HomeMy WebLinkAbout076-04
TOWN OF NANTUCKET
BOARD OF APPEALS
NANTUCKET, MASSACHUSETTS 02554
Date: ~ ,0' ,2oot
To: Parties in Interest and. others concerned with the
Decision of .the BOARD OF APPEALS in the Application of the
following:
Application No.: . afro -0<(-
owner/APPlican.t:' . ,COf({-- {'() - ~ ~(}r:r2-0
Otl\& [jQ{lne L. Schcuor+2-
. ,
III,
I
,
> .
Enclosed is the Decision of the BOARD OF APPEALS WhlCh has
this day been filed in the office of the Nantucket Town
Clerk.
An Appeal from this Decision may be taken pursu,a.nt to
Section 17 of Chapter 40A, Massachusetts General LawS.
Any action appealing the Decision must be brought by
f~ing an complaint in court within TWENTY (20) days after
th~s day'S date. Notice of the action with a copy of the
c~plaint and certified copy of the Decision must be given
tefL.the Town Clerk so as to be received wi thin such TWENTY
(4-?) days.
~"i-
P
~a~~~
1'\ ~y ..::t. vr(2(lS J Cha irman
c.....,
LL :
c.
cc:
Town Clerk
planning Board
Building Commissloner
PLEASE NOTE: MOST SPECIAL PERMITS AND VARIANCES HAVE A TIME
LIMIT AND WILL EXPIRE IF NOT ACTED UPON ACCORDING'TO NANTUCKET
ZONING BY-LAW ~139-30I (SPECIAL PERMITS); ~139-32I (VARIANCES)
ANY QUESTIONS, PLEASE CALL THE NANTUCKET ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS.
NANTUCKET ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
1 East Chestnut Street
Nantucket, Massachusetts 02554
50 Monomoy Road
Certificate of Title No. 14029-A
Lots A-3, B-3 and C-3
Assessor's Map 43
Parcels 45, 49, and 50
LUG-l
DECISION:
1. At a public hearing of the Nantucket Zoning Board of Appeals, on
Friday, November 19, 2004, at 1:00 P.M. in the Conference Room in the Town Annex
Building, 37 Washington Street, Nantucket, Massachusetts, the Board made the
following Decision on Board of Appeals Application No. 076-04, of CARY M.
SCHWARTZ and ELAINE L. SCHWARTZ, of 36 Post House Road, Morristown,
New Jersey 07960, in connection with property known as 50 Monomoy Road,
Nantucket, Massachusetts.
2. Applicants are seeking a MODIFICA nON of SPECIAL PERMIT relief
granted in the Decision in BOA File No. 013-04, which permitted renovation and
alteration of the use (to interior living space) of an attached garage within the
required front yard setback area. Applicants had not asked to demolish that portion
of the structure at that time. Applicants state that during renovation, which included
placing a new foundation under the garage, the garage was found to be in such poor
condition as to render it unsalvageable and it could not be moved back onto the new
foundation. Applicants are asking to amend the previous Decision to allow
demolition and reconstruction of that portion of the garage and site it back within
the front yard setback as part of the granted relief. In the alternative, Applicants are
seeking relief by VARIANCE under Section 139-16A to be able to replace the garage
portion of the structure back into the front yard setback area on the same footprint
and in the same dimension as the previous garage, without coming any closer to the
front yard lot line than the garage had been sited (as close as about 10.7 feet in a
district that requires a minimum front yard setback of 35 feet). The Locus is also
nonconforming as to lot size with the Lot containing about 27,032 square feet of area
in a district that requires a minimum lot size of 40,000 square feet; and as to ground
cover with the Lot having ground cover ratio of about 10.5% in a district that allows
a maximum ground cover ratio of 7%.
The Premises is located at 50 MONOMOY ROAD, Assessor's Map 43, Parcels
45,49, and 50, Land Court Plan No. 14029-A, Lots A-3, B-3 and C-3. The property is
zoned Limited-Use-General-l.
