Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1995-03-28 i , � � �' MINUTES PALM DESERT ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION MARCH 28, 1995 ***************************************************************** I . CALL TO ORDER: The meeting was called to order at 12 : 10 p.m. Commissioners Present: Current Meeting Year to Date Present Absent Present Absent Richard Holden X 13 0 Frank Urrutia X 12 1 Chris Van Vliet X 13 0 Wayne Connor X 13 0 Richard 0'Donnell X 12 1 Ronald Gregory X 11 2 Staff Present: Phil Drell Steve Smith Jeff Winklepleck Daisy Garcia Donna Bitter II . APPROVAL OF MINUTES: It was moved by Commissioner Connor, seconded by Commissioner Holden, to approve the minutes of the March 14, 1995 meeting as amended. Motion carried 5-0-1, Commissioner 0'Donnell Abstaining. III . It was moved by Commissioner Holden, seconded by Commissioner O'Donnell, to approve the following cases by minute motion. Motion carried 6-0. A. Final Drawings : 1 . CASE NO. : 4466 SA APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS) : AUTO ON THE MALL, 74-990 Joni Drive, Building 3A, Palm Desert, CA 92260 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Approval of business identification signage LOCATION: 74-990 Joni Drive, Building 3A ZONE: S . I . Steve Smith presented pictures of the five signs in place on the building and the free standing sign at the driveway. He also showed a site plan with the placement of the various signs . Mr. Smith indicated that you don't , . � � � MINUTES ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION MARCH 28, 1995 see more than one sign at a time until you actually drive in the driveway where you maybe see two signs at one time. They are asking for approval of what they have already installed. Mr. Smith questioned the need for the sign at the end of the driveway and the south facing wall sign. Commissioner Urrutia agreed. Commissioner Holden felt the signs were acceptable as they are fairly small and non-illuminated. Commission approved the signage as installed. 2 . CASE NO. : 4467 SA APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS) : DONCO & SONS, INC. for CIRCLE K, Post Office Box 2103, Yorba Linda, CA 92686 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Approval of revised business signage LOCATION: 44-775 San Pablo Avenue ZONE• C-1 Jeff Winklepleck presented pictures of the sign locations noting that the applicant wants to consolidate their price sign and the monument sign. He noted that staff would recommend some type of landscaping in this area. Commissioner Holden asked if they will be taking down the wall . Mr. Winklepleck indicated that the wall would remain. Commission approved the revised signage subject to the applicant working with staff to design an acceptable landscape plan for the signage area. 3. CASE NO. : PP 92-5 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS� : LOWE ENTERPRISES, INC. for DESERT CROSSING, 11777 San Vicente Blvd. , Suite 900, Los Angeles, CA 90049; MCG & ASSOCIATES, 200 So. Los Robles Avenue, Suite 300, Pasadena, CA 91101-8461 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Approval of final working drawings for C.V.W.D. booster station interior structures, Major 8, Retail G/H, Retail J, and Major 7 2 , . , � � MINUTES ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION MARCH 28, 1995 LOCATION: Desert Crossing - Southeast corner of Fred Waring Drive and Highway 111 ZONE: P.C. (2) Mr. Drell noted that the commission had already approved the landscaping for the booster station, and the plans before them today were for the structures inside the station. There is a 14 ' high concrete block structure inside the station with a 8 ' high wall around the station. The walls around the station are split block to match the center. Commissioner Urrutia discussed his concerns with the roof and would rather see a flat roof with a small parapet around it to help screen the equipment. Mr. Drell noted that the Major 7 building was located at the end of Fred Waring Drive and that this was the only elevation along Fred Waring Drive that had not been seen yet. He showed how the building was treated as a back of a building and asked the commission if the medallion treatments would be sufficient detailing. Mr. Drell presented the final drawings for Retail G/H, Retail J and Major 8 noting that they were the buildings along the storm channel . There is a dome on one end with a pyramid on the other. Mr. Smith asked what trees were being proposed for this area. Mr. Drell reported that the plans called for 15 gallon eucalyptus and 24" box sweet acacia. Chairman Gregory indicated