Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1964-10-13; Planning Commission; MinutesI : CITY OF CARLSBAD PLANJVIPTG COMMISSION i Minutes of: : Date of Meeting: October 13, 1964 i Time of Meeting: 7: 30 P. M. i Name *s,'*!!& '\, ! : Place of Meeting: Council Chambers : Member *$$@.-&dfb,j ;""""""~""""""""""""""""""~""~""~"""""""i""""""~"-,""-."~"-- I ROLL CALL Was answered by Commissioners Grant, : @,I;, ; Sutherland, Lamb and Freistadt. Commissioners Palma- i i:::i; i teer, McCarthy and McCornas were absent. Also pre- : ; sent were Ass't City Engineer Thornton, RoSert A. John-! i ston, Engineering Dept., and Building Inspector Osburn. : i APPaOVAL CF MINUTES: brant : :xixi ; : I 22, 1964, were approved as submitted. Preistadt : : Ix: : : I ::!!:: : '*\ *.;*, '*\ '*,',, I ', '8, 'b, ', ', '* I I "* " \, *.,'.,'* ; of 'S*O'' ' ,q/, *- I I I I I I 1 I I '\ * '\ '* , * *a "?&%* $8 &+ :::;I; :::;Il (I#,: 111 'I'::; :::I:I bl:;; i:::;; I I I I I putherland : ' ;x: I i I (a) Minutes of the regular meeting of September ix ; :xi ; ; I I WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS I I I I I ! I I I (a) San Diego Coun4y Planning Dept. - re: Notice i of Public zoning meeting for Southeast Carlsbad on Thurs+ day, October 15, 1964, at 7:30 P. M, at the Carlsbad i ; Municipal Water District office; proposing A-1 (8) zoning i I (Home-sites on 8 acres of land) for property in the Count3 : in that area. I Chairman Sutherland asked for some one from the Corn- : ; stated that he would attend the meeting to speak for him- : ; self. Commissioner Freistadt volunteered to attend the : i meeting to represent the Commission and his offer was i accepted. I I I I I I mission to attend the meeting. Commissioner Lamb : 4 e I * 1- I I I I I (b) Mrs. Doris Chalmers - re: Variance to Create! a panhandle lot split granted by Resolution No. 324. Mr.: : Thornton stated that the lots are already served by a . : paved driveway and it appears that the complete facts I I were not presented at the time the "panhandle" was ; granted. He drew a sketch of the paved driveway being : i used, and of the "panhandle" portion that was granted by : Resolution No. 324. The City Attorney and the Staff have! I no objections if the present road is used to serve the 3 ; i which Would have to be improved according to the "Pan- ; ; handle lot split policy. ; After discussion 3n this matter, the Chairman stated the i Commission was not opposed to this request but felt they : : should have the legal opinion of the City Attorney on i whether they were qualified to vote on this matter since 4 : part of the Commission were not at the meeting when this: variance was granted. He inquired if there was an ur- : : gency for this request. I I I lots. If discontinued, they would still have the "panhandl$' I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I MRS. DORIS CHALMERS, 3812 Skyline Rd., stated that ; this could lose a sale and pointed out that this variance ; i was granted last November. The Chairman stated they would have to wait until they I I I I I I 1 : have the legal opinion of the City Attorney. I I I I I I I I (c) Council Action pertaining to Planning Makters.-I i Mr. Thornton reported the action taken by the Council on ; Planning Matters and that they had also approved the finaC map of Magnolia Glen. I I I I I I I I I I I I I I i ORAL COMMUNICATIONS: i There were no oral communications. l I I I i PUBLIC HEARINGS: i dwellings) on property located on the Northerly side of : Adams Street and Southerly side of Highland Drive, being! : Lots 13 and 14, Block E of Bellavista, Map 2152. Appli- i cants: Vercel J. & Lois A. Tolles & Opal V. Law. I I I I I I I I (a) RECLASSIFICATION: - kt-1-15 to R-3 (Multiplb I I I I I I # & I I I I ! ! n I- I s, ,. , *. I I I I I I 4 I * I " ',,'\,, 't, '*,'-, I I I '" '8, ', 8,' * ' * I , 8 , ',,'" I I -2- I Name 't8 ',%$ \,, +++, : '8 '.&I. i I I i of '+>88;,$$& ; I """"" "- """"""_" -" -" - ""_ "- -" ---"-""-"--" - - - -" -" - ";" -" "" """_" - 2% "" (11 1q ::l:ae I :::::: ;l:'l@ 1*1:1: 4:::; :::::I I :::;:I I I !I:::: 8' * I " ', ', * I I 8 Member $f@~~O~..d.