uses. Pennitted Uses There was no detailed discussion at the Charrette concerning permitted uses. The UMCDR simply proposes that there should be a mix of retail, commercial, and residential uses. The following is proposed: • Retail and office use would be allowed on the first floor, residential would be allowed on both floors including above a commercial first floor (live - work): • Allowable retail and office uses would be all current allowable uses for both Neighborhood Retail (NR) and Residential Office (RO) (see Land Development Code, 20 -3.3 Permitted Use Schedule). Dimensional Requirements The goals of the dimensional requirements are to protect the adjacent single - family residential neighborhoods by keeping development intensity low, the scale of the buildings the same as that of the nearby houses, and setbacks that create a distance buffer between commercial buildings and residential property. Therefore, the following dimensional requirements are suggested for the proposed mixed -use transitional district: • ` Min. Lot Size - 7,500 square feet • Min. Frontage - 75 feet • Front Setback - 0 feet (required so buildings are uniformly placed along the street) • Min. Rear Setback- 25 feet (measured from commercial property line) • Min. Side Setback (interior) - there must be access to rear parking from building front • Min. Side Setback (street) - 15 feet • Max. Building Height - 2- stories and 12 feet floor -to -floor for first story and 10 feet floor -to -floor for second story (which is similar to existing transitional zoning districts) • Max. Floor Area Ratio (FAR) for retail, office, or mixed -use buildings - 0.5 (this is double that of existing Neighborhood Retail) • Max. Density (units per acre) for solely residential (townhouse) developmegr 6 (this is the same as for existing Townhouse Residential RT -6) • Max. Impervious Coverage - 80% These proposed dimensional requirements are shown on Attachment #2, along with requirements for other zoning districts for comparison; and are addressed below with comparison to the UMCDR proposals. Floor-area-ratio and units -per -acre. There was no discussion of what would be an appropriate maximum building intensity during the Charrette. However at the Pre - Charrette Meeting With Residents, many residents indicated that building intensity should be similar to existing transitional zoning districts. The UMCDR allows as much floor area as parking requirements will allow. This is excessive for transitional zoning. FAR absolutely should not exceed 0.5 for retail, office, or mixed -use buildings; or 6 units per acre for townhouse development for the following reasons: • As can be seen on Attachment #2, this FAR is 100% higher than what is currently allowed for Neighborhood Retail (NR) and 67% higher than what is currently allowed for Residential Office (RO). • The proposed 0.5 FAR is lower than the 0.7 FAR allowed for Low Intensity Office (LO) zoning, which is not allowed for transitional zoning and from experience would not be appropriate. • Any increase in FAR above the existing maximum of 0.25 for Neighborhood Retail or 0.3 for Residential Office is suggested with great reluctance because it is believed that residents in most neighborhoods adjacent to transitional. zoning would not be pleased with a trend toward increasing building intensity in transitional districts. • The maximum of 6 units per acre is the same as for Townhouse Residential (RT -6). Number of stories and building height. At the Charrette, two of the five work groups proposed that buildings be a maximum of 2- stories; one group proposed amaximum of 2- stories plus an attic loft in a building with a peaked roof, with a maximum height of 32 feet from ground to roof peak (this results in a building about 4 -feet higher than a 2 -story house); and two groups proposed that a third story should be considered only in the front 30 to 50 feet of the property. Of course building height should not have been addressed alone but should have been addressed in conjunction with building intensity (FAR) since the two are closely related and both are important for compatibility with residential neighborhoods. The UMCDR proposes the following: Buildings should be a maximum of two stories, except in the front 40 -feet of the property buildings can be three stories. And, buildings for retail use shall be a minimum of 12 feet and a maximum of 14 feet floor -to -floor, buildings for office or residential use shall be a minimum of 10 feet and a maximum of 12 feet floor-to-floor. These building heights are inappropriate for transitional zoning. It is herein proposed that a maximum of two stories, 12 feet floor -to -floor for lower story, 10 feet floor -to -floor for upper story be the design criteria, for