Loading...
35-175 (9) i Qzf� of Xortllal»rptoll � B �a54aCIl7t8rlIS DEPARTMENT OF BUILDING INSPECTIONS INSPECTOR 212 Main Street ' Municipal Building Northampton, Mass. 01060 Frank X. Sienkiewicz March 22, 1991 Mr. John McKenna, Jr. 1345 Burts Pit Road Northampton, Mass. 01060 Dear Mr. McKenna: We have received a complaint that you have done bathroom renovations, including plumbing , electrical , and structural work including a skylight. After reviewing your file there are no permits on file for this work. After viewing your premises on March 21 , 1991 I saw that a skylight had been installed. Therefore, you are in violation of the Mass. State Building Code (see section enclosed) . Upon receipt of this letter call me at 586-6950 ext. 240 to let me know your intentions in this matter. S rely, Frank X. Sienkiewic FXS/lb SENDER: Complete items 1 and 2 when additional services are desired, and complete items 3 and 4. Put your address in the "RETURN TO" Space on the reverse side. Failure to do this will prevent this card from being returned to you.The return recei t fee will provide you the name of the person delivered to and the date of delivery.Fora itiono aes t e following services are available.Consult postmaster y or tees a n t c ec ox es for additional service(s) requested. 1. ❑ Show to whom delivered, date, and addressee's address. 2. ❑ Restricted Delivery ` (Extra charge) (Extra charge) 1 3. Article Addressed to: 4. Article Number v —a {��iAV1 QM�►�-� Lf Type of Service: o � o� n o� t ❑ Registered .C3 Insured u. Certified ❑COD z ` Return Receipt D/ i\/„� ❑ Express Mail ❑ for Merchandise ¢ W° m CJtf1 n UJ 0 Z c 01 Always obtain signature of addressee 1 U u� ) 0 cc z z � ` " or agent and DATE DELIVERED. N° 5. Sign tu're Address 8. Addressee's Address (ONLY if 3 z° d c X requested and fee paid) a °= z� d w = LL ignature —Agent W cc .o d 7 Date Of Delivery a � � L �� 7 �o4� row Grit» of NolrtfiR»111toil g fCi$ssRtllnatIIs e Mffirr of flit �11!511trtor of 3111iltnit10s 212 Alain Street •Mimicipal Building -= Northampton, Mass. 01060 COMPLAINT SHEET How received: Telephone ( } O �j Complaint No. Personal ( ) Date: �� MAR 2 0 f 991 �- �-- Letter ( ) Time: A.M. � '��`P_M,.' DEPT OF BUILDING INSPECTIONS Telephone No. NORTHAMPTON MA 01060 p Complainant's Name: Henry F . Kaha r Complainant's Address: ..$.$� u�an Read Florence , Ma . 01060 Complaint received by: VIOLATIONS OF: ❑ Chapter 44 Zoning Ordinances, City of Northampton XZ Chapter 802 As Ammended Mass. State Building Code ❑ Sanitary Code, Art.2 Complaint reported against; Name: John MrKPnna Tel. 586-0597 Address: 1345 Burts Pit Road Florence Ma 01060 Location ofcomplaint:1345 Burts Pit Road Florence Map#1 35 Lot #r I A 9 Signature of Complanants: Nature of complaint: Complete bath room renovations , including electrical , plumbing and carpentry with installation of sky light , ect . ect . with out obtaining permits to do same . Investigation: Yes ( ) No ( j Investigated by: 4. In addition it should be noted that Mr. McKenna runs a masonry business out of his home and back yard and has done so for many years. Also you will find inclosed a complaint that I filed with the Building Inspector office on March 20, 1991 which has not yet been resolved. In light of the above information, I question if you will pursue the McKenna violation with the same pressure and bias that you have against Mr. Racicot. Why one man can cause problems for another when he himself disregards the laws and ordinances of the city should not be tolerated. I would appreciate your immediate response. Sincerely, Henry F. Kabat 884 Ryan Road Florence, MA 01060 cc: Chief Daniel L. Labato Frank X. Sienkiewicz Richard J. Labarge, Jr. Other Members of the City Council L May 18, 1992 Her Honor, The Mayor City Hall Northampton, MA 01060 Madam: I am writing you as a concerned citizen. I have been a resident of 884 Ryan Road, Florence for over 35 years. My concerns are about a neighborhood feud that has been going on now for some 10 years between Mr. Racicot and Mr. McKenna. This personal vendetta has cost Mr. Racicot his livelihood