HomeMy WebLinkAbout112990 Min Ag Packet
~"l'£ity of Port Townsel
Planning Commission
540 Water St., Port Townsend, WA 98368 206/385-3000
.
e
.
e
Meeting of November 29, 1990
I. Roll Call
Chairman Ron Kosec called the meeting to order at 7:55 p.m. Other
members present were Alan Carman, Lois Sherwood, Karen Erickson,
Jim Tavernakis and Jim Roberts. Also present were planners Rick
Sepler and Dave Robison.
II. Communications:
Darlene Bloomfield listed names of 22 persons who submitted letters
on the Urban waterfront plan since the 11/19/90 public hearing.
A. Current mail -- none
III. Old Business:
A. Urban Waterfront Plan and Implementing Ordinances
1. Staff Review. Rick Sepler introduced Jan Zimmer and Katherine
Johnson, planning and building assistants new to the department.
Mr. Sepler reviewed the draft ordinance. He stated the only changes
to ordinance were clarification of language. Mr. Sepler also noted
the memo of proposed costs which was attached to the ordinance.
Mr. sepler reviewed the three drafts of the Planning commission
Resolution. Draft A recommends adoption of the Preferred
Alternative (PA) plan and draft ordinance, along with any
amendments. Draft B recommends against the plan, however adopts
the special overlay districts described in the ordinance. Draft
C states that the Planning Commission requires more time to review
the plans before they can reach a decision.
Mr. Sepler described the two al ternati ves for measuring height
overlays, as demonstrated on the maps before the Commission.
Alternative A calls for measuring heights as described in the
ordinance. Alternative B proposes measuring height for each block
by taking an average of four corner points.
Mr. Sepler commented on the procedure to date, stating that the
11/19/90 public hearing was the last opportunity for public
comment, but letters have been taken since then. Letters will
continue to be taken for the city Council up until their December
4, 1990 meeting.
·
e
e
..
;¡ . .
."
'.
.
Planning commission - November 29, 1990
Page 2 of 8
2. POlicies, Programs and projects
Ms. Erickson disputed the map on p. 85 of the PA plan. She stated
that parts of the "waterwalk" should be labeled as "proposed".
Some discussion followed abOut the intention of the "Waterwalk."
Mr. sepler stated that the map was conceptual. The plan was
amended as follows:
The "Waterwalk" section of the Preferred Al ternati ve
should be amended to acknowledge existing private
property lines, and the rights of property owners to
control public access. The map of the "Waterwalk"
appearing on pp. 85-86 should be relabeled to reflect the
conceptual nature of the projects at this time. In
addition, text should be added that specifically
describes the planning process that will be used to
design the actual trail. This written description of the
process should include a comprehensive pol icy on the
acquisition, lease, or creation over time of public
access along the shoreline.
Mr. Kosec asked the Commission to address the letter from the Port.
Ms. Sherwood read the letter. The letter stated that the Port does
not want bicycle access through the Port but along Sims Way
instead. Ms. Sherwood also noted the letter from the OlYmpic
Trails which made the same suggestion. Some discussion followed.
Mr. sepler stated again that the plan was only conceptual.
Ms. Sherwood stated that she had heard from some members of the
communi ty that they thought the special pavement for the Town
Common was unnecessary and too "glitzy" for Port Townsend. Some
discussion followed. Mr. Carman proposed deleting the reference to
special paving. The fOllowing amendment was adopted by the
Commission:
Create a citizen-based design process to involve the
community in the design of the Town Common1 eliminate the
following text on p. 18:" .through the use of
special paving. . . ."
The commission turned to discussing city Dock. Mr. sepler said
that City Dock will be in severe danger in the next wind storm.
Ms. Sherwood stated that she thinks City Dock is a high priority.
Ms. Sherwood said she thinks some low cost alterations could be
made to Jackson Bequest. Mr. Robison said the city could possibly
obtain a $50,000 grant from the Washington Dept. of Fisheries for
the renovation of the Jackson Bequest. The monies could become
.
e
e
("
.
e
Planning Commission - November 29, 1990
Page 3 of 8
available by June 1991 with an additional $50,000 in unmatched
funds the following year.