the following reasons: • It has proven adequate for good transitional development in all other parts of the City. • It is compatible with single - family housing and, as can be seen on Attachment#2, is nearly the same requirement as for Single- Family Residential Townhouse residential, Neighborhood Retail, and Residential Office • A third story is not needed to get an appropriate building intensity (FAR). The highest possible floor -area -ratio (FAR) with 2 -story buildings, and all on -site surface parking and immediately adjacent street parking is approximately 0.8 (four street parking spaces per 100 feet of property frontage, parking requirement of 1 space per 300 square feet of gross floor area, each parking space requires 260 square feet of area). Hence, 2 -story buildings are more than adequate to get an FAR of 0.5. • Three story buildings for transitional zoning is not consistent with the City's Land Development Code. Again it is noted that Low-Intensity Office (LO) zoning which has a 2 -story and 30 feet maximum height and maximum FAR of 0.7, is not used, nor; appropriate for transitional zoning. • It is not desirable to have different story heights for different uses, as proposed in the UMCDR, for buildings designed to accommodate many uses in a mixed -use district.. • The story height allowances given in the UMCDR are too la and result in buildings that are 11 valent in height to three and four story buildings. For example, three floors using the UMCDR alglowances could take up 38 feet which is greater than 4 floors with 9 feet floor -to floor. Also, usin g the UMCDR allowances, two floors could take up 26 feet which is nearly the same as three floors with 19 feet floor -to -floor. R Setback Requirements. At the Charrette, it appeared that most participants agreed that a zero front setback would be acceptable given the proposed wide sidewalks and extensive street landscaping. Rear and side setback requirements received little discussion. The UMCDR proposes a zero front setback; a zero side setback; and a 25 -feet rear setback, except where there are cross- streets the setback can be zero. These setbacks are not entirely appropriate. Different setback requirements are proposed for the following reasons: • Zero front setback, but only where there is a wide (minimum 20 -feet) sidewalk, with extensive street trees to replace front yard landscaping. • Minimum rear setback of 25 -feet measured from the commercial 'property line, which is consistent with requirements for Single- Family Residential, Residential Office, Neighborhood Retail, Townhouse Residential. Special criteria for zero setback at cross streets (wrap- around comer building) could be developed for consideration. • Adequate side setbacks to allow access to rear parking from the building frontage. Parking Requirements The goals of the parking requirements are to provide adequate and convenient parking for the commercial properties and to keep parking and traffic from infiltrating into the nearby single - family residential districts. Parking for neighborhood retail, services, and many types of office use must be designed for convenience, as most visitors (customers) come and go within a short period of time. And, since the buildings are mixed -use, the parking space requirement should be adequate for the highest possible combination of uses (note that residential floor space generally has a lower parking requirement than retail and office floor space). This would allow a mixed -use building complex that will allow changes of uses to occur without the danger of inadequate parking or excessive regulation by the city. The UMCDR proposes the following parking requirements: The parking requirements shall be in accordance with the City of South Miami Zoning Ordinance. On- street parallel parking spaces along 62nd Avenue shall be counted toward off - street parking requirements. Surface parking lots shall be permitted up to a maximum of 80 feet frontage along public pedestrian space. Such frontage shall have a minimum setback of 5 feet and shall be landscaped with hedges, canopy trees, and a 3' high stuccoed masonry garden wall. Vehicular entries shall have a maximum width of 18 feet. Loading and service entries shall be located on the alley. Access within parking lots and /or drives is permitted if alley access is not possible. Structured parking is not permitted. The following two provisions are suggested additions to the UMCDR: • The provision in Section 20 -4.4 (A) (2), Off - street Parking Requirements, of the City's Land Development Code, should not be allowed. This provision states: "On- street parking spaces may be assigned and credited to other properties within 1,500 feet of any on- street parking space by written consent of the