Planning Commission Agenda Packet 08-13-1985V AGENDA
REGULAR MEETING - MONTICELLO PLANNING COMMISSION
August 13, 1985 - 7:30 P.M.
Members: Jim Ridgeway, Joyce Dowling, Richard Carlson, Richard
Martie, and Ed Schaffer.
7:30 P.M. 1. Call to Order.
7:32 P.M. 2. Approval of the Minutes of the Regular Meeting
Held July 9, 1985.
7:34 P.M. 3. Public Hearing - Variance Request to Allow
a Garage Addition to be Built in the Side Set
Beck Requirement - Applicant Brazil Pyle.
7:49 P.M. 4. Public Hearing - Variance Request to Allow
an Addition to be Built Within the Front Set
Back Requirement - Applicant, Monticello Dairy Queen.
8:04 P.M. 5. Public Hearing - Conditional Use Request to
Allow Minor Auto Repair and Outdoor Sales in
a B-4 Zone - Applicant, Monticello Auto Sales.
8:19 P.M. 6. Public Hearing - Request for a Revised Dovolopmant
Plan of a Planned Unit Development - Applicant,
Mike Roher.
8:49 P.M. 7. Public Hearing - A Roquoet for a Final Stage
Plan Approval of a Planned Unit Development
Applicant - Ultra Homes Inc.
Additional Information Items
9:09 P.M. 1. Sot the tentative for the Monticello Planning
Commioolon Mooting for Tuooday, September 10, 1985,
7:30 P.M.
9:11 P.M. 2. Adjournment.
MINUTES
REGULAR MEETING - MONTICELLO PLANNING COMMISSION
July 9, 1905 - 7:30 P.M.
Members Present: Jim Ridgeway, Richard Martie, Richard Carlson,
Ed Schaffer.
Members Absent: Joyce Dowling.
Staff Present: Tom Eidem, Gary Anderson.
The meeting was called to order by Chair Jim Ridgeway at 7:33 P.M.
Motion by Ed Schaffer, seconded by Richard Carlson, to approve
the minutes of the June 11, 1905, Planning Commission meeting.
Motion carried unanimously.
3. Public Hearing - Variance Request to Allow Less than the Minimum
Number of Parking Spaces Required and to Allow no Curbing in
Certain Areas of a Parking Lot - Applicant, Jim Powers.
Jim Powers was present to discuss his variance request for less
parking spaces than required and curbing along the northeast
Dido of his property. Mr. Powers explained that due to the nature
of his type of activity in the health club business and with
the amount of area taken up by the swimming pool and the racquet
club, he felt he wouldn't need as many parking spaces as required
by ordinance. Under the formula for the parking spaces, parking
spaces aro allowed for the lounge area, the health club area,
and also coma retail rental apace. Adding up the total number
of spaces required, Mr. Powers would have to come up with 209
total apacco. Mr. Powers was able to generate 136 spaces, which
woLld leave a variance of 75 parking opacco. Mr. Powers also
indicated he would like to have a variance to allow no curbing
along the northeast property lino from Sandberg Road went into
the property approximately 200 lineal foot. If allowed no curbing
along that 200 foot strip, it would allow joint parking with
the proposed now tenant or tenants to be located on the adjacent
lot.
Motion by Ed Schaffer, ooconded by Dick Martin, to allow a 75
parking opaco variance and to allow no curbing along the northeast
property line approximately 200 fact along this property line
from Sandberg Road for a period not to exceed one year. At that
time it will be reviewed by the Zoning Administrator, and his
recommendation will coma back to the Planning Commission at that
time. Motion carried unanimously.
On-
Planning Comaission Minutes - 7/9/85
C. Public Hearing - A Development Plan for a Planned Unit Development -
Applicant, John Korno vich.
Mr. Lionel Kull was present to propose the development stage
of the Planned Unit Development. Mr. Kull was present with architect,
Sid Williamson, to propose the development stage with the changes
as penciled in. Mr. Kull explained the penciled in changes came
about as the result of a meeting with City staff members Thomas
Eidem and Gary Anderson on Friday, July 5. Chair Jim Ridgeway
opened the meeting for input from the public. Before any input
from the public, he read a letter which was submitted from Mr.
Roger Pribyl, a resident in Kampa Estates. Mr. Pribyl-s concerns
were addressed by Planning Commission members, staff, and developers.
