HomeMy WebLinkAbout1995-25t
ORDINANCE N0. 95- 25
AN ORDINANCE OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA, AMENDING THE
TEXT OF THE FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT, THE HOUSING ELEMENT, AND
THE TRAFFIC CIRCULATION ELEMENT OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN; AND
PROVIDING SEVERABILITY AND EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners adopted the Indian
River County Comprehensive Plan on February 13, 1990, and
WHEREAS, the county received comprehensive plan amendment
applications during its January 1995 amendment submittal window,
and
WHEREAS, the Local Planning Agency held a public hearing on
all comprehensive plan amendment requests on April 27, 1995 after
due public notice, and
WHEREAS, the Local Planning Agency recommended approval of
this comprehensive plan amendment to the Board of County
Commissioners, and
WHEREAS, The Board of County Commissioners of Indian River
County held a Transmittal Public Hearing on June 13, 1995, after
advertising pursuant to F.S. 163.3184(15)(b)(1) and (c), and
WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners approved the
transmittal of this comprehensive plan amendment to the Florida
Department of Community Affairs for their review and comment, and
WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners announced at the
transmittal public hearing its intention to hold and advertise a
final public hearing at the adoption stage of this plan amendment,
and
WHEREAS, the Florida Department of Community Affairs received
this Comprehensive Plan Amendment on June 28, 1995, for the State
review pursuant to F.S.163.3184(4), and
WHEREAS, Indian River County received the Objections,
Recommendations, and Comments (ORC) Report from the Florida
Department of Community Affairs on September 5, 1995, and
WHEREAS, the ORC Report contained no objections to this
comprehensive plan amendment, and
0
ORDINANCE NO. 95- 25
WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River
County held a Comprehensive Plan Amendment Adoption Public Hearing
on October 24, 1995, after advertising pursuant to
F.S.163.3184(15)(b)(2) and (c);
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED, by the Board of County
Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida, that:
SECTION 1. Comprehensive Plan Amendment Adoption and
Transmittal
The amendment to the Indian River County Comprehensive Plan
identified in section 2 is hereby adopted, and five (5) copies are
directed to be transmitted to the State of Florida Department of
Community Affairs and one ( 1) copy is directed to be transmitted to
the Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council.
SECTION 2. Amendments to the Comprehensive Plan
• Revision to Policy 1.27 of the Future Land Use Element, as
shown on Attachment A.
• Revision to the Definition of Affordable Housing in the
Housing Element, as shown on Attachment A.
• Revision to Policy 2.1 of the Traffic Circulation Element, as
shown on Attachment A.
• Revision to Policy 8.3 of the Traffic Circulation Element, as
shown on Attachment A.2
• Revision to Policy 8.5 of the Traffic Circulation Element, as
shown on Attachment A.
• Revision to the Data'and Analysis of the Traffic Circulation
Element, as shown on Attachment A.
• Revision to Table 4.1 of the Traffic Circulation Element, as
shown on Attachment A.
• Revision to Table 4.7.3 of the Traffic Circulation Element, as
shown on Attachment A.
• Revision to Table 4.8.3 of the Traffic Circulation Element, as
shown on Attachment A.
• Revision to Figure 4.11 of the Traffic Circulation Element, as
shown on Attachment A.
0 Revision to Figure 4.13 of the Traffic Circulation Element, as
shown on Attachment A.
• Revision to Figure 4.13.2 of the Traffic Circulation Element,
as shown on Attachment A.
SECTION 3. Repeal of Conflicting Provisions
All previous ordinances, resolutions, or motions of the Board
of County Commissioners of Indian River County, Florida which
conflict with the provisions of this ordinance are hereby repealed
to the extent of such conflict.
ORDINANCE NO. 95- 25
SECTION 4. Severabilit
It is declared to be the intent of the Board of County
Commissioners that if any provision of this ordinance and
therefore, the Indian River County Comprehensive Plan Amendment is
for any reason finally held invalid or unconstitutional by any
court of competent jurisdiction, such provision shall be deemed a
separate, distinct and independent provision and such holding shall
not affect the validity of the remaining provisions.