property owner to whose property the space is currently credited with the written consent and approval of the City Manager! Since 62nd Avenue is a residential feeder street, it is not appropriate to have cars driving back and forth looking for street parking spaces. ® Commercial parking space requirements should be high enough (regardless of immediate anticipated use) to allow changes of uses to occur without the danger of inadequate parking or excessive regulation by the City. Landscaping Requirements The goals of the landscaping requirements are to provide a barrier between transitional zoning and single - family properties, to provide a barrier between parking areas and public space, and to beautify the street and commercial properties in the garden character of the city. The UMCDR proposes landscape guidelines that appear to achieve these goals except for the following items: ® The landscape buffer between mixed -use development and single - family residential properties should follow the regulations given in the South Miami Land Development Code. This subject is discussed in the "Alley" section of this report. • Since the buildings will have a zero front setback with no landscaped front yard, street trees in front of the buildings are essential. The proposed mixed -use zoning should specify that it is only applicable at locations where a wide sidewalk with street trees is possible. Hence, street reconstruction should occur before zoning changes. • Requirements for site trees and parking lot landscaping are given in the South Miami Land Development Code, 20 -4.5 Landscaping and Tree Protection for All Zoning Districts. All of the requirements given here should apply. Architectural Guidelines An advantage of the proposed mixed -use transitional zoning district is that required architectural guidelines can be included that will produce building types that are more attractive and compatible with the single- family residential buildings than what normally occurs with current Neighborhood Retail (NR) zoning. Architectural guidelines were not discussed in any detail during the Charrette. The guidelines proposed in the UMCDR need extensive review. As a starting point, the following eg neral architectural guidelines are suggested, which are partly adopted from the "Hometown 1 Plan," to encourage an eclectic mix of architecture, promote reusable buildings, encourage harmony among both commercial buildings and nearby houses, and discourage fakes and tackiness. • To encourage a better skyline and to be more compatible with nearby houses, flat roofs are not allowed. • To reinforce the pedestrian scale, require an expression line, change of materials, or cornice line between first and second floors. • Require upper -story windows to be proportioned no wider than they are tall. • Buildings shall not have a single facade more than (say) eighty (80) fleet in width. • The primary entry of the building shall be oriented to the street. • Building colors should blend with natural surroundings and be limited in intensity. • Encourage awnings, arcades, and front porches. Haw To Deal With Existing_ Buildings Currently, much of the 62nd Avenue west side commercial corridor is vacant land. Of the existing five buildings, two are non - compliant uses under the current Neighborhood Retail (NR) zoning (printing plant, auto repair), and the same two would also be non - compliant under the proposed mixed -use zoning. Also, some of the existing buildings do not have front or rear setbacks that would comply with either Neighborhood Retail (NR) or the proposed mixed -use zoning. Non of the existing buildings are particularly valuable, making it feasible to demolish and replace them. Although the existing buildings and uses are "grandfathered in" with the regulations of the adopted zoning district, any effort to enlarge or alter them would make them subject to the provisions of Section 20 -3.2 Application of District Regulations of the South Miami Land Development Code which states: "(B) Total Compliance. No building, structure, land or water areas shall be used or occupied, and no building or structure or part thereof shall hereafter be erected, constructed, enlarged, reconstructed, moved or structurally altered except in conformity with all the regulations specified for the district in which it is located." 