3. Our Decision is based upon the Application and accompanying
materials, plans, photographs, architectural drawings and representations and
testimony received at our public hearing. The Planning Board recommendation was
that the Application did not present any issues of planning concern. There were no
letters received regarding the Application and no abutters appeared in opposition at
the hearing. The builder was present at the hearing to clarify the sequence of events
during the renovation.
4. The Applicant explained the sequence of events that led to the
demolition of the existing garage building after it had been stored on the site while a
new foundation was constructed. The condition of that portion of the building made
the restoration of it and placement back onto the new foundation impractical.
Instead a new structure of the exact dimensions was constructed in its place. This
matter was called to the attention of the Building Inspector and the application for
this relief was subsequently filed. Given the historic nature of the main portion of
the building, with the garage being an integral portion of the original structure, and
its long-standing prominence as a landmark in Monomoy, the Historic District
Commission directed that the structure formerly used as a garage must be rebuilt to
its prior proportions - no smaller and no larger.
5. Given that demolition of the pre-existing, nonconforming garage
occurred as it was being converted into interior living space in accordance with the
prior Decision of this Board, the Board determined that variance relief, rather than
special permit relief, would be required to re-build this portion of the existing
building because of its location within the front yard setback. Therefore, the Board
finds that the unique circumstances relating to the historical significance of the pre-
existing structure on this lot, and its physical condition are circumstances relating to
the shape and topography of the structure on the Locus, and especially affect the
Locus without generally affecting the zoning district in which it is situated. The
Board further finds that the requirement from the Historic District Commission that
the structure be reconstructed in its exact location and to its original dimensions
means that a literal enforcement of the provisions of the Zoning By-law would
involve substantial hardship to the Applicants. The project is not inconsistent with
the relief granted in the prior Decision of the Board and the Variance may be granted
without substantial detriment to the public good and without nullifying or
substantially derogating from the intent or purpose of the Zoning By-law.
6. Accordingly, by a vote of four in favor (Waine, O'Mara, Loftin, Toole)
and one abstention (Sevrens), the Board GRANTS the requested relief by
VARIANCE under Nantucket Zoning By-law Section 139-16A to permit the re-
construction of the demolished portion of the structure that was formerly the garage
to be sited on its original location within the front yard setback and to the extent
inconsistent with this Decision, GRANTS the requested MODIFICATION to the
2
SPECIAL PERMIT granted in BOA File No. 013-04 to allow said demolition and
reconstruction, based upon the following conditions:
a.
There shall be no increase in ground cover without
further relief from this Board;
b.
The demolition and reconstruction of the garage shall be
done in substantial conformance with the Certificate of
Appropriateness No.4 tst ranted by the Historic
District Commiss' n.
C. Richard Lo' ~
l'O~ ~ lt~M-
Nancy J. Se r~ns
Dated: ~1-, 2004
3
TOWN OF NANTUCKET
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
1 EAST CHESTNUT STREET
NANTUCKET, MASSACHUSETTS 02554
PHONE 508-228-7215
FAX 508-228-7205
NOTICE
A Public Hearing of the NANTUCKET ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS will
be held at 1:00 P.M., FRIDAY, NOVEMBER 19,2004, IN THE CONFERENCE
ROOM, TOWN ANNEX BUILDING, 37 Washington Street, Nantucket,
Massachusetts, on the Application of the following:
CARY M. SCHWARTZ AND ELAINE L. SCBW ARTZ
BOARD OF APPEALS FILE NO. 076-04
Applicants are seeking a MODIFICATION of SPECIAL PERMIT relief granted
in the Decision in BOA File No. 013-04, which permitted renovation and alteration of the
use (to interior living sp~ce) ofan attached garage within the required front yard setback
area. Applicants had not asked to demolish that portion of the structure at that time.