from the closing of a business he operated for over 32 years because of one man. Mr. McKenna continues to harass Mr. Racicot almost daily complaining to the Police Department and Building Inspector about zoning violation. Police Department and Building Inspector records will show that they have not found these complaints to be valid. It should be noted that Mr. McKenna is not even an abutter to the Racicot property, but must drive his vehicle to the property in question. It seem odd that none of the abutters have any complaints about the Racicot situation. Shortly after you became Mayor, a special meeting was called with Rick Labarge, the Building Inspector, Mr. Cook and yourself concerning the Racicot case. At this meeting you were emphatic that something must be done about Mr. Racicot. In this time of financial problems in the city and the constant media coverage of reduced police officers and inability to have needed coverage and everyone is spread thin. It is time that you as mayor and the police chief should put a stop to Mr. McKenna's nuisance and harassment calls. Some day one of our police officers is going to be needed for an emergency when he is spending time, fuel and taxpayer's money to satisfy one man's personal vendetta. I have also personally observed Mr. Cook with a policeman in a police cruiser checking on Mr. Racicot. Also just last week Mr. Cook was in the company of the Building Inspector checking Mr. Racicot's property. Quite unusual I would suspect there is pressure from someone. I have been told by police officers that there has been pressure from City Hall for them to pursue promptly all of Mr. McKenna's complaints against Mr. Racicot. It has also been brought to my attention that you, your husband and Mr. McKenna are personal friends and would indicate that your involvement to pressure the police or other departments in this matter might be considered a conflict of interest and non- professional favoritism and selective enforcement in as much as there are at least six businesses being operated for homes on Ryan Road, including Mr. McKenna's. �'1REEA(1�11E[1rE y 00ffire of the �111311ertor of 'Allilbhltls =g= 212 Main Street •Municipal Building Northampton, Mass. 01060 - n, COMPLAINT SHEET How received: Telephone ( ) Complaint No. Personal ( ) Date: Letter ( ) Time: A.M. P.M. Telephone No. -- Complainant's Name: ._—C� YL�L`— .���i�iZ� — -- Complainant's Address: ` U Complaint received by: -- y VIOLATIONS OF: - f(X Chapter 44 Zoning Ordinances, City of Northampton Chapter 802 As Ammended Mass. State Building Code ❑ Sanitary Code, Art.2 Complaint reported against: I 7 Name: ! �_ /� �'i,Yt.':/ Tel. Address: _1 ,, _� 4 C LtoJZX � Ll�. Location of complaint: 13 `'1J k>�{ t� J�' "�� Map # Lot # C _ Signature of Complanants: Nature of complaint: _?-c� , _!?�L -.,��_�i /1�2 ��l�-1 �✓L2.. 7L -7� -_C i�- ( f Investigation: Yes Investigated b : - ( ) No ( ) In g y cX MASSACHUSETTS UNIFORM APPLICATION FOR PERMIT TO DO PLUMBING (Print :,r'Type) 910 16 '7' aAl 9 �j Permit Y te,/% �.- c� Mass. Cate , "Owners hame Buildingg Location / / �.C1b'J Type ct Occ pay %}��11�%,Y�—�"'� New r Renovation Replacement Plans Suomitted: Yes _ No FIXTURES I. I �7 P V1 O itl Y } V U < 3: i 3 Y J I ❑ N � O � ( — 1- � Vf � y V � O � O K .� 9 I O SU3--gSMT, I I I I I I ( I I BASEMENT I I I I I I I I I ( I I I I I I I ?ST FLOOR 2N0 FLOOR I I I I 1 I I I I I I I I I I f 7R0 FLOOR I ! I I ! ! I I I I I I ( I 4TH FLOOR I I I I I I I I 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I 5TH FLOOR I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 I I I I I 6TH F LOO P. I ++I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 7TH FLOOR I 1 I I ( I ( I I I I I I I ( I I 87H FLOOR Installing Company Name � / � ) Check one: Certificate Address P Q/ '�'�r �`C �� Corporation = Partnership Business Telephone Firm/Co. Name of Licensed Plumber INSURANCE COVERAGE: I have a curren liabOty insurance policy or its substantial equivalent which meets the requirements of MGL Ch 142. Yes No It you have checked yes, please indicate the type coverage by checking the