Chair Ridgeway questioned staff members if they felt confident
that these penciled in changes would all be put onto the final
development stage plat. Zoning Administrator Anderson and City
Administrator Eidam answered that they felt very confident with
the developers that those would be incorporated onto the final
plan to be submitted prior to recording.
Motion by Richard Martie, seconded by Richard Car loon, to approve
the development stage of a Planned Unit Development with the
conditions as noted by Planning Commisaion membar o and City otaff.
Motion carried unanimously.
Motion by Dick Martin, seconded by Ed Schaffer, to approve the
final plat of the Planned Unit Development with tho conditiono
as attached by Planning Commiosion membero and City staff. Motion
carried unanimously.
5- Public Hearing - A R ovinod Development Plan for a Planned Unit
Development - Applicant, Mike Rehor.
Chair Jim Ridgeway gveotioned otaff membora it everything vee
in order for thio item. Staff members countered that we aro
ohort the recordable documents for tranaforring of land for otroot
purp0000 and aloo the development of th000 prop000d atrooto.
Taking that information under advioemont, Chair Jim Ridgeway
reported that the Planning Commiooion mombora would not hoar
Mr. Rohar-o requoot, as everything in not in order. Mr. Ridgeway,
however, otated they felt Mr. Rehor had a very good plan but
that he tomo back to them with everything in order before they
would hold a hearing on it.
Additional Information Itoma
1. Motion by Ed Schaffer, noconded by Dick Martin, to approve the
next tentative mooting of the Monticello Planning Commiooion
for Auguot 17, 1905, 7:70 P.M. Motion carried unanimounly.
-Z-
c
Planning Commission Minutes - 7/9/85
Motion by Ed Schaffer, seconded by Richard Carlson, to adjourn
the meeting. The meeting adjourned at 8:39 P.M. Motion carried
unanimously.
Respectfully submitted,
114 4',14,17
Gary Anderson
Zoning Administrator
-3-
Planning Commission Agenda - August 13, 1985
i
V 3. Public Hearing - Variance Request to Allow a Garage Addition to be
Built in the Side Setback Requirement - Applicant Brazil Pyle. (G.A.)
A. R EPERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
Mr. Brazil Pyle is proposing to add a lean-to addition onto
his garage for storage of a boat and other misc. accessories.
The placement of the garage would be within six inches of
the side setback line. The distance between the proposed
garage addition and the next adjacent structure,which is a
residential house, is 25 ft.
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTION
1. To approve the Variance Requeet to allow a garage addition
to be built within the side setback requirement.
2. To deny the Variance Request to allow a garage to be built within the
side setback requirement.
C. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS
Staff recommends approval of the Variance Request to allow
a garage addition to be built within six inches of the side
property line. With the proposod addition there would be
25 ft. between the proposed garage addition and the nearest
residential structure.
D. SUPPORTING DATA
Copy of tho location of the proposed Varianco Request. Photo
to be preoonted at the Tuesday night mooting.
rIDT £IAN - —
VIDORESS '' I � I I PERMIT E[A41ER
LEGAL
DESCRIPTION .;LOT'S-P'/S/ L• fr y'S I BLOCK ADDITION
50, PT. Of 31TE ARCA I 50. R. Or AREA OCCUPIED BY BUILDING
INSMICTIONS TO APPLICANT
INIs rORN RICO "T SC W[0 t ll PLOT PLANS DIUV+N TO SCALE ARE'ILE. V11N TI.0 PCRNIT 111LIC.v11ON.
TOR N[V OUILOI Mp3. ►tbOY.0. TINE fp LIOVIMO INfORPrA710Ni LOCATION or PNp►pS[D CONSTRUCTION AND EXISTING
-PRO V CVCNTA. ANOV aY1-a— [ITC ANO 3CTOACR DIR[N3ION[. IttOV (AS" "TS. IINISN CONTOURS OA D:AINACI.
•'IR37 ILODR [L[YAT IOM 7. 07RccT [L[YA71DR AND SC VLR CL[Y ATION, $N0 LEC ION OI VATC R. 3[VC 4, G.l,
,NO ELECTRICAL [[RYIC[ LINC3. 3NOV LOCATIONS Of SURVEY' PINT. SPCCIP♦ TMC USE Of C.CII SUILOINC.