Some discussion followed. Mr. Robison stated that Bob Wheeler,
pUblic works director, and Councilmember Mike Kenna have been in
contact with the artist and are trying to obtain his cooperation in
the renovation plan. The commission agreed to p. 30, #5:
"Renovate the Jackson Bequest by providing landscaping, street
furniture and interpretive marine-oriented displays."
Some discussion followed regarding Memorial Field fence. The
Commission agreed to p. 30, #3, as was written in the PA plan:
"Assist the county in the design and replacement of the existing
Memorial Field fence with a more permeable screen along washington
Street.
Mr. Kosec opened the discussion of the crossroads triangle. Ms.
Sherwood said she had not received positive comments on this aspect
of the plan. Mr. Robison stated that the crossroads triangle is
part of the Gateway plan, and many of the recommendations in the PA
plan came out of the Gateway plan. Ms. Sherwood suggested the
Commission make the language more general and suggested a citizen-
based process. After some discussion, the following amendment was
adopted by the Commission:
Replace text on page 17, Project #5 to read:
II Develop Kearney street to emphasize
pedestrian linkages to the Kah Tai Lagoon, the
Kearney Street-end view point and the
waterwalk trail system. II
The Commission turned to the Point Hudson section of the plan.
After a brief discussion of the need for clearer language, the
Commission adopted the following amendment:
Replace text on page 48, Policies and Programs #5 to
read:
liThe beach shall retain passive public access
and protect and enhance open spaces and view
corridors. Any new development will be
setback at least fifty feet from the Admiralty
¡nlet."
Mr. Kosec opened discussion for acquisitions (p 20) under Land Use
projects. Ms. Erickson strongly suggested that the City not
acquire the 5i te. Ms. Sherwood stated that she would like to
acknowledge the numerous people who spoke out against private
development of the site. After considerable discussion, the
Commission adopted the following amendment to the PA plan:
.
.
e
Planning Commission - November 29, 1990
Page 4 of 8
It is recommended that the proposed acquisition of the
Thomas oil site be put to the public through a special
election to determine the extent of community support for
this purchase, and provide appropriate funding. This
election should occur at the earliest possible time.
Some discussion followed about whether or not an environmental
impact statement would be required for the Thomas oil site. Ms.
Sherwood stated she thinks the costs of the EIS should be
incorporated into the plan. Mr. Robison stated that an EIS would
likely not be required, but an extensive soil study would be.
The Commission took a break at 9:55 p.m.
Mr. Kosec called the meeting to order again at 10:10 p.m.
Mr. Kosec opened discussion for Land Uses, #1, p. 20 regarding the
Fleet Marine and Indian Point sites. Ms. Sherwood and Ms. Erickson
suggested adopting this section as written. The Commission
concurred.
e
After some discussion of p. 21, #3 regarding the City acquiring
development rights for the Salmon Club, Ms. Sherwood suggested to
eliminate the first sentence. The following text was deleted:
liThe Salmon Club parcel provides a critical connection
between the Pope Marine Park, Thomas Oil and the rest of
the civic District."
Mr. Kosec suggested a clarification for #4: American Legion. Mr.
sepler suggested the following amendment to the text on page 21,
Project #4:
"Should, the American Legion b~ offered for sa;L~, a right
of first refusal should be purchased by the City for the
site."
The Commission adopted the above amendment.
The Commission discussed page 21, #5 regarding the restoration of
Ci ty Hall. Mr. Robison stated that only grant funding was
mentioned for this project. The Commission adopted this project as
stated in the plan.
The Commission adopted project #6, page 21 regarding the Chevron
oil site as stated in the plan.
e
After some discussion, the Commission amended page 21, #7 to read
as follows:
e
e
e
."
.