Applicants state that during renovation, which included placing a new foundation under
the garage, the garage was found to be in such poor condition as to render it
unsalvageable and it could not be moved back onto the new foundation. Applicants are
asking to amend the previous Decision to allow demolition and reconstruction of that
portion of the garage and site it back within the front yard setback as part of the granted
relief. In the alternative, Applicants are seeking reliefby VARIANCE under Section 139-
16A to be able to replace the garage portion of the structure back into the front yard
setback area on the same footprint and in the same dimension as the previous garage,
without coming any closer to the front yard lot line than the garage had been sited (as
close as about 10.7 feet in a district that requires a minimum front yard setback of35
feet). The Locus is also nonconforming as to lot size with the Lot containing about
27,032 square feet of area in a district that requires a minimum lot size of 40,000 square
feet; and as to ground cover with the Lot having a ground cover ratio of about 10.5% in a
district that allows a maximum ground cover ratio of 7%.
The Premises is located at 50 MONOMOY ROAD, Assessor's Map 43, Parcels
45,49,50, Land Court Plan 14029-A, Lot A-3, B-3 and C-3. The property is zoned
Limited-Use--General-1. (/} ~~
% Kf~
Nancy J. Sevrens, rrman
THIS NOTICE IS AVAILABLE IN LARGE PRINT OR OTHER
ALTERNATIVE FORMATS. PLEASE CALL 508-228-7215 FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION.
l?EE: $300.00
NANTUCKET ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
1 EAST CHESTNUT STREET
NANTUCKET, MA 02554
APPLICATION FOR RELIEF
CASE NO. .0 l~ -1J cf
Owner's name(s): Can' M. Schwartz and Elaine L. Schwartz
\1ailing address: 36 Post House Road. Morristown. NJ 07960
~pplicant's name(s): same
\failing address: same
Assessor's MaplParcel: Map 43. Parcels 45. 49 & 50
Locus address: 50 Monomoy Road
Land Court Plan No.: 14029-A Lot No.: A-3. B-3. and C-3
Date lot acquired: 10'14'03 Deed Ref.lCert. of Title: 853'245 and Cert. 20937 Zoning District: LUG-1
Uses on Lof~ Commercial: None-L Yes (describe)
Residential: Number of dwellings 1 Duplex~ Apartments_Rental Rooms
Building Date(s): All pre-date 7/72? yes or
C of O(s)?
Building Permit Nos: 5204-87 (french doors) and open permit for current proiect
Previous Zoning Board Application Nos.: 013-04
State below or on a separate addendum specific relief sought (Special Permit, Variance, Appeal), Section of
the Zoning By-law, and supporting details, grounds for grant of relief, listing any existing no~nformities:
See Addendum A
I
,...1
,
'"
<J
I certify that the information contained herein is substantially complete and true to the best of my
knowledge, under the pains and penalties of perjury.
Cary M. sc~ E1:inC L~ S~' ~y: ~ttorney, Melissa D. Philhrick
SIGNATlJI{E:~ Applicant Attorney/Agent X
(If not owner or owner's attorney, please enclose proof f agency to bring this matter before the Board)
nG /y( FOR F ICE USE
Application received on:Jt!.!J..1.::::L. By: . Complete: Need copies?:
Filed with Town Clerk:..Lf.;.fj()!!-Planm. .. By: ~J
Fee deposited with Town Treasurer:J!IJ J,07By: Waiver requested?: Granted:-'-'_
Hearing notice posted with Town Clerk:JULO( Mailed: / f ,XfJ3I&M:-.f/;-1J0c.4 jjJj{}sJ!/-
Hearing(s) held on:-'_'_ Opened on:_'-'_ Continued to:_'-'_ Withdrawn?:-'-'_
DECISION DUE BY:-'-'_ Made:_'_'_Filed wrrown Clerk:_'-'_Mailed:-'_'_
DECISION APPEALED?:_' -' _ SUPERIOR COURT: LAND COURT Form 4'03/03
Application of Cary and Elaine Schwartz
Addendum A
The applicants seek to a modification of Special Permit 013-04, which permit granted
relief pursuant to Section 139-33A to renovate that portion of the pre-existing non-
conforming structure within the front yard setback and convert it to residential use. The
existing foundation within the setback was replaced with a new foundation and the
portion of the building in question was stored on the property. After the completion of
the new foundation, that portion of the pre-existing building within the setback was found
to be in such poor condition that the contractor was unable to move it back in place.