* : Notice of hearing was read. Secretary Grant certified ; that proper notice was given in the newspaper and to the i : Property owners in the area, and then read the applica- ; I tion. : There were no written communications on this matter. i i The Chairman announced the Commission would now hear: : fron the applicant or his representative and those wishing; i to speak in favor of this reclassification. I l,!l!l 14 :::118 4:::; I:#; 11 I I I : MR. VERCEL TOLLES stated that he had stmWthe ap- i i plication and Mrs. Law had signed the application in I 1 i favor of the reclassification on his property and then : dgcided she wished to have her property zoned R-3 also. i He reported that they had pioneered that part of the City I : and it is too much for them to take care of now because : I of their age, and wished to sell his property, Mrs.. Law i : does not want to sell her property. Although this abuts : R-T zoned property, they had not requested the R-T ; zoning as they felt the R-3 zoning would be better there. i He stated that his neighbors approved this zoning and that i ; lot splits have been made in the area. : There were no others desiring to speak in favor of this : I reclassification. I I I & I I I 1 I I I * I I I I i The Chairman announced the Commission would now hear : from those present desiring to speak in opposition. i MKS. I%". FXEY, 4350 Highland Drive, stated that she : was not necessarily opposed to this ubt does not under- : stand this zoning as they have never had R-3 on Highland : Drive. She stated that she was opposed to a "blanket" i zone without any plans of what will be done, as this is a : nice residential area. I I I I I I I 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 I I ! * : There were no persons present desiring to speak in op- i i position. i The public hearing was closed at 8: 04 P. M. I There was considerable discussion on zoning a larger i : area at one time rather than just the two lots and where : the boundaries should be; whether it should be R-2, R-3 I : or R-T, and if it would be connected to the sewers. : Mr. Thornton stated that there probably would not be sewers there for another year and the health department I : would require percolation tests before they would be per- ; i mitted to have a seftic tank. He questioned the size of i : the lot area permitted under R-3 in this area, whether : ! it would be R-3-6 or R-3)5. i The Chairman inquired if they would have the required . . : square footage after dedication of the corner of their pro-i i perty for street right of way and Mr. Thornton assured i ; him they would. ; When questioned regarding their intention for the use of : the property, Mr. Tolles stated that their property is fori : sale and this would give the property owner a chance to : build a guest house. I 8 i Mrs. Law stated that her property is directly across fror$ i the property that was Whitey's Boat Landing and that she : : has no plans at the present time. She pointed out that her: i property faces on Adarns and also faces Highland and she! ; could divide this property andhave nice homes overlook- : I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I * I 1 t I I ing the lagoon. I I I I I I I i Commissioner Lamb stated that he felt that R-3 or K-T : : zone should have been restricted to the south side of I 1 i Adams Street. I I ! ; MR. TOLLES agreed that they needed a boundary and : i stated that he felt this would give a perfect shut off for a I : boundary line. I I I I 1 I I There was discussion on zoning the lower portion of the : Northerly side of Adams and the Southerly side of Adams )* to R-T due to the activity and use of the Lagoon; whether 1 if the property is rezoned to R-3 and with today's tax s strukturwould they just build a guest house on the property. The Commission discussed denying this reclassification i and adopting a resolution of intention to rezone an area in: that vicinity to R-T. i I I I a t I I : MR. ART CRAFT, 4400 Highland Drive stated that he I lives next to Mrs. Hogg and was not informed of this re- : I classification until a neighbor notified him that evening. : i He stated that he had owned the property for 4 months and: : would like to be notified of any reclassification in that I ; area. i S. F. DUNNE, 4379 Highland Drive, stated that he lives : : closer to the property than Hightowers or Freys and was ! not opposed to this but would like to know how far they ar? : going to rezone the property on Highland and would like ; i to receive a notice of any public hearings