.ND C.CN N. JON PO DTION TNL
OINDICATE NORTH IN CIRCLE EACH fRAPH SQUARE EQUALS I0N-0' In 10- -0"
i �
c ken rY
IIWI c tY IR.t IRI P•ep�yn�cl,un wrll ea
Intl Oblunr•ty IDpo.Pl
'7T1:N11Uvr'Z1.' pV.!['q-pA�C7NrT.ICTtto�r-Z.-tr:•'�ra rlvr
........................................ •.•.... • .................................................. 0........
(NOR C I TAY'• UAC • ONLTI
1,NCD APPROVED By DAT(
3
iRl Er.n.n.rAnl.M
rn.. .Irr.wn nt.r4., xt In.t r r ♦n
nor. w ��I�r , ri w..n r
'7T1:N11Uvr'Z1.' pV.!['q-pA�C7NrT.ICTtto�r-Z.-tr:•'�ra rlvr
........................................ •.•.... • .................................................. 0........
(NOR C I TAY'• UAC • ONLTI
1,NCD APPROVED By DAT(
3
Planning Commission Agenda - August 13, 1985
d. Public Hearing - Variance Request to Allow an Addition to
be Built Within the Front Setback Requirement - Applicant,
V Monticello Dairy Queen.(G.A.)
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND
Mr. Mel Walters, owner of Monticello Dairy 2ueeen. is proposing
to add an addition onto the front of his Dairy Queen Building.
The proposed new addition, 13' x 23 -atrium or greenhouse
addition similar to the front entrance on the new Wendy's
Building, will encroach 3' into the front setback requirement.
The addition when constructed would be 27 feet from the front
property , instead of the required 30 foot setback from the
front property line. With the proposed addition onto the
Dairy Queen,the site lines will not be obstructed with this
new addition.
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS
1. To approve the Variance Request to allow an addition to
be built within the front setback requirement.
2. To deny the Variance Request to allow building addition
to be built within the front setback requirement.
C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends approval of the Variance Request to allow
the addition to be built onto the Dairy Queen in the front
setback requirement. Seeing no obstructions of view, upon
leaving the Dairy Queen exit, we sea no obstruction of visual
site linoo.
D. SUPPORTING DATA
Copy of the location of the prop000d Variance Request, and
copy of the cite plan.
. Soy Te STRceT _-_
i 449>1 T 1 or A, iv •e. --
Ll
L J
4a %.;;LsT .Hitt
oR 9l�oi.T 37' Lr.FTTtTAesT
Planning Commission Agenda - August 13, 1985
5. Public Hearing - Conditional Use Request to Allow Minor
Auto Repair and Outdoor Sales in a B-4 Zone - Applicant, Monticello
.� Auto Sales. (G.A.)
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND
Dr. McCarty is proposing to lease the former K & H Auto Building
and Lot, on which the building site, from Kenny Stolp. Mr.
McCarty is proposing to be allowed to have a sales lot for
his automobiles and also to be allowed to have a clean up
of his vehicles to be done within the existing building.
Also in the existing building, he would have his sales office.
By ordinance we do allow as a Conditional Use, outdoor sales in
a B-4 Zone, but it is limited to five separate conditions.
We like to emphasize condition number one, that the outdoor
sales area be limited to 30% of the gross floor area of the
principal use, which would be the existing building. The
existing building is currently 30' x 50' which is equal to
1500 square feet less 10% for wall area, would amount to 1350
square feet. 30% of 1350 square feet is equal to 405 square
feet in which he would be allowed to display his auto sales.
405 square foot would be equal to about 1 space for a vehicle.
Also, as a condition under item number 1, dooB allow this
percentage to be increased as an additinal condition to the
conditional use. Mr. Stolp was allowed to sell autos under
hie currant Conditional Use Permit. Mr. Stolp was allowed
to have six vehicles displayed for sale. Also as a condition,
we would like to highlight in this agenda supplement is the
screen fence when it abuts a residential area. we would like
to see the ocreen'fence be installed and be of a residential
typo screening fence.
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS
1. To approve the Conditional Use Request to allow Outdoor
Sales in a B-4 Zone.
Z. To approve the Conditional Use Requoat to allow Minor
Auto Repair in a B-4 Zone.