Instead, he found it to be necessary to re-frame this one-story portion ofthe building; it
will be re-framed to the exact dimensions on the foundation that was constructed to
support the original structure. Accordingly, the Applicants request that the Special
Permit be amended to incorporate the demolition and reconstruction of that portion of the
existing building within the front yard setback as a part of the granted relief. In the
alternative, relief by Variance is requested, if needed. \ 3 9 r (0 ~
. R~,
~'5D f1()"'oVY\o~
. MAP
LoCuS. .
+.
-i-
I
12.
I
I
.
';4
.f ..
fr>'~. 0
TOWN OF NANTUCKET ~ . e .er.ad .'?~i
Date 'me"" _
. Nantucket Registry
BOARD OF APPEALSBook 'bq( Of=~ 2<::5
. OoOument No. !i.'7lf3k
NANTUCKET MASSACHUSETTS 02S.~TitleNo. 'O'-{37
, . JOI!Sf'\riI&-,L. Kelley,
Registet of Deeds
.
.
Date:
;9 prl {
()..t:..
\." ~p
\
Jo
, 2001..1
To: Parties in Interest and, Others.concer~ed with the
Decisio~ of the BOARD OF APPEALS in the Application of the
following:
Application No.:
013-0 Y
. C'q,n \ Vh, S~ LVar-rz.
~Qh LA rnv1L
Owner/Applicant:
r.(Qthf> ~ L,
nnc€.
Enclosed is the Decision of the BOARD OF APPEALS'which has
this day been filed in the office of the Nantucket ,Town
Clerk.
'An Appeal from this Decision may be taken pursuant to.
Section 17 of Chapter 40A, Massachusetts General Laws.
Any action appealing the Decision must be brought by
filing an complaint in court within .TWENTY (2.0). days after
this day's date. Notice of the action with a cOPY'of the
complaint and certified copy of the Decision must be given
to the'Town Clerk so as to be received within such TWENTY
(20) days.
cc: Town Clerk
Planning Board
Building Commissioner
~^*-
Chairman
PLEASE NOTE: MOST SPECIAL PERMITS AND VARIANCES HAVE A TIME
LIMIT AND WILL EXPIRE IF NOT ACTED UPON ACCORDING'TO NANTUCKET
ZONING BY-LAW 9139-301 (SPECIAL P~RMITS); ~139-32I (VARIANCES)
ANY QUESTIONS, PLEASE CALL THE NANTUCKET ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS.
"
NANTUCKET ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
1 East Chestnut Street
Nantucket, Massachusetts 02554
50 Monomoy Road
Land Court Plan 14029-A
Certificate of Title No. 20,937
Assessor's Map 43, Parcels 45, 49, and 50
Lots A-3, B-3 and C-3
LUG-1 Zoning District
DECISION:
1. At a public hearing of the Nantucket Zoning Board of Appeals, opened
on Friday, March 12,2004, at 1:00 P.M., and continued to Friday, Apri12, 2004, in the
Conference Room in the Town Annex Building, 37 Washington Street, Nantucket,
Massachusetts, the Board made the following Decision on Application (013-04) of
CARY M. SCHWARTZ AND ELAINE L. SCHWARTZ, of 36 Post House Road,
Morristown, New Jersey 07960, in connection with property known as 50 Monomoy
Road, Nantucket, Massachusetts:
2. Applicants are seeking relief by SPECIAL PERMIT under Nantucket
Zoning By-law Section 139-33A (alteration/ expansion of a pre-existing
nonconforming structure/use). Applicants propose to alter the use of an existii1.g
attached garagef storage structure by converting the use to interior living space in
connection with the existing single-family dwelling to the rear. There would b~
window an,d door changes but there would be no expansion of the garage structure.
. As part of the renovation, a new porch area vvould be added to the rear of the garage.
that would be attached to the northeasterly side of the dwelling, a small portion of
which wSluld be constructed within the required 35-foot front yard setback area but
sited no closer to the front yard lot line than the existing structure as the entire porch
is situated behind the garage, In addition, the Locus is nonconforming as to lot size
with the Lot containing about 27,032 square feet of area in a district that requires a
mininium lot size of 40,000 square feet; and as to ground cover with the Lot having a
ground cover ratio of about 10.5% in a district that allows a maximum ground cover
ratio of 7%. .