.
v
Planning commission - November 29, 1990
Page 5 of 8
tI. . . On the waterside, the City co~ld provide a tree-
lined Waterwalk atop the rip-rap breakwater with seating
and Mediterranean docking."
Mr. Kosec opened discussion of the Economics section (p. 25). Mr.
Robison said he understands that Main street has received a grant
to promote interagency cooperation in planning for tourism.
The Commission members read the Incentives Program (p. 108), but
had no verbal comments.
Mr. Carman asked for clarification in the Economics section to
change the wording to housing above (and not over) retail. The
Commission adopted the following amendment for page 25, Policies &
Programs #1:
"Encourage mixed-use development which provides housing
physically above retail and service uses on the ground
floor. II
3. Special Overlay Height District
The Commission reviewed the maps provided by Mr. Sepler.
Ms. Erickson stated she does not agree that height limitations
imposed on Pt. Hudson, specifically the Thomas oil site, are
justified by the argument that the limitations are "to preserve the
bluff line. II She proposed a 35 ft. height limit as the minimum
height limitation to be consistent with other waterfront property
height limits. Ms. Erickson stated she prefers Map B.
Mr. Sepler explained that in the design guidelines it further
discusses the reasons for the pyramidal height limitations. After
some discussion, the Commission amended the draft ordinance as
follows:
1. It is recommended that Al ternati ve Map "B" be used as
the Special Overlay Height District Official Map. Within
this alternative, two sub-areas should be amended to have
a maximum height limit of 35 feet. These areas are
defined as:
The block defined by Monroe street, Port
Townsend Bay, Jackson Street and Water Street.
The block def ined by Monroe Street, Jackson
Street, Water Street, and a projected
extension of Washington street toward Point
Hudson.
.
.
e
Planning Commission - November 29, 1990
page 6 of 8
4. special overlay District, Design Review and Design Guidelines
Mr. Sepler stated the final format in the ordinance would include
a discussion of the design guidelines.
Ms. Erickson stated that this plan changes the role of the HPC
since the design guidelines will be required to have mandatory
compliance. Discussion followed about mandatory versus voluntary
compliance and about the timeline for the HPC Design Review
Process. Mr. Carman stated he was concerned about the timeline of
the process and feared it would become burdensome to the applicant.
Ms. Sherwood asked if an appeal process is available if compliance
becomes mandatory. Mr. sepler stated that no appeal process was
provided for. A discussion of an appeal process followed.
Mr. Kosec asked Mr. Sepler if he had heard any comments from HPC on
mandatory compliance. Mr. Sepler stated that HPC elected not to
make a formal decision until a final decision came from Council.
e
Ms. Erickson asked Mr. seplerabout the outcomes of recent HPC
Design Reviews. Mr. Sepler stated that the HPC has had some
concern about not being able to enforce their recommendations. Mr.
Sepler stated that many national organizations, including the
National Historic Preservation Society, strongly suggest mandatory
compliance to Design Review.
Ms. Sherwood restated Peter Raab's statement about the City's
responsibili ty as a National Historic District to maintain the
integrity of the district.
Mr. Carman stated he thinks the parking reduction incentive will
make Design Review mándatory compliance unnecessary. He stated
that if compliance were mandatory, there should be an appeal
process.
Mr. Sepler suggested that if the Commission did suggest an appeal
process, they create criteria for certain thresholds.
More discussion followed. Mr. Carman suggested changing the 60
days back to the original 30 days. Mr. Carman motioned to omit
mandatory compliance and to maintain mandatory review, voluntary
compliance with parking reduction as the incentive. An extension
of the 30 days could be granted at the applicant's request.
Mr. Roberts stated he would like to know what the HPC thinks. Mr.
Sepler stated that the majority of HPC members favor mandatory
compliance. Mr. Sepler stated HPC can deal with many issues the
Planning commission cannot. However, they cannot make decisions
which violate any zoning.
e
.
.
.
e
planning Commission - November 29, 1990
Page 7 of 8
Ms. Sherwood asked Mr. Doug Lamy, a property owner in the historic
district, how he felt about mandatory compliance. Mr. Lamy said
he has been through the Design Review process and favors mandatory
compliance.
