PL 02/11/1987 - 30657CITY OF FRIDLEY
� PLANNING CO��ISSION MEETING, FEBRUARY 11, 1987
r'"'�
CAL L TO ORDER:
Chairperson Billings called the February 11, 1987, Planning Commission meeting
to order at 7:33 p.m.
ROLL CALL:
Members Present: Steve Bil]ings, Dave Kondrick, Dean Saba, Sue Sherek,
Dale Thompson (for Rich Svanda), Donald Betzold
Members Absent: None
Otf�ers Present: Jim Robinson, Planning Coordinator
Jock Robertson, Community Development Direc�or
Duane Waldoch, 1655 - 75th Ave. N.E.
Jim Determan, 1241 - 72nd Ave. N.E.
APPROVAL OF JANUARY 28, 1987, PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES:
Mr. Billings stated that on page 5, paragraph 3, second to last line, the words
"stated that" should be inserted.
MOTION BY P,?R. KONDRICK� SECORIDED BY MR. BETZOLD, TO APPROVE THE JAN. 28, 1987,
PLANIVING COMMI5520N MINUTES AS AMENDED.
UF011z A•VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON BILLINGS DECLARED THE MOTION
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
1. PUBLIC HEARING: CONSIDERATION OF A SPECIAL USE PERP�IT, SP #87-01, BY
EDIJARD AND ROSE WALDOCH:
Per Section 205.13.1, C, 9, of the Fridley City Code to allow exterior
storage of materials and equipment on the east 125 feet of Lot 18,
Block 2, Central Vaew P�anor, the same being 7340 Central Avenue N.E.
MOTION BY MR. KONDRICK, SECOIVDED BY M5. 5HEREK, TO OPEN THE Pi7BLIC HEARING.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPER50N BILLIINGS DECLARED THE
PUBLIC HEARING OPE1V AT 7:35 P.M.
Mr. Robinson stated this property was located west of O1� Central between
� 73rd Ave.. and 732 Ave. The zoning was C-1, or neighborhood commercial,
the City's lightest commercial zoning. The property was surrounded on the
north +�nd on t�he west by auto recycl ing yards.-:; �St�� �ra�s:- a�.tempted several �
- tim�s- �� tl�e pa�t ta s�,et �thi s property cl e�ed u�. There v�as, a`. non-conformi ng
use in that t ere was a sing e ami y ouse, garage and.an auto r�pair business
on one tax parcel. These uses are legal non-conforming uses at this time.
�� There were presently t{�ree income pro-duc-i�ng �operat.�ons on the property:
(1) the rental property, the house; (2) rental of the corrunercial bui lding
on the north of the site leased to Sam's Auto Parts; and (3) the petitioner
uses the property for a lawn maintenance business.
i^�
PLANNI�G GOMMISSION �EE1`�NG, FEB�U�RY 11, 1987 PAGE 2
Mr. Robinson stated ���t at.any given time, there was quite a bit of autside
storage of trucks and equipment on the site. There have been co�plaints
from neigh�ors about the condition of the site.
Mr. Robinson stated that on Sept. 30, 1986, the �ost rec�nt tag was written
for outside storage wi�thout a special use permit and:also for the storage
of junk vehicles. Judge Gi�bs, who precided over the case gave the owners
30 d�ys to apply for a sp�cial use permit and postpo�ed the cou�t hearing.
A court.appearance was set for Mar�ch 1, 1�87, if necessary. So, the petitioner
has made an application for a special use permit for outside storage.
Mr. Robinson stated that at this .time he would like to show the Commissioners
a video tape of the condition�o� 'the��;pr���rty. The video tape was tak�n the
previous day.
Mr. Robinson stated Staff was recommending the following stipulations:
l. Provide an 8 ft, high solid wood screening fence as per cit�y plan dated
Feb. 11, 1987, by P�ay 15, 1987.
2. All ma�terials to �e:stored inside the fenced stnrage area below the top
of the fence by P�lay 15, 1987.
�� 3. Install landscaping as per city plan dated Feb. 11, 19$7, to include
edging, mulch, weed barrier and lawn sprirtkling by June 15, 1987.
4. Sod bcsulevard areas.along �entral Ave,,.73rd Ave., and 7� Ave. as per
city plan dated Feb. 11, 1987, by June 15, 1987.