8 HOW TO PROCEED WITH THE PROCESS This report has critiqued and proposed changes to the University of Miami Charrette Draft Report (UMCDR). These proposed changes have been endorsed by theCharrette participants and Cocoplum neighborhood residents listed in the attachment to this report. The following steps are requested as away of producing-a true community vision: • Accept this report as an addendum to the UMCDR. • Submit both to Planning Board Committee for comparative review. • Allow the Planning Board to make final suggestions and recommendations to City Commission. ,477A-CH/he/Yr FUTURE LAND USE CATEGORIES This section contains language which explains the intent of the future land use map. Zoning regulations Nvhich permit uses that are specifically permitted by this section and that also permit uses that are less intensive than those permitted by this section may be deemed to be consistent with the comprehensive plan. Zoning regulations that are more restrictive than the provisions of this section may also be consistent -%rith the comprehensive plan. The terms "less intensive" and "more restrictive" in this section are not defined in this plan. Planned unit development zoning regulations which permit buildings to be higher than stated in this plan may be deemed consistent with this plan. provided such regulations do not permit the overall floor area on a site to be greater than could occur if the height limits of this. plan were observed. Nothing in this plan is intended, or has the effect of Iimiting or modifying the right of any person to complete any planned development which has been issued a final planned development order which is in full force and effect and where development has commenced and is continuing in good faith, provided that all regulations and conditions as imposed by the City are met. Any legally granted variances to a development code regulation which implements this plan shall be deemed to be a legally granted variance to this plan and as such shall be deemed to be consistent with this plan. This variance provision, shall apply to all elements and sections of this plan. Vested Rights Nothing contained herein shall be construed as affecting validly existing vested rights. It shall be the duty and responsibility of the applicant alleging vested rights to affirmatively demonstrate the legal requisites of vested rights. Vested rights shall require a demonstration to the Mayor and City Commission ofthe City of South Miami that the applicant (1) has relied in good faith, (2) upon some act or omission of the government. and (3) has made such a substantial change in position or incurred such extensive obligations and expenses to the applicant's detriment as to create an undue hardship. The mere existence, of zoning contrany to the South Miami Comprehensive Plan shall not be determined to vest rights. Developmental actions where all required approvals have been received. or orders or permits that preceded the official adoption of this Comprehensive Plan shall remain in full force and effect but subject to all applicable zoning laws and regulations of the City. The land development regulations to be adopted shall provide for specific standards to carry out these concerns. To reflect the repeated public concerns expressed at the charrettes and public hearings regarding the preponderance of land use regulations. the land use categories are reduced in number to reflect the traditional land use desimations utilized by the planning profession. Regulation of specific uses and intensities will be included under provisions in the Land Development Code. (97-1 ER) Single- Family Residential (Two- Story) The single - family land use category is intended to provide for one residential dwelling unit on each parcel of land. New panels should have a minimum area of 10.000 square feet. In areas where existing platting is characterized by parcels larger than 1100.000 square feet, zoning regulations should be consistent with such parcel sizes provided that minimum parcel sizes need not exceed one acre. In areas where existing platting is characterized by parcels smaller than 10.000 square feet zoning regulations should be consistent with surrounding parcel sizes. Sites large enough to be subdivided into parcels of I0.000 square feet. or larger could be zoned accordingly. but only if such zoning would be compatible with surrounding development. (97 -TER) Lot of Record: If the oNE-ner of a platted lot in any district does not own a parcel or tract of land immediately adjacent to such l_ot, and if the deed or instrument under which such owner acquired title to such lot was of record prior to the application of any zoning regulations to the premises, or if such lot were created and first recorded in compliance with the zoning regulations in effect on the lot at the time of recording, and if such lot does not conform to the requirements of such regulations as to the width of H/ . �.. 