3. To deny tho Conditional Uoo Roqueot to allow Outdoor Sales
in a B-4 Zone.
4. To deny tho Conditional Una Request to allow Minor Auto
Repair in a 0-4 Zono.
5. To approve the Conditional Uoo Request with the five conditions
so notod in soction 10-14-4 Subcoction B, under B-4 Zoning.
6. To allow the Conditional Uoo with the five conditions
ao addroosod in Section 10-14-4 with additional conditiono,
which are ao followa:
Planning Commission Agenda - August 13, 1985
a. The City has the right of removal of this business which
would supersede any lease agreement that he has with the
owner of the property.
b. He would have to vacate the property within a 10-15 day
notice.
c. He have available on site, seven off-street parking spaces.
C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff takes the position of with the new downtown study being proposed
for the City of Monticello and this type of activity only allowed with
certain conditions, and that we are trying to create a good image of
our downtown, we would like to see the Conditional Use Request denied.
However, if you would approve the Conditional Use Request, that you
do address several conditions over and above the five which are stated
in Section 10-14-4 Subsection B. That the conditional conditions be
as listed under alternative actions letter number six, letters A -C.
D. SUPPORTING DATA
Copy of the proposed location of the Conditional Use Request and a copy
of site plan for the Conditional Use Request, and a copy of the B-4
Zoning Ordinance Section 10-14-4, Subsection B.
't -
�'� ^� - Conditional Request to allow
Minor Auto Repair and Outdoor
Sales in a 8-4 Zone.
c
44,
IJ
NO
t
�.r•'i •f !' 1 �pp �N .
p Vk 4y�4
.. ci
- L -
OFF
? AtlIr
ry.(! RIM&
3.4
CPKs
0
6X sr/Nb 8
j0 K SO
ADDa- /ONj6- OFF - 571etE7- 01src,ov 1
'?A 8 f./A1B AREA
DtSPagyy
ARaA ToR 9 ro is cAR 1
?R= 5F- /TL y K + H Ar -0 eL P/►iR-
l��o��SGU 770 f r, L-� s �.—AUC •
u
Planning Commission Agenda - 8/13/85
6. Request for a Revised Development Stage Plan for a Planned Unit
Development - Applicant - Mike Reher.
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND:
Mr. Reher has been in several times to discuss different ways to
plat his portion of the Planned Unit Development. The City Staff
has come up with the recommendation of changing the Planned Unit
Development to a straight subdivision and are suggesting a zoning
change for the entire property from B-3 (Highway Business) to
B-2 (Limited Business). With the proposed rezoning change, it
does allow all of the activity which he does have all the different
uses for the property as he has indicated allowed only as con-
ditional uses. We have put together a punch list for Mr. Reher
to make those changes on his plans. If his plans are in order
we are suggesting going over revlewal for possible approval or
denial of a preliminary plan for a subdivision. However, if
the items on the punch list have not been put onto paper in
the plans in their entire form, we will suggest not hearing his
request at all.
B. ALTERNATIVE ACTION:
I. To approve the preliminary plan of n subdivision.
2. To deny the preliminary plan of a subdivision.
3. To npprove the preliminary plan of a subdivision with certain
conditions and they may be attached by Planning Commission
Members and/or staff.
C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
If Mr. Rehrhasall of his plans in order for a preliminary plan
for a sijbdivision, we will recommend approval at that time.
However . if the punch list items which we have established are
not In their final form on the subdivision plat as proposed,
we suggest not having the public hearing on it at all.
D. SUPPORTING DATA:
A copy of the proposed preliminary plan of Mr. Rehe is subdivialon
request . Additional plans of the preliminary plan to be submitted
at Tuesday night's meeting.
Planning Commission Agenda - August 13, 1985
Public Hearing - A Request for a Final Stage Plan Approval
of a Planned Unit Development - Applicant, Ultra Homes Inc. (G.A.)
A. REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND
Dickman Knutson, current owner of the Meadow Oak Development,
is proposing preliminary and final stage approval of outlets
C, D. G, and H. Outlet G, which is called the Meadow Oak
3rd Addition is very close to final approval of the plat as
presented. The utilities have all been put in except the
blacktop street surface and the curb and gutter. The curb
and gutter and the hard surface streets will be installed
yet this fall. We do however, have some problems with the
other outlets, outlet C which is the Meadow Oak Estates, 2nd
Addition, outlet D which is the Meadow Oak Estates 3rd edition,
and outlet H which is Meadow Oak 6th edition. These proposed
plate on these outlets C. D, and H currently have no utilities
in and have no assessments against them. We do however, recommend
approval of the preliminary stage for these developments,
the plats with the iota as platted looked to be within the
minimum requirements or Planned Unit Development Ordinance.
We do however, foresee one problem with the granting final
approval of outlet C. D. and H. Current with no utilities
in to service these lots, the lots could essentially be sold
to individual property owners with no aosesamenta on them.
If the owners of those individual lots would come into petition
the City for water and saver improvements to their vacant
lots, we would at that time have to consider bonding to have
water and sower improvements brought into these vacant lots.
We do not want to gat into that position of having to bond
for public improvements in for residential vacant lots. It
has boon our policy with the last two additiono that wore
brougt in to the City, the Par West Addition and tho Clubvlew
Terrace Addition, that the developers baro all the coat of
the public lmprovemanta.
D. ALTERNATIVE ACTION
1. To approve the preliminary planned Otago of the Planned
Unit Development for Outlot G.
2. To approve the preliminary plan for a Planned Unit Development
for Outloto C, D. and H.
3. To deny the preliminary plan for a Planned Unit Development
for Outlot G.
0. To deny the preliminary plan stage for a Planned Unit
Development for Outloto C, D, and H.
5. To approve the final planned Otago for a Planned Unit
Development for Outlet G.
G. To approve the final plan Otago for a Planned Unit Development
for Outlota C. D. and H.
Planning Commission Agenda - August 13, 1985
7. To deny the final plan stage for a Planned Unit Development
for Outlot G.
8. To deny the final plan stage for a Planned Unit Development
for Outlots C, D, and H.
C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends approval of the preliminary plan for a Planned
Unit Development for Outlot G. We also recommend approval
of final stage of Planned Unit Development for Outlot G, subject
to the conditions that a copy of the contract be in for City
approval for curb and gutter and street surface for Outlot G.
The lots be rough -grated as according to the grating plan.
We also recomment preliminary plan approval of Outlots C,
D, and H. We do however, recommend denial of the final stage
approval of a Planned Unit Development for Outlots C, D, and H
with no indication from the developer as to when the public
utilities would be put in on these three Outlots. We recommend
denial of these throe Outlots C, D, and H until such time
that the public utilities are proposed to be put in.
D. SUPPORTING DATA
Copy of the location of the proposed preliminary and final
stage plan request of a P.U.D. A copy of Outlot C, Meadow
Oak Estates 2nd addition, Outlot D Meadow Oak 3rd addition,
Outlot G Moadow Oak 3rd addition, Outlot H Meadow Oak 4th
addition.
Request for final stage plan of a
Planned Unit Development.
� /•.
� Nile eLL ItM 81 t1EY f'P
^y „ - �s 1
m[Lotet lan. ower no D
• N the IbvltY of leerepl
13/azb' / , 1
0alol D. WJCOI OM1
I
eo e se to 1
mCeuluam
Ign liflM .la me! ,erebf
rorever the tMrdTlen
JJ♦ �. / 1
In .!t- -t—f -10,
these Oresent! t0 be f1
-' 8
of 19.
, 1
11 // t•JI \\ W. 11 7a
SIMED:
' to
bl O
1•!. Y! • I _�
Q 3t - - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ J I" nl
/ 8
�• Ult+avn C. I Lt :
^ 1'
01� 4 1 --=00•C 1STATE
OF
L _ _ __=?'oG•C _ _ Ju J 1 1 ^
p - _ _ A'A-
me tort{plrq lnit rur
o! 19_
b• _ -- V I 1
O • , 1!).7! - a'iu I 9 �1
In... • M reerotn oom
• r 1 w t i
z I� x Ioi.M 1 `
Mt�rY NbllC. IC.r.npi
li
_
Caeslsllon E•olies
10
.0 1
i
_
17v 1)
I iu
Q
w
I O
'I 1I �\
1 'I IIb I2
la I cif =• la G \\ O.l / , I+•�
�cl, , _t. iil.1 r�
OAK
MEADOW
\
---�--'
to
I
\
1 \
\\
p• , , 1 1 I, 1,
J
b 1
o 13 /I x.111 t� �S
i1
•\ C
to it
01 1I ,I 11 11
J
- - 1. - - - - 3 - - -' - -I 1 - - - - - - 11' - - - - - - - 1——————
1 1 1 C/ 1 1 , 1
Yve•71' I1•l W.11
7 ro„ ht7c eo,se�envt, r; e, No. 269626
O U T L O T C
'6
*me !o Oqk EstA 5 2•iud•'dMfo'A
0UVOla C _
O I
vv
I88•14•00•E 179.59 �.A N59.00100•E _
i2f.as i Tt T. ; N9e•52. 00'E 205.31
1 1
1 i8 $1 1 81 —ter-----lea.."m —---•, i•—tii� j�
\� 1
z I 3
w••I•• Oo•! ' I =' ' v 1
25n 25 L__ -_____Q t____J� ♦ 1
g NLARKSPUR CIRCLE'1•, `�__ t••• 1.• 00•) W
i$ ree•1.•oo•e x.o.00 f______
3 A _ n.0 •�-
/ c '
1 .• - nom
-- --• I i I ♦ 1 11 � a l N
6
I L.TI) / \ ♦ - - - j)!t wl
�'[ - - Itl.n �••�,� moi- i 1 nl �
2-7. ;7
1`'� ' ' I , 1 , 1W � I^, 1 •I
1 ` 10
12� �gg 13 14
J
' )AK-- ----- LAMES' -- --�
,�,' /,•' _4 .a' �t� it
. •��.'' ' i I' ' I 11 I I. !
8 I1 9 ?IIP 10 411. 11 w 12
It
I l I I I I I I ' •. I
----------
I/0.•0---- -�/' --- 1.1.1•-- -- L- t!
1 - - _ Iq••1T 11.1 Ml..l \ _ _ J
...f, �7ionlmluion /me tosen+en/; •0
a n•17 ce!
McRdoiy; �� � s:tA es .3RdD44J f�oN , : L) 'A'
01it •lot f.7� � .�
meAdow Onk
nuflol' G
3Rd Add'+►oN
FI c » 1
tis 9'S o, 1/ne�a Z696Z6 } _ - �• r- oaW $ mr
- rran e
enf
119.7s ep5 cr t$ ui i$ 'f ro m mt 1 T $ r
4
<�T 110. tiQCe f
S..'' s,Q �s'�ey�. ` 4CS'f�f1'l\Ot'G•.a]� t `a1r. r�aV.�a°'"0,,—., i 1La•csa.•vsote0.'.ao•oas.tJs•oo'`t`l.•r:oo99..o.s
70.00 J a.ro.sa a• •LANE'
"tI
wtiE..�.�n
,.,o]
a:.,OAK
25 25
] tt6. Jq t•]a.x] �'
�,° ] o° _ _ .7.001 -�s.00a,00 \
i �(n•°p.'sa r �.ec•ss.�.- 1 a. °'r of
.. .. _ � 'j0�a .y: I I I a..•s.•oo' i Q W 3 Q rl
:i.• � �., :]° ^o'i !� $ Q �...: a .�. "r
� r V - 133.51
vo: Je ` r ,-_-9�.•�o'oo•r`'7 ::sem �`.��3. \ a f
W A. ' 'a 'e ^rT $\ N•�
m c�
a
L1-92 \
pp � � tea_°= '_.. '. � : �ry8 s•/=:,a. ,e ;}
" Ma] t J . to J• N.. / � p\
•t /.o.0 aF � �\ i
-tt \ 4 t•: i 6.%3.0000
SCarf� EEi „�
2 •'3.�
1
a
. e rJw � 4 ai 3 ••fin;
12
a`a104,,
-
t n ,i (9',
a 5
t n�
O _� � ,ere'ev ,e'•
Mc COMBS—KNUTSON ASSOCIATES. INC.
AR: If11ut`1:16i�tiL:�.:.IILLY' `
/le.Adow 04 4th Add(*fioN
outtof H
1
Nqltllqll
j/r \ / d J r b ap1otot osoi oto vw oott ^_ 1___� 41�
Al-
� .,�"`-^ FQ
t N
� tlD r 5 vl_
!
-77
IL i
a
00,
j
I