The Premises is located at 50 Monomoy Road, Assessor's Map 43, Parcels 45,
49, and 50, Land Court Plan No. 14029~A, Lots A-3, B-3 and C-3. The~roperty~
zoned Limited-Use-General-l. . Q)':;::~::
-4' I" or.
0",:,. CO
2~ : ':' :;a
w
C>
....".,
....-.~.::~
rn
", .,:0
n
r-'
~
~~T.~
""
v
--..
, <
""
. ""t
\0
3. Our Decision is based upon the application and accompanying
materials, plans, photographs, architectural drawings and representations and
testimony received at our public hearing. The Planning Board recommendation was
that the Application did not present any issues of planning co.ncern. There were no
letters received regarding the Applicatian and one abutter appeared in opposition at
the hearing expressing concerns about issues that the Baard ruled were outside the
purview of this Board and more properly before the Nantucket Historic District
COmmissian, as that entity was still involved in the public hearing proce~s related to.
this property.
4. The Applicants presented, through counsel, an affidavit establishing
that the dwelling and garage were constructed as presently sited prior to the 1972
enactment of the Zoning By-law. An aerial photograph from the Town records was
introduced indicating that the structure and attached garage were in their present
locatians as early as 1938 and as such, the garage was validly grandfathered as to
said intrusion. Applicants also submitted photographs af the existing structure, a site
. plan of the existing and proposed conditions dated April 2, 2004, drawn by
Blackwell and Associates, Inc., and exterior elevations of the proposed renavation to
the strUcture as approved by the Nantucket Historic DiStrict Commission in
Certificate of Appropriateness No. 43,453. The Applicants represented that
conversion of the exis~g garage to. interior living space, without changing the
footprint of the garage within the front yard setback area, would not increaSe the
nonconforming setback or ground cover violations. Applicants further represented
that the change of use from garage storage accessed froin the exterior to living space
accessed from the interior of the existing single-Jamily dwelling would not be
substantially more detrllnental to the neighborhood. In addition to interior changes,
there would be exterior fenestration changes to the doors and windows as part of the
renovation. The Applicants stated that the southeastern most addition to the
proposed unenclosed parch on the easterly side of the single-family dwelling and
attached to the rear of the garage, although partially within the front yard setback,
would not inq:ease the. graund cover ratio. and have littIe impact on the
neighbarhood since it would be located entirely behind the garage and away from
the front yard lot line. There would be no separate cooking facilities in the converted
garage.
5. Based upon the foregoing, the Board finds that converting the pre-
existing, nonconfarining garage into additional interior living space without
increasing the growld caver o.r coming any clo.ser to the front yard lot line than the
existing garage structure~ would not increase the nonconforming ground cover ratio.
or front yard setback intrusian. The Board also finds that the small addition to. the
porch located to the rear of the garage and caming no closer to. the front yard lot line
than the existing garage, daes increase the massing of the structure within the front
yard setback area. Further, The Board finds that said alterations, would not be
2
( .
. ,
substantially more detrimental to the neighborhood than the existing
nonconformities, and would be in harmony with the general purpose and intent of
the Zoning By-law;
6. Accordingly, the Board of Appeals voted UNANIMOUSLY to GRANT
the requested SPECIAL PERMIT relief under Nantucket Zoning By-law Section 139-
33A to permit the conversion of the existing garage to living space and permit a
portion of a new porch addition to be sited as proposed, based upon the following
conditions:
(a) The work related solely to the structure shall be done in substantial
conformity with the "Site Plan", done by Blackwell and Associates, Inc., dated April
2, 2004, a reduced copy of which is marked as Exhibit A and attached hereto;
(b) The extension of the porch within the setback shall not be enclosed and
there shall be no increase in overall ground cover ratio without further relief from
~B~~ .
(c) No exterior structural changes are permitted to the portion of the
structure sited within the front yard setback area without further relief from this
Board;
(d) The work on the structure within the front yard setback areas shall be
done in substantial compliance with the plans approved by the Historic District
Commission under Certificate of Appropriateness No. 43,453, as may be amended;
and . .
(e) No cooking facilities shall be permitted in the portion of the structure
sited Within the setback area without further re!f from this B,~
Dated:. April~.2004. .sa~_ .~
'. ancy J. S vrens
Dale.Waine
.3
:li!Y" .~ "',., .:~.... "~~' .... :..... 'w..:. ..~ . _,".
, c:UllRfm' ZONING Cl.ASSlF1CAllON: /
. ", ~ u.. c.nn 1 (\.U.G.-l) A'~'"
. ,,'-. ,""
IoIINWII .lOJ SIZE: 40.000 s.F'. ~
-=~r~ '~~. /,r(
RFAIVSlOE stnw:K: 10 FT. ,
GROO~ C(MR ~ 7X ?
Nliiwcnr ';/
"B:iRBOR /~#
.;{'
~",O~
~'?
· . -.. .\. '\ '-, 1.
....v.-' \,\1'
""Y' .
. ',". .'
'.
,,~'
.I'
/' .
I'
I'
I'
/'
~~'
,/'
*'/
y.~'/
/
:UGl:inJ:': "':.':' ..,. .
<E> DENOTES CONCRET'E BOUND W/DRIUHOLE
fOUND
I" "
i~
.,~~ . .
LOT C3
A=5881 :i:S.F.
I
..
.4J-4J
N/F'
LEINBACH
/
/
/
,,/
4.J-18
N/F
FRAZIER
SITE PLAN TO ACCOMPANY .~~
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS .
APPLICATION
in Nantucket, MA
Prepared For
CARY Jl. SCHWARTZ
ELAINE L. SCHWARTZ
#50 MONOMOY ROAD
Scale: 1 "=40' April 2, 2004
BLACKrELL and ASSOCIATES, Inc.
. Professional Land SUrueyOTS
20 TEASDALE CIRCLE
NANTUCKET, MASS.' 02554
(508) 228-9026
GRAPHIC SCALE
I " j I
0' 20' 40' 80' 120'
. ~~
. ~~~.
~~ OWNER'S REFEReNCE
CERT. OF TTTLE:' 209J7
LOrs .u,c.J It BJ LAND COUFrT PLAN 14029-,1.
DEED. BK. S$J PG, 245
ASSESSOR'S MAP 43 PARCEl.. S 45,49 ci 50 B8178
/......
. .
. .
. ..
..' . .
, , . ,
- ...... .1:.i;~~~~L-~_
, .
c,
I Q"Jttn:ym4.:r 20 OA YS HAve E"t..As~ AF'r"til
J!IE OOQ~10N WAS FILED tN i1iE QF}~Ol Or nu
tOWN 0'.Bur. M'b 'r'HAT NO .APfliA.L fV~ ES2N
~~1o~.. 1\SBCl. nn~l1
.:- \~
'.;.
'to . ~ '. .
ATTEST: A TRUE COpy
.~
NANTUCKET TOWN CLERK
~...,...~.....
MAY 2 4 2D04
.. ~If 5, 00
/
'. ~ -...' ,",,"" f'P" D~'
~'!=t;;~~2:~ \/ ~=l
'OF I.~, ,~n:(.",;;-s~:,~~~
BO~RD . .q:V':;:;;;',:J".",",.j~.,,:>>
" ~~ -
Town of Nantucket
OCT 0 6 2D04
. .
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
-;-"'.~""".
HJ
't:,r:
.'-,.& >j
IN'ANTU't: /.,a::T ~.. 1:1'2\
' ~ ' ' "'=' ~ ~l1.- , tl CtJ..
LIST OF PARTIES IN INTEREST IN THE MATTER OF THE PETITION OF
PROPE~ TY OWN ER.... ~'~'1' .:. ..(./~. ~ ;.~... ~~. ~0. .~..............
MAILING ADDRESS. .~qJ?It,'.!b",~~,~.........,.... ......,.,..,
PROPERTY LOCATION.... .~Q.,. .t!.'?~.~.~.~.'d-'" .Rel:.......................