1Jcr,AF, -IAA !V7,FW91TY Z,>1 � E�us[TY ctl�l6Lf lie R- SPE6,41 TY Gt- 4i t RAMS ! IBIVRL REQUIREMENT RO LO MO. NR SR GR Mtn. Lot S'¢e Net Area (sq. IL) 7,500 7.500 10.000 7.500 5.000 10,000 % .lei O Frontage (ft) 75 75 100 75 50C 100 7S" Mtn. Setbacks (ft) Front Rear 25 20 20 15 10 25 15 10b 10 20 15 Side (interior) 10 i0 0 — — — Side (Street) 20 15 10 15 4ob 15 [ ` Ad}, Res. DisL 25 25 25 25 25 25 Z Side(W /diveway) 20 2D 20: 20 20 20 Between Buldtngs 2D 20 2D — — — Max. BuMng Heght Stories 2 2 4 2 4 2 W IL— Feet 25 30 50 25 50 30 j Max auiiding Coverage {96) 30 — — — — Max. impervious Coverage N 75 80 85 75 90 85 d Max Floor Area Ratio (FAR) 0,30 070 1,50 25 11A 080 0- a 5' setback with wall opening adjacent to rear property line; no setback if no openings in b Applies to ground floor only; columns are permitted within the setback. Columns shall not be greater than 24 inches in diameter; columns on the property line shall not be closer to each other than 10 feet. c The frontage requirement does not apply to uses in the SR �ZM.E�rsiQnrf}� �Ec�u.IR�in�.v7"�" . IvoArR.EEsibwv�-ilq-L bts7"R a-.s' ge7Dh 20 —3.5" G oc d �'o u ll'<<a,�►;t �e+,r2.l�p�, t a � w WKW -8 4 n f 4 tl WKW -8 1 1 .fir .,. b t ,• k' r F% % l pi � t " w a: �}� $ta . ✓4 .fir .,. b t ,• O F% S t jjh 3 crrk 0 N N° O a 9 • i�d1 �r t y IAN . X� s rye s pf f t � £ �� w'rozA��E'•a��' �� .ks*� a r xa � r# eyy��(•a ,� s y�` .crSf Eli rnnhg C 1F+,,� 5 1 - Fr '�� irf•.,4+�aK3 � s 7 $ " ,5 ✓°r,R�.�wta .�..w•. a [ar� ='i' fir. 959 4AS z�s.is,s ... ;;' r•;e 2r"" ryr 1�; . All � s �s. �5,7 srsw ,P ft. 0 v�M h �x !d t f O 0 y F' : y A loll : o 0 q. m .7 7 7 @ 0� E ON t'D § (D J ] k rD � � � o C § n n � 2 A b ON 1 � W � Ind F V a O a � p}a 111:3 4:3 � ` ro ro iA ro ro W m m N ro m k� eD C x Q' x Q' x x ro I•, I-•� Fi F•� w. x � n x o a. " m " o " o 0 o �' c O ,(D p.+. A ro rt ro rt m rt ro rt cn (D m o � ' Amyy V �roy.�yy V V �•e A ro M ro� O O rt aq h: ro ro A A� p1 ro M rt � O ro rt A CIQ �1+ r � P� �''�' ON 1 � W � Ind F V a a a � p}a 111:3 4:3 � ` ro ro iA ro ro W m m N ro m k� eD C x Q' x Q' x x ro I•, I-•� Fi F•� w. x � n x o a. " m " o " o 0 o �' c O ,(D p.+. A ro rt ro rt m rt ro rt cn (D m o � ' Amyy V �roy.�yy V V d ro M ro� M O ® aq h: ro ro A A� p1 ro M rt C® m ro M A CIQ �1+ ON 1 a r n � W � F V ey��.hr H � p}a o W � N b-a Z'� cn eD o ro ro rAi. A) a a � n x o a. " m " o " o 0 o �' c O ,(D p.+. A ro O cJ� cn (D m o Q, ' C ►� m m ro M ro� M O ® aq h: ro ro A A� p1 ro M rt C® m ro M A m. �1+ r Q, �''�' � O cn � A m• � � N 0 O N ro N � � �• � 0 CD CL 9L a r n � W � F V ON � p}a o W � N b-a Z'� cn o ro ro rAi. A) a a � n x o a. " m " o " o 0 o �' c O ro ro O F m "CS CrJ Q, ' C ►� m m rt M rt M Vl ® lAD h: ro ro A A� Ind N N N � W � F V ON C31 p}a W N b-a Z'� cn o rt A) a a � n x o a. " o " o " o 0 o �' c O rt ro F m "CS ' L3 Q, ' �1+ ►� m rt M Au M Vl ® lAD h: ro ro A A� p1 ro M rn ro rt C® m ot3 �' b+. �1+ r Q, �''�' cn � A N � � N � N ro N � � �• � CD CL 9L m C m C CD C ro w o� CD r" ro I.- ro CD o Cm ro h ff 0 i++ i++ ��.r Y+ T.•+ Y+ fir+ r/ �,+ Q CL Ind N N N !-a W F rt A) a a � n O �- h: M• �j ro rt vQ 0 0 w 0 IR F rA �r w 'Zf tr1 O H "C! n O 5' �"� ta. �+. (�•+ 'L7 m 0 H O Sup ` ,�� pOi o ~• rt ~• m m H ~ r{ rt FP O t•h fD 0 �"` w ��-+'• rt H (D C\ fD �. p� n �•}• to O �1+ � rt �' (D `�' �C O n Vi "�"' ti• O „�,�,' �y A (D �-�• �.. rt cA n 1D O ,'3 t rte.• tD .�+ ��, w K ",J' h ,,C+ V O m O N o y n ,r.. O P. �C n� � fD m '�, N � N•. mtmD m Uf1 fD ".� O UQ cD O O �' { � �. D 0 IDA W. M. ' y p p O �p O tD O m y O ;n cr rt O O d P. p� m rD �~i A. .� �' n Q• O `C G rt �Ay� fD �.. '* fD 3v fD m m o o n R a.• F, ^" 7 m `C m rt rt o r, (D O C cO r n "r P. � rt ' Od �-n CD O " C n !Z n Q 5 " n O o O .. W N O. y F•h C/1 .+. "� .•d' O m �". �, N a n �.+ G n M• A Al m O O nom+ rt (D �•�+ m Q. P, m 93 O n O rt rt n p r- teN O A tD O n n � D m O wD CD O p y ► w m p, . �D + �+ to �• p ... o o UP rA O fD. ... n O .� O o r N y UQ n O p ". t7. 0 al aq Q o fOD O ►Q C/� r0+� n h a m n� o O e m rt p mm m p n` xy g1. O r. rt Ai K O ►•• fD rt "'7 i.1. w N M.a °�' nH u�a yO M. r" C vi f.. 4) (D CCD H A• Ot O p 4 h " 0 O+ eb tD �+ C ID rt rt O n �. cnD O rA p on " C C O a. m m `C p rj,� �. W CD Fy �d r'" O O ¢• C O' W .� R Qb eD (D �' y ID c P' y z fD (D V1 o CA upo c '0 P, �t eb rt O. N m N O C fD n 0 h a. 0 h n rt rt n r-A 01 N p C n 0 a: 0 �t n rt m o�ou) It h � ° o ..r CD UQ 0' O K o n� K O O r• � c A C. 0 CM 0 rt r A O � rt n n 'rtr fD P j 4 C v Ari �5 ro �: z M O d d M Ci w b G ID C d p n n °• d m A i1• p �. � i•i � � ,Oy. � rt � rt rt .-r 8 cn cn R° OQ ,b � � � by � p o m� art �• � o � � o � � �' � �, o y W, o r ac 0 Q° ID o O QQ rt a✓ � A + per,, �' rt K i••� � �. A� � y m ° w c d �, ID n n su O O y .-r � d n rt O �•i f �R Gi CID �� undo• � � -h �• pi rt C per,, �' rt K i••� � �. A� � y m ° w c d �, ID n n su O O y .-r � d n rt O �•i f �R rn N C n 0 a. 0 n rt rt W i F C U) A-� (D n 0 w ® (D rD CA Or~4 -0 r+ w N N ° �. cn 0 5 n CA lD cn n cn [D r+ r+ fD 4 lD [D r+ CIQ r A. O O N N Ci O rt tD rt O fD ?