for rezoning i : that area. 9 I : The Chairman pointed out that the property owner8 with- in 300' are notified of any reclassifications and that notic$ i is also given in the Carlsbad Journal. I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Commissioner Lamb stated that he was opposed to R-3 : zoning of this prcperty but did not believe they should i i turn around and zone this property it-T at the present : : time. : After further discussion, a motion was made to adopt i Resolution No. 373 denying the application for reclassifi- : ; cation from R-1- 15 to R- 3 for the following reasons: I I I I to the Agua Hedionda Lagoon and overlooks said lagoon : ; so that R-3 zoning does not permit the most intensive and: i logical use of the land. I I 1 I I I I * I I I I I I I 1. The property is located within close proximity i I I I I I I I I 2. The two parcels involved are located adjacent ; I 3. Therep-zoning of these BO parcels, bound: i ed by two streets and R-T zoned properties would not ac-: I complish consistent planning and desirable orderly de- i i velopment. I I i The following resolution was presented: : to property presently zoned R-T. I I I 9 I I I 1 I I I I I i' I 1; ! :a I I i Planning Commission Resolution No. 373. A RESOLU- i FROM R-1-15 TO R-3 ON PROPERTY AT NORTHERLYGrant i SIDE OF ADAMS STREET AND SOUTHERLY SIDE OF butherland i : HIGHLAND DRIVE was adopted by title only and further Lamb I i reading waived. Preistadt ix ! I I I I I I I I 1 I ON DENYIFT~~NCE OF ZON~ I ! I ; There was discussion on adopting a resolution 6f inten- ! tion and where the boundaries should be for rezoning pro-! i perty near the lagoon. I I i By common consent it was agreed that the Commission i : would consider this under Old Business at the next regu- i i lar meeting when there is a full Commission and the City : Attorney present. I ! I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I' I b8 ', ", '88 '8 " I I I 8\ '8 ', b8 '*8", I I 8' x, ', 8'8 '8 '8,'88 I I 8, '8 '8 '\ ' ' I -4- I i N a me 't, '4&, 8, $A I I : of Y4'0' '+88 : I I +b%9' +&& ;'I 14 ::;;:I ii:::: 11 I :;::e: I f I I I I '8 't4~ I : Member '9$38$-(? 4.: (b) VARIANCE -To consider a reduction in the re-: ;:::I' quired side yard setbacks from 7.5' to 5' on property lo- I::::: :""""""""""""-"""""""""""""*""""""""~"""-~""""""""" "","" I I 11 I i cated at 3177 Lincoln St. on the Westerly side of Lincoln I I St. between Oak and Pine Avenues, Applicants: William y i A. and Jessie L. Knox. 1 ;I:::: I I l!!l!l 1 Notice of hearing was read. The Secretary certified that i : notice of the public hearing was sent to the property owneqs in the area. He then read the application and the signa- i i ture of those approving this variance. I 1 There were no written communications. I 1 I I I I I I I ! 1 i The Chairman announced the Commission would now hear i I from the applicant and any others wishing to speak in i favor of this variance, The Chairman asked Mr. Knox : about the parking. 1~:1li I :;I:;: I ::i+: ;II 1: ;;:!:I ;::::; ':::;: ::::,I I I I I I :I 11:: 1 b MR. WILLIAM A. KNOX stated that the parking would B4 i under the second story of the front apartments. They : ; plan to have a patio in the center of the property. The : :;:;:: )1*,1( i Blternative would be to have the parking sideways but they! i:: 1:: : would like to make it as attractive as possible. He re- i ported that the present structure is non-conforming and : : they plan to tear this structure down. i The Chairman announced the Commission would now hear i from those desiring to speak in opposition. I i There were no persons present desiring to speak in opposi- : tion, I I 1 I I I I I I 6 I I I I I I I I I I I The public hearing was closed at 9:OO P. M, I I i There was some discussion on,the Commission having I discussed having 5' side yard setbacks regardless of the : i width of the lot, and that the ordinance should be changed.: : Mr, Thornton reported that the roadway was of ample i width although it is not improved to the City standards. I After a short discussion, a motion was made to adopt i Resolution No. 374 granting a variance in the required : : : side yapd setbacks from 7.5' to 5' for the following rea- i ; sons: I I I I I I * I I I I I I I I I I 1. That such variance is necessary for the preseri I 2. That the granting of such variance WliU not be i i vation and enjoyment of a substantial property right pos- I ; sessed by other property in the same vicinity. 8 6 I I I 8 I I : materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious : to the property or improvements in such vicinity in which i : the property is located. I I : The following Resolution was presented : Plannin Commission Resolution No. 374. A RESOLUTIO$ I 8 I I I I I f I f I i r7mnTT VARIANCE YEiGPEEtTY AT 3177 LIN-Grant : COLN !kE$T, @N THE %?kI'ER,LY SIDE OF LINCOA Sutherland LN STREET BETVVEEN OAK AND PINE AVENUES, Lamb was adopted by title only and further jreading waived. preistadt I I I I I I (c) VARIANCE - To consider a reduction in the rei it aired side yard setback from 10' to 5' on Oak Ave. and ; : reduction from 6. 3' to 5' on interior side yard setback, i and reduction from 12.6' to 5' on the rear yard setback orl : property located at 3100 Ocean Street, on the Southeaster: ly corner of Ccean Street and Oak Avenue. Applicant: : : Charlctk F. Leftwich. I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 ! c c I I I I I I I 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 4 I $ I I I I I I 1 I I I I 1 .I I I I I I I I I I I t I I I I I I I I I t I I I I 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 I I I i I 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 4 I I I I I I I -5 - 1 I I I I I I ~""""""""~"""""~"""-"~"""~"""""""""~~~~"~~""~~~ Notice of hearing was read. The Secretary certified that : proper notice of hearing was given to the property owners! in the area, and then read the application. I I I I There wareno written communications. The Chairman announced the Commission would now hear i from the applicant and any others present desiring to speak in favor of this variance. Mrs. Leftwich stated they plan to remove the present * home on this corner in order to build apartments there. i The Chairman announced the Commission would now hear i from those present desiring to speak in opposition. There were no persond present desiring to speak in op- I position. I I I The public hearing was closed at 9: 12 P. M. MR. LEFTVJICH stated that they own the adjacent pro- perty to the South but are just removing the house on the i corner of Oak and Ocean at the present time. They are ; re-deeding the property to include the property under one I parcel. They plan to have three story apartments with : off- street parking there. They want to buy the property i on the corner of Carlsbad Blvd. and Qak and would want : the commercial property to face Carlsbad Blvd. The Building Inspector explained the reasons for asking i these reductions. I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 I I I I I I I 1 I I I I I I I # I I Mr. Thornton stated that the Engineering Department ap- proved the right of way as it is. After due consideration, a motion was made to adopt Resolution No. 375 granting a variance as requested for the following reasons: 1. That the property abuts against C-2 property on the East, and this zoning sets the precedence for the commercial use of this neighborhood. I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 2. The State Park is across the street and this in-! tensified the use of the property. I I I 3. Oak Avenue has an 80 foot right of way and will i carry ultimate traffic load. I ! I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ! I I I li;:!: 4. That there was no objection. I I ::::I: :;!!:I The €allowing resolution was presented B * Planning Commission Resolution No. 375. A RESOLU- I I;:I: ~~~N~%",",'~~$ASTERLY COR-butllerland : ; :Xi i NER OF OCEAN STREET AND OAK AVENUE, was Lamb : : :x; ; adopted by title only and further reading waived. Preistadt I I XIX~ ; I j::!: i::i; E PERTY AT brant ;xi :x: ; I I TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP - BONITA VALLEY - I : 16 lots - R-1-7.6 I I I I I i Owner: Robert L. Watson : Location: E sterly side of Valley St. , between Oak Ave., i' and Valley Place. I I I I I : DON HOLLY, Licensed Land Surveyor, 2965 Eoosevelt, i 1 stated that the City Engineer requested a 50' property i ; line radius on the cul-de-sac, and they would like to corn-: I promise for 48'. 38' curve radius at curb line is standard) 48' pmpdrtj line would allow the k;ltnimm requirements: to be met. 1 I 1 I I I I I I I I I I I -6 - * : of * I I lot 6 would require a variance. They were concerned wit! : the turning radius in the roadway. Anything less than 50' should be justifiable. Mr. Holly came into the office late : ; that afternoon and the Engineering Dept. will go along witG modifying this to 48' . I I I I I I I MR. HOLLY questioned the problem of sewering the pro- : Mr. Thornton pointed out that this property and the pro- i perty across the street is included in a 1911 Act Sewer Im& : . Distriict.' The design of the sewer main will be such as:; i io benefit both properties with one main in the center of I : the street. There is a sewer system to the south that I ..: could be extended to sewer this property but it would not i : benefit the property across the street, therefore, the 1 i Engineering Dept. recommends that this property not be i i excluded from the Fewer district. Mr. Thornton stated : that if tfre sewer iiiswict'is realized, sewers could be i I available by March or as late as May, 1965. i The Secretary read the reports from the various depart- I : ments and agencies, and read the proposed Resolution No.! i 376 recommending approval of the tentative map of Bonita: : Valley incorporating the recommendations of the various I i departments and agencies. I I It was agreed that Item 6 should be changed from 50' to 48! : radius on the cul-de-sac. I I ! MR. HOLLY questioned the 12' easement for underground i i utilities as they generally do not ga on an easement in sub+ : division. They generally go down the street. He asked it! : lot Or if this is just done in certain cases. I I FRANK DEVORE, Governmental Right of Way Supervisor; i San Diego Gas & Electric Co., stated that if they need I : easements they will get them on their own. I 1 : The Chairman stated that this will have to be worked out i I between the subdivider and the Gas & Electric Co. i MR. DEVORE stated that the underground utilities in sub-: i division are always laid before the final map is approved. : : If easements are required, it Will be shown on the final i i map. I Upon being questioned, Mr. Thornton stated that is the I ; policy to put in the Enf;ineer's report that the developer i i submit a name for "A Street and if this name is not in ; ; conflict with the Fire Department or the Police Depart- : ment, they are permitted to use the name given. The Fir; ; Department can use the wharf hydrant as supplement to i perty. I I * U I I I I I I * I I I I I they would have to show 12' easements on the back of each:; ' I I I I I I I I I I * I I I b I I I I I I fire fighting. I I 1 I I I I I i After further discussion, a motion was made to adopt : Resolution No. 376 recanmending approval of Bonita Val-! i ley Subdivision subject to the recommendations of the I I : various departments and agencies, and modifying Item 6, I i to 48' radius. I ' I 1 I I I I 1 I b I I I I * b I ! " I I I I I I I I I ; '\ " " I ' '' I '.' ', '* I -7- I ' I Name '\ 1 : Member :"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""-~.""""". I TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP - CARLSBAD COUNTRI! : HOMES - 11 lots 1 R-A I I I I 8' \ ', : of i Owner: Ernest Adler, Jr. : Location: Cn property adjacent to the Northerly boundary ' i of Falcon Hill No. 1, Map 4415, being a portion of Lot 7, i : Section 32, T. 11 5, R. 4 Vv'. S. B. B. & M. 4 I ; The secretary read the reports from the various depart- I ments and agencies. I I i The Chairman questioned the Elm Avenue extension route; i Mr. Thornton explained the proposed route and stated thai i the tentative map of Falcon Hill was adopted by the Plan- i ; ning Commission and the Council showing the Elm Avenue: i street extension. The Engineering Dept. had already i ; been instructed by the Council to prepare a precise plan. : i He took the liberty of redesigning the subdivision with the: ; Elm Avenue extension, with the same number of lots and ; i a reduction in the recreational space. The Master Plan ; shows Elm Avenue from point "A" to "B" i Mr. Alder presented a rendering of a "bird's eye view" .: i of the proposed subdivision. He expressed appreciation ; : for the cW*ks extended him by Mr. Thornton and I for the opportunity to appear before the Commission. He: ; reported that this property was purchased in January, 1964 because of its outstanding features, nearness to I I : the schools, making