Ms. Sherwood seconded Mr. Carman's motion.
Some discussion followed that the ordinance adds more guidelines
for the HPC to follow and that this is positive.
Mr. Sepler suggestèd that an appeal process be included in Design
Review, but that appeals should be subject to certain criteria.
Mr. Carman withdrew his motion; Ms. Sherwood withdrew her second.
Mr. Sepler suggested and the Commission adopted the following
amendment to the draft ordinance:
e
It is strongly recommended that an appeal process be
included as part of any form of Design Review. In
addition, specific criteria for determining the
appropriate threshold for an appeal should be developed.
Ms. Erickson opened discussion of the City Forum, #6 in the
ordinance (p. 9). She stated she was concerned that the language
"small parking lots It was too I imi tin9 . Mr. Sepler said the intent
is that there should be many small pockets of parking to make it
more appealing. Mr. Sepler suggested the language and intent could
be clarified. The Commission adopted the following amendment to
the draft ordinance:
In the Urban Waterfront Design Guidelines, Section A:
City Form, Guideline #6 should be expanded to more
adequately describe what is meant by "small, incremental II
parking structures.
Ms. Erickson asked for clarification of the description of
properties in the Pt. HUdson Marina District. Mr. Sepler suggested
and the Commission adopted the following amendment to the PA plan:
Amend the title text on pp.46-48 to read: IIpoint Hudson
Properti,es"
5. General Comments
Ms. Sherwood moved to recommend Draft A with the amendments to City
Council.
4IÞ Mr. sepler read resolution Draft A with the agreed upon amendments.
-
-
e
.
.
e
.
Planning Commission - November 29, 1990
Page 8 of 8
Mr. Roberts seconded the motion.
Mr. Kosec opened the table for discussion. Ms. Erickson asked if
the Thomas Oil site goes to vote before the city and is defeated,
does the City have any other recourse? Mr. Sepler stated likely
not because the City would not be ablè to show public ~nterest for
condemnation. !
,
i
The Commission voted and unanimously approved Resolution Draft A
with amendments.
IV. New Business
A. Conditional Use Permit Application, 9011-01, Ron Ramage and
Suzanne Cabot.
1. Scheduled: February 14, 1991
2. Committee: Roberts/ Sherwood
3. Staff: Robison
B. Rezone App., 9011-03, City of Port Townsend
1. Scheduled 2/14/91
2. Committee: Erickson/Tavernakis
3. Staff: Robison
V. Announcements
Announcements, as stated on the agenda were read.
Mr. Kosec adjourned the meeting at 12:10 a.m.
Katherine Johnson
planning and Building Assistant
< --\ty of Port Townse'
Planning Commission
540 Water St., Port Townsend, WA 98368 206/385-3000
.
e
NO PUBLIC TESTIMONY
REVISED AGENDA
Regular Meeting November 29, 1990
I. ROLL CALL----------------------------------------- 7:30 P.M.
II. COMMUNICATIONS:
A. current mail
III. OLD BUSINESS:
A. Urban Waterfront Plan and Implementing ordinances
-
1.
2.
3.
4.
Staff Review (Sepler)
Policies, Programs and Projects
special overlay Height District
Special Overlay District, Design Review and Design
Guidelines
General Comments
Recommendation to City Council
5.
6.
IV. NEW BUSINESS:
A. Conditional Use Permit Appl., 9011-01, Ron Ramage and
Suzanne Cabot
1. Scheduled: February 14, 1990
2. Commi ttee: Roberts/Sherwood
3. Staff: Robison
B. Rezone Appl., 9011-03, City of Port Townsend
1. Scheduled: February 14, 1990
2. committee: Erickson/Tavernakis
3. Staff: Robison
-
,~,
.. '"
".. '.