ASS ESSO RS MA PIP ARC EL,. .. '1. 3./..'f.~f. ,<f.1...!':. .?:"~...................,......
APPLICANT,...,....I1.!. J?l1!: !b.n:e4-,............... ...........................,..
SEE ATTACHED PAGES
I certify that the foregoing is a list of persons who are owners of abutting property, owners of
land directly opposite on any public or private street;or way; and abutters of the abutters and all
other land owners within 300 feet of the property line of owner's property, all as they appear on
the most recent applicable tax list (M.G.L. c. 40A, Section II Zoning Code Chapter 139.
Section 139-29D (2)
dJd.../3,..~apf
~/i!~
DATE
-
ASSESSOR'S OFFICE
Town of Nantucket
'y
.....
~
>-'
o
.....
>-'
w
.....
N
o
~~~:::~~~eeeeee ~
"
>-'
o
N
-J
.... .... ..J ....J ...:I 0'1 U1 Ul .. .. .. ,. ... t'"
Ul In I\) .... U1 W .... 0'1 .. f\).... 0
m w " ~
'" Voj
'l)'
J-'
c.,
~
>-'
~
fl
".
~~S~~~~~~E~~~ ~
SS~=S~~~~a~~~ 2
~~~;~~i~~E~i~ ;
SS~fJ~~;8~~8;e lD
~ ~ ~ = ~ ~ R ~ ~ ~ ~ R ~
< < ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~ ~ ~ ; ~ ~ a ~ a ~
~ ~ ~ ! ~ S S ~ ~ ~ s ~
~ ~ ! ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
.. .. OJ tl (l t;J ~
~ ~ : rJ ~ t-J t<
f;; H ~
>:
<<
i ~ ~ ~
~ ~ B B
~ H Ii l-:J
~ ~
~ f;;
~;n:~~~~~~~~~ll ~
~ ~
n
.....
o
'"
H
..,
(l
fg
I
~
=
H
H
H
tl
1l
>:
g
e
~
~
~
~~~~:g~!?~
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 ~
~ ~ H ::l >< >: co ><
g; = ~ a t: ~ en ~
.. e ~ ~ ~ e '"
g Q ~ a g ~ fg
c ~ tl
iO' ill ~ !
~ ~ ~ '" [:l
fg ill
c
ill
H
= =
o 0
gJ gJ
tl ~ ~
~ ~ ~
~ ~ rl
~
~ ~
o 0
~ ~
~ ~
a '"
n >'
i:l ~
~
>:
~ 8
1.J i1i
< ~
~ ~
a
~ ~
~
~
~
n
i:l
~
~
)
H
~
~
~
~
~
~
.Q g
o
~ ~
~ m
"
I
i:l ~
E f
~
>:
jl;
~~
~H~
8~
>it"
H
l/1
~~
Z
Ii)
'" '"
.... co
8 ill:; [
~ ~ ~ "
>< ~ ~ :
W [:l H
~ >: ~
~ 6
~ S
ill :0:
in;
~ ~
tl n
~ ~
~ ~
~ ill
~ ~
~
f
".
I-'
".
D
"
~
'"
"
m
~
~
:z: ttj t::I = n
~~~~~
i:l ~ ~
~
WWONOOO...,.OO....O-J N
WWNNNJrt.)O'IOO\I\)OO'l.... ....
..Q)\oU1UlOOU1..lnUlmo'tJ
U1UlUlI\)U1U1N-.JNC.11.....NI\)
UlUlI'IJW..O-Jo\...JO.....
I I
'" '"
W W
W W
'" '"
.... .... ... ... .. ..
o ..J .. O'l \Q Ul
'U
"
"'
m
Ulini~~
SSg ~ g ~
f;; f;; ~ ~ ~ ~
~ ~
il' >' fg fg ~ fg
<: <
~~~~~~O\ :
Z l2: 2l 11
~~~~~~~ e
~~~~g~~ ~
~ t< t< t< HI g
~
Eg ~ Eg ~ p:
o
D