HomeMy WebLinkAboutSOUTHPOINTE S-10950-2Southpointe
5-10950-2
AQUIFER TEST AND DATA
EVALUATION
FOR THE PROPOSED
VILLAGES WEST SUBDIVISION
COMPLETED FOR
POTTER CREEK LAND COMPANY
16420 St. James Place
ANCHORAGE, AK 99516
907-345-1842
April 29, 2004
INTRODUCTION
An aquifer test was conducted on April 7 through April 10, 2004, on property owned by
the Potter Valley Land Company and proposed for development into Villages View
Estates Subdivision. This test was completed as a supplement to information gathered
on September 5 through September 7, 2003. The second test was performed to
provide additional data and to improve the quality of the aquifer test. The property is
proposed for development into 21 single-family home lots. The purpose of the aquifer
test was to evaluate the long-term capacity and nature of the aquifer and to determine
the capacity of wells to be constructed to serve the individual lots in the subdivision and
impacts to wells and property in the surrounding area. The scope of the test included a
short-term aquifer test to estimate an appropriate discharge rate for the long-term test.
Once the discharge rate was determined a long-term test was to be conducted to
evaluate the production capabilities of wells in the proposed subdivision and impacts to
surrounding wells in the area. The long-term test was conducted over a period of 72
hours and included the pumping and monitoring of the production well and the
monitoring of drawdown in both the production well and two outlying observation wells.
In addition, a well located approximately 1,000' to the west of the production well in
Villages View Estates West Subdivision was also monitored for drawdown impact during
the aquifer test.
The proposed Villages West Subdivision is located immediately east of The Villages
Scenic Parkway and south of Potter Valley Road. Much of the surrounding property in
the area is served by the Municipal water system. Three lots to the west currently have
wells on the property. Terrasat, Inc conducted a study and aquifer test on those wells in
late 2001. A well included in this study was monitored during our aquifer test for
impacts to drawdown during our aquifer test. We have reviewed the report completed
by Terrasat and relied on some of the assumptions and conclusions made during their
study in our analysis. The terrain of the Villages West Subdivision is very similar and
mostly identical to that studied during the Terrasat, Inc. analysis.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
All formulas utilized in this report unless otherwise noted are taken from the book
entitled "Groundwater and Wells" written by Fletcher G. Driscoll, Ph.D. The book was
copyrighted in 1986 and the referenced issue is the sixth edition completed in 1995.
METHODOLOGY
M -W Drilling, Inc. completed three wells in the proposed subdivision. These wells were
located on Lot 1, Block 1, Lot 1, Block 2 and Lot 2, Block 2. The locations for the wells
were pre -approved by Mr. Jim Cross, P.E. of the Municipality of Anchorage
Development Services Department On -Site Water and Wastewater Program. The
location map is included as an addendum to this report, which details the location and
separation distances between the wells. Each well is constructed of 6" steel casing
which is grouted into bedrock. The wells are completed open hole in bedrock and
intercept water from fractures in the bedrock.
Villages West Subdivision Aquifer Test Page 1 of 6
The well on Lot 1, Block 1 is 305' deep with 6" casing extended to nearly 21' below the
surface. The static water level is 40.55' below the top of casing. This well is located
approximately 150' west of the well on Lot 2, Block 2. The ground elevation at the
wellhead is approximately 1040'.
The well on Lot 2, Block 2 is 342' deep with 6" casing extended to 20.35' below the
surface. The static water level is 47.12' below the top of casing. This well is located
approximately 300' south of the well on Lot 1, Block 1. The ground elevation at the
wellhead is approximately 1058'.
The well on Lot 1, Block 2 is 206' deep with 6" casing extended to 20.2' below the
ground surface. The static water level is 5' below the top of casing. This well is located
300' north of the well on Lot 2, Block 2 and approximately 330' northeast of the well on
Lot 1, Block 1. The ground elevation at the wellhead is approximately 1,035'.
AQUIFER TEST
An aquifer draw down and recovery test was conducted on the well on Lot 2, Block 2
from April 7 to April 10, 2004. The well was pumped at a continuous rate of 3.0 gallons
per minute for 72 hours. The two outlying wells were monitored during the test for draw
down. The total draw down in the production well (Lot 2, Block 2) at the end of 72 hours
was 108.24' to a depth of 156.65'. The total depth of the well is 342'. Full recovery was
noted in the well less than 6 hours later. The drawdown in the well on Lot 1, Block 1 was
monitored during the test and was measured at 1.03'. At the end of the of the 72 hour
test, however, the static water level in the monitor well had recovered completely and
surpassed the level recorded at the beginning of the test. This can probably be
attributed to recharge of the aquifer during the test. No drawdown was noted in the well
on Lot 1, Block 2. In addition, no drawdown was measured in the well located to the
west approximately 1,000' away in Villages View Estates West Subdivision. Data
recorded from the production well (Lot 2, Block 2) during the test yielded a calculated
transmissivity of 12.77 gallons per day per foot.
The well on Lot 1, Block 1 was pumped for a period of 24 hours between September 9
and 10, 2003. The pumping rate was set at 3.5 gallons per minute and maintained over
the duration of the test. Again, the two outlying wells were monitored for draw down
during the test. The total draw down in the production well (Lot 1, Block 1) was
measured at 83.76'. A total drawdown of 1.7' was measured in the well on Lot 2, Block
2 and no appreciable draw down was measured in the well on Lot 1, Block 2. The
calculated transmissivity for this well was noted at 20.09 gallons per day per foot.
The well on Lot 1, Block 2, was pumped for a period of 24 hours between September 9
and 10, 2003. The pumping rate was initially set at 12 gallons per minute but was
gradually scaled down to 3.0 gallons per minute for the last 17 hours of the test. Again,
the two outlying wells were monitored for drawdown during the test. The total
drawdown in the production well (Lot 1, Block 2) was measured at 149.67'. No
appreciable drawdown was measured in either of the outlying wells during the test.
The static water level in the well recovered to near its pretest level after 17 hours.
Drawdown data obtained from the test was erratic due to changes in the pumping rate
and inflows into the well resulting in dramatic changes to the static water level. The
Villages West Subdivision Aquifer Test Page 2 of 6
estimated calculated transmissivity for the well was noted at 12.75 gallons per day per
foot with an estimated storativity factor of .000001.