�' (D ID rt W n F.,. O CD R h y � m. fD UQ rt'. GAi q h h ¢, �~.. �. C F-, CD �+. N. �C A 0 CD 0 rt od tD Al O fD ID h O Al �O- � (D �'. rt Q rt O .� m A O Q, ,y. x]+ CJ fi4 O O UQ w ,.t FD rt �-e rt ®� ►p� �+ . fD N y O SV `N ` O r, m () $:w , � 0 O f p O O tlQ r m O O $aU3 0 , p D . n n O C v O A m L rt G p O i . �• tL m OA to O .D Q' Ci 2 � �, � � ~' [D' �' �• � � � D � eDD K r, Q' ;� rt % I-f� h A) F•! �f CA 0 UQ �+ f+• � �. art+ lD �A M O o V' O rt �. O ,''`..', O N �' fD n irt,. p .e� ,rt' O 'r%" t�D V� ~$•� S Ci .� I.a rt h �• �i can ~ ro `.� O n O 0 rt y (D m w O a ` ~• n ° U4• O w p Im. CD H � � � `�' A' m UQ p� `C'T N• ey UQ O 0 ?4 0 '" O C m M 15 n C UQ K7 rt N i A' O `�- rt p, O m O N ti rt rt A, ® � � tL �D ry '� d+ rt vyi �. "�' S]. Q' rt �D � � � y p. � �• "*' � d � p, � fD � irt�, O � p? ~ O O rt O dQ rt "•1 t3+ `_ rt O y VOi �-! �~+ �+. rts (QD n � EA OQ (D rt `o "r n p O G7 fD �D F1. �+ (D rt p (D Ui O eD ID m P. "d � n n K m' K �. � O � tD O M y �' rt M 0 p O m m n N m m fi C rt cr O m �O ^S C . � 0 ` QC + rt rt Un �O w y N ti N O m Q. ,� m Ai M m ►� "'� !v C p. O-+ U�Q 'y-+ cm U3 Ch 0 w CrQ K K y G7 M fD p m �. H p��' H ar w 0 % x Uq �'' UQ P O tL m W O OQ M �. p, C A O cm cm � ID 0 N O +. 0n ail "A m fD p H CD M O n rt >v � O N O O C rt rt UQ w. ol O CY P. O m N Q 4. w O 1O (n fD CD ol��. O rOD n v� ro O tl O. �r 110 (7 C O Q C 0 O W O X h 0 M � gL cD O eDD '.s ID iM O i A i i VJ A crtn rte+• iz+ rt CA)I1 C'' � �. G lrtD �• [rtD CD eD `... C eD -e CD �• (D m 0 n �. eD m cn �p eD rt A O ti. ® O eD m �, � (b �D M h O eD rn N C A n 0 K 0 K n K rt A a R. M r' • o i s r VQ A+ IZ PI t.aa � ro n• � •.- CJQ C O CD � � O � • fD can �+ as _ �a k YY 3. �+ 0 � •.- N C .�r Y n 0 i-+ O "I fD OO j �g8 VIVO ws � a p M^' u, Ol d a b N N � A O • • • 0 t o m c y,� '+ p rL p M tD 'Cf Vl y � ¢. M e fD � . A cm o ra t.. dQ Ln CfQ T7 jCL m p 0 1�h a Fl F - $ 55�33� } ;a m�'.. N N O • • • 0 t o m c y,� '+ p rL p M tD 'Cf Vl y rD � ¢. M A t,3 ra dQ Ln CfQ T7 jCL m p 0 1�h F L M�.�`c� ... iK�rv' f r� fA N • • • • 0 o m c y,� '+ M tD 'Cf Vl y rD � ¢. M A ra dQ Ln p 0 p ,,IN p 0 s� N o� SG ww +i O R� v N I �payjl N W C!1 1"A PJ r . O I n C;' U�Q C 'Li 1 rt O � O cOn s� N o� SG ww +i O R� v N I �payjl N W C!1 1"A PJ K Z:3 1 q va hd O N 1 w Oyy R� V N E r . O I n r � � rA O O O m+ C I OQ � fD y 0 C A y O p O \titi � n x` j ID `y ` O K Z:3 1 q va hd O N 1 w Oyy R� V N E l(a Nq p�p SG {Wy1 J Oy is N �yy .N pbpfj1 N 1 M M 174 4 . O I n r � � rA O O O m+ C I OQ � fD y 0 C A y O p l(a Nq p�p SG {Wy1 J Oy is N �yy .N pbpfj1 N 1 M M 174 4 O O O cm �. y O p t i 61 N p. C ro O O rD n 0 0 >v rt rt N N W t 1 1 a$ f t � a C ua' Ln m Q � � p m O. � rt rt rt P� iv C. M K~ fD It 0 0 It 0 0 0 0 0 It 0 n � U) r rn rn rn d m m m m (D m 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ZI-ld It rt cn m m �• m �• �' �. a � (D �- �'' (D m It d �• CD CL M 0 o o o d � Z � � O �' o m CD CDN Q 4 O p n O M O K n AI h CD CD rt rt m N W tz A .�.� ''1' A y v' ft i+ p N. •(nD n 'N`F' �` S11 \(nD ~ m ti ah Uq' r m � ¢, PD tv d A ry ri, X17 m �' �� (D n A '� n tlq h •� �• �' .7 P. Uq �• A+ p '~.•'' � cm `O"' 2) It tAp• '"."' 0 � A fD � O ,0.., '.1 co' � t`� �• "' A)• �"� � (CD A n A ,J m �y n rt n cn rt p d �' d 'n, A m .� 'ti > �+. t0 w p (D �u C 9L eD �. el, M o 0 cm n vii coo m Q �, � o (D ;p N O O SU Uq tin rt H' �• _ n i.+• C rjQ (D „ in CS' rn \n �+ Q, O ¢ C ,�., �� Q. rt O r� CD y, pl �t (D Or p; o- O �• fD rt n. .-1 i1+ n p (D (D (D O 1 rt h o c qd cu rL CD m 0, (D O "j i1 n y Z O A• M 1 (p M (D (p Fr. O (D O Q+ OKI Pt y • fD C m m O. UQ CL O `rl ((D (D n n M t A� fD m O 1y (p O M (D �t n Q+ .� ,.. 0 Q rt G7 UQ (D n .� Frt+ AI r�i �' (rtD m CD 1-r•. Q• O � CD • �7 W (p n r! .� w 0.0 (n by Cn En t! tZ. ►t .. m (D u v, cD ti A fi. -- (D (D (D co m n Qr n (D cr p rt �yy. i+ n (� O h h Z3 O = A Q �� '' a ro ra C A� UQ• m C O h 0 ti to o �(D �, m obi A� �, a. �. (D q Clq M �. rt o XD (D a, rI �C Fes+. eD CM (D rD ., y 4) OO uV, a C' O A' (nD O O h GQ N.• (gyp' 0 OQ w h n (D n .rti �t (D rt "S (D �(p AI n rt 0 .. rt►- • � � (p � Q O O m D � n Uq (D (D C m AO• � p r "J (n eD A (D � Q 1... (3� ef-r•• O f`' ��: „y,. CIq O+ mow. SZ. N �frt'' .� 'O rD CD of n n C fi M m CD Q.' � ,�? c'*D n Q tom*, �. ro � ,� y • • cn • • • Gd `C n (D O`Il1 W iD W., O O n r0+. Oy{ nom+ O (D to O Lv h yrtr o y h C rt ��• n m .� H, C UQ CD C R AI rt Uq 1� M a rt y f.'