that it would take up to five years for the proposed landscaping to mature to the sizes indicated on the drawings . Mr. Smith felt that additional landscaping was needed with the tamarisk trees now gone. Commission approved the booster station interior structures subject to redesigning the roof to a flat structure with a parapet to screen the equipment. Commission continued Major 7 directing the applicant to redesign the elevations on the Fred Waring Drive side. Commission approved Major 8, Retail G/H, and Retail J subject to the applicant submitting a revised landscape plan to provide better screening since the tamarisk trees have been removed. Motion carried 5-0-1, Chairman Gregory Abstaining. 3 . � � MINUTES ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION MARCH 28, 1995 4 . CASE NO. : PP 92-5 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS) : BOSTON PACIFIC INC. for BOSTON MARKET, 1200 No. Harbor Blvd. , Anaheim, CA 92803-8183; LOWE ENTERPRISES, INC. , 11777 San Vicente Blvd. , Suite 900, Los Angeles, CA 90049 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Approval of landscaping plan for restaurant LOCATION: Desert Crossing - Southeast corner of Fred Waring Drive and Highway 111 ZONE: P.C. (2) Commissioner Connor discussed his concerns with the mediterranean fan palms as he felt they were not appropriate unless they exist on the approved landscape plan for the center. Chairman Gregory suggested filiferas in place of the mediterranean fan palms . Commissioner Connor felt the filiferas would be better. Commission approved the landscape plans subject to revision of the landscape plan as noted above. Motion carried 5-0-1, Chairman Gregory Abstaining. 5. CASE NO. : PP 92-5 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS) : CEARNAL EHLEN ASSOCIATES for FRESH CHOICE, 523-1/2 State, Santa Barbara, CA 93101; LOWE ENTERPRISES, INC. , 11777 San Vicente Blvd. , Suite 900, Los Angeles, CA 90049 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Approval of patio addition with lighting plan and landscaping LOCATION: Desert Crossing - Southeast corner of Fred Waring Drive and Highway 111 ZONE• P.C. (2) Mr. Drell presented the plans for the proposed patio addition with wrought iron railing and pyramid top pilasters to match the center. Commission approved the patio addition as submitted. Motion carried 5-0-1, Chairman Gregory Abstaining. 4 . � � MINUTES ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION MARCH 28, 1995 6 . CASE NO. : CUP 94-4 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS) : ST. MARGARET' S EPISCOPAL CHURCH, 47-535 Highway 74, Palm Desert, CA 92260 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Approval of final elevations and landscaping plans for school addition LOCATION: 47-535 Highway 74 ZONE: P S.P. Mr. Winklepleck presented the final plans noting that there were some interior changes to be made but no exterior changes from the approved preliminary plans . Chairman Gregory questioned the turf on the south end slope area. The landscape representative, Ray Lopez, explained that in actuality there are a lot of rocks in that area and he will place turf in as much area as possible there. He indicated that a great deal of that slope will not be able to be turfed because of its existing condition. Chairman Gregory asked what type of ground cover would be used in the parkway planting. Mr. Lopez indicated that he was going to leave the natural material that is there now. Commissioner Connor felt that everything outside the wall to the curb looked sparse. He felt that more of the character of what Bighorn has done should be picked up in this area. Mr. Lopez indicated that he was trying to keep a low ground cover there and use some of the same planting that is across the street. Commissioner Connor felt that the plan lacked detailed planting between the walk and the curb and that the area needed to be beefed up more with a little more variety, and especially quantity. He added that the dalea needed to be changed as it is not totally reliable for long term. Mr. Winklepleck indicated that staff would like to talk to C.V.W.D. regarding getting the trees closer to the storm channel . Commission approved the final architectural and landscaping plans subject to beefing up the planting between the walk and the curb with more variety and changing out the dalea greggi as it is not reliable for long term. Commission suggested picking up more of the character of what Bighorn has done. 5 � � MINUTES ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION MARCH 28, 1995 7 . CASE NO. : APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS) : CHRISTOPHER