DATA INTERPRETATION
Transmissivity (T) of an aquifer is defined as the rate at which water flows through a
vertical strip of the aquifer V wide and extending through the full saturated thickness,
under a hydraulic gradient of 1 (100%). During the aquifer test on the production well
on Lot 2, Block 2 it was noted the draw down in the well on Lot 1, Block 1 was
measured at slightly more than 1.0'. As previously mentioned, however, the static water
level in the monitor well completely recovered and exceeded the level at the beginning
of the test prior to the completion of the aquifer test. We completed our calculations
based on the drawdown observed in the well prior to recovery, but before the end of the
aquifer test. The coefficient of transmissivity is calculated from the pumping rate and
the slope of the time -draw down graph in the observation well. The coefficient of
transmissivity for our aquifer test was calculated at 416.8 gallons per day per foot. This
value seems high and is affected by the minor amount of drawdown noted in the
observation well during the aquifer test. The static water level dropped only 1' after 18
hours of pumping. It then held constant for an additional 10 hours while pumping
continued in the production well. The static water level then gradually rose up to and
past the original level while pumping continued until the test was completed after 72
hours. The final static water level was measured at 40.46 at the completion of pumping
compared to 41.0 at the beginning of the test. It is apparent from the readings the
monitor well was affected by recharge effects or other outside influences not related to
the production well. We have therefore chosen not to rely on this information in
determining long-term impact on wells in the surrounding area. We have chosen to
utilize data obtained in the production well to determine transmissivity of the aquifer.
Transmissivity was determined utilizing the production well on Lot 2, Block 2 by
multiplying the average production rate of 3.0 gallons (Q) per minute by 264 and
dividing by the slope of the time -drawdown graph expressed as the change in
drawdown between any two times on the log scale whose ratio is 10. In this case the
total drawdown over the test was 62' (AS). This value was used to determine the
transmissivity between the production well and the observation well.
T = 264Q
AS
T = 264 (3.0 GPM)
62'
T = 12.77 Gallons/Day/Foot
This transmissivity value compares favorably with that obtained in the Terrasat Report
completed on the Villages View Estates West Subdivision immediately to the west.
Transmissivity values noted in that report range from 3 to 18 gallons per day per foot.
Villages West Subdivision Aquifer Test Page 3 of 6
Storativity represents the volume of water released from storage, or taken into storage,
per unit of aquifer storage area per unit change in head. Calculated storativity values
from observation well data give the best approximation for the area between production
and observation well. The storativity value using data from Lot 1, Block 1 during the
pumping of Lot 2, Block 2 was calculated at .000945.
The coefficient of storativity was calculated from the time -drawdown graph using the
zero drawdown intercept of the straight line of the slope. The intercept using our data
was determined to be 250 minutes or .17 days (t ). This number was then multiplied by
the transmissivity determined above of 419.2 gallons per day per foot (T) and the
constant .3. This total was then divided by the total of the distance between the
production and observation well squared (R). The coefficient of storativity for our
aquifer test was then determined to be .000945. Again the storativity determined from
the monitor well on Lot 1, Block 1 is influenced by the Transmissivity value attained and
is probably not accurate due to the slight impact the production well appears to have
had on the monitor well. We again used the information from the recovery of the
production well on Lot 2, Block 2 to determine storativity.
S = .3Tt
R
S = .3(10.42)(.004)
(150)
S = .000001
The storativity determined from the production well on Lot 2, Block 2 was found to be
.000001 based on the recovery of the well verses time after the aquifer test had been
completed. This figure compares favorably with the storativity values achieved from
production data completed on the wells on Lot 1, Block 2 and Lot 1, Block 1. Storativity
values achieved in the Terrasat Report for Villages View Estates West Subdivision
ranged from .000037 to .0016. In that study, however, the radius used to determine
storativity was 80' as opposed to our radius of 150'. In addition, the formula utilized in
our study varied from that used by Terrasat. The formula for storativity for our report is
found in "Groundwater and Well" by Fletcher G. Driscoll, Ph.D. in Chapter 9, Well
Hydraulics.
Based on the transmissivity and storativity values calculated from data collected during
the aquifer test we are confident that each well should be able to support a minimum
pumping rate of 1.0 gallon per minute for 10 years of continuous pumping.
SPECIFIC CAPACITY AND LONG TERM YIELDS
The effects of long term pumping for a single family home are calculated using a typical
domestic use rate of 450 gallons per day (Q), the value of T obtained from the data
obtained from the production well on Lot 2, Block 2 (10.42 gallons per day per foot) as
an estimate of the aquifer capability and a storativity value of S=.000001. After 30 years
of pumping negligible draw down is calculated a distance of 100' away from the
pumping well. This assumes no recharge, which is very conservative. The expected
Villages West Subdivision Aquifer Test Page 4 of 6
impacts from any single domestic well are therefore expected to be extremely minor.
Each well should be able to support a pumping rate capable of producing 450 gallons
per day or .3125 Gallons per Minute.
IMPACT PROJECTIONS
The theoretical specific capacity of a well discharging at a constant rate in a
homogeneous, isotropic, nonleaky artesian aquifer infinite in areal extent is given by the
equation below. This equation is taken from 'Practical Aspects of Groundwater
Modeling" Second Edition, Copyright 1985 by William C. Walton a consultant in water
resources. The equation assumes the production well penetrates and is uncased the
total saturated thickness of the aquifer. It also assumes the well loss is negligible and
the effective radius of the production well has not been affected by the drilling and
development of the production well and is equal to the nominal radius of the production
well.
CALCULATION OF SPECIFIC CAPACITY FOR A PUMPING WELL
Q/s = Specific Capacity (Gallons per Minute per Foot)
Q = Discharge (Gallons per Minute)
s = Drawdown (Feet)
T = Coefficient of Transmissivity
S = Coefficient of Storativity
r = Nominal Radius of the Well (Feet)
t = Time after Pumping Started (Minutes)
No
264 log ( Tt ) —66.1
2,693 r S
1 Hour =
.008
GPM/Foot
6 Months =
.0046
GPM/Foot
1 Year =
.0045
GPM/Foot
10 Years =
.0040
GPM/Foot
20 Years =
.0039
GPM/Foot
CONCLUSIONS
The groundwater conditions at the proposed subdivision have been studied and tested
on site with three newly constructed wells. These wells have been found to be capable
of yielding far in excess of the minimum required supply for a single family home as
mandated by the Municipality. Existing aquifer testing, water level, well yield and water
budget data all indicate that sufficient water supplies are available from wells to be
constructed in The Villages West Subdivision without affecting neighboring wells. All
new wells are expected to exceed Municipal requirements for single-family homes.