.
e
e V. ANNOUNCEMENTS: Next Scheduled Meetings
Dece~er 13. 1990
A. Port Townsend Business Park, Rezone
(Committee: McDole/Carman) (Staff: McConnell)
B. Herbert and Jean Herrington, Conditional Use Permit
(Committee: Carman/Sherwood) (staff: Sepler)
C. Robert A. Friedman, Conditional Use Permit
(Committee: Erickson/Roberts) (staff: Sepler)
~anuary 10, 1991
A. Vantage Homes, Subdivision
(Committee: Tavernakis/Shérwood) (staff: McConnell/Burke)
B. Summit communications, Inc., Conditional Use Permit
(Committee: Sherwood/Roberts) (Staff: To Be Assigned)
C. Summit communications, Inc., Variance (Committee:
Tavernakis/Roberts) (Staff: To Be Assigned)
January 16, 1990
.
A.
Public Hearing on Development Plan for Gateway project
JaQuary 31, 1990
A. Planning Commission Recommendation on Gateway project
Devèlopment Plan
F~bruary 14. 1990
A. Doug and Nancy Lamy, Conditional Use Permit
(Committee: MCDole/Carman) (staff: Hildt)
B. Ron Ramage and Suzanne Cabot, Conditional Use Permit
(committee: Roberts/Sherwood) (staff: Robison)
C. Rezone Appl., 9011-03, city of Port Townsend
(Committee: Erickson/Tavernakis) (Staff: Robison)
VI. ADJOURN
.
~ "","
. e
RESOLUTION 90/1- 0/
A RESOLÙTION of the Planning co~ission of the
city of Port Townsend, recommending adoption
of an Urban Waterfront Plan and recommending
passage of a draft implementing ordinance.
WHEREAS, on June 5, 1990, with Ordinance No. 2192, the City
Council of the City of Port Townsend (the "City") enacted
interim zoning controls (the ·'Interim Zoning Controls")
to preserve the status quo while the City reexamined its
land use policies in light of potential adVerse affects
on the City's Historic and Central Business Districts of
large-scale developments; and
WHEREAS, a Joint waterfront Planning committee was appointed (the
"Commi ttee" ), including three members of the Planning
Commission, to oversee the planning process and recommend
a preferred alternative urban waterfront plan (thé
"Preferred Al ternati ve" ): and
WHEREAS, the city Council subsequently extended the Interim Zoning
Controls during its planning process; and
WHEREAS, on septe1t1ber 25, 1990, the City issued a Draft Urban
Waterfront Plan (the "Draft Plan II ) and Draft Environ-
mental Impact Statement ("DEIs")1 and
WHEREAS, on October 10, 1990, the city held a public open house
and hearing on the Draft Plan and DEIS; and
WHEREAS, the City received public comments on the Draft Plan from
September 26, 1990, to october 25, 1990: and
WHEREAS,
on November 8, 1990, the
Environmental Impact Statement
ordinance 1 and the Committee
Preferred Alternative; and
City issued a Final
and a draft implementing
issued its recommended
WHEREAS, on November 19, 1990, the City Council and Planning
Commission held a joint public hearing on the Preferred
Alternative and a proposed implementing ordinance; and
WHEREAS, the Plan provides for the establishment by the City of
special overlay districts wi thin the Historic and Central
Business Districts which impose specially tailored height
requirements and design guidelines on property located
within certain subdistricts which differ from those
imposed under existing zone classifications: and
.- ....
e
e
e
.
.
.
the Planning commission finds that it is in the best
interest of the City to adopt the Plan and establish the
special overlay districts provided for in the Plan; Now,
Therefore,
WHEREAS,
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE PORT TOWNSEND PLANNING COMMISSION that it is
hereby recommended that the city council adopt the Preferred
Al ternati ve as the Urban Waterfront Plan of the City of Port
Townsend as an addendum to the Port Townsend Comprehensive Plan;
and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Preferred Al ternati ve be amended in
the following respects:
1. The "Waterwalk" section of the Preferred Alternative should be
amended to acknowledge existing private property lines, and
the rights of property owners to control pUblic accesS. The
map of the "Waterwalk" appearing on pp. 85 - 86 should be
relabeled to reflect the conceptual nature of the project at
this time. In addition, text should be added that
specifically describes the planning process that will be used
to design the actual trail. This written description of the
process should include a comprehensive policy on the
acquisition, lease, or creation over time of pUblic access
along the shoreline.
create a citizen-based design process to involve the community
in the design of the Town Common1 eliminate the following text
on p. 18: fI...through the use of special paving... It
2.
3. Replace text on page 17, project #5 to read:
"Develop Kearney street to emphasize pedestrian
linkages to the Kah Tai Lagoon, the Kearney street-
end view point and the waterwalk trail system."
4. Replace text on page 48, Policies and Programs #5 to read:
"The beach shall retain passive public access
and protect and enhance open spaces and view
corridors. Any new development will be
setback at least fifty feet from the Admir~lty
Inlet."
5.
It is recommended that the proposed acquisition of the Thomas
Oil site be put to the public through a special election to
determine the extent of community support for this purchase,
and provide appropriate funding. This election should occur at
the earliest possible time.
2
·
e
e
6. Eliminate from text on page 21, Project #3 the following:
liThe Salmon Club parcel provides a critical
connection between the Pope Marine Park,
Thomas oil and the rest of the Civic
District."
7. Add to text on page 21, Project #4 the following:
"Should the Ame~icanLe9ion be of~ered fot'
.w.e, a right of first refusal should be
purchased by the city for the site."
8. Amend the text on page 21, Project #7 to read as follows:
"...On the waterside, the City co~ld provide a
tree-lined Waterwalk atop the rip-rap
breakwater with seating and Mediterranean
docking."
9. Amend the text on page 25, policies & Programs #1 to read as
follows:
"Encourage mixed-use development which
provides housing phy~ically aboye retail and
service USes on the ground floor."
e
10. Amend the title text on pp. 46 - 48 to read as follows:
"Point HUdson Prope:rties"
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the proposed implementing ordinance be
passed to establish the special overlay districts1 and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that said draft ordinance be amended as
follows:
1. It is recommended that Al ternati ve Map "B" be used as the
Special Overlay Height District Official Map. Within this
al ternati ve, two sub-areas shoUld be amended to have a maximum
height limit of 35 feet. These areas are defined as:
The block defined by Monroe Street, Port
Townsend Bay, Jackson street and Water Street.
The block defined by Monroe Street, Jackson
Street, Water street, and a projected
extension of washington Street toward Point
Hudson.
e
3
----~-
~
... ...
e
e
e
.
.
.
.
.
.
It is strongly recommended that an appeal process be included
as part of any form of Design Review. In addition, specific
criteria for determining the appropriate threshold for an
appeal should be developed.
3. In the Urban Waterfront Design Guidelines, Section A: city
Form, Guideline #6 should be expanded to more adequately
describe what is meant by "small, incremental" parking
structures.
2.
Adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Port Townsend and
approved by the Chair this 29~h
day of Novembe~, 1990.
~\~
Ron Kosec, Chair
4
---- ------ ------------~--------------
'!
\i!
. >~. . ¡II
. .~. Iii
.. .. ¡i;
e
~.....-.','
.
~.
L~~¡\~R:p r-~A-~':~': WA-/er~'+- Ifrrn'
t!1 Co0A! \ C0, ~e.-\;,\)suo~\~,~ '\\\4-~\~~ " \,~"
, L~.JJe".--llþ,q by' /IA,~;..MdJ, -h~K ~')~
~.. ~m;;Þ--#'~ -h -¡:;L!LJM/VJ
p ~~¡¡~ ßrrb ~ll/c W/-fIztdr~/~ k,r:1- ßv/lðÍ~
~ c.V.e i~. .' ".~¡ . )
# ~~"X~n~f7: ~ ~,~ons, ~
· ~!11~ (!V.P. ,e-. ,.~~ 4~~ ?