S . MILLS, 121 So. Palm Canyon, Suite 222, Palm Springs, CA 92262 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Approval of parking lot landscape plan LOCATION: Corporate Way, south of the Desert Dialysis Building at Hovley Lane ZONE: S. I . Jeff Winklepleck presented the colored conceptual plans for a parking lot only adjacent to the Desert Dialysis Center noting that when the future building comes through it will be processed under a precise plan. Commissioner Urrutia noted his concerns with the location of trash enclosures when the plans for the future building comes in. Mr. Drell noted that they will loose a parking space or two. Mr. Smith noted the existing wall between the dialysis center and the proposed parking lot and asked if a walkway would be provided from the parking lot to the existing building. Chairman Gregory thought that the applicant would be knocking out part of the wall to provide access . Mr. Winklepleck indicated that staff would condition the precise plan for this access . Commissioner Urrutia noted that if a handicap space is provided, then technically you have to provide handicap access to the building. Commission approved the parking lot plan subject to providing a pedestrian access to the existing dialysis building. Motion carried 5-0-1, Chairman Gregory Abstaining. B. Preliminary Plans : 1 . CASE NO. : PP 94-7 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS) : F & M ASSOCIATES for DEEP CANYON PLAZA, 2041 San Remo Drive, Laguna Beach, CA 92651 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Preliminary approval of revised architectural plans for an 81,747 square foot retail shopping center 6 � � MINUTES ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION MARCH 28, 1995 LOCATION: Northeast corner of Deep Canyon Drive and Highway 111 ZONE: Proposed P.C. (2) Commission continued the case at the applicant' s request. IV. CASES: A. Final Drawings: 1. CASE NO. : 4464 SA APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS) : FEDERAL SIGN COMPANY for PAYLES5 SHOE SOURCE, 871 No. Maplewood Street, Orange, CA 92667 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Approval of business identification signage non-conforming to center' s approved sign program LOCATION: Desert Crossing - 72-339 Highway 111, Suite B2 ZONE: P.C. (2) Mr. Drell presented the proposed signage noting that it complies relative to size but the colors are not in the approved sign program. The colors are yellow, orange and black, none of which are in the approved sign program. Mr. Drell added that the city attorney will be discussing with city council the laws that protect federal copyright laws and logos . Commissioner Holden discussed how the commission is an aesthetic board, and how every tenant should have known what the approved four colors were for the center and that they all should conform. Mr. Dennis Stout, of Federal Sign Company, reported that the requested sign is their registered trademark and they will not come into the center unless they get their requested sign. 7 � � MINUTES ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION MARCH 28, 1995 Action: It was moved by Commissioner Connor, seconded by Commissioner O'Donnell, to recommend denial of the sign request to the city council, upholding the sign program as approved by the city council . Motion carried 5-0-1, Chairman Gregory Abstaining. 2 . CASE NO. : 407 C APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS) : JOSEPH BRANDT for MAX' S OPERA CAFE, 14 Mt. Holyoke, Rancho Mirage, CA 92270 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Approval to addition to restaurant LOCATION: 73-030 E1 Paseo ZONE: P.C. ( 3) Mr. Smith distributed photos taken by staff of the existing area noting that the applicant is requesting approval to add a small storage area to the existing facility. He noted that staff suggested that it look like it belongs and was not just added on. Mr. Drell noted that currently this area is the back end of the building and staff suggested that it be designed with architecture suitable for facing a major arterial . He noted that glass block was added. Commissioner Urrutia felt that the added glass block was not enough to accomplish this . Commissioner Van Vliet asked about the setbacks . Mr. Drell indicated that the applicant will have to get a setback variance. The architect for the applicant, Bob Riccardi, indicated that the problem the applicant is facing is that because the restaurant is doing so well, the Riverside County Health Department is making them provide storage for the outside area to the east. Staff recommended that they try to make it look a