appropriate box. A liability Insurance policy �( Cther type of indemnrty -- Bond r OWNER'S INSURANCE WAIVER: I am aware that the licensee does not have the insurance coverage requirec by Chapter 142 of the Mass. General Laws, and that my signature on this permit application waives this requirement. Check one: Cwner 1:1 Agent Signature of Cwner cr CNner s %gent I hereby certify that all of the details and infounation I hav� itted (or entered)in above appiication are true and accurate to the rest of .M knowledge and that all plumbing work and in<_tallationspertorlea un er the t Issued !or ,his appiication will e in compliance Kith ail pertinent provisions of the Massachusetts State Plumbing CJ e an hapt r 142 I h4Generat Laws By >1C^ tgna re of con eo oer ✓ Title T of License Master ^ :ourneymanx1 o �o� D Ol �1 �' - ei LTfT7 c�111 fII11 Z T.' DEPARTMENT OF BUILDINIG INSPECTIONS 212 Main Street • Municipal Building INSPECTOR g Northampton, :Mass. 01060 rank X. Sienkiewicz 1,'arch 22, 1991 I . John 11cKen7n a . Jr. �5 Burts Pit Road Northampton, 11ass . 01060 Dear Mr. Mi�cKenna . We have received a complaint that you have done bathroom renovaticns , including pluMbing , electrical , and structural work including a skylight. After reviewing your file there are no permits on file for this work. After viewing your premises on larch 21 , 1901 I saw that a skylight had been installed . Therefore, you are in violcticn of the Xass . State Building Ccde (see _ecticr enclosed) . Upon receipt of this letter call me at 586-6950 ext. 240 to let me know your intentions in this matter. Sin re1yl� Frank X. Sienkiewic FXS/lb - 0 SENDER: Complete items 1 and 2 when additional services are desired, and complete items 3 and 4. Put your address in the"RETURN TO" Space on the reverse side. Failure to do this will prevent this card from being returned to you.The return recei I t fee will r2vide you the name of the oerson delivered to and the date of delivery.For additions ees the o owing services are avaijaD1e. onsuit postmaster or fees and check Doxtes for additional service(s) requested. 1. ❑ Show to whom delivered, date, and addressee's address. 2. ❑ Restricted Delivery (Evra charge) (Fora charge) 3. Article Addressed to: 4. Article Number U' 2 W �. v� CVI�.K� -ate , 0 C) _ U { Type of Service: 1 LL Registered Insured g ---��� ❑ Re El\7 Certified El COD W c press Mail ❑ Re-, ReceiRt rn(4 0 1 i\J ❑ Ex for Merchandise U u o Always obtain signature of addressee t ;? L or agent and DATE DELIVERED. ' O 5. Sign ttiFe Address B. Addressee's Address (ONLY if o c S X requesred and fee paid) o Z� n v F w Z ° U. U Ignature —Agent o — W - ti n a 7. Date oTDelivery 7 —% for the problem of getting Mr. Racicot to live up to the agreement he made. The present administration's conduct with relation to this matter has been limited to inquiries as to its status. I have felt no pressure to take unwarranted action. If nothing else I have felt that my handling of this matter has been too slow due to the press of other business. , On the matter of your complaint against Mr. McKenna the Building Inspector reports that Mr. McKenna did receive permits for the work in question and the inspections are partially complete. The inspections will be completed soon. In sum, I have pursued Mr. Racicot because every citizen of Northampton is entitled to have complaints investigated even when their motivations are mixed. The law is the same for everyone and Mr. Racicot has broken and continues to break that law. Thank you for your time and consideration. Sincerely, Joe M. Cook JMC CITY OF NORTHAMPTON O4���pTO MASSACHUSETTS * Kathleen G. Fallon, Esq. CITY HALL City Solicitor r 210 Main Street c� Northampton, MA 01060 Joseph M. Cook, Esq. �t Assistant City Solicitor LAW DEPARTMENT (413) 586-6950, ext. 245 FAX: (413) 586-3726 May 21, 1992 Mr. Henry Kabat 884 Ryan Road Northampton, Massachusetts 01060 Dear Mr. Kabat: I have been requested by the Mayor to respond to your letter of May 18 regarding the case of Mr. Robert Racicot. The criminal case against Mr. Racicot was begun in the Spring of 1990, well before