SECTION 5. Effective Date
The effective date of this ordinance, and therefore, this plan
amendment, shall be the date a final order is issued by the
Department of Community Affairs or Administration Commission
finding the amendment in compliance with Section 163.3184, Florida
Statutes, whichever occurs earlier. No development orders,
development permits, or land uses dependent on this amendment may
be issued or commence before it has become effective. If a final
order of noncompliance is issued by the Administration Commission,
this amendment may nevertheless be made effective by adoption of a
resolution affirming its effective status, a copy of which
resolutions shall be sent to the Department of Community Affairs,
Bureau of Local Planning, 2740 Centerview Drive, Tallahassee,
Florida 32399-2100.
This ordinance was advertised in the Vero Beach Press -Journal
on the 16th day of October, 1995 for a public hearing to be held on
the 24th day of October, 1995 at which time it was moved for
adoption by Commissioner Eggert , seconded by Commissioner
Adams , and adopted by the following vote:
Chairman Kenneth R. Macht
Vice Chairman Fran Be Adams
Commissioner Richard N. Bird
Commissioner Carolyn K. Eggert
Commissioner John W. Tippin
BY:
Kenneth
ATTEST BY::
Es 11
Acknowledgment by the Department o
this 1st day of November 1 1
SSIONERS
Y
q.a
Re Machti4kman
' ..`
B oe nS,:,Clr
o of
State o1w,. Yr'e� a'te ev'o ' ,Florida
50
nk
Acknowledgment from the Department of
day of 11/06 , 1995, at 11:30
the office of the Clerk of the Board
Indian River County, Florida.
u\v\j\cpal-95.ord
State recolwed1`on this
A.M.64 and filed in
of County Commissioners of
Indian Fiver Cn Approved D to
Admin. T
Lsgal C40
�-
Budget
Dept.
Risk Mgr.
1. Future Land Use Element Policy 1.27 and Definition of Affordable
Housing
2. Traffic Circulation Element
3. Traffic Circulation Element
4. Traffic Circulation Element
5. Traffic Circulation Element
6. Traffic Circulation Element
7. Traffic Circulation Element
8. Traffic Circulation Element
9. Traffic Circulation Element
Policies 2.11 8.3 and 8.5
Data and Analysis Page 9
Table 4.1
Table 4.7.3
Table 4.8.3
Figure 4.11
Figure 4.13
Figure 4.13.2
FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT POLICY 1.27
The Public Facilities designation is intended for public
facilities and services including, but not limited, to
government offices, service centers, public utilities and
transportation facilities, schools, parks, libraries, police
and fire stations, and landfills and related uses such as
recycling equipment operations, composting facilities and
operations, incineration of solid waste, borrow pit operations
for fill material, industrial waste and leachate treatment and
management, and equipment storage and maintenance. Not all
public land uses are shown on the Future Land Use Map. Public
facilities are not limited to the Public Facilities Land Use
Designation.
Housing occupied by a household paying housing expenses which
do not exceed 30% of the household's gross income. Monthly
housing cost for owner -occupied housing shall include mortgage
principal and interest, taxes, and insurance. Monthly housing
cost for renter -occupied housing shall include contract rent.
However, it is not the intent to limit a household's ability
to devote more than 30% of its income for housing. Programs
and policies of the Comprehensive Plan with regard to
affordable housing shall be limited to those households in the
very low- (less than 50% of median income), low- (50-80% of
median) and moderate- (80-120% of median) income groups.
TRAFFIC CIRCULATION ELEMENT POLICY 2.1
No development project shall be approved if the projected
impacts of the project would serve to reduce service levels of
any roadway on the traffic circulation system below the
standards identified in Policy 1.1 Conditions applicable to
this policy are as follows:
o Development project shall be defined as any activity
which requires issuance of a development order. This
includes: comprehensive plan amendment, rezonings, site
plan approval, preliminary plat approval, preliminary PD
approval, DRI development order approval, preliminary PD
approval, DRI development order approval, and building
permit approval for single family structures.
o Projected project traffic shall be based on the
application of ITE trip rates (Trip Generation, 4th
Edition or subsequent editions), Indian River County trip
rates, or applicant derived/county approved trip rates
for the proposed use(s) to the project.