Þ £eP~~{:5~i:/ lAy¡~¡ ~~ .
¡ii'
Ii,
In
Ii!
¡iI
\\1
¡1I
J'1
Iii
I!!
iil
!i!
_ c¡~ ck ?,\'. ~"Z-OVV- Appl. T s:¿:pA Ckuc-J's-l-
'í!
. ~s 1-0 AÅv" 't- M ß _ ~fi1 / ~S' .¡- ~ 0 /-bt~
I ¢ t ¡;~~;¿;;~I/~ ~
.+~,&-:~~ ~
.. h>/~fw/~ ~ £ec.Y Cðrz~ ø~
~.: J) G/2/lfl6f A lei rl ch
iil Z) ~cìA- W~~, I-hsnnr;ccJ. Soc.A-e--h.}
¡:\ ?) LOUIS{BuD) v- 6v-e-J'I1Y1 ~nØn~
:;; 4)~/~ þ#u.>R
!,j
_ ¡il s) s-bJe de h "'~'-
Iii fo) FfirfL¡¿ L) AM (j¡¿(~
'~"i ~ \l1¡qf9t> -V #l4/1J !f~
i¡1 8) ¡(j¡NA f:J2/SNt AN
!I
Ili
PCDMM P¡t-CJcEY5 01\ l/j2eoj9D
.
PCOMM PALtETS OF /1/28/9D
- - - - - -- - - -'- - - - -..~...- -- -.- - - --- --..... - - -- _.'.....--- --------- - - ------'N-. ~--.....
~ ~ ~etVk)e...-~ ~ e, Iii... "
I ¡ .'. till
f) OLYMPJC/{:;f5~1JZAIL/~ÞAV It;· \lA.\bxA:0kj , 11
::d \ lí
L7'-.1 0, &\~\'\t\j\ Y\ il
J~ ¥\ !..¿X f-t-nâ.v\ I ¡¿: (~ <2A/1 /7 A j I
':/ . -r~' II
¡tfb&4 ~~ II
1~~-\1- LA/GUUêV\ Iii
JI?) ~\~ ~'i P
L C"- ¡!
I]) 'IZ ~\m) [I
/~ Woo~e.x. ,&k\- ÇòJrÓ~Dh II
I~~ ! 6~ÆPh~t:'~ ""'~~ 'I
.~\*-<'\)~~ve.- l2e.~o\utio nS .fò~ u).,q,.Jer-fronr ,
f ~'" ç.,n,IVS ,.~ ~I ~,,~~, : ~&r £&1-, Ii ks
.fo< '.prpp:::&eO. lJr~ v.l.Aerhn+ PJA-n PY?;)j~c¿ i
Ii
I
¡I
I'
,I
III
III ·
,II
It!
1/",-- ~,
¡
,II
. ., l'
¡..
111
III
,[
it
II
il
¡¡
III
H
¡¡
Ii
II
It
,I
II
II
-
'"'-\
< ~ .~....
',---..,' .~
'.
..,
-,'
",!,--'-, -:.;,)); A
.
..... .
.''J>,. ,
'.... .. <.:-';"'.,
..... .. -.J¡ .,.'~-~.)';> ~" ';
~..~.
.' .~.__...,._i,
.--~~
\.~ \
~.
·1It
\~~
~
-
_..... ff:
t· ·
NAME (please print!
J./JN 1/M Hk7L-
ra1l7u~ uJaf1~
JO~~ÙA \
Gwst List wAn::l~J7i2-0tv-r ,J
" " "PLAfJ ~CO.\ /.l¡iC¡ rb
ADDRESS
53$"" ¡JEN'7t!J/I/~
ID Hadt~ VT
P.D.3DX' fo3l PT
'Lt 0 ~\~ SJ-
0, . .
.~~
!?D/~ 07 zJ
So
Pð73 ~~L
/3,;;¿ D .-.- ~;
j~VæJ~,r
t.
Ul
l
ø
Do you wish to If yes, indicate
resent testhnony? topic.
YES NO
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o