5. Repaint bu�lding facade and trim by June 15, 1987.
6. Provide 6 ft. concrete curbing as per city plan dated Feb. 11, 1987, by
June 15, 1987.
7. Remove concrete island from par�Cing lot by June 15, 1987.
8. Repave and stripe parking lot and driveways by Sept. 15, 1987.
9. Provi de a performance bond or a l etter of credi t i n the ama��tt o�f' $5,000
t� c'over all.of the above stipulations prior to Council approVal.
10. Parking or storage of street inoperable and/or unlicensed vehicles is
prohibited.
11. Parking of vehicles.within street right-of-ways is prohibited - violaters
will be tagged and/or towed within�ten iiays. Date of possible action
is Feb. 23, 1987.
�, 12. IVo sales or leasing of vehicles is or will be permitted on this site.
PLANNIfJG COMh1ISSI0N MEETING, FEBRUARY 11, 1987 PAGE 3
13. Special use permit, SP #87-01, for outside storage for 7awn care operation
only and is intended for present owners only and is not transferrable to
future owners.
14. Special use permit to be reviewed in six months.
Mr. Kondrick asked-if there had been any response fr�om the neighborhood
regarding the special use permit application.
Mr. Robinson stated there had not been; however, there was quite a bit of
rental property across the street.
Mr. Saba stated he was concerned about the unlicensed,vehicles being stored
in violation of the agreemen� with Sar�'s Auto originaily. What would prevent
that violation fram reoccurring in spite of the special use pet^mit?
Mr. Robinson stated the special use permit would be just for the lawn
maintenance business, and no cars could be parked out there that were inoperable
or did not have a valid license. It would be a matter of polici�g it.
Ms. Sherek�ask�� if any of the vehicles parked out in f�^ont o� Sam's were
for sale.
�'` Mr. Duane Waldoch stated those_vehicles were customers' cars that were waiting
to be repa�red or have been repaired and are waiting to be picked`�.�up. However,
there were some exceptions.
Ms� Sherek asked how many vehicles were parked there for the Yawn care service.
Mr. Waldoch stated right now he had four trucks and two trailers. He planned
to be cutting back on vehicles to 2-3 trucks.
Mr. Waldoch stated he had talked to his legal counsel that day, and they had
advised him not to ma�e any agreements at this meeting. Speaking for himself
and h�is parents who� owr� the property, he was in agreet�ent to try to improve
the property, but they had to laok at it from the standpoint that when they
bought the property, they were told they could use the property in the same
manner it had always been used,
Mr. Waldoch stated Sam has been usi.ng the property for about 10-12 years and
that was one of the conditions when buying the property that Sam would
contfnu� to� l� a s���n�r of the property.
Mr. Walctoch stated before he purchased the property, he had about lZ hour
conversation with Steve Olson, who was with Inspections in the Public Works
Department. He asked ��r. Olson wh�at had to be done to the pr�e'rty so they
knew�wNat was required by the City before they purchased the property. At
that time, Mr. Olson told him three things: (1) In 1982, the southwest
� corner of the property used to empty into 73rd and Q1d Cer�tra]. Mr. Olson
stated barrels or some type of barrier had to be put up so there would be no
� PLANNING COH9MISSIQ(� MEETING, FEBRUAAY 11, 198Z PAGE 4
access at that point. (2) Mr. Olson gave him�a five year timetable on the
dirt area on the southerly side of the property where g;�_:tanks had been
removed and it had not been tarred over the top. (3) painiing the building.
Mr. Waldnch stated wh�t the City was doing was taking 20.ft. away"from the
parking area-�rich�has always been a parking area and giving them only six
stalls. Also, over the years the property has been rrrade smaller from road
improvements--improvements to 73rd Ave., 732 Ave., and Old Central.
Mr. Waldoch stated this process was a new experience for him, a�d he was
willing to work out an agreement; but he could not agree to the.stipulations
as presented at this meeting. The City was proposing to take 50% of his
parking and make it a green area. If that was done, then Sam could not
utilize the property and they lose a renter and 2/3 of the rental that comes
from Sam.
Mr. Billings stat�d the parking proposed by the City was six stalls. How
many parking stalls did Mr. Waldoch feel he needed?
Mr. Waldoch stated he needed 15-20 parking spaces, depending on the number
of employees.