o Existing service level will be derived by using the peak
hour/peak season/peak direction traffic volume ranges or
average travel speeds of a link. Volume shall be the sum
of existing demand and committed demand. This is
described in the concurrency management system component
of the Capital Improvements Element.
o Capacity shall be calculated as specified in the latest
edition of Florida's Level of Service Standards and
Guidelines Manual, "Generalized Daily Level of Service
Maximum Volumes for Florida's Urban/Urbanized Areas",
using peak hour/peak season/peak direction default table
assumptions. The state roadways portion of the default
tables will be used for all such capacity analyses.
1 i uu►�cu .,.. ..,. r. uwiv v V u1.M 1� ui..+, ...... per. .. r,v .. ....� ....... �... L -....----
does not meet approval requirements, the developer may
choose to conduct a more detailed traffic impact analysis
as described in Policy 2.2.
TRAFFIC CIRCULATION ELEMENT POLICY 8.3
The county will use the Indian River County Metropolitan
Planning Organization (MPO) and the MPO Advisory Committees to
promote intergovernmental coordination with the municipalities
W
n the county.
TRAFFIC CIRCULATION ELEMENT POLICY 8.5
The county will continue to coordinate with the plans and
programs of all transportation facility providers, especially
FDOT and the Indian River County MPO. The county will meet
annually with representatives from each entity prior to formal
adoption of individual transportation plans.
LEVEL OF SERVICE A
- Uninterrupted flow
No restriction on
maneuverability
- Little or no delays
- Stable flow conditions
- Operating speed beginning
to be restricted
LEVEL OF SERVICE C
- Speed and maneuverability
restricted by higher traffic
volumes
Satisfactory operating speed
for urban conditions
Delay at signals
LEVEL OF SERVICE D
- Low speeds
Major delays at
Little freedom
signals
to maneuver
Lower operating speeds
Volumes at or near capacity
Major delays and stoppages
LEVEL OF SERVICE F
Low speeds
Stoppages for long periods
because of downstream
congestion
The level -of -service for roadway links is determined by comparing
the traffic volume to the roadway capacity. The result is used to
identify the LOS.
In Indian River County, LOS "C" is considered the minimum accepted
standard for rural principal arterials and rural freeways during
peak hour/peak season and peak direction conditions. The peak
hour/peak season parameter is considered the 100th highest hour of
traffic activity during a year; however, peak hour/peak season is
generally regarded as comparable to the 30th highest hour of
traffic activity during a year established by FDOT. During peak
hour, peak season, peak direction conditions, level of service "D"
is the minimum accepted standard for all other freeway, arterial
and collector roadways. In calculating level of service, the
county uses the latest edition of FDOT's generalized tables showing
the level of service maximum volumes for urban/urbanized areas.
The county uses the FDOT generalized tables applicable for state
roadways in performing level of service calculations for roadways
under state and county jurisdiction.
The relationship between number of lanes, capacity and level of
service is provided in Table 4.1. These planning capacities were
derived from the latest edition of FDOT's Generalized Daily Level
of Service Maximum Volumes for Florida's Urban/Urbanized Areas
default tables. The portion of Table 4.1 relating to state
roadways in applicable to all roadways in Indian River County,
since the county uses this portion of the table in its level of
service calculations.
The capacities used in the Florida Standard Urban Transportation
Model Structure (FSUTMS) model reflect typical arterial conditions,
where traffic entering and existing driveways as well as local
intersection operations impede the free flow movement on the
roadway. Conceptually, there are no such impedances on a bridge,
and as a result, bridge capacities are usually higher than
arterials. However, this greater capacity is not that meaningful
within the context of overall operating conditions of a road.
GENERALIZED ANNUAL AVERAGE DAILY VOLUMES FOR FLORIDAJ
URBANIZED AREAS*
UNINTERRUPTED FLOW
Group A (loss than 0.60 signalized intersections per mile) (Waralogn For a
specific ansdyata a faoiliL3ea unintorrupl.od portions and
the port(ona subject to capas:lty constraints should be
evaluated separately.)