little nicer, so the glass block was added to match the glass panels on the building. Commissioner Urrutia questioned the one corner being clipped off. Mr. Riccardi indicated that this was done in order to keep the entire building 10 ' back from the property line. Commissioner Urrutia noted that you still 8 �rr �r+� MINUTES ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION MARCH 28, 1995 would see a small piece of the overhang. Commissioner Urrutia also suggested removing the glass block. Commissioner Holden agreed and would rather see more lush landscaping to screen the area instead of the glass block. Mr. Riccardi noted that he could add vines for screening. Mr. Drell indicated that the design of the existing service entrance is not satisfactory. Mr. Riccardi indicated that this is what will be in the enclosed area. Commissioner 0'Donnell asked about adding a trellis . Commissioner Urrutia wanted to see the addition squared off. Commissioner Van Vliet agreed and was concerned with the fascia overhang. Commissioner Urrutia added that he thought the applicant had time to make the changes as discussed and bring it back with a landscape plan before going to the planning commission. Mr. Drell indicated that the next planning commission agenda that the applicant can get on would be the second meeting in April . Action: It was moved by Commissioner Urrutia, seconded by Commissioner Van Vliet, to continue the request to allow the applicant to redesign the addition to square off the ends, delete the glass block, and include a trellis structure on the side similar to the existing trellis on the Highway 74 side of the building. Motion carried 6-0 . 3. CASE NO. : 408 C APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS) : U.S.A. PETROLEUM, 1261 Ninth Street, Pomona, CA 91766 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Approval of canopy with signage LOCATION: Flying J - Northeast corner of Highway 111 and Fred Waring Drive ZONE: P.C. (3) S.P. Steve Smith presented drawings of the proposal to install a new canopy over the existing gas pumps noting that the existing canopy has a 3 foot high fascia with a vertical brown stripe. The request is for red lettering with a white outline on a 3 foot high illuminated white canopy. 9 `��.r �rr� MINUTES ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION MARCH 28, 1995 Mr. Smith added that there also is the continuation of the existing canopy on the building. Commissioner Urrutia noted that there appeared to be new parking spaces created as well. The applicant, Mr. W.R. Rogers, indicated that they are removing the air/water island which created the additional parking spaces . Commissioner Urrutia also noted that the drawings indicate that the dump station is also in a new location. He felt that it would be difficult getting in and out of these spaces with the new location of the dump station. Commissioner Holden felt that lighting should be eliminated behind the canopy and suggested the use of ceramic tile in place of the illuminated canopy. Mr. Rogers indicated that the material is vinyl and is back lit for the signage only. Commissioner Urrutia felt that the material and the siqnage should be more compatible with the other stations in Palm Desert. Mr. Rogers asked about just illuminating the section of the canopy where the logo and lettering would be located. Chairman Gregory indicated that they were referring to individual back lit channel letters with the material on the fascia being more substantial . Commissioner Urrutia suggested the use of a metal fascia with back lit letters for signage. Commissioner Urrutia asked if anything was being done to change the building. Mr. Rogers indicated that he would be painting it. Action: It was moved by Commissioner Urrutia, seconded by Commissioner Holden, to continue the request to allow the applicant to redesign the canopy with the following direction: 1) Change canopy to a more substantial material with back lit letters; 2 ) New fascia to be continued on the building; 3) Provide detailed, upscaled landscape plan; 4) Provide color samples for building color. Motion carried 6-0 . 