Ms. Sherek stated there seemed ta be a misunderstanding on the part of the
�"� petitinner in that city ordinances have always prohibited parking of vehicles
from a business on city right-ef-way. That outer perimeter of the lot that
was being proposed as green area and landscaped was city right-of-way. The
right-of-way ran with the deed of the property and was.a legal description.
This area might have been used for parking in the past, but it was not a legal
parking area now or ever had been.
Mr. Waldoeh stated that if this should never have been a parking area, then
that should have been brought up by Mr. Olson or someone from the City before
he purchas.ed the property. He came in all honesty to the City of Fridley to
find out what needed to be done before they purchased the prop,erty. At that
time, Mr. Olson told him the conditions he had outlined earlier, and they
purchased the property with the understanding that their proposed use of the
property was feasible, because the property had been used that way in the past.
If they had known any of the things they were being told now, they would not
have purchase�d the _ pr.c�p�t°ty and v�oul d hav�e l ocated somew�ere else. One of the
th i ngs they 1 ooked at wi th the Fri dl ey �e wa-s tha� bec�� af `tkre j unic vards ,
possibly in ten years the junk yards would not be there, and this could be a
very nice looking property.
Mr. Waldoch stated something he would like to add was that vdhen the work was
done on 73rd Ave., that was $8,OQ0 worth of assessments put orr their ptroperty
which did not he1p any business on 73rd Ave., plus the fact that it took
another 3 ft. of property away from them.
�—, Mr. Waldoch stated that�as far as thet�nlicense�_vehicles� w�en thgv were
issued the tickets, those vehic7es were moved by Sam. Most of the vehicles
are shi_fted or moved e�t�er��_�day on a ten-day cycle, Sam has told him that a
lot of times a customer will drop a vehicle off to be repaired and sometimes
stay while waiting for a part, possibly a coupl:�-of weeks. As far as "junk"
r"'�
PLANNIiVG C01'�4ISSION C��1'ING, FEBRU�Y 11, 1987 PAGE 5
vehicles, as discussed with Staff that marning, som�e of the cars parked there
look like "junk" but are licensed and are operating and are.customers' cars
�Mat are being used. And, that is part of the problem, because the cars do
look like junk cars. Sam is getting blamed for junk cars being parked there,
but those vehicles are waiting �o �+e fixed and go back on the road.
Ms. Sherek stated Sam's Repair Shop was really separate from the jurrk yard.
She thought a distinction had to be made between Sam pa�king jurak vehicles
(which on occasion he does do) and custor�ers cars that really are being
�urn�d over. He cannot run a repair garage if he is permi�ted to run the
repair garage on the site, but yet has no place to park the cus_tamers' cars.
Mr. Waldoch made the suggestior� that on the west side (back side) of the
garac,� wl�ich rwns against Sam's lot, that an extension of Sam`s existing
fence be run�:along �he'prop��ty line through the-green area t� the front of
the garage on en ra ve. a was one, e i not t in t,ey would
need to use the driveway that was in the back now. Ar�d, if this was done,
Sam could ._�cont�inue to run his operation-over into that area. Possibly
some stipulations would need to be ntade,'but S�am could use that area to store
some of the cars an� have access to the g�rage. It would screen all the
unwanted cars that are being seen out front.
Mr. Billings stated he saw a problem in that the City Couhcil already speci-
,,_. fically said that with regard to Sam's license application for a junk yard,
he cannot use the Waldoch property to store jurtk cars.
Mr. �illings as`k� if 2-3 more stalls could be added to the six stalls
proposed on Central Ave.
Mr. Robinson stated he thought there was-room for a little bit of growth,
possibly to 8 stalls.
�Ms. Sherek ��ked�-if there was a possitri1ity of instead of fencing the
back portion, it be turned into a parking area?
Mr. Robinson stated if they are thinking about changing the stipulations on
the stflrage, then they would have to r�ecommend to City Council to change the
stipulations on the license. He had no particular problem with that, except
to the point whe-re th���c�re�t� 'ar�other junk yard.
Mr. Robinson stated he would like ta give a little history on wYtat has been
done regarding this property in the past:
In 1976, the City sent a letter to the owner of the propehty before
Mr. Walctoch, which outlined six items, five of wh�ich had been discussed
a�_this meeting. This letter was written by Mr. Boardman, City Planner,
at that time. It talked a�out vehicles on the boule�tards, i-n�sperable
vehicles,_etc. Also included was a plan for improvemen-� much like the
6ne before the Commi�ssion at this meeting.