the election of the new administration. In December of 1990 Mr. Racicot, upon advice of his attorney and by agreement with myself as Special Prosecutor for the District Attorney's office, plead facts sufficient to warrant a finding of guilty on charges of running an illegal auto repair business and auto junkyard. As part of this arrangement I agreed not to seek the rather hefty fines that Mr. Racicot was subject to as long as he immediately halted his illegal operation and got rid of the illegal number of unregistered vehicles within sixty days. Zb ctba Mr_ Racicot has not lived up to his agreement. I have called the police to have an officer investigate reports by Mr. McKenna of continuing illegal activities. Since I am aware that there are personal ill feelings between Mr. Racicot and Mr. McKenna I have felt that it was important to have independent and objective confirmation of his reports prior to taking any action. The Building Inspector has visited Mr. Racicot's property, as allowed by state law and a court order in this case, to confirm Mr. Racicot's lack of progress. I have at times accompanied the Building Inspector so I could see the situation with my own eyes. You have implied that the present administration has put pressure on me to take action against Mr. Racicot. This is false. As I said above this case was started and finished in 1990 except In conclusion, I feel there has and still is an internal reason why Mr. McKenna is allowed to procrastinate on the necessary permits, inspections and continues to use the city as his personal lawyer and protector. Enclosed is a complaint sheet about Mr. McKenna running a business out of his home that I have filed with the inspectors office I will not go away and if necessary will take this to the media. Sincerely, -7 r Henry Kabat June 20, 1992 Her Honor The Mayor City Hall Northampton, MA 01060 Madam: As a follow up to my letter of May 1Sth and Mr. Cooks' letter of May 21st, may I say that you are a true politician. During your campaign for election to be mayor of our fair city, you often stated that you were going to be a mayor of the people and would welcome their comments and input. Since you became mayor you have completely ignored the wishes of those voters and taxpayers who put you where you are today. My letter was directly written to you as mayor with speczfic items that only you could admit or deny. You, however, chose to have Mr. Cook answer for you with a complete smoke screen of the facts at issue in my letter. Mr. Cook's letter in no way addressed my concerns but did continue to hammer on Mr. Racicot with information that was only half truths. If you only had taken the time to look at the facts as presented and followed up Nvith the concerned departments, i.e. Police and Inspectors Departments, you would find that Mr. McKenna presently continued harassment is both a problem for the police and inspectors office people. The only item in my letter that Mr. Cook even touched on was permits obtained by Mr. ?McKenna. I have made many visits and phone calls to the inspectors office in the last year, only to be put off. First of all the only permit obtained by Mr. McKenna was taken out for plumbing repair. It should be noted that my complaint was filed on March 20, 1991, Mr. Sienkiewicz's Ietter to him was dated March 22, 1991. And guess what? A plumbing permit was issued on March 22, 1991 for work that had already been done. A bit unusual I would say, that a permit was issued 2 days after my complaint and on the same day the inspectors letter was written. It appears that someone had to immediately notify Mr. McKenna about my complaint. In addition, to this date there has not been a permit for electrical work taken out and the electrical inspector has been most uncooperative to my questions as to why. It has also been brought to my attention by knowledgeable people that Mr. McKenna has actually done work at your home. r ZBA Meeting of October 21, 1992 to all applicable Fire, Building, Electrical, Plumbing and Health codes, and he did not think Mr.Racicot's building could meet the