• CD aQ CD W. n ►o v� rt O o- rt rl• O A p n n m• " A �• O C n frAy. A rt H+.. tom- In fi aq ''C CD °! _ rt N M rt h (D "O (p Oi ,, � G7 ¢ r. "' 10, m 0 CD 93 CD p x rL M O a. vQ rj pi o- . (D O+ rt (D O O ~ rt rt �y N UQ ' r O fx, A rt fxD -t �D k O p 0O �n3+ w�' * ((DD (D r (D O �0 Sy (D h' (D rt K rt �C rl• ot (D " n ¢. (D n H o p (D b t1• � ,p z A' (D o �' m• `C W-0 ra Ml 4. • O pj • • • • • • • (p et O �' �• C Un Un G ticQn Cv O Um O rL �. PI ID 11 0 CD '""'� O rt M �. Ort Ort M C A" .xr •fCD �• "�' CD n eD CD w 00 0 o A) o o y k c CD (D cm d rt d O W i ti, m p C y am-• rt 4y m 5 0 ID �� c v, ¢ p ',zt' Uq (� C f D O O CD 5 aQ (D p� ilQ ~k ~• rye• 7 f�D rt eb CD 9 V Vrti ` rt rt A (D O O p ~• O p' O ".. M ap y M � p O (D Cd A �„� A) m rt �+ O fAD rt rt (D A tom.+ A W (D A �L C ® A A • m • rt ID > 0.1 . 3 d 12 0 O rt ti c� �n � 1 p, �. � ID n �i o O rt ery+. ¢. M Oq wy" M rt A iv Oq O ,Art �_ $02 `C C , �, aq �`'' r• A tAn rt ,"��, M m n 0. o 9 OQ W 0� D O "A , O �'�' m wtll 57 N "0 GC tF•# �. vi. m y c o o cn M. Pt (D .•�• (D ►t N w~• h Q+ ,"'°`.., su O. d �' 00 0 m "O+, eD CD 0 'CJ y �• � ,��j � (�rtp p� fA � �Ci �, '� r ?� tS � A� (D (D � �-- Ci) �'t3 A fD � (�D F! p O L7� aq p "o aq A aQ (p — rt `� A d �• ((D A aq tL "� c!q Cfq ti aq ►.. eD p M Wow �-�• ��' � G � R ��+ '�.' (D O ►� t1. A M 0 0 O M "' qq "•�R3 lz C3 .� O aq rt O h m .y+. pip t3. i1q �. ((DD F. S1. 0- 'p'" H• (D p� rt A (D 19 N OK tT • • • • C� • • • • • • • Cfl > O . �d rt (D b '* n (D rrJ (/) '+ (n �+ O O • • Q • `fl aq �• ° (D ".e O h O x o x `�" `� G � > o 5. C "+. A (n A ".1' A.. O rt �.a (D g 'art' D h rD M of rt O ?' d (D Q• o �+ (D aq !]. �• C A �, f�. ¢, m �. Vi (n p UQ (n 'fir ' " N m O ty , (� �, y w (p C n tL v� `.. (D �-+ O -- .-. ".. ... rA N A rD (p m U� ,(p, M %L (D d O � w. rt W W �- m O O N (p aq iv ?� O -e 00 (D Q, _ O� M+ 0+ O a. (D N• (� O• Ca (rtD A `Q d A r. �p Cy rt 0 C� O ,�-" Q I-K (CD `� `0 p(i RD 0�. (ODD rt n � p 0 o O N `C K O p ►. 11 a4 p y ti (D ¢. rt r,- + O r. A O �m O rt O m CD �. O ,rt rt �• n 0 OQ 4) O ma O � rt f„ 0. A � ` p (D 47 77 m CD A r ' R P 1, r , q4k,� ;qq 4! 1 M r a �: � a� c ?; � n c rt �• tD! M O O m ° 0 �' tiC `C O p+ n O N. A rp ° O t M UQ O UQ UQ O MX ID m m m r° ID O D O �' w A� o P ° 0 + N� �-t OD 00 CA `.�" to M••� "i..+' "y'' O � N ~ aQ 9L ID ��-++ n �+• x� h' O O Q+ A7 f1, 0 ni x m �l 0 UQ ar. m � w � ht• UQ ro C N• � O ri CD '1�3 eD O O • �C m m O' O a' 7C O n M (D •lrtD � 0 A k Drt k ID ID O cm n tz z %L h b C fD N rtcA O C wv n CD O C' C O. 0 9 M '-h �/r m O re b P4 rt "�, (D rt A �• �.{ Vl 2D IDD (D G7 �''• O CCD C O of (D p 0 0 sol. ,O,' -- (D UQ '0• O O UD d m 'd 4) `C CD p rt O o nW om O m M, `+ ow `r O O a= (D O m Su ''T' c' C i7Q (hD O G" O� m fD M (ID to O O O �1Q Ort rt r 10 �r co p � (p O 0 � � (D H n Ay � w0- O CD+ M rt CD Wk "3' 0'. �� ►� d N p• rt 1L (D r�ny (Op �� rJQ (A CFQ O rt y k 0 rt 'n'r ¢' • �C m m O' O a' 7C O n M (D •lrtD T N O a A F+ n O 0 K n rt rt eD N Ul II Im ,,� •h F 1 k Drt k n h b C rtcA rt D "* O. �4 M '-h �/r m O b P4 ( 2D IDD (D W O m M, `+ `r O O a= (D O m Su ''T' c' C O G" rt r 10 �r co p � (p 0 � � (D H � � O � M O. 0 "3' O 0'. �� ►� d N p• rt 1L (D r�ny (Op �� rt y k 'n'r ¢' O 0 O w p p. ' O • n ti ZO 5 (D O — (D K O rt a-+ p O dQ • Aj O A x O+ y " �. O M� 0 ►0. 9L h 0 jd CD rrQ su t w • D %L UQ (D O rA o " O ° ° „,,, o i ' rt ° rt � �%:6 O rt O fD ¢ Ul o t4 •� m 0 O" n 0 Cu 0 rt �-r rt 0 �� O O O Q. ° w O rt T N O a A F+ n O 0 K n rt rt eD N Ul II Im ,,� •h F 1 O1 N O+ C n O h 0. O K K ro m N rn ' o • • • • • • wit ¢. �' fnD x C ��• �C x ►-i �'.. O dQ O Q" vyi Ani �. O T3 t3. p ri p O k 'C-'• �• � f+,+'TS '� %' �• O ¢' � � 'art' �' 'i � ID m to r0 A' p 'S �+ (D 'j O M A) E'•� (D 'd ►- F a 0 O rt h CjQ �. H n "C1 CA .Ort.. m �. (CD UG y O r+, 0 A �+ ro Q' m rt O r+ .O UI (D � . ID p �! 0 N O ti Cl� m CD O !3. O .yr ai (f DD O 00 rti rt (D rt C rA M m dIQ dFQ (IQ ?? tD x 0 y n r R¢, C rt o • • c7i • • • • 01 ' 0� O O +. tT A> (D n M', O n O ID O .yF O (rtD > dQ (D r0+ 'O+ rt 0 O �Q (D m Q g: O `CO C d O P Q (D dq �A) X. to Iz rD r' eD At n eo m tL ¢. O L� m �C • O to `� dQ rjQ '~J' ice.. �C CI pt �� (D r% O 0 w 0 omh s m` A� cm (n (D " R (D UQ (�D '+ �. ��• At 0 O O O i1, O tL rr. � � O �• � `D � � � C r F rt O �+• .� p m ul O rJQ CA En O ot "" rt p (D O .�ti. O (On m 0d O dq 9L O D • �O O 1 a 'L M 0 0 dq � IDA a ad (D dq Al +. O K rt ►� m A„ 01 dQ dq 't 10 O rt 0 0 A+. ., �i �t m dq �-- IZ dQ 0 C 'C3 dQ (D At p dQ 0 ll 0. r m p dQ O lal 'd q M ro dQ _ p w_ O rA x 0 -t C' O. dq t p, O ' ,�. O t O ►h.. At (D O C p y rt m rt O .P,� ' J' (D 'nr phi �- O dy A m dq �y + -' �• t. �. o 0 c dQ � n O dQ cm T T rs` �l L�J 04 �mrl o R N O• C m n 0 a: a n pl h nq rt ID I� V ;o rn m --4 ( • rn 0 z «r„►r CA m CA m www�w 0 z WOW#A w a CA 0 0 on on � NMIYItlA a f) H o ri) M Q+ CIQ r•r. 'ZS m m O rt tp fD Q+ rr CfQ w rt '+• � � O tv rt rt %U lD O O eb x F•h rt a� N C 0 rd n 0 h sL 0 n n rt eD �7A CM o C CD rt '"G dQ $a+ �Q• m � PD COQ It 12 ((D �yN rb !D rt bR 0 m m m rt rr- O V N m lD ro rt rn N O. C ro O rt O n w Pk h ro rt e , ti T N N n h O m m En (D n O • O • • • _ 0 r-. �-h Pf• p � ry eb A Q+ ¢, ro y rt I--i rt (yp m f{i rt ry Al r+• Al rPy+ A foh ro n• C .