Lant&( Level of Service
Divided A B C D E
2 Undiv. 4,500 129000 16,300 20,000 24,700
4 Div. 110000 289000 36,700 42,800 50,200
6 Div. ... 1 G,400 423400 660300 64,400 75,300
8 Div. 20,700 63,100 69,200 60,600 94,100
INTERRUPTED FLOW
Group 13 (0.50 to 2.49 signalized intersections per mile)
Lanes/ Level of Service
Divided A•• 11 C D•••
2 Undiv. 11,GOO 14,700 16,100
4 Div. - IrV900 31,900 34,200
G Div. - 40,300 48,400 51,200
8 Div. - 49,900 59,800 62,800
F.s..
IG,200
34,200 C
51200 1.
62,800 A
S
9
Group C (2.50 to 4.50 signalized intersections per mile) )
Lane&( Level of Service
Divided . A•• B•• C D E
2 Undiv. - - 9,500 139400 150000
4 Div. 20,500 29,400 32,200
6Div. - - 317300 45,000 48,800
8 Div. 38,300 55,800 609400
Group D (more than 4.50 signalized intersections per mile and not within
primary city central business district of urbanized
area over 500,000)
Lanes/ Level of Service
Divided A•• B•' C•• I) E
2 Undiv. - - - i l ,600 14,700
4 Diva - - 25,600 32,000
6 Div. _ _ - 38,700 49,000
8 Div. - - - 48,000 60,100
Group I (within urbanized area over 500,000 and leading to or within
6 miles of primary city contra) business district)
Lanes Level of Service
A B C D E
4 25,900 40,000 57,100 68,900 74,100
6 38,900 60,000 85,600 103,400 111200
8 61 ,900 80,100 114,200 137,900 149,200
10 64,900 100300 142,700 172,300 185,300
12 75800 117,000 166,8(10 201,500 216,700
14 86,100 132,900 189,500 228,900 246,100
Group 9 (within urbanized area and not in Group 1)
Imes Level of Service
A B C D. E
4 24,200 37,300 53,200 64200 69,100
6 36AW 560000 79AM 96,400 1030600
6 48,400 74,600 106,400 1289500 138200
10 60,400 93,300 133,000 1609600 172,700
12 70,600 1098000 165,400 187,700 201,800
14 770900 120AM 171,500 207,100mgm 222,700
NON -STATE ROADWAYS
MAJOR CITY/COUNTY ROADWAYS
Lanes/ Level of Service
Divided A•• B•• C D
E
2 Undiv. 10,900 13,400 14,700
4 Div. 23,800 29,500 31,900
6 Div. - - 36,600 44,700 47,900
OTHER SIGNALIZED ROADWAYS
C (signalized intersection analysis)
L
A Lmeed Level of Service
5 Divided A•• B•• C D E
S 2 Undiv. - - 5,200 10,300 11,700
Div. 11_1 4 Di - - 11,500 22.800 25.300
Group E (more than 4.60 signalized intersections per mile and within
primary city central business district of urbanized C;
area over 5)0,000) 1
A
Lanes/ Level of Service S
Divided A•• F306 C•` 1) F: S
2 Undiv. - - - 13,000 14,700
4 Div. - - - 28,800 32,000 111
6 Div. - 44,!00 49,000
8 Div. - - - 54,700 GQ100
ADJUSTMENTS
DIVIDED/UNDrvIDED
(alter corresponding two-way volume indicated percent)
Lanes Median Left Turn Bays _ Adjustment Factors
2 Divided Yes . 5%
2 Undivided No .15%
Multi Undivided Yes 5%
Multi Undivided No .20%
ONE-WAY
(alter corresponding two-way volume indicated percent)
One -Way Corresponding Adjustment
Lanes Two -Way Lanes Factor
2 4 .40%
3 6 -40%
4 8 -40%
5 6 - 25%
' The table does not constitute a standard and should be used only for general planning applications. The computer models from which this table is derived should be used
for more specific planning applications. The table and deriving computer model. should not be used for corridor or intersection design, where more refined techniques etdst.