codes. Buscher also said he thought the ordinance was written to allow more artists, and crafts type people do conduct home occupations. Buscher said he did not think the ordinance was designed to allow a heavy duty garage repair type of business in a residential area. Buscher said the business must be one which can be conducted without causing a disturbance in the neighborhood. Therefore, Buscher concluded that he could not properly vote to grant the Special Permit and would vote to deny the request. { I Bill Brandt moved that the Special Permit be granted with conditions to be set by agreement of the ZBA members. Dr. Laband seconded the motion. Bob Buscher voted to deny the application for Special Permit. The motion to grant the Special permit was denied on a 2:1 vote. 5 Y ZBA Meeting of October 21, 1992 visited the site, it was quiet. Laband said he thought the City was in a much better position to enforce conditions. One of the conditions in granting a special permit for a home occupation is that the applicant must come back before the board after a one year period and ask for a renewal of the special permit. This time period would allow for neighbor's complaints and allow the Building Inspector time to follow up on whether the conditions and restrictions of the special permit were being met. Laband said he would vote in favor of the special permit with specific conditions for operation of the business. Bob Buscher said that the simple question before the board was "is an automobile repair and restoration business a home occupation?" The ordinance is perhaps a little clearer in that it sets requirements and details. The definition of the home occupation is a vocation, trade, small business, craft, art or profession which can be conducted in its entirety with the main (principal) or accessory building of a property by a bonafide resident of the property, and which by nature of its limited size and scope, does not cause any outward manifestation (such as traffic generation, parking congestion, noise or air pollution, materials storage, public service, utility demand, etc. ( which is uncharacteristic of or an additional disturbance to the particular residential neighborhood in which said property is located. Buscher raised the question of whether Mr. Racicot could practically conduct his business in its entirety within the main or accessory building of his property, and said he did not feel that the business could be entirely conducted within the accessory building. Buscher also noted that Mr. Racicot's business would create traffic generation, noise and air pollution, which would be uncharacteristic of the neighborhood and would create a disturbance to the neighborhood. Buscher noted that you cannot restore old automobiles without the use of pneumatic tools, and dealing with paint and rust removal which require the use of sandblasting and grinding tools, all of which make a lot of noise. Buscher noted that §11.11 outlines a whole set of criteria which Mr. Racicot could not meet such as whether the building qualifies as an accessory building because it had been used for many decades as a repair garage. Buscher said he thought of a garage as a place to store the family car, and small storage of household tools and lawnmowers, but not as a place of business. Buscher also noted that §11. 11 states that the home occupation must be clearly incidental and secondary to the use of the building, and he did not judge Mr. Racicot's use as incidental or secondary. §11. 11 also states that the home occupation shall produce no noise, obnoxious odors, vibrations, glare, fumes or electrical interference to the neighborhood. Buscher also noted that Mr. Racicot did not qualify because the accessory structure in a home occupation must conform 4 - k ZBA Meeting of October 21, 1992 businesses run out of the home. Bixby said his father had managed to support his whole family out of a home electrical contracting business. Bixby pointed out that if the ZBA put restrictions on Mr. Racicot' s business, the City of Northampton would benefit from having control and Mr. