HomeMy WebLinkAboutDRB 2015-07-07 #2Meeting Date: July 7, 2015
Case Numbers: ED15-017
Project Planner: Steve Stafford -(415) 458-5048
Community Development Department Planning Division Agenda Item: ~
SUBJECT:
residential
accessed Irwin
Residential (M
Mission Street LLC,
Neighborhood,
PROPERTY FACTS
location
Project Site:
North
South:
East:
West'
Outdoor Area
General Plan
MDR
HDR
RO/MDR
LDR
NA
Required' 200 sf per unit
Approved: 618 sf per unit
Proposed: 295 sf per unit
Height-
Allowed: 36'
Approved: 29' 9%'"
Proposed: 30' (approx.)
Parking
Required: 2 spaces per unit
Approved: 2 tandem spaces per unit
REVIEW BOARD
Carriage Houses) -Request amendment of an
Permit to allow miscellaneous modifications to
for the redevelopment of a 26,400 . ft multi-family
conditionally approved 15 townhomes with courtyard parking
, which is not to change.; APN: 014-01 Mediu
Bob Wright of Wright Architecture Studio, Applicant;
Thompson Family Trust, et ai, Owners; Montecito
Zoning Designation
MR2.§
HR15
RIO & MR2.5
R5
NA
Landscaping
Existing land-Use
Multifamily Residential
MultifamHy Residential
Office/Single Family and
Multifamily Residential
Single Family Residential
Northbound Freeway On-Ramp
to U.S.101
Required: 50% of fronUstreet side yards (2,834.5 sf)
Approved: 50% of fronUstreet side yards (7,305 sf)
50% of fronUstreet side yards (2,985 sf)
Lot Coverage
Allowed: 50%
Approved: 39%
Proposed: 39% (No Change)
Grading
Approved:
Proposed: 2 tandem spaces per unit \"-'-":"'===1
Cut: 3,000 CYS (Export)
Fill: ° CYS
Trees
Approved'
Removed 10
New: 43
Proposed,
Removed 10
New: 42
Proposed:
Cut: <500 CYS (Export)
Fill' ° CYS
Front:
St. Sides:
Rear:
Required
15'
10'
5'
Approved
15'
10'
5'
15'
10'
5'
• Hillside building height Is measured from natural
finished grade pursuant to the "UBC" method
10 top 01 (oof at any given point Non-hillside building height is measured from
SUMMARY
The project is referred to the Review Board (Board) for review and recommendation(s) on
proposed modifications to the approved and building for redevelopment of a 26,400 sq.
multi-family parcel Exhibit List of Proposed Modifications). In the City
Council. with the recommendation Board and the Commission, conditionally
approved a to demolish single-story and garage on site,
which had determined to be historic resources under and to construct 15, 'carriage house'
attached townhome condominium units (13 'market-rate' units 2 'affordable' units at low-income
housing levels) within two buildings parki improvements.
approval. new owners have that
in order to make the easier to
The
is an of the proposed n
and more
design
modifications, with recommended Staff requests that the provide its recommendations
on the proposed and building n modifications for the project and staff's recommended
revisions, as in this report below:
Design Building Scale
• Whether modifications, the approved scale and are
site.
Whether building modifications would be improved by providing: 1) a minimum
one-foot (1') wood shingle reveal oel[wEle trims for the 'board-and-batten' and the new windows;
and of the chimney as previously
Site Design
• Whether the proposed modifications, affecting the approved
• Whether the proposed site design modifications would im by: 1) continuing
textured/stam and/or integral color concrete driveway approach from Irwin
preserving
building design modifications,
BACKGROUND
Site Description & Setting:
The subject is in the Montecito neighborhood, immediately north of Mission
Irwin Street and Way. northbound onramp to 101 is located
to the site. It is a large, 26,400 ft. that is relatively flat,
It is currently with 10, two-bedroom residential units within five duplex structure and five
(5) detached which are accessed by either Irwin Street or Way.
The site is primarily by a mixture multifamily and residence to the north and
east, a mixture of multifamily residential and commercial office to the south and the Highway 101
onramp to the west.
History:
On July 16,2007, City Coundl conditionally approved the redevelopment the subject
through following
• Rezoning No.1 MR2.5 to allow for higher density
proposed by
2
II Environmental Design (E006-024) Tentative Condominium Map
001) to demolish the existing residences, which been determined to be 'cultural
under and to 15, house' attached townhome condom inium units (13
'market-rate' units 2 'affordable' low-income levels) within two buildings and
associated parking and landscape improvements (CC No.1 1
Environmental review on the impacts included the City Council's certification of a
(CC Resolution No. 12313) adoption of a of Overriding Considerations, approving a
Mitigation Monitoring Reporting Program (CC Resolution No.1 The Statement of Overriding
Considerations was to allow the demoHtion of the existing structures, 'cultural
for the of CEQA, on site.
approved a of one-and automatic
extensions on all subdivision approvals for which the City also automatically extends
approvals related to State-approved map (San Municipal
15. .155). The project approvals are set to expire on July 16, 2016.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
new ownership which is currently proposing the following minor modifications to the
building (Exhibit 2):
ing by having construction the garage and
motor court 3.5' below existing along Mission
II Realign common walls better and front facades to increase the from
(3) to seven
• entry number of units from three (3) to seven (7);
• Reduce the roof pitch
• Add 'saddles' gable
e Exchange window design;
e Eliminate screening of the vents;
II Eliminate the stone in lieu of heavy-textured stucco in a 2' x 4' block pattern;
II Introduce a new material, 'board-and-batten', to the upper portions of gable ends:
III Eliminate three sq. ft. (5' x 1 balconies (two along the Mission . frontage and one
along driveway) and two (2) larger 176 ft. uncovered along the
Ave.
• Eliminate pavers in motor court in of integral
asphalt
18 Eliminate the color concrete in motor court in of asphalt;
II Eliminate size, Valley in the motor
II Reconfigure the residential units to convert the Room" on the floor to a third
bedroom.
ANALYSIS
Plan 2020 Consistency:
General Plan use designation site is Medium-Density Multifamily Resjdential (MOR).
The MDR use designation allows a gross density of 5 units per acre, typical of duplex, garden
apartment condominium The was originally approved with a density 15
residential units (13 'market-rate' units and 2 units at low-income housing and the
modifications do not seek to density.
proposed
the maximum
=~=~=:..z....:::=-.!..= (Building Height) and
measurement for building height (Building
3
is measured from finished to the Uniform Building
height of the new building is proposed to be approximately
mid-point of the gable roof a slight to the approved building
1997 method). The
finished grade to the
9%".
proposed project will continue to in accordance with =c:..:..:..:..:..:.=~'-==~...:......::=.z.....:::;.:;;:;..-'-'-
Sustain ability Policy SU~6 (New
much of the existing mature street tree presence along both the Mission and Irwin St frontages
(no trees exist along the Green Way frontage) which is also a mitigation measure in the adopted
MMRP. .
staff concludes that the
applicable design-related
original project approvals included
to District which allows the
to increase density for the project.
modifications to the n,.n""",...' continue to meet
ing the site from Multifamily (MR2.5) District
on the site. The proposed modifications do not seek
which will reduce the
with the minimum
n"'\I'~fO outdoor areas
landscaped setbacks
usable outdoor
Affordable Housing Requirement
inal project approvals include a condition (Condition #49: TS06-00 1)
15 residential units meet affordability to low-income household
do not seek to or affordability req
for the 15
parking requirements. The
that DNO (2) of
The proposed
project.
on the first floor, to a third and the
the half-bath to a full-bathroom. 3-bedroom/3-bath reconfiguration for the
units will continue to meet the City's parking requirements
supports the proposed reconfigured floor plan of the approved given
is located near-Downtown, block of the DowntOWn neighborhood; and 2)
the continues to comply with the City reqUirement, pursuant to SRMC
18.040, as two (2) on-site parking are required for either 2-bedroom or units.
4
Tandem parking is prohibited un approved under un circumstances, including as a concession
granted under State Density Bonus law for complying with City's affordable housing
requirement. inal project included tandem which meet the minimum interior
dimensions garage parking The proposed modifications do not seek to or eliminate
the affordability requirements of or the approval of tandem parking granted as a concession
under Bonus law,
The review for Environmental Design Review that the
modifications to approved site and building design (arChitecture, farm, scale, and color,
etc,) continue to 'relate' to the predominant design or 'character-defining' design elements existing in
the vicinity.
& 3.5'
below grade
II Realigning cammon walls better the number of 'paired' units from
three (3) to seven (7);
II Grouping entry staircases to the number of 'paired' units from three (3) to seven (7);
s Reducing the roof pitch from B: 12 to 12;
II Add between gable
1/ window design;
e of the and
• (3), 60 sq, ft, x 1 balconies (two Mission Ave,
interior driveway) and two (2) larger 176 sq. ft. patios along the
Planning staff generally supports many the proposed modifications affecting the approved building
scale and design, given that:
1) Site gradi would be significantly
2) The 30' building height (35' to roof
height (29' 33' 1
3) The 2") roof pitch
defined predominant roof pitch in the
4) While the addition of 'saddles' between
have little along the street
from 3,000 CYS to
would be a slight
ridge). and
CYS;
over the approved building
create a 'high' roof pitch where there to be no
vicinity of the site;
gables is more apartment-like, staff believes it would
5) While less interesting than the original window design, the more traditional window design, Tn("'l:j:>Trl!'>
with the addition 'board-n-batten' ends, would a more consistent townhome design;
6) The existing street trees would to be serve to screen new
townhomes help to reduce the building bulk and and
7) The plan includes landscape which would help provide visual
depth along all frontages, helping the perceived building bulk and mass,
Staff, however, the follOWing project modifications to
better complement the overall 'carriage
,. Reduce the width of the new propO:5ea 'board-and-batten' to allow a minimum one-foot (1')
wood shingle reveal between trims the 'board-and-batten' and new windows (limiting the
width of 'board-and-batten' to the fascia and
5
• The chimney venting should continue to be screened from view with a metal shie ld matching the
approved color palette .
Materials and Colors
The proposed modifications, affecting the approved materials and colors, include:
• Eliminating the stone base in lieu of heavy-textured stucco in a 2' x 4' block pattern; and
• Introducing a new exterior material, 'board-and-batten', to the upper portions of the gable ends.
Planning staff generally supports the proposed modifications affecting the approved materials and
colors, given that: 1) the new stucco base is proposed to be heavy-textured and distinctive from the
wood shingle finish; and 2) the addition of 'board-and-batten' gable ends would provide further
articUlation to the overall craftsmen-style design , However, staff recommends design changes to the
proposed project modifications , as discussed previously, to better complement the overall 'carriage
house' design. A revised Material and Color Board for the project will be presented at the Board's
meeting .
Site Design
The proposed modifications, affecting the approved site design, include :
e Eliminate the precast permeable pavers in the motor court in lieu of integral colored concrete
asphalt
• El iminate the integral color concrete in the motor court in lieu of asphalt; and
• Elim inate the 24"-box size, Valley oak tree in the motor court
Planning staff generally supports the proposed modifications affecting the approved site design, wh ich
are not visible from off-site . While permeable pavers assist w ith the rate and amount of off-site storm
water drainage, the Department of Public Works was supportive of their replacement, subject to the
submittal of a Drainage/Storm Water Prevention Plan by the City Engineer prior to bUilding permit
issuance. Staff recommends, however, that the project cont inue to provide a distinctive
textu re d/stamped and/or intEgral color concrete driveway approach from Irwin Street.
Additionally, staff is not supportive of the proposed elimination of the approved specimen (24"-box size)
Valley Oak tree from the motor court. Again, staff believes this is an approved site feature that is clearly
visible from off-site, along the Mission Avenue frontage, which should be retained .
Staff requests the Board's comments on the following:
• Whether the proposed modifications , affecting the approved site des ign, are appropriate .
• Whether the proposed site design modifications would be improved by: 1) cont inuing to provide
a textured/stamped and/or integ'ral color concrete driveway approach from Irwin Street ; and 2)
preserving the approved speci men (24 P -box size) Valley Oak tree from the motor court .
NEIGHBORHOOD CORRESPONDENCE
Notice of hearing for the project was conducted in accordance with noticing requirements contained in
Chapter 29 of the Zoning Ordinance , A Notice of Publ ic Hearing was ma il ed to all property owners and
occupants within a 300-foot radius of the project site, the appropriate neighborhood group (the
Montecito Area Residents Association or MARA), and all other interested parties, 15 calendar days
pr ior to the date of this hearing. Additionally, not ice was posted on the project site, along the Mission
Avenue frontage.
At the time of printing staff's report, no comments have been received as a resu lt of this noticing.
6
CONCLUSION
Planning staff is generally supportive of proposed design modifications, with recommended
revisions. Staff requests the Board's recommendations to Community on
identified previously in staffs report. Staff further welcomes additional comments or guidance on
the any site or building design details that would further improve the
EXHIBITS
1.
2. Design Modifications
3. Project Modifications
Full-sized and reduced provided to the ORB members only.
7
Vicinity Map -1524 Mission Avenu Carriage House Project'
/
,(
1
.~.
!
1"1' /
I
. -,:
,
\ .
i
i.
'I:
I I!
I,
\
(
i '
_._----------------"
N
100 200
4
300 A EXHIBIT I
Thursday, July 02,20158:52 AM
MISSION IRWIN CARRIAGE HOUSES
WAS 14106 April 2015
Do not recess garages and moior court. The current
below Mission
Flip units so plumbing wal\~ are This
as to the current 3 paired units.
101 I.ucas Valley Road 5,Jile 313
San RafaEl', Ci\ 9:1903
Ph: 415-49', -1.44'!
June 2015
has the
7 ",rural"'! un 11 s
Reduce number of jogs in the building footprints. The current plan
individual unit. This proposal only units,
roof pitch from 8:12106:12,
the curren1 stone base arld use heavy textured stucco
reveals in a 2 foot by 4 foot nnTTPlrn
board and batten siding at ends.
Eliminate the 3 balconies and 2 patios on the end
Change the integral in the motor court to asphalt.
the precast permeable povers in the motor courl and change
asphalt.
Remove proposed oak jree at the motor court.
Modify window to traditional single hung fit the architectural
style of the buildings.
Reverse kitchen orientation function a "great
convert the original family room to a third bedroom.
concept and
walks units so that one access from the serves
access from to 8 rather than 15.
EXHIBIT 2
THOMPSON
DEVELOPMENT
July 1, 20
Attn: Stafford
Rafael Design Review Board
City San
1400 Fifth Ave
San R CA
File No. IED15·017] Letter to Design. Review Board
250 BEL MARIN KEYS BLVD. BLDG. A
NOVATO. CALIFORNIA 94949
415.456.3972 TEl.
415.382.9896 FAX.
Delivered via: Hand and Email
Minor Modifications to Approved 15 Unit Apartment Redevelopment
Mission Ave.} APN: 014~013-05
r Design Review Board
My name is Casey and I the owners of Mission Avenue. We
you the time to conSider our iication. have proposed to
minor modifications to the approved unit condominium project at 524
Avenue commonly referred to as the Rafael Carriage Houses' and you will
make a decision regarding matter at the July 7th Design Review Board Hearing.
Located the North corner of Mission and Irwin, the project site abuts the
boundaries the "Plan Area" as defined in n Rafael's Downtown Station Area
roved project the density from the 10 units to 15 2 of
which will meet requirements for Market Rate {BMR} Hou When SMART
commences with passenger in late 2016 this central area of the City will soon
me a reg[onal hub and bustling transit-oriented station as laid
out in the City's Station Plan. Our project is in with goal and we are
very excited to construction on project as soon as possible.
Attach you will find 3 detailed list entitled 'Proposed Modifications to Current
Approved Project' by the project architect Bob Wright We are proposing
for a number of reasons: First, the approved project an inner court that is
recessed 3'6" below M Avenue, Not only this expose the to a higher
EXHIBIT 3
flood it also the use of sum p pumps because the is below
flow line of the Sanitary Sewer. approved design is unnecessarily
campi and Is Infeasible to build of inflated construction
As a remedy we are proposing a few modifications wh still keeping archItectural
and very similar to what has a been approved. As you will see
in our Material and Color Board, we have to mimic what has already
approved by the City. significant revision is that we are proposing to bring the
back up to . To offset the resulting increase in overall building height the
a has the pitch roofs from to 6:12 to minimi2e impact
create a rooWne that is more in with the architectural below a table
com pari approved vs. height:
Approved 33'
Proposed
As you can see we have reduced the
mid-gable by only 9)).
Height H
28' 3"
height by and increased heIght at
We are enth about beginning construction on this project being a pa rt of the
rejuvenation that is in the the City, Thank you for your and
consideration and we forward to your on Tuesday
Sin~ereIY) '"\ ~ n r, ,(e () r'~ '-J. L..IriCJ)~tt.~~ -.
Clement
Development Manager
, r
!
J
"
'J.t;" '"'
, WII:;)r.t .Arc::nlf'POTtEe Sluc:;-
101 u.cc. VoJoy !Ioc'_ Su,. 31 3
.' $.:I ..... J(c(,O Gl I, CA. 94903 •
_ ("5) '0' .... 7 11».)( (41<) ':91-4!.<15
A~UE
San Rafael Carriage Houses
524 NbiIO'n A~rrI,.otl
APNOl4;·013·00
'" ~
iYPICAlUNn lAYOUl
TOTA.l15
~ CAR rANO~"" GAltAC~ ANI) VfIU'IY S'1A.C-'
~Q!
~11Af ROOM, FJ"fC'HEJt', a!Dl!OONi ~ I!fU aAf1i
~'WQ.Q$
, ,~EC:tOOM 1, &EDR;OOM 2.:2 RJU U flIftOOM.§:
'~ROJECT NOn'S ~
~ TOfA\ PA.~KlNG SP~ rN 2 CAli: 'fA~CEM
~M .. RAC;~ )llllS" G-UUl PARJJNG S!ACE3.
ACnMll1E~Ol1i 11)!.! M..e;ASURttl 10 MII)~OINO OF ~ nOPll'(C ROOf' -Af7R:OxtMAlEl'r 29 ·~6· •
PROPOSED PROJOCT ZONING· M!l2
Mm, LOt NU,A.
MIN. LOT A),!AJ
DWEUlNG u.~1T
C;i!05l D !N.""
f •• Coo SF
l.DOOU'
1..500 sr
I'//OfNSIl'Y ~ON'"
lL,.,400 "I .... " <f e lK/(l.6\· 24.SV)
MiN. 1.0' WIO'Tt1 6()".
MIN. nom YAle> l!in.
.Mt~. sIce YARD ~b n.
~'(A~D S ;:'I,
.\AAx. H~IGKT .. n_
MAX.lOTCOVE'tAC.E -,,\tN'. USAJH.! OIfTi: OC~ 2ii~SF
A.RU..tOWEUING UJi!1
.... Htll-.CMllil' ___ . .-'0"
"'~JI'.leVg ::,>
26"0.1 Sf Jll0VIDED
1.6Y3 s, i"iOV~fD
24.!9 U ~ns P"t.R. 1\0.&
ItOn.
15 Ft,
10r'(.
H1'_
77·6 ~ ;. prlOl .
3'"
1 'A 5J APf'AQX..
, .'i~.eROVIOEO
-1?"""""~ ~cs.D t~ ,(,.,pJ;) ~, -: "!, '1'0;17 0 ~
~I~
"t1'3e,.slS&~~o::t .... ~
I~L'o'"TE ~p~ ~~. ur-I.<T ~
-~ 1> _ "-PROPOSED SITE PLAN-----.-_ j -
...,-:::;JTA.!.-F'?\\.,f ... \1! ~~ 1\'\SRA~5.. ;:.:t'2.~.s <5=::t=!w-=l"(fi3
--. -. ·~-='jlf:.IL ' ... I·...Q' ) ..
S2~ Mls'$b1I\'w'O,l!C
2&l!lu;I Mcy~"'I Keyt CIllO. ~ A. __ CAo.o949 r:===1 -II -IloborJW~1 AlA NCA~.
. ARC~tECp~;.:. ~~Ol>lIw"J>"dQrc",''''''''=1\ldlo.QOm • __ ==_~ ~"""""~~"'Cl~.:~'!="';3·D.O~-_~_=:::::;;:s:::::a ::::JiO!2'C!: __ =" ~ .. :r.s::::::: ... ___ ·_:z:::::_Ok __
J ~];]J
-. _ ._dl
C ~2)1t ~ ""M~l :-"
RECEIVED
JUL 01 ZU1S
PLANNING
I . /.
I I 1-H;r:
Ii I'
"
I
!
:--' ,-
U4
' "LJ l!---' I , i-1
'---c---____ I 11
~T
,I I , I I I
: I ~
, i i
,I : I
I I
, I
~: 1-_._-=±:::.:::.
~~9.!'
llJ
1-
:T:
u
(j)
VJ o
0..
u
(j)
> o t.-o.
0. «
:j
I
i -I t,
}:j
.9
I u
C!: <
D
Q)
U1 o
Q o t.-
LL
Ul
(/)
Ul
:J
0 :r:
(/)
D')
0 ';::
'-0
(J
"CD
0
4-
0 c::
c
0
(/)
~ Hl rLJ " ' ,> 0': ~'? ~~
.22 ,,0
N « 'I,
~ :r::
U
t:!: <
" i!
JCj • ;.' I :
.' . ,
,.·n 11 . . -==-
'1'" ,: ~~=.,
-~--[JDD~ Iii ), r' ~ : J'~l' ~.: I .' 101 . B" '. ~~ !~ Iii II I . II . .~~.I 71
1'1 . f~ .~. B'~ .;'. '; .... ; 'Ig
Ei .f ~ ~ ._-f===ll i ,.! CD' .,. . _ ~~ li~
;j;~""",,= '11 1 :. '. . . ....l ~,""""'':I~'--~-::.::lJ . ..ll . . ..!.; .' .~.. .. . . = ._ ........... _ r "; I'j '1: 1 T' ". .. .... ·r ·t::,' " J .~f '; "
.• lJ5rNG:SEtrtQ~-·---"·:'-=-· -"~';';;"'.:_ ... ,,,,,,,,="=~;=.,,~ .. :: .. ::: "-"-':':',,:.:'.;._::'::~:':::::-:: ___ .
'I
,Robert Wrigrt'/>JA NCARB
i wllgnt AroMeelure SiL>:!;o
'. 101 wee, VolieV Rood. Stote 313 i Son Rolo ... CA 94903
-;:-mr 0IUllH c;.secno.liliL .-'--~'-~~":'':~'''-~'-..
• _. .... ".JJ ..... 6(. ..•• . ..z.. -"BtJltDtNG"SECIIOK:JS :"-" ·lt1!C ···· " .. ""n _
--.. . _n ::., -'.. .: "" . ' ... .... ~~~4~~;j.£~::,;::_~h.-=-:
SQn Rafael Carriage Houses 5:24 Mils\on Ave. lie
2SO eet Molin Key; 8!vd Bldg . A
. Novcto. CA. 94\149 5:24 ~sion A""'""
APN0 14-013-DS
. ,(415) 491 -4447 I FAX (~15) 491-4445 ARC~. !1'emoil:bob.VlIIg~tQrcI1l~:>.e:.n .. ==m==_I=.=_w="a _==A"""" .. ='==ao=::.= w .. =' s. .,.,:s .n . !I ~-. ~~
", .... ~~1 !
~t;
\1m-~
_L ~~~~~~:,
~-,
Lt" -f
'.' [""
'II I' ',,' __ ::~:_
I '~t.::Ii"i::.::.",=-
r~'-'--l~r
'4
W J ' r -, : -~'-'l~
< ,~ :, '
~3'-< UNIJ 'A ·-SECOIiID FLOOR- -
~i-m:-~1·,:n,~ --------------'-
Approved
• ' !\~CHITECT~.
-=::=; l.O c:C. ..... ;I3i:'lZ:l:l
,,--====---=-_ -_-,C-
~rr~:.!...
J1, -'L-ir:.
/'
'>1.",,,-
),\A!:":''''a:::''~-
Proposed
_n" I_ t ~-. -:~ W 'F--,---~ 'I<\! i: 1-"-, -" _c,; , __
"
-0' ~~
,,~.
·:tJI1Q::I:i ~11(
--_ ..... _-
1---
i-----""'-----~
:.t:::::J----=L
o b
Il I I -:-1
(ii(...c .. \.T ~""",
~L ,
---; I f, lC j----c. i]
, 2 . .) UNIT" '-FI~~i.FL~)liIR "'~Q .ij '_._;'~' ~~'---'-----~-
Approved
~I
}~:~'''''~{~: ~ ,! ."~ _I -I 1 ~ ",
III':
)[ ;U~,
ll!l! I ,.J.~~~I~~
1'----~, ,UNIT A· B:4SE,MENT ~".",!,<", ~---~
Approved
----'
, ------,
I
I
I
tA.Q.A..~
",,-_.-
'~,
il (-.... 1--.,
I /~ "'\..-/
_'7"L"~,!\.-/ Ii
~l::L ~.~-~_~ :wl i
Proposed
:,1;
R' "" r A 'Ai'!~APB S R fie r' Houses 524IV1issic'A'.'c,~_C ---, ~ ... .n=~;: ",~~,,'-,; " ': an 0 ae or loge 2!:J Go, ;v',,(, {~Y' ~Iv~_ ,'~g, I,: _ :1 "./lcr A.,h et;,,J e ~,JO 0 r-.: I CA 9
/
91.9 ". ~ i~l ~ ::.J:::'cs Vclloy ~o:1d, S:..;;~ 313 524 \/i'~5::>nAvr.rI29 ovc.:,O, • • ~\ A4 1 ~ ;
Scr ~cfoel. CJ\ :}'9:l:;' _ A?t\ :11 t ,_ ~13 -O~ l ' ...!. 'i
(4 15) L91--'/'47 I ;:AX (I.' 5) 49i-4~~b· ':; --, _ ;1
e:":"'C I : =:1b~""lgrla·criD~J'cs.rudl::l _CC, n """",""'. ~~~
:z:: '''''A11~'~'to