Values shown are annual average daily traffic (AAD7) ma�dmum volumes (based on K100 factors, not peak to daily ratios) for levels of service, and are based,on the 1985
Highway Capacity Manual and Florida traffic, roadway and gignalizalion duta. The tbo,e'a input value assumptions and level
Cannot be achieved. of service criteria appear on the back.
�--' `•' Volumes are comparable because intersection capacities are reached.
Source: Florida Department of Transportation, 1991. 1 F
04/12/92
VIA In In In r
CO CA
b
AIVIVIVIVIV
3 3 3 3 9 8
a v v v v o
S S S S S S
m
pA
A IV IV IV IV IV 10
vvvvvv o �m
AIVIVIVIVIV Q
>
S S S S S S
W
]
V JA JA In_In_In
f
F.?Na_v.rn��p y �y
'� � e�' �•� naaR n p� O•°� _�_ ad 9m
u S � � yW Ct yZ'•W Q, �. F �i a NQ�Ny R'n �
n
12
m 0
� v
]
o
i m
o'
3 a
v 7.%7;'1,% :�7'•' 'Lvm io
y aa>Ra>
o m
i�
] m
C ^
W C
mAI t 4 0 1o C Q
6
0 ON
-mei C
m �
L° N �a�D r i �a6o r> D a � �` IJ'i 2lo "� • •� ...
3. w
N � '
oo ro > > > 2S t)i tlo -Y a
ONv
'-m Na>a82s Di�� o
Nc3'�^ u i �=8e Na>a$iS �i2S;25 m
wa*N ... K K> _N> x
N >> x
n
C17
Z
H
C7
ym�
►••s S
tat
comm
C
o
cmf
Mo
W
a
3 � �-Oi 2ND= i 2202 -mi 12 S p= -Ni Cal 002221�211� 20D CJO�000
ZS ��� U{NN�.N����i N DD DD D D D D DDDR DDD
�xmm� � �mmmmmmm,mmmm mmm000
s m m* g g z z z z z z z z z z z z z
w mmmmmmmmmmmmmm
0
7; U A N N m OD m Li 0 0 0 N N N N N N N N N N N
m0 -1Z Z'i -i 7A-4 zzzzzzzzzzz- 3a0m 0 ayO70r231 y 6N a
m DDD D D D D I+ D➢ D D D D D D D D D D D D$ m o U m m m S m m m 9 Ui 0 mZm D O 3
z�mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm o loi{oo �mm
O c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c C=
m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m
0 z z z z
+1 0 0 0 0 0
cz z z z o
m a) m m x < O
< < <
z O N 0 0 0 o m m m N� m m m m m O m r
�z�0oo.� <� �yy11 -{�<C G Qol p N N N O
m 2 a 0 0:1 C S S S 2 0 0 0 (h m m N O
MOm D R 2 X D D DDD D r r Q$Q$Q$������ O ooy{{ N KZ z 2 2 S Z C z Z z Z Z mm m C C C C C C a a a D 0 „m,{ = 0 m 0 S D o S
c S c c c c c c N N N D D W m Cl) W m cn m a m W<
m 2m� m m m m m 00 o�c8�o-i�-r o {o m
Dn�n888�e8e8Poo 888888888888I
wiwA8888088888880080088888888808888888888888 3
P.