The three wells completed on this property were found to have production rates of 3.0,
3.4 and 3.5 gallons per minute. These rates far exceed the Municipal requirement for
Villages West Subdivision Aquifer Test Page 5 of 6
single-family homes. In addition, these rates are much greater than the average well
production rates for wells in the Anchorage area. Data collected during the aquifer test
indicates that little or no impact was seen in the observation wells during the 72 hours of
continuous pumping of the production well. A third well located approximately 1,000' to
the east was similarly monitored during the test with no fluctuation noted during the test
period. This data would suggest that the wells operating independently would have little
affect on each other.
Recovery of the production well after 72 hours of constant pumping required only 4 to 6
hours indicating recharge of the aquifer is very good and a substantial amount of water
is available to support this subdivision. Conclusions drawn from the aquifer test
completed in the Villages View Estates West Subdivision stated long term pumping
rates of 1.0 gallon per minute should not cause well interference beyond available head.
Our aquifer test showed similar results to the Terrasat test, but with much less
drawdown in the monitor well. We therefore conclude similarly, that a 1.0 gallon per
minute production rate per well will have no impact to adjacent wells. This rate is
adequate for a home with up to nine bedrooms according to Municipal standards.
A recent study completed on the subdivision immediately to the west of this proposed
subdivision concluded that a connection between rock aquifer systems in the area is
very unlikely. This is supported by the apparent north -south trend in local fracture
systems as interpreted from aerial photographs. This indicates that the hydraulic
connection in an east -west direction is unlikely. No data, however, exists to
conclusively state the water wells in this subdivision are not hydraulically connected to
adjacent water wells.
Data obtained during the aquifer testing and presented herein are representative of
conditions at the time of testing and should be considered representative only of that
particular period in time. Changes will occur to the property over time, which will affect
subsurface conditions and may impact conclusions drawn in this report.
Michael E. Anderson, P.E.
Villages West Subdivision Aquifer Test Page 6 of 6
Municipality of Anchorage
• Development Services Department
Building Safety Division
MEMORANDUM
DATE: December 12, 2006
TO: Jerry Weaver, Jr., Platting Officer, CPD
FROI\i�el Roth, Program Manager, On -Site Water and Wastewater Program
SUBJECT: Comments on Cases due December 15, 2006
The On -Site Water & Wastewater Program has reviewed the following cases and has
these comments:
%S10950=2 -__ Southpointe Subdivisionl
No objection. Comments to remain the same as stated in Planning and
Zoning Commission Resolution No. 2004-043, B.9)a. & b. & c.
S10965-3 Denali Vue Subdivision
No objection. All properties to be served by public water & sewer
S11496-1 Eagle Crossing Subdivision
No objection. All properties to be served by public water & sewer
S1134—f Viewpoint Subdivision
Previously Routed, No Changes
S11557-1 Tumagain View #3 Subdivision
No objection.
Mayor Mark Begich
Municipality of Anchorage
P.O. Box 196650 • Anchorage, Alaska 995196650 *Telephone: (907) 343-7900
Physical Address: 4700 Bragaw Street* Anchorage, Alaska 99507 • www.munl.org/planning s
Planning Department
REQUEST FOR COMMENTS ON PRELIMINARY PLAT SUBDIVISIONS
November 21, 2006
The Municipality of Anchorage has received application relating to the following preliminary plat
activity. The hearing date is Wednesday, January 03, 2007 and comments must reach our
offs 5'Z0061R order to be included in the staff conditions of approval.
Preliminary Plats to be heard:
(j,t4^c, T5 REMtVA/
S10950-2
Newsubdivision: Southpointe Subd. (formally Villages View) ! H F. S14 -M E
prig. subdilegal: Villages View Estates
Request: 18 month time extension
S10966-3 itl
Newsubdtvision: Denali Vue�%• '
Orig. subdiLegai: Scimitar Subdivision Unit #3
Request: Time extension for Subdivision Agreement Case # 04-037.
6114% -1
Newsubdivision: Eagle Crossing Subdivision
Orig. subd4-egal: Eagle Crossing Subdivision
Request: To subdivide seven (7) tracts of land into one hundred one (101) lots and ten (10)
tracts of land with a phase plan and with variances from AMC 21.80.36013(Design
standards- Hillside lots -Slope chart), AMC 21.85.030.A.3 (Improvement
requirements -Urban area -Curbs & gutters), AMC 21.80.3000 (Design standards -Lot
dimensions -Corner lot), AMC 21.80.300D (Design standards -Lot dimensions -Width
to depth ratio) and AMC 21.80.3008 (Design standards -Lot dimensions -Lot depth),
311546-1
Now Subdivision: Viewpoint Subdivision PREVIOUSLY ROUTED NO CHANGES
oris. subdiLegai: Viewpoint Subdivision
Request: To subdivide one (1) tract of land into two (2) tracts of land.
DOUBLE=SIDED 1__OF_2_PAGES
S11657-1
NewsubdivWon: Turnagain View#3 V.0,
Orig. subdUgal: Turnagain View #3
Request: To subdivide one (1) lot into one (1) different lot with vacation of Right-of-way
(Cange Street) running north -south along the east property boundary
Attached are copies of the proposed plats. Please submit your comments in writing,
specifying any easements or other requirements that your department or agency may
need.
If no easements are required at this time, please provide a list. of those plats to which
there is "no comment' or "no objection".
Sincerely,
Jerry T. Weaver, Jr
Platting Officer
Enclosures
7
November 14, 2006
Mr. Jerry Weaver
Community Planning and Development
Municipality of Anchorage
4700 Bragaw Street
Anchorage, Alaska, 99507
Re: Southpointe Subdivision, Case S-10950
Mr. Weaver,
NOV 1 7 2006
ENT
S' 1 19 5 0 JAN 0 3 2007
We would like to request a time extension for Southpointe Subdivision, Case
Number S-10950. This time extension is required to resolve engineering issues
that have arisen.
Thank you,
Tim Creary
Petitioners Representative
Lantech Inc.
LANTECH, INC. • SURVEYORS • PLANNERS • ENGINEERS
440 W. BENSON BLVD., SUITE 200 • ANCHORAGE, AK 99503 0 1907) 562-5291 • FAX 561-6626
Villages View plat sign -off for 2003-043
Bartels, Gloria A.
From: Tim Creary ]timcreary@lantechi.com]
Sent: Tuesday, March 28, 2006 11:30 AM
To: Bartels, Gloria A.