it a desirable homesit e. The Title i I Search did not show Elm Avenue Extension. The street ; : interference problems were not considered. In May he i noticed the alignment of stakes and found that a survey : : was being made. A subdivision study was submitted in MAT, i 1964. The proposed alignment of Elm Avenue cuts the : heart out of this parcel and stands in the way of the de- i velopment that they had in mind. He directed a letter to : : the City Manager reselling the property to the City. On i September 29, 1964, he submitted this tentative map. : : It would be a low density country development with ocean ) i and back country views. 25% of the property would be - : used for a park area. The unique land use will add char-: acter to this section of Carlsbad. There will be two re- : ; creational areas. I I i ThtYplan to comply with the subdivision ordinance, the I ; zoning ordicance and the new underground utilities ordin-i I ance. They are not asking for any variances. He en- ; : gaged Mr. Brooks from Rancho Santa Fe EnginGering C0.i i and they have studied the technical aspects of Elm Ave. ; : alignment and the most economical route. I I 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I _. - " I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 I I I MR. BROOKS stated that he was not familiar with what was proposed in the other subdivision, but had come up ; with an alignment for the extension of Elm Avenue which i he showed on a map. He explained that the terrain on : this plan was not as rough as the pmposed alignment of I Elm made by the City and there were no obstructions in ; the way. It would still require - having to clip a small ; portion of this subdivision for Eim Avenue Extension. Hi felt that there are other ways to extend Elm Avenue I without affecting this subdivision. They would have couni try type homes with well planned recreational centers. i Their intent was to put greenery in the subdivision. There was considerable discussion on the extension of I Elm Avenue. e t L. ALLAN JANDRO, 2801 Camino Real, stated that his property is adjacent to the subdivision and lies to the Ea&, and the City wants to run a road through his house. He I stated that he felt if the City mns Elm Avenue farther North it would not cost the City as rrruch as they ' I I e I I I .I * I I I ! l 0 I 0 : '8, 's ", 'I '8\ '8, 0 -8- 1 I I I *, ', ' 8, ' '\ I '\\ '' " ', , 0 I I I '\ \+ '., 'y, 0 0 I I ' Name ' 8%. ' , *?A i I 0 i of ''*&,;.,;?& ; :"""""""""""""""""""--"""""""""""""""""-l""""""""" I Member ,o~,~~p&. ".",""%l I 1 :::;I; i:: Ill I I I #;l:t* :::;:: I1 i:!;;; I I I I I \\ '&, '888'\s would give the City a 100 foot strip of their property. He i i stated that he approves of this subdivision. i After further discussion, a motion was made by Commis-i : sioner Grant to continue the consideration of Carlsbad : i Country Homes until the next regular meeting. 'ol)4: I I(*# I I 4 I I I I I 0 0 I I OLD BUSINESS: I I I I I (a) Proposed resolution regarding an amendment : to Ordinance No. 9060 to require dedication of necesshry : 1 right of way and easements upon granting reqver6 for i I rezone. I The Chairman asked that the Commission have copies of : I the Engineering Dept's report for study and this matter i : be continued to the next regular meeting. i wood, Daniel, Mann, Johnson and Mendenhall stating that! : he had resigned and conveying thanks to the Commission : I for their cooperation on the study of the Master Plan of : the City, and that Bymn Barnes and Paul Neal will be : i continuing the study for the City. I I fi 0 I I I I I I I 0 I I I I (b) The Chairman read a letter from Mr. Ken Nork I 1 I I I I I I I I 0 ADJOURNMENT By proper motion the meeting was adjourned at 11:42 P. I$. I I I I 0 I I 0 0 0 I I I I I I I I 1 0 I i I I I I 0 I I I I I I I I 0 I I I I I I 1 I I 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 0 0 0 I 0 1 0 I I I 0 I I I I I I I 8 I I 0 I 0 I 0 I I 0 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 0 I * I I I I 1 i Respectfully submitted, I I I I I i Dorothy Sou$a ; Recording Secretary 1 I I 1 I I I 0 0 0 0 I I 0 I I 0 0 I 8 I I I 1 0 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 0 0 I 0 I I I I I 0 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 0 I 0 I I I I I I 0 I I I I I I I I I I I I I i I 1 I I