�i H 0• (roil H rt o O V1 Y•�i A rt rt F••�i Q ►Cj C3 Ham+ rt W m rt �, N C 1 ¢. rt 1 0 N x O pl O r-+ m x1. A+ �_ Cn �_` ro ro to eD SOD yW..,, i0,., ro f�D p r+. p (D fi o CNll rt (p Vl' f�•!' ~ i� :U rt1 Sll �, r' r-+ y C O A r.. tD ro X �• O ' ro ro ''* CD to Cn ro � .... A m ID rt N o ¢, u phi C +� g C �D N p� p O � h p„ "��' ' ;� "� � ".�' rD �.. `� � h�i•. �•�, Q.i"t Ri ro o p W r 0 'r3' �~- O F%+ ^� �. 04 Pro+ �. Na to m C > ro u` c U4 O pj o �. r- C p.. X '� w O -K O rroi, VI w D y ¢ Uq to r� ►Cj rt �. ¢, r . lu ro w pl A ky - ... fL O ro m Ind 0 CD G7 a a' ro p w ... A o Ort ro �. 0 > 01 0 H a• ro �. ro ro v C I w O vl M W C. (� rr. r+ to O ti• -+ 0- Z A `0 ro ' Val CD frt D O rt n �+ O" CA ~ CA o N• _ -. g, r+. rt ~ W y ro (D �- � y rr• 6 Al O pAi rt pl W pi CA O (rot ro eD COQ tr eOti• ;y' 9L - O Oy W `" r0+ ►rot .' O O . CD � �• O' � W ro � ti• ro �i► �3 r�'1� X7 R L R t=i CD � rpt, ro O y � .'7i• C c. Uq ro C cm ti T N N n h O m m En (D n O • O • • • _ 0 r-. �-h Pf• p � ry eb A Q+ ¢, ro y rt I--i rt (yp m f{i rt ry Al r+• Al rPy+ A foh ro n• C .�i H 0• (roil H rt o O V1 Y•�i A rt rt F••�i Q ►Cj C3 Ham+ rt W m rt �, N C 1 ¢. rt 1 0 N x O pl O r-+ m x1. A+ �_ Cn �_` ro ro to eD SOD yW..,, i0,., ro f�D p r+. p (D fi o CNll rt (p Vl' f�•!' ~ i� :U rt1 Sll �, r' r-+ y C O A r.. tD ro X �• O ' ro ro ''* CD to Cn ro � .... A m ID rt N o ¢, u phi C +� g C �D N p� p O � h p„ "��' ' ;� "� � ".�' rD �.. `� � h�i•. �•�, Q.i"t Ri ro o p W r 0 'r3' �~- O F%+ ^� �. 04 Pro+ �. Na to m C > ro u` c U4 O pj o �. r- C p.. X '� w O -K O rroi, VI w D y ¢ Uq to r� ►Cj rt �. ¢, r . lu ro w pl A ky - ... fL O ro m Ind 0 CD G7 a a' ro p w ... A o Ort ro �. 0 > 01 0 H a• ro �. ro ro v C I w O vl M W C. (� rr. r+ to O ti• -+ 0- Z A `0 ro ' Val CD frt D O rt n �+ O" CA ~ CA o N• _ -. g, r+. rt ~ W y ro (D �- � y rr• 6 Al O pAi rt pl W pi CA O (rot ro eD COQ tr eOti• ;y' 9L - O Oy W `" r0+ ►rot .' O O . CD � �• O' � W ro � ti• ro �i► �3 r�'1� X7 R L R +, V 1 }.yyjjdd lit S e k r Oya h x �3. Y a �x rt � rp Un a 0 't O N p rt :� UQ m O rt ift � '• � � C rt rt eD N O n ¢+ � o. ro Oya h x �3. Y a �x h ,ip Oya x �3. a �x n:. icy �3, r; a "V1 ift � '• e � O CA N rjl N � C � O a. CDfD I..,. m � ro n m CD rt O n � ri" (� F+• N �qq Fes+ q• n ro cm uxi e rt '.� cm CD O rt rh O UQ O v ! I eD s `art1 p n y Q+ �1+ r N C �* m �'* %1 cn v. rt �• m O `C eD rb t3 C eD lu N ry p �ru.. .0 rt Q+ rt rA.. YD M f9 y `.� UQQ n �, 0 art+. fD A i-r, ® I.A. rt rr" ��'' n j�6 • CrQ H- A rr O p O `C t-•i �1+ e) rt ��-+ per. ►ah / CM O _ tv "'� 0 I-K iii, U C O• m• ,tea, r•• '. - A, n to w UQ A) CT' eD C!Q r�i' �' A�• per' v' eD CD A A� rD ►,,, tL hC A� rt rt ,� �+, A m p to h ~ + (�D rt rt C fD i-•� gyp, ��.. 9L �. A UQ 0 (A ® ® G m dq � �, � C3' UQ W m Ate• ,.. 1 1 � ry� • • � Y®. tz eD si CD fD O Q. �, O rr LOS O+ i-n �C xy rp rD O A• p O+ m O O 04 F•c K �. P A rt C� �, rt ► A �.+ 0 O V1 rt n O n rt eD fD O ID rt rt Cf ,.�: PD N rt V 01 N �D � 0 UQ CQ C .3' m UQ O E, O O eD n CIQ O rt fD UQ fD A CA ® rt • Z m A �, Q: K O+ rt -'' '-h '.� UQ O AAi O A A Gn + `C rD rt n cn rr• d n � rt rt N ' � ,00 � iL W d ¢� ►Oi W � rt o CM h ` 0 n n o .Arts O rnr- W UFQ A � P ir I"I �- 0 o 0 m ( d ( m d m m d m m d d �- a q as ao m a4 A� m n o o aq m m 0 ir I"I N t1+ a n 0 0+ 0 K n rt rt A N V7 r' "' rt 0 OQ 0 �+ O �+ ril rt O 0 � rt 0-+ A rt �• BCD Q+ n m CrQ ts' O r+, � O � s • • A rt CL OQ CrQ h UQ � rt CD ro � � o cr rD r' "' • s • � O O o ON CtQ N � CD lD rn � � rt � fD• rt Q.. � � z A O �p r3 O O �• � � 1 A 1 (� A rt h e • Q+ � a o � �� rt 00 a rt rt rt ae rt a� N O O. CD CD f9 O h i]+ O at n w fb fb A N . �q ) , e • • o s • cm.v ro ro ro rt � � CIA �+ m � � O CD h.r ro C O PDT ro O ro w "� UQ OQ h ro ro � ro O n ro o rt rt ro • • • • • yC• � rro•• � ~c �+ m CD ro C CD PDT ro O ro w "� UQ OQ ro � ro ro o rt AIN r 'R m CD ro C CD ro � ro ro eD � rt AIN r 'R Q C1 C m n O eDn eD rt (D Oo N . , x x �• AM x.r ktiV.,;t.;t" ° N -A P# . (D CD vJ- ¢ #F sus rt C rL+ CIQ CJQ-1 Y ... -A �' a e�3 {.. k.• �•.• /ylgd 'kR 1 �,. q '� t R�. 1� 1•� � Ott • , .`d ' y„ J= ; x�w .� � F•t a ® iv H•. eD to eD k � x r CrQ eD eD o h (D CJQ eD 4 �.eD V rt - O s � s. ry 1 `11 _ c' 61 N tl. C CD CD n 0 a. 0 K n x K rt rt 77 'h a a i f 6 G I q � o �:�° ,.�. }.$ �.. ,w �� A rrPw��A e Lod VJ a • • • • • • • • • • • • • o • • • • • • • • • • r • • • • • • • • • ►�+ iU f0.j CSQ ro ¢. ID r' C x x pi x W L7 -! G1 �y r. C V !D cn t4 n (� mf09 n+. fie' Q' �. m' '•3 n ��4 W W X. ID it CD `C CD M CD y�,nddc�dy 0 00 0 0 n0 0n 0 00 nrr � n r. =y r. r• N O UQ K �- !� Q' h d � �U O �C 'm" �y rL ID 0 O r�• (7 x 0 �i. o h p m .t � '" n oiS 1 Cy JCL u iv p f R eb P, x in" cr o x 0 K 0 >r as o, N p C p sr A n 0 K h w a 0 ru of ID K n oS rt w cu