10 �rrr � MINUTES ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION MARCH 28, 1995 B. Preliminary Plans : 1 . CASE NO. : TT 25711 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS) : DESERT AGGREGATES, INC. for TIERRAVISTA, Post Office Box 11478, Palm Desert, CA 92255-1478 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Preliminary approval of revised elevations, color schemes and landscaping plan for model homes LOCATION: Eldorado Drive and Appian Way ZONE: PR-5 5.0. Steve Smith reported that the applicant was before the commission at it' s last meeting and the commission had asked for additional detailing. The applicant has now included a conceptual landscape plan, eave detailing for the building elevations, and material samples for the trim and roof tiles . The applicant, Mr. Bruce Maize, noted that there are three floor plans with three different elevations . The intention is to use all six proposed color schemes . Commissioner Urrutia asked what the difference was between the stucco and the base stucco. Mr. Maize indicated that the accents on the buildings were the base stucco colors . Mr. Smith distributed a letter received from Mr. Varner stating his concerns with the size of the proposed homes and how they will impact on the selling price of his homes . Commissioner Holden understood the concern and was sympathetic with the existing homeowners, but did not understand why an adjacent project should be a concern of the commission. Mr. Norman Aron, homeowner, noted that he had spoken to Mr. Varner and understood that he is a separate development, but noted that Mr. Varner has invested a substantial amount of money to continue the streets to their projects . He noted that as you drive down E1 Dorado Drive now, the only two developments are this one and Mr. Varner' s project. Mr. Aron stated that he had two real estate people from Prudential come out to his home yesterday and when he informed them that the homes could be as small as 2200 square feet, they felt that his property, as well as Mr. Varner' s property, would be dramatically impacted for appraisal purposes . 11 � � � MINUTES ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION MARCH 28, 1995 Mr. Aron felt that the value of his home will go down approximately $200,000 if these smaller homes are approved and built. Mr. Aron feels that the front courtyards are very important, and understands that the new plans do not include courtyards . He wanted to go on record with his concerns and wanted to know where to go f rom here to have his concerns heard. Commissioner Holden noted that the commission did ask for yard walls, etc. to give the appearance of added amenities, but they can not set things such as size. He stated that the commission is here to see that the homes fit in with the existing homes . Mr. Smith stated that if the homeowners are still concerned that their needs have not been adequately met, there is a 15-day appeal period from the date this commission makes a decision. The applicant can file an appeal with the city clerk' s office to take this issue to city council . Ms . Lisa Ballenger, existing homeowner, spoke and agreed with Mr. Aron' s concerns . Mr. Smith stated that perhaps the commission would like to request that the larger homes be adjacent to the existing homes . Mr. Maize reported that the existing homes were Lot 68 at 3150 square feet, Lot 69 at 3480 square feet, Lot 70 at 3760 square feet, and Lot 91 at 3480 square feet. The first of the lots to be built would be Lot 76 at 2429 square feet with a 280 square foot guest house, Lot 75 at 2650 square feet, and Lot 74 at 2920 square feet. Commissioner Connor asked if the proposed plant pallet complies with the existing landscaping. Chairman Gregory noted that the proposed plans show more of a water conservative approach with only one model being a drought tolerant plan. Commissioner Holden noted that one of the things discussed at the last meeting was where the architecture ends on the sides. He did not see this addressed here today. Chairman Gregory asked if it would be difficult to add a courtyard wall to Lot 75 . Commissioner Holden did not think it had to be a courtyard, but maybe just a privacy wall. He did not think it was necessary to add courtyards on every lot but felt that some front walls 12 - �,rr `�rrr� MINUTES ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION MARCH 28, 1995 would help to break up the properties . Mr. Maize indicated that their intention with the side garages is their way of addressing the streetscape. Commissioner Holden showed how the opportunity was there to continue the front elevations around on the side of the elevations . He felt that the walls give the homes a more custom look. Mr. Maize felt that these walls could be incorporated on certain elevations . Mr. Maize indicated that he wants to provide the owner with the option of choosing a landscape plan. There would be at least three landscape plans that could be intermixed throughout the development. Chairman Gregory noted that there needs to be some type of transition between the different lots . Commissioner Urrutia suggested that the landscape architect design all the landscape schemes so that they will all blend in some way. He added that because there are smaller homes going on the same size lots, you have more opportunity to do more landscaping than on the previous lots . If it is done right, it could be a positive aspect. Commissioner Urrutia felt that the proposed details presented today were fine, but needed to see how they apply to the elevations . Mr. Maize felt that the side garages and window treatments should address the concerns . Commissioner Urrutia felt that what was submitted today was very conceptual . He needs to see how it all works together and asked to see a floor plan and roof plan all at the same time with the elevations to see how it all ties in together. This is to insure that the applicant has studied the issues and worked them all out. Commissioner Holden agreed and felt that the commission needed to see how the walls, details, etc . are all brought together. Commissioner Urrutia noted that there were some windows on the garages but not on the f loor plans . He stated that the commission needs to see reality. Commissioner Holden felt that the proposals are going in the right direction, and if all things are compatible, it would be acceptable. He would just like to see the little extras the commission has asked for on the plans . Commissioner 0'Donnell asked the homeowners if they had talked to the developer since the last meeting to see what changes had been made. Mr. Aron stated that he had not seen the revised plans . Ms . Ballenger felt that 13 � � MINUTES ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION MARCH 28, 1995 aesthetically she did not see any problems with the proposed plans . Her main concerns were the size of the units and the impacts they will have on the value of her home. Action: It was moved by Commissioner Van Vliet, seconded by Commissioner O'Donnell, to continue the plans to allow the developer to provide detailed, revised plans to include a floor plan and roof plan with the elevations to see how it all ties together. Commission directed the developer to add some front walls to break up the properties and requested examples of the proposed landscaping plans to show the transition between the different lots . Motion carried 5-0-1, Chairman Gregory Abstaining. V. ADJOURNMENT: The meeting was adjourned at 2 : 30 p.m. , � � �_,�,�.f_ . � _'�" (�--f: { �. '�� S'rEVE SM H AS50CIATE PLANNER SS/db 14 , P'�1R-2"-1995 1��56 FROM �.�ARNER L.JARI7 LE�S 1 h;G TO ��17�58 P.01 ''�rr' �" � { ►7l]n�E'�"�"cl.(�% To. Steve sm�.th Architecte��r�al. Revi�w CQmmittee �te: Sierrancava/T��±r.ra Ui �t-a Th� Suni-�rr�c-� H+�m�e�wx�er's Assoaiation, ccansastinc� af 25 m�mbers �nd � ob�ect strongZy to �ny cansideratian of �he 24pQ sc�,frt . hamA to b� us�d as a lost �.�a+�Qr at T�erra V�.sta_ The Eldorado cQ�rr�de��r surrour�d�d by mh� Lakes �Count�y Glub, Indian Ridg� ar�d Saant�rrrae� is �.n ups�ala comrnun�t�. At Sux�terraae the s�all�st hoz�es that we intend to build in tihe noar future are 3183 eq.ft. going ta 3707 ,�q.ft. Our apprais�ls fvz �.hese hc�mes r�ng� from $525,�00 ta $590,004. zt is �udicrous to �onsid�r homes that �re 2�4Q0 sq.f�. in the $�5(3,00� prxce ra�nge �a be cc�mpa,tible. W� ax� spendxng Iiteral�y hu�ndreds of �housands of dollars to upgrade Eldorado ancl Hovely L�az��s ��Civa�n� i�na�����ng, eaalZs� gates, water features, liqhting and w•e intend tc� strent�usly prote�t s�ur home va2ues. On tihe pvsitiv� sid� 2 m�nt�.on�d to Gra�nite Cvrporati�n that I felt theix� 2900 sq.ft. home with pxoper a�e�ities and qu�ality cons�ruction wc�uld be acc��tabl� to the Hozn�ow�-xer's and mE. �„�,... Tha�zk you fQr anq cansideratian you might gi,ve t�hxs m saqe. Robert Varn� � 75-795 ARAdOV�L WAX•DF.1.P�S�6SfiRT�CA 92ZG�•�,Q.BOY q68�•F,1LM DES6RT.C�.n22Gi �(GS^)34A�52C4� `Fs�X(61p"773•3287 TOTAL F.�1 09-Ff8-199C3 11�30AM FROM Portola Center TO 3468688 P.02 . - " �����5 � PHASE I Produc�n Units � PHASE II Productian Units �I �ERRAN 011A � �' > � TRACT N0. 2571t a � ��E> T 6 6 . 15 t4 13 12 11 t0 9 8 i ib ORF�ICE t-A�EE 4 93 �7 85 87 86 89 90 92 3 � � 94 18 7 85 6Q 79 74 73 > 2 `� � � 95 a � S9 A a4 - 8i � 78 7� � i2 � 1 • U za �� $2 �T �fi . � �� �6 � � 21 �APf I1►N uAY _ � � K d S 22 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 ?0 4� t � o � o < 23 < 61 55 �'� 48 4a 41 � 39 � � � p � � ~ � 38 � 24 � 60 56 � � 49 J 46 42 � � 4q M ZrJ U V 37 1 59 59 57 � 52 6 i 50 � 45 44 �43 < � 26 LAK N LANE �6 � 28 29 30 3t 32 33 34 35 � 27 1 � . SANDCAST�E -_ _ _ - - �—��- � ���� � ���o� - (1 C�.,J � ����5 �1 ��,�5� Z � 1� C._____ - �� `� s� � �� n �--> �`m�� � t � � TOTAL P.02