�
n
r"�,
�
PLANNING COMMI�SSI-ON MEETII�,� FEB�UARY. 1�1', 1987 PAGE 6
In 1g81, a letter was sent to Sam, the rent�r �f t�ae pr�p�erty, that told
him about the parking on tl�e boulevards.
In 1982, Mr. Board�a�:�ut a.note into the ffle saying he had talked
t�r�� Uu�t�e- Wal doch who was th� potenti al purchaser •of the property about
the improvements and rleaning.up of the prop�rty, and Mr. Waldoch
seemed to be agreeable to the improvements.
In Feb. 198b, Ric Iatiersma of City Staff, sent a letter to Mr, waldoch
outlining eight improvements which basically included everything
discussed at this meeting.
Mr. Robinson stated. that was wh�at they had in writing. He could not comment
on what Mr. Waldoch was told by a former city �taff person. What they have
in writing does bear out that the City has been earnestly pursuing improvements
on this property for at least ten years and very little, if anything, has been
done to improve the site.
Mr. Billings stated he wau]d be inclined to look at the passibv'l�i°ty of 2-4
additi�onal parking spaces on the Central Ave. side. He.did nat think he would
be in favor of opening up the whole area on the north side of the crnnrnercial
building for a fenced-in area because.he thought it would be contrary to the
wishes and intent of the City Council, who specifically ind�icated they do not
r�ant_a junk yard over there. He thought a fence would d� that, whether they
wanted it to or not.
Mr. Waldoch stated that on the north side corner, there was a driveway coming
into t�he p��rty. There was actlially an entryway prepar.ed by ti�e city on the
corner of 732 and Old Central. In the prQ�osed site plan, the�City was pro-
posing that be tak-en out, but that was put in by the City. If there wasn't
suppo��d to �°i`an 'en'tryway ther�, why avas ane p�t in�? /�lso, a1�1 up and down
Old Central, businesses do park right up to Old Central. In talking about
setbacks and city right-of-way, why are they allawed to do that?
Mr. Billings stated some of the stipulations listed were alrea�y city code.
Mr. Waldoch was not being picked on. Whenever a petitioner. comes in for a
special use permit, they try to get the.p�p�rty up to city�code.
I�r. Waldoch stated the anly thing he can say at this �ime was that he had
been advised by his attorney that he should not agree to anything at this
time.
Mr. Robirrson stated the City's objective was simp]y_to get_the� property cleaned
up. They want to be realistic and do not want to impose stipulations or
conditions that are so strenuous, the property owner w6n't do anyti�ir�g. He
would r�commend some of the curbing be eliminated and just go with curbing to
define the twa driveways and set the limits for the parking area adjacent to
Ol d C�ntra7 . Th�y cc��rl�d �add �wo more parki ng stal ls . Regardi ng the storage
ar�a, i f the Corronis si on fel t i t was i r� the Ci ty's best i nterest to expar�d i t,
it would sti11 be an improvement to-the property.
� PLAIVNIl�G COMMISSIDN MEETINC, :FEBRUARY�'11, 1987 PAGE 7
Mr. Wal doch agreed. that the r�ducti or� i n curbi ng �nroul d be ��ette�^, aut he sti 11
really had a problem with the reductiorr ir� parking area.
Mr. Determan stated he awned Determan l�elding close to Mr. Waldoch's property.
H� tho�ght sflme �cor�sidera�tio�r shoi�l�d �be g-iven to these busi�esses who cannot
afford to make extensive imprnvements �an� end'up°�.going.out of business. Con-
sideration should �e given when money is not available and give th�e businesses
more time to do the work,
MOTION HY MS� SHEREK, SECONDED BY MR..KONDRICK� TQ CLOSE TNE.PUBLIC HEARING.
UPON A VOICE V02'E, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRFERSON BILLINCS DECLARED THE PUBLIC
HEARIPIG CLOSED AT 8:50 P.M.
The Commissioners concurr�ed that tl��s special use pehmit �r��te5t shovld be
tabled�as �h�re seem�d to b� no cor�currence with the petitioner an the
stipulations.
MOTION BY MR. KONDRICK, SECONDED BY MR. SABA, TO TABLE SPECIAL USE PERMIT,
SP #87-01, BY EDWARD AND ROSE WALDiDCH., UNTIL THE.IVEXT MEETING.
�., UPON A VOICE VOTE� ALL VOTING AYE, CHAI.RPERSON BILLINGS DEC.UARED THE MOTION
' CARRIED UNAIVIMOUSLY.
Mr. Billings encourage�.Mr� Waldnch to take the site plan and stipulations,
get �t��etMer t�ith his legal� counsEl as soon as possihle, and t{aen get t�gether
wi th Staff to come up v�i th an al ternati�'e� pl an that was agree�abl e to both
the petitioner and city staff.
2. COPJSID�RATION OF A ZOlVII��:�COD�� CH�4NGE. PERTAINI�G TD G/kRA6E SETBACKS;
Mr. Betzold stated the Appeal� Commissi�n seems to get a 1ot of requests
for variances from people. who have single car garages and v�at�t double car
garages. They are primarily talking about houses �corrstr�uc�ed in the 1950's,
1960's, and early 1970's. In most of the cases, the house �'as co�structed
in the center of the lat with a single car garage which looked nice back
then, but as times change, the do�uble car garage is naw the.standard, In
fact, by today's cad�, all new constru�tion has to have a��auba.e car garage.
So, people with single car garages are trying to expan�d ta doutile.car garages.
By having the house situat�d in the center of the lot and then�expanding the
single car. garage to�the double car garage, they get a Tittle too close to
the lot line.
Mr. Betzold stated there might �e individuals who feel they cannot do this
simply because the code does not all�ow it. In order to a-llow �it, a person
has to get a vari ance wl�i ch means comi n�g b�fore the Appeal s Cor�ni ssi on. The
problem comes in that by strict� definition the law says th�t before the
�''� Appeals Cammission can grant a variance, there has to be a hardship--some-
t�i�n�-:ur�ique about the property that says the cod� ought to be varied. And,
� PLANNI�G COMP�ISSION MEETIN�, FEB:�UARY-11, 1987 PAGE 8
in ih�-cases, there really isn't a hardship that says a pers�n sh�uld have
a double car garage. So, the Ap_p�als_Commissian really has to work to try
to find a hardship in o�der to grant the variance, and it was �eally a
disse�vice to the law in order to do it. So, if they cannot find the hard-
ship, the better. way to do it.was to change the code,.which was what he was
suggesting. Maybe the c��e oaght to �e changed to allow people to build
a little closer to the lot line for the single purpose of having a two-car
garage. That would also allow people to bring their property up to code by
having the two-car garage.
Mr. Betzold stated the philosophy right now was there sho�ld be a certain
distance between adjacent struc�ures, particularly i� case of fire, What the
code says now was structures ���ould not be closer tha� ten feet, garage to
garage. The only way to build closer was by getting a var�{:ance. That was
where the trouble came in because in order to build a double car garage,
they could not do it within 5 ft, of the lot line. The standard garage width
for a twn-�ar garage was 22 ft., and they usually come within 4 ft, or � ft.,
and sometimes a little bit closer.
Mr. Betzold stated his prop�sal was on page 2 of the agen�a. Basically, he
was p�op�sing the following:
�n exlsting, single-car, attached gar�ages, the side yard may be
�'� reduced to three (3) fee� provided the new garage is:
1. No wider than 22 feet.
2. The adjacent structure is a house and at least ten (10) feet
from the lot line.
*3. The adjacent structure is an attached two-car garage and is
at least four (4) feet from the lot line.
If the adjacent structur.e-is a single-car garage, the setback for the
new garage cannot be less than four (4) feet.
Exterior walls of attached-�gara.ges, less than five (5) feet from a
proper,ty line, must be canstructed �F`material�s approved fot^ one-
hour fire resistence on the in�side and no unprotecte� openings are
allowed. The maximum roof projectlon is limited to two (2) feet.
*At no time can two attached garagES bE closer than 8 feet, and the
distance between an attached garage and a house can be not less than
13 feet.
Mr. Betzold stated that on page 2A, Mr. Clark had put tog�tY�er some samples
of just how the code would work.
�,
� PLANNI�dG COMPhISSI�ON MEETIIYG� F.EBRURRY 11, 1987 PAGE 9
Mr. Betzold stated this particu-lar item.was on the Appeals Commission a�enda
last ti�ek, �ut the meeting.was not held because of a lack of quorum. He
stated they will be discussing._it at the Feb. 17th meeting. Prelimin�arily,
he has gotten no objections from the Appeals Commissioh on�this proposal.
Ms. Sherek stated she liked this.proposal because it addressed a specific
prwblem.
The Commissioners were in agreement with the ordinance change-fow existing
one stall garage side yard setbacks as proposed by Mr. Betaold.
3. RECEIVE J�41�URRY 20, 1987, ENVtR�NMENTAL QUA4�.fi?f�-CO�ISSION MINUTES:
MOTION BY MR. THOMPSON� SECON73ED BY MR.. KONDRICK� TO RECEIVE THE JAN. 20� 1987,
ENVIRON�'�L•'��QUAF:I-TY COMMI�S520N MINUTES.
ITPON A VOICE VOTE� ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON BILLINGS DECLARED THE MOTION
CARRIED UNANIMOU5LY.
4. OTHER QUSINESS:
a. Feb. 17, 1987, Appeals Commission meeting minutes
^ Mr. Betzold stated that hecause..of a.lack of a quorum, there was no
Appeals CQmmission meeting on Feb. 3. This meeting has been rescheduled
for Feb. 17th, .ar�d because:of some urgency on th�e part of the petitioners
�o move ahead, he was asking the Planning Cormtission if they had any
objection to the Feb. 17th minutes going di:rectly to the City Council
without� goir�g to the �`lanning Gorr�nission first to be received which was
the usual procedure. He gave a brief description of the var�iance requests
that would be discussed at that meeting.
MOTION BY MR. BETZOLD, SECOIVDEII BY MR. KONDRICK, THAT THE FEB. 17, 1987�
APPEAL5 COMMISSION MINUTEB GO DIRECTLY TQ THE CIZ'Y COUNCTI, ON FEB. 23,
1987, WITHOUT BEING ROUTED FIRST THROUGH THE PLANNIAIG COM'MI5SION.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE� CHAIRPERSOAT BILLINGS DECLARED TNE
MOTI0IV CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
b. CDBG Allocations
Mr. Robinson stated the City Council had made a motion to approve the
CDBG allocations at their Jan. 26th meeting. Th�e �►er�e some changes
in the 1987 CDBG funding allocations and the 1989 funding allocations,
These were outlined in his Feb. 3rd memo to Mr.Robertson.
Mr. Robinson stated also attached to the memo was the Neighbarhood
Commercial Rehab Loans Program Guidelines for the City of Fridley dated
�-, Feb. 3, 1987.
� PLANNING COM�ISSION MEETING, FEBRUARY 11, 1987 PAGE 10
c. Planning Commission Goal Setting
Mr. Robinson stated that at the Jan. 28th meeting, the Planning Commission
members had discussed the passibility of establishing goals and objectives
related to long-term pla�ning issues facing the City. In his Feb. llth
memo to the Planning Commission members, he had outlined a five step
program whereby this could be accomplished. If this proposal was agreeable
to the Corrnnissioners, he would send it on to the City Coun�il for their
concurrence.
Mr. Kondrick stated he felt this Commission needed to be more involved
in the planning process and he was fully in agreement w`ith this proposal.
However, he would like to take more time to review this a little more
carefully.
Mr. Robinson stated they could discuss the steps outlined in his memo
more at the next rr�eting,
ADJOURNMENT:
MOTION BY MS. SHEREK� SECONIlED BY MR. BETZOLD� TO ADJOURN THE MEETING. UPON A
VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTIIVG AYE, CHAIRPERSON BILLIRIGS DECLARED THE FEB. 11, 1987�
^ P�ANNING COMMISSION MEETING ADJOURNED AT 10:05 P.M.
Respectfully s bmitted,
a
L n e Saba
Recording Secretary
,--.
�
�� . � . �
� .� . �, � ��7
�
� ��- �.�� ��G�� /� s��- �s- �`�-� �� ,��;�� �
a / � �' %
i U � rn �-e �� v� m � h I a �-� � � � a � �� � �/_ �. �'� i ��c �
;
�
1
� /1