cI c
y T O
oc 3
'0 3
c
D
m
a
mmcccccccccccccccccccccccccccc�ccccccccccc °3
a
3p 0
V A A (n (n (n N N (1P u m W W V A V U W A m W N O fT (n N
tT N W m W m U W in W W m m 0 N N N m m W m M m A A m A Ol A -� A UI Ui W P N A -` in� k1 OW I N
W0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 000 9 0 0 0� 0 00��� 0 0 �.� 0I `3D � c
S0 0 0 0 o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 W 0 0 0 N N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 m0 0 0 0 s3 r
OI m A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A _P6� A A N A P A N V co O O O W A V V N N�
m
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o o 0 0I H L
ro
0°000
000000000000000000000d00000000noo 0000000
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
a a a a a a a a a a m
mmmm mmmmmmmmmmm mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmTmmmmmmmT O{-`
Mb 0 0 8 8888 88 888 828 Q �Z`
ccc(((������ mg y+Pg�
D D r r r➢ r D r r r r D r r➢ r r- r➢ r D r D Or 8 D D D D D D C7 D D DI o
OOO��Or m
A A N N Nm N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N NN N N N N A N N N N N N N W
m m c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c L c c c c c c c c (("c'' o c c c c c c c o
m c�
"o W m W W m W W 00$'0000 oFi'c�iim mmm mue°3 000l 4m CL CL
?L I ii
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
96
a V
000000000000000 "0 oFi'otWi0000mob''o`6'mo`a'c"i00000l 0 �I
v
Z Ff
O O I r0 -
z
CD
y
3
o a��
�QA
V
j V m V V N N � � .V. W N U1 [J V W[p� J A W V W Np Np Wm <
�m�iw0010 o�pp 0mWNmA3a
A A♦ v N t N .+ A V (T ♦ V Z• u V 1R tD
18.3a
L
m
m
O
O
m
m
Z �
0
m
o m
D
D A
O'
ND W
O
0
Z
m
m
m
z
z
�...e.... sa},mss,
i f �
1 1 M f 'i !'k{fit N a,.
Samatdf.1S:Em$u:'+�iJiki'SY:(i@51sJebirek �ifi�ada+t%nW1Atl�&lSit4wa.1 .,L.. mn,ltia,e,W aY.M.�i^.euwwrvL�........I.IfI �,{i8 w.4?t��.Af-�
{s
n
i
TRAFFIC CIRCULATION ELEMENT
TABLE 4.8.3
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
ADDITIONAL ESTIMATED RIGHT-OF-WAY NEEDS
FOR ROADWAYS THROUGH YEAR 2010
Old Dixie Hwy. (4th St.
to 23rd St. SW)
20th Ave. (12th St. to
Oslo Road)
27th Ave. (S.R. 60 to
Oslo Rd.
11
43rd Ave. (SrR. 60 to
Oslo Rd.
6'6th Avenue (Phases).
CR 510 to 57th St.
57th St. to 53rd St.
53rd St. to 12th St.
12th St. to 8th St.
8th St. to 9th St. SW
58th Ave. (C.R. 510 to
33rd St. &'12th St, to
Oslo Rd.)
Varies - 80'+ 11500,000
drainage
80' needed 500,000
varies
100' needed 850,000
80'/50' needed 600,000
100' needed existing
R/W varies 700,000
50,000
700,000
100,000
450,000
2,500,000
501to70' needed
74th Ave. (C.R. 510 to 100' needed
Oslo Rd.) existing R/W
varies
82nd Ave. (S.R. 60 to 1101186' needed
CR 510) At
82nd Ave. (SCL to S.R. 60) 110' needed
Roseland Road 20' needed
80' existing
2,000,000
1,100,000
1;889;8.®8
111001000
300,000
IE
4`
fit
i a tAKI4 bbtit
Itof ii 4x�� I, r{{�,
a
% (it ka
it
r
1R4T I
it 6 1r , y " ,Gtir
ot
it
4 t .
1 ,fk'i" E { y, 4I !'
�k,,,.it 'tn a uN i
2005-
1992
1992
1992
2005
2005
Source: Wilbur Smith & Assoc.,Aug.1989
Revised: Nov. 1993
OCT. 1995
Co Mo
O m m
c ..
� _m
.. m
av
�Z"
Q o
fn ' Co
3 � m
=r CD
00 w
D QD
H O
w
o n
o
D m
c m
m 01
m
OD
m
CA
0
d
m
N
O
r
O
T
C
C
m
m
1 � .ern
m loth
mn
A; 0 A N A osn°
ro
D D D D n
zZ Z 2 5 74th
m. M. m M. Q
m m m ma I
661e
x000 r
'O D D D D
m v v v
pseen
fA D D D Z
{ { {
D 3 "' °
{ D.
A#
0
D
v
a
{
r
D
Z
m
a
G)
m
271
loth
co z v to �a
o a d n ►°
n a o
m 4
tocl
a s e
w
7 � �
31 m CO
t m f0
r
m a
00
o
n
N
� s
Ot
7
10
v
N_
O
7
D
c
m
..
co
r
OD >
tD cons 512
0
•T