Subject: Fw: Villages View plat sign -off for 2003-043
Follow Up Flag: Follow up
Flag Status: Flagged
Tim Creary
Lantech, Inc.
907-770-9203 (direct)
907-830-7358 (cell)
907-561-6626 (fax)
From: Taylor, Anastasia 1.[mailto:TaylorA]@ci.anchorage.ak.usj
Sent: Monday, March 20, 2006 2:26 PM
To: Bartels, Gloria A.
Cc: Tim Creary; Dave Grenier
Subject: Villages View plat sign -off for 2003-043
Hi Gloria,
Villages View (aka Southpointe)
Dave and Time have been working with me to resolve conditions B -9-f 1-v.
Page 1 of 1
(i) site grading and drainage plan (95% complete). Dave and Tim will be working with an adjacent property
owner who is currently out of state to obtain a drainage easement Dave and Tim would like to proceed with the
final plat with the understanding that the drainage easement will be required prior to PM&E acceptance of the final
plat when it comes through for mylar sign -off.
(ii) The erosion and sediment control plan is substantially complete pending the final site plan from item (i).
(iii) The drainage easements are dependant upon the final site plan from item (i).
(iv) The SWPPP is substantially complete pending the final site plan from item (i).
(v) This item is satisfied. -
Please let me know if you have any questions.
Ana Taylor
Project Management and Engineering
Private Development Engineer
office 343-8025
fax 343-8088
MUNICIPALITY OF ANCHORAGE
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2004-043
A RESOLUTION APPROVING A SUBDIVISION OF TWO TRACTS CONTAINING 50.45
ACRES, KNOWN AS THE VILLAGES SUBDIVISION, TRACT A-2 AND VILLAGES
VIEW ESTATES SUBDIVISION, TRACT A -IE, INTO 22 LOTS AND 3 TRACTS WITH A
VACATION AND REDEDICATION OF A RIGHT OF WAY, AND VARIANCES FROM
AMC 21.080A.2 TO ALLOW STRIP PAVING; AMC 21.85.080 TO ALLOW GRASSED
SHOULDERS AND SWALES INSTEAD OF CURB AND GUTTER; AMC 21.85.140 TO
ALLOW GRASSED SWALES WITHIN THE RIGHT OF WAY ALONG WITH
GREENBELT AREAS FOR BIOFILTRATION INSTEAD OF URBAN STORM DRAIN
FACILITIES; AMC 21.80.110 TO ALLOW FOR NO LIGHTING ALONG THE STREET
AS REQUIRED IN URBAN AREAS; FROM AMC 21.80.290 TO ALLOW BLOCK
LENGTH TO EXCEED 1,320 FEET; AND FROM AMC 21.80.30OG TO HAVE FLAG
LENGTHS LONGER THAN 200 FEET; AND DENYING VARIANCES FROM AMC
21.80.330,21.85-050 TABLE A, 21.80.010 AND 21.80.290 TO ALLOW FOR POTTER
VIEW CIRCLE AND VILLAGES VIEW DRIVE TO BE PRIVATE STREETS; FOR
PROPOSED VILLAGES VIEW ESTATES WEST SUBDIVISION, GENERALLY
LOCATED SOUTH OF POTTER VALLEY ROAD ON THE EASTERN SIDE OF
VILLAGES SCENIC PARKWAY.
Case S-10950 Tax ID No. 020-311-39 and -26
WHEREAS, a petition has been received from John Berggren, petitioner, and
Lantech, Inc., representative, requesting approval of a subdivision of two tracts
consisting of 50.45 acres, known as The Villages Subdivision, Tract A-2 and
Villages View Estates Subdivision, Tract A -1E, into 22 lots and 3 tracts for 18
months with vacation and rededication of a right of way, and variances from AMC
21.080A.2 to allow strip paving; AMC 21.85.080 to allow grassed shoulders and
swales instead of curb and gutter; AMC 21.85.140 to allow grassed swales within
the right of way along with greenbelt areas for biofiltration instead of urban storm
drain facilities; AMC 21.80.110 to allow for no lighting along the street as required
in urban areas; from AMC 21.80.290 to allow block length to exceed 1,320 feet;
from AMC 21.80.300G to have flag lengths longer than 200 feet; and from AMC
21.80.330, 21.85.050 Table A, 21.80.010 and 21.80.290 to allow for Potter View
Circle and Villages View Drive to be private streets; for Proposed Villages View
Estates West Subdivision, generally located south of Potter Valley Road on the
eastern side of Villages Scenic Parkway; and
WHEREAS, notices were published, posted and public hearing notices were
mailed and a public hearing was held on June 14, 2004.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, by the Municipal Planning and Zoning
Commission that:
planning and Zoning Commission
Resolution 2003-043
Page 2
A. The Commission makes the following findings of fact:
1. This 52 -acre preliminary plat proposes to subdivide one tract into
twenty-two (22) single-family lots and three tracts. The lots range in
size from 52,255 square feet to 176,271 square feet. The plat
application has a vacation request and several variance requests. The
vacation request is to vacate and rededicate the access road on the
northwest corner of the site, to overlay the existing access road. The
variances are primarily to allow for private roads, and to allow for the
roads to be developed to rural, rather than urban standards, and a
variance to allow for private roads.
2. The property is located south of Potter Valley Road on the eastern side
of Villages Scenic Parkway. The lots are requested to be served with on-
site water and wastewater utilities. Access to the site will be from Potter
Valley Road. An internal access is provided by a 60 -foot wide tract
(Tract A -1H) connecting from Potter Valley Road and meanders to the
East boundary between Lots 8 and Tract A -1G.
3. This preliminary plat was originally submitted without the required
amendments to the Hillside Wastewater Management Plan (HWMP) to
allow the site to be served by on-site septic systems, and without the
Site Plan required of AO 84-21 (aa) which governs the special
limitations for the site's R-3 SL zoning. The Shaw property to the west
was recently removed from the HWMP to allow on site septic system and
wells for approximately 15 acres as identified on Map 9 of the HWMP
and to allow a residential density less than the minimum 3 DUA
recommended in the HWMP. However, the petitioner has since
submitted these required applications. The Commission must first
review and approve the cases in the following order prior to reviewing
the plat: 1) HWMP amendment (case 2002-208), 2) Potter Creek Master
Plan amendment, Final Master Plan and final site plan (case 2002-207),
and then 3) the requested variances, vacation and preliminary plat.
4. The petitioner's representative has provided several studies of the
groundwater and septic system capabilities on this site. The Municipal
On -Site Water and Wastewater Program Manager has reviewed this
information, and visited the site with the petitioner's engineer. The
Program Manager has provided review comments that this site will be
able to support twenty-two lots with on-site well and septic, and that it
will not impact area wells. The petitioner has also proven to the
Program Manager's satisfaction that 3 septic sites per lot can be located
and platted to ensure retention for future use.
planning and Zoning Commission
Resolution 2003-043
Page 3
5. The Commission approved the variances from AMC 21.030.A.2 to allow
strip paving, from AMC 21.85.080 to allow grassed shoulders and
swales instead of curb and gutter, from AMC 21.85.140 to allow grassed
swales within the ROW along with greenbelt areas for biofiltration
instead of urban storm drainage facilities, from AMC 21.80. 110 to allow
for no lighting along the street as required in urban areas, from AMC
21.80.290 to allow block length to exceed 1,320 feet, and from AMC
21.80.300.g to have flag lengths longer than 200 feet.
6. The Commission, in approving the above noted variances, finds that
this property is in an area that is unique and these variances will allow
it to be developed to a more rural standard. The Commission further
finds that these variances accommodate problems encountered by
virtue of where the property is located.
7. The Commission denied the variances from AMC 21.80.330, 21.85.050
Table A, 21.80.010 and 21.80.290 to allow for Potter View Circle and
Villages View Drive to be private streets.
8. The Commission finds that, regarding the request for private streets,
that there was testimony in support of both positions, however, the
Commission finds it is in the public's interest that these streets be
- publicly dedicated. The Commission further finds that the petitioner is
not the homeowners who would ultimately have to pay for the
maintenance of these streets into the foreseeable future.
9. The Commission finds that, regarding the request for private streets,
that a LRDSA would accomplish more control over the maintenance of
the roadways, it would create a local board with local control, but with a
public element.
10. The Commission finds that Anchorage 2020 supports public access to
open spaces and parks and approving a variance to allow private roads
is contrary to that plan. This area is close enough to Chugach State
Park that the concerns regarding access to the Park should be honored.
In the absence of a Potter Valley master plan for the area, it is
necessary to keep these areas open.
11. The Commission finds that although private roads have been allowed in
other subdivisions, Anchorage 2020 guides the Commission's actions.
planning and Zoning Commission
Resolution 2003-043
Page 4
12. The Commission approved the request to vacate the access road,
finding that the vacation request is housekeeping in nature, as the right
of way for this road on the northwest corner does not overlay the road
that is physically being used, and the plat shows a rededication for
access. It was further discussed that there is a condition of approval to
resolve the access to the north through construction of the access road.
13. Opposition finds that, regarding the requested vacation of right of way,
that there were serious concerns with regard to providing connectivity,
and on the Hillside connectivity is a serious life safety issue and
opposition did not want to eliminate the opportunity for connection to
the residents to the north.
14. The Commission approved the plat for 18 months subject to Staff
conditions 1 through 8, noting, due to public comment, that condition
number 7 regarding open space clearing is consistent with a condition
that was in prior plat approvals.
15. The Commission finds that, regarding the recommendation to the
Assembly for denial of the HWMP amendment, that there shall be an
additional condition number 9 to allow for resolution of any additional
improvements based on the Assembly action on the HWMP amendment.
16. The Commission finds that the conditions proposed provide adequate
protection for the issues raised during the hearing.
B. The Commission recommends the above captioned subdivision with variances
and vacations be APPROVED, subject to the following conditions of approval:
1) Approval of variances from AMC 21.030.A.2 to allow strip paving.
2) Approval of variances from AMC 21.85.080 to allow grassed shoulders
and swales instead of curb and gutter.
3) Approval of variances from AMC 21.85.140 to allow grassed swales
within the ROW along with greenbelt areas for biofiltration instead of
urban storm drainage facilities.
4) Approval of variances from AMC 21.80.110 to allow for no lighting along
the street as required in urban areas.
Planning and Zoning Commission
Resolution 2003-043
Page 5
5) Denial of variances from AMC 21.80.330, 21.85.050 Table A, 21.80.010
and 21.80.290 to allow for Potter View Circle and Villages VieV4 Drive to
be private streets.
6) Approval of a variance from AMC 21.80.290 to allow block length to
exbeed 1,320 feet.
7) Approval of a variance from AMC 21.80.300.8 to have flag lengths
longer than 200 feet.
8) Approval of the vacation of the access road on the northwest corner of
the site to meet up with existing roads.
9) Approval of the plat for 18 months subject to the following conditions:
a. Resolving the following with On -Site Water and Wastewater
Services:
b. For each lot in this proposed subdivision, three wastewater
disposal system sites shall be identified on the final plat per AMC
15.65.180.B.2. The areas to be used for wastewater disposal
systems must be designated on the plat as being unavailable for
use for driveways, parking areas or structures.
C. To develop this property onlywasLewater.disposal systems that
have been approved ashittroe�i Yeducing systems by the MOA
shall be installed. A note to this effect shall be placed on the final
plat. These systems will be required by code to undergo yearly
maintenance and approval.
d. Submitting a restoration plan with a cost estimate of revegetating
the portions of the site that are . disturbed which will not be
developed under a site plan approval, as well as estimates of
revegetation of the site if the proposed development fails to occur
along with a bond to ensure revegetation of the site to the
Planning Department.
e. Submitting wind data to Building Safety for a determination of
design and construction required by the Uniform Building Code
for structures to be constructed on this property and place a note
on the plat to specify any design and construction requirements.
f. Resolving the following with Public Works:
Planning and Zoning Commission
Resolution 2003-043
Page 6
i. A site grading and drainage plan for the development must
be submitted to Public Works for approval.
ii. Submitting an erosion and sediment control plan to Public
Works for approval.
iii. The need for drainage easements and drainage improvements
with PM&E.
iv. Submitting a storm water treatment plan and obtaining an
NPDES permit.
v. Entering into a subdivision agreement for construction of the
required internal strip paved road, external access road to
gravel standards, and all required monument, drainage,
telephone and electric facilities, traffic control devices,
landscaping, and proposed separated trail along proposed
Villages View Drive.
g. Submitting an access agreement on Municipal form in accordance
with AMC 21.45.040 to Land Use Enforcement, if Lots 2 and 3
utilize the access easement shown on the site plat. _
_ h. Making the following drafting changes:
i. On the vicinity map, text "New Seward Hwy" should be just
"Seward Hwy".
ii. On the map, the tract south of Tract A is Tract B of Villages
View Tracts subdivision.
iii. Tract 20 in the SW corner is in "The Villages" subdivision.
iv. Tract A-lE is in "Villages View Estates" — the "s" is missing
on Villages.
i. Placing the following note, or an alternate note approved by the
Planning Department, on the plat:
"Only that area needed for home and driveway construction shall
be disturbed within 30 feet of the foundation and driveways with
recountouring and clearing; all other areas of the lots are to
Planning and Zoning Commission
Resolution 2003-043
Page 7
maintain the existing contours of the topography and vegetation
to the maximum extent possible. Prior to any construction, the
owner shall have a Land Use Enforcement Officer verify the limits
of clearing and construction on the site, and ensure they are
clearly marked during construction. Prior to receiving a
certificate of occupancy, the owner shall have the site inspected
to ensure that no additional clearing or disturbance of vegetation
to be retained occurred, and if it was; that it is properly restored."
An amendment to the Hillside Wastewater Management Plan shall
be reviewed and approved by the Municipal Assembly, and the
site plan approval be deemed effective, prior to this approval
becoming effective.
k. Resolve with Planning any additional improvements based on the
Assembly action on the HWMP amendment.
PASSED AND APPROVED by the Municipal Planning,and, Zoning Commission
this 14th day of June 2004. �) 1
Tom Nelson
Acting Secretary Chair
(Case S-10950, Tax ID No. 020-311-39 and -26)
ac
MUNICIPALITY OF ANCHORAGE
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2005-045
A RESOLUTION APPROVING LEGAL AND PHYSICAL ACCESS TO VILLAGES VIEW
ESTATES SUBDIVISION, AND TO ADOPT FINDINGS OF FACT THAT THE REQUIREMENTS
OF AMC 21.75.010 A.3,4. AND 6, FOR (REMAND FROM THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT,
CASE S-10950, EXISTING LEGAL DESCRIPTION IS THE VILLAGES SUBDMSION, TRACT
A2 AND VILLAGES VIEW ESTATES, TRACT A-lE).
(Case S-10950, Tax I.D. No. 020-311-26 and -39)
WHEREAS, this case is a remand of a platting action from the Board of Adjustment
to determine whether the Planning and Zoning Commission erred in approving the vacation
of the right of way in Villages View Estates. The matter is remanded to PZC to reopen the
record to accept additional information, evidence, and testimony regarding legal and
physical access to Villages View Estates Subdivision and to hold a public hearing; and to
make new findings as to whether the requirements of AMC 21.75.010A.3., 4. & 6. have been
met, and
.WHEREAS, the Board of Adjustment upheld the Commission's decision regarding all
of the requested items, including the plat, variances, and vacation of right-of-way request,
and the only item remanded was to determine if there was legal and physical access, and
WHEREAS, notices were published, posted and a public hearing notices were mailed
and a public hearing was held on August 1, 2005.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the Municipal Planning and Zoning
Commission that:
A. The Commission makes the following findings of fact:
1. This case is a remand of a platting action from the Board of Adjustment. The
Board of Adjustment upheld the Commission's decision regarding all of the
requested items, including the plat, variances, and vacation of right-of-way
request. The only item remanded was to determine if there was legal and
physical access. The public hearing notice for this request over -advertised the
case. It stated:
Remand from the Board of Adjustment to determine
whether the Planning and Zoning Commission erred in
approving the vacation of the right of way in Villages View
Estates. The matter is remanded to PZC to reopen the
record to accept additional information, evidence, and
testimony regarding legal and physical access to Villages
View Estates Subdivision and to hold a public hearing;
and to make new findings as to whether the requirements
of AMC 21.75.010A.3., 4. & 6. have been met.
Planning and Zoning Commissiot,
Resolution No. 2005-045
Page 2 of 7
2. This remand is only to reopen the record to accept additional information,
evidence, and testimony regarding legal and physical access to Villages View
Estates, and related to that, findings regarding AMC 21.75.010A.3, 4, and 6.
3. This 52 -acre preliminary plat proposes to subdivide one Tract into twenty-two
(22) single-family lots and three tracts. The lots range in size from 52,255
square feet to 176,271 square feet. The plat application has a vacation
request and several variance requests. The vacation request is to vacate and
rededicate the access road on the northwest corner of the site, to overlay the
existing access road. The variances are primarily to allow for private roads,
and to allow for the roads to be developed to rural, rather than urban,
standards.
4. The property is located south of Potter Valley Road on the eastern side of
Villages Scenic Parkway. The lots are to be served with on-site water and
wastewater utilities. Access to the site will be from Potter Valley Road. An
internal access is provided by a 60 -foot wide ROW connecting from Potter
Valley Road and meanders to the East boundary between Lots 8 and Tract A-
1 G.
5. The public hearing for this case was opened and closed, and the plat,
vacation, and variances approved at the June 14, 2004 Planning and Zoning
Commission meeting. The plat was subject to 7 conditions of approval.. A
copy of the staff report, minutes and the verbatim transcript from June 14,
2004 relating to this case and the summary of action are included in this
packet.
6. Potter Creek LLC, represented by Michael E. Wolski, P.E., submitted an appeal
of this case to the Municipal Clerk on July 27, 2004. The appellants cited 6
allegations. Findings of Fact were requested by Potter Valley Development,
LLC, on June 15, 2004. The Planning and Zoning Commission approved
Findings of Fact (Planning and Zoning Commission Resolution) on August 2,
2004. A copy of the Findings of Fact is included in the packet.
7. The Board of Adjustment deliberated and decided the appeal on December 14,
2004 and adopted Findings of Fact on March 7, 2005. A copy of the Board of
Adjustment Findings of Fact is included in the packet. The Board of
Adjustment affirmed the decision and findings of the Platting Board except for
the following that were remanded to the Platting Board to:
a. Reopen the record to accept additional information, evidence and
testimony regarding legal and physical access to Villages View Estates
Subdivision and to hold a public hearing;
b. To make new findings as to whether Villages View Estates Subdivision
has legal and physical access and whether the requirements of AMC
21.75.010A.3, 4, and 6 have been met.
Planning and Zoning Commission
Resolution No. 2005-045
Page 3 of 7
8. The applicable definitions are as follows:
Legal access. Having legal access means being adjacent to a
roadway as described in Section 9.04.010. (AMC 9.04.010
related defuiition: Street means the entire width between the
boundary lines of every way open to the use of the public for
purposes of vehicular travel.)
Physical access. Having physical access means being adjacent to
a road suitable for travel by passenger automobiles that is
connected to the publicly dedicated and improved transportation
network of the municipality.
9. In the Department recommendation to the Commission at the June 14, 2004
public hearing, staff noted that the property is located south of Potter Valley
Road on the eastern side of Villages Scenic Parkway. Access to the site will be
from Potter Valley Road. An internal access is provided by a 60 -foot wide ROW
connecting from Potter Valley Road and meanders to the East boundary
between Lots 8 and Tract A- IG.
10. It was noted in this review that the access road that leads into the site at the
northwest corner of the petition area, is not fully within the dedicated right-of-
way (ROW), either through the tract to the north outside of this plat where the
petitioner has access, nor where it enters the petition site. The petitioner
requested, and received approval from the Commission, to vacate the portion
of this existing ROW on the petition site. This action will relocate the ROW to
fit over where the road will lead into the site. The ROW is not fully over the
access road on the property to the north, but as that ROW abuts the petition
site, but it connects in to the proposed new road within the petition site. With
this action, the petitioner now has legal access by being adjacent to a right of
public way. Thus, the petitioner has proven that they have legal access.
11. As the ROW is not fully over the access road on the property to the north, the
petitioner has to prove that they have physical access, meaning that the
petition site is adjacent to a road suitable for travel by passenger automobiles
that is connected to the publicly dedicated and improved transportation
network of the municipality. This does not mean that the access road has to
be dedicated to the public, but rather it could be an easement or other
acceptable road for access that connects into the publicly dedicated and
constructed Municipal road system. Also, it has to be suitable for travel, or
made so.
12. The petitioner does not own the property to the north, where the ROW does
not overlay the road used for access. However, the road and the ROW both
connect the petition site to a publicly dedicated and improved ROW of England
Avenue, which connects to the end of Greece Avenue and onto Potter Valley
Road, which then travels out to the Seward Highway.
Planning and Zoning Commissioi,
Resolution No. 2005-045
Page 4 of 7
13. Thus, to meet this physical access requirement, the petitioner would have to
either construct a new road within the existing ROW, or to establish legal
access across this private property to the north of the petition site and
construct that existing road to Municipal standards. The Commission
properly conditioned the plat to ensure that this access road will be
constructed to Municipal standards td make it suitable for travel. As the
petitioner does not own the property on which this access road lies, a replat to
vacate and rededicate that ROW is not possible. However, documentation was
provided by an adjacent property owner who has used this access road
through the petition site and to the north since 1954, when the road was
built, and from a 1955 BLM survey completed to establish the location of the
road, later which was recorded in 1957. Documentation was also provided
showing that this has been considered physical access over the years with
other plats being approved which accessed through this existing access road.
14. The petitioner has provided a letter from the State of Alaska Department of
Natural Resources (DNR) dated September 12, 2003. This letter concurs that
the documentation provided appears to satisfy the acceptance of the RS 2477
rights establishing the use of this access road as a public way.
15,, The Traffic Department and Project Management and Engineering Department
reviewed the access into the site, especially proposed reconstruction of the
curve where Ahe road within the petition site meets the curve of the access
road. The Traffic Department and Project Management and Engineering
recommend approval of the intersection configuration based on conditions for
improvements which will be a part of the road improvement requirements
when permitting occurs. Design review is on-going with Traffic Engineering
and the property owner's engineer relating to the development of the northerly
parcel as it relates to a future road alignment. However, this does not impact
this issue. Traffic Engineering and Project Management and Engineering have
completed a preliminary review and have stated that the revised alignments at
the curve intersecting with the road in the petition site appear to meet
Municipal standards for construction. Those comments and schematics have
been included in the record.
16. Thus, with the DNR response and research provided for that response, the
review by the Traffic Department and Project Management and Engineering,
and the condition to reconstruct the road to Municipal standards, the
Department finds the requirement for physical access is met.
17. The record demonstrates that legal and physical access does exist. The
information from the adjacent property owner, Robert Miller, summarized the
'history of the use of Potter Valley access road as a public road. The record
also demonstrated the connection at the north boundary as mentioned in
Traffic Department, Development Services and Street and Park Maintenance
memos. There was also evidence that as early as 1980, plats have been
reviewed and recorded by the Municipality, all located to the east of Villages
View which use the existing road as their legal and physical access. The Board
required final resolution of that issue through establishing physical and legal
W.
Planning and Zoning Commission
Resolution No. 2005-045
Page 5of7
.• ,
and legal access through either vacating and replatting or establishing this
access road as 'a public road. The petitioner has since provided a letter from
DNR accepting that the RS 2477 requirements appear to be met in order for
this to be considered a public road.
18. The Commission approved the legal and physical access subject to the two
conditions recommended by Staff, and incorporated six findings of fact offered
by the Department that legal and physical access to Villages View Estates
Subdivision and that the requirements of AMC 21.75.010A.3., 4. & 6. have
been met.
19. The Commission finds that one of the primary issues with this case was
whether legal and physical access had been established and there is now a
Department of Natural Resources letter indicating that a road was established
in approximately 1953. It appears the petitioner has met all necessary
requirements and, with Staffs recommendations, the Commission further
finds that the matter should go forward.
20. The Commission thanked the parties and municipal staff for working to come
to a resolution rather than requiring the Commission to try to fashion a
solution. The Commission approved the two amendments offered this evening
and adopted the six proposed findings.
21. The Commission voted unanimously to approve the request: seven in favor,
none opposed, motion carried.
B. The Commission APPROVED the subject request subject to the following conditions:
Amend condition of approval (13)(9)(l)(v) as follows:
f. Resolving the following with Public Works:
V. Entering into a subdivision agreement for construction of
the required internal strip paved road, extLmal
read to gravel—standards, and all required monument,
drainage, telephone and electric facilities, traffic control
devices, landscaping, and proposed separated trail along
proposed Villages View Drive.
2. Add a condition of approval (B)(9)(4 as follows:
Before the final plat for Villages View Estates is recorded, Petitioner
shall escrow for the benefit of Potter Creek Development, LLC, the
owner of the property immediately north of Villages View Estates, the
sum required as Petitioner's contribution to resolving legal and physical
access to Villages View Estates in accordance with the terms of the
Agreement Concerning Villages View Final Plat Recording dated July
Planning and Zoning Commission
Resolution No. 2005-045
Page 6 of 7
18, 2005 (the "Agreement"), among the Petitioner, Potter Creek
Development, LLC, and the Municipality of Anchorage. Subject to the
preceding sentence, Petitioner may proceed with Villages View Estates
plat and development prior to completion of the access road right-of-
way relocation and access road improvements.
C. The Commission APPROVED the following findings of fact regarding:
1. The Planning and Zoning Commission finds that the requirement for legal
access has been met as the right-of-way within the petition site now has been
vacated and realigned to abut the right-of-way leading to the petition site from
England Avenue to the north.
2. The Planning and Zoning Commission finds that the requirement for physical
access has been met as the petitioner has provided a documentation and a
letter from the State of Alaska Department of Natural Resources •(DNR)
concurring that the documentation provided appears to satisfy the acceptance
of the RS 2477 rights establishing the use of this access road as a public way,
the Traffic Department and Project Management and Engineering Department
reviewed and gave preliminary approval to the access into the site, and
conditioned the plat to reconstruct the access road to Municipal standards.
3. The Planning and Zoning Commission finds that the requirement of AMC
21.75.010A.3 has been met as the approval of the physical and legal access
will enable the long used access road to be constructed to Municipal
standards and allow for required associated drainage improvements to allow
for vastly improved traffic access through the area for the benefit of current
and future user's.
4. The Planning and Zoning Commission finds that the requirement of AMC
21.75.010A.4 has been met as the approval of the physical and legal access
will allow alignments of the roads to occur in a proper arrangement, and the
revised curve radius at the intersection of the petition site road with the
access.road curve will allow for proper and improved alignment to Municipal
standards over the current status.
5. The Planning and Zoning Commission finds that the requirement of AMC
21.75.010A.6 has been met as the approval of the physical and legal access
will allow for the resolution of the road alignment and improvements which
will improve the efficient movement of vehicular and pedestrian traffic through
allowing construction of the existing road to Municipal standards, and for the
provision of separated pedestrian pathways with in the petition site.
6. The Platting Board incorporates the references in the appeal record cited in
the June 14, 2004 staff report as additional submittals of the petitioner,
comments by the Traffic Department and Project Management and
Engineering, and the additional findings relating to the issues of legal and
physical access.
Planning and Zoning Commission.
Resolution No. 2005-045
Page 7 of 7
PASSED AND APPROVED by the Municipal Planning and Zoning Commission on the Iat
day of August 2005.
ADO . ED by the Anchorage Municipal Planning and Zoning Commission this
day of ` 2005. If the secretary received a written request and intent to appeal, this
written decision/resolution of the Planning and Zoning Commission is final and any party
may appeal it within twenty (20) days to the Board of Adjustment pursuant to Anchorage
Municipal Code 21.30.030 and Anchorage Municipal Code of Regulations 21.10.304. if the
secretarydid not receive a written request and intent to appeal within seven (7) calendar
days of the date the decision was made on the record, August 1, 2005, then this written
decision is final and not appealable to any other administrative body. Final administrative
decisions with no further administrative remedy may be appealed to the Superior Court
within thirty (30)) days.
Tom Nelson on YAhon /
Secretary Chair
(Case S-10950)
(Tax ID No. 020-311-26 and -39)
M-
n
chi O
a >
z
c
3
V
IOD
CD y Nn
��, u, 0o F Z
w
>m�
c�
OD ..mom
o 90
+1'
X�Z
0
>90
n NSC UI
o ur�A
1 C
o^
\1
O
0
(A
o �77'jj m
Ft m 0 C
Zrz
6>
—Z)
o MZC
^' r9mC
m �T�
W (A C
F i; o t
e �• n
a
a°o�Ss'
0
s = coo
P . Jm n o
-1 N N •-4 D
of CL
1, — c
5 o > a
00 V-.� O
o>CD O
�.
`<F1
NO p5
3•
p- A F
N ? v m
O�o0
1 O O o
�t0 An
•oav
.11E
0015-00
7 N
CL
�o
ou
u
0 En -4
A A O
>
NyN
c
1-0
ez5
�MET
Jh00
y
C
O
n.
i
C
. m
)
in
m\
0
z
)
---
3
�o
_
|
)
/
C9
3
1
'O'os•»j
I
49.77.
I
I
m
„
V
NOr Y
L
\
�
Co
•\
nr
'• O
g
egg
S
N
Fi
50 7'48-W 3M7 (R"I)
b
It
Q
^
o
e
"\
S
CL
.
C
N
a
•
I
I
Q I
I
C
I
a I
n I
I
a
L ----J
I
.I
LANTECH
i
I,
/
/
1
I
/L u
1 ¢
1�
Y14 S
gl� �
li .ti
}•.
�`` �r 9t
-Oft
~
J,
I
N 3 F
}� 3
ps
I
vun�
a' —8
�i
s/
I
P, w y
pq
1
A
N
r
\
S
\
en Gp•
N 0)
w F
m
D
m
.•F pYJ ,y/ p
4 MrOy
N
�
w
m
le
CD
N
N
77ff
4 V i
I•.
S
r1
ET
r �c.otpoN
1
n�va).co'eor
I,
/
/
1
I
/L u
1 ¢
1�
Y14 S
gl� �
li .ti
pore
yrs -7,0 Z rgl.lr DON ?
pM
i bL 61 m •ul
C ? e+c
V
c pu
¢r "
}•.
�`` �r 9t
-Oft
i u
8�0
N 3 F
}� 3
ps
\
1
A
"
r
\
\
pore
yrs -7,0 Z rgl.lr DON ?
pM
i bL 61 m •ul
C ? e+c
V
c pu
¢r "
\-
}•.
�`` �r 9t
-Oft
i u
8�0
N 3 F
}� 3
ps
"
r
o
en Gp•
p
.•F pYJ ,y/ p
4 MrOy
hU.: LA
�
le
\-
.gym
S1 N / u y���LgyX
• o W / - � � icy �3 i
4 i
N
11 /6
4Jy'
41
/ F / u 4
_) ,a a OOa '
foo.•
k O
P ; ;
4Ct
/
:e
:ifs j u
wa
i
Y _ / c , \ \ \
l I 11
200.00' / o =13.
/ / ^ •�� � .15.0 �`J3J. JJ
y� }���3 S49CAy5 &�1ci•. J7J�
i rn
—__..........613.!1'..............
S009y'22'W 330.50(RlYI) SOOl2'11W 99232'(RtYt)
., •.� w � f 3 °i
' ' @
P
.y assa.r.+�/� .e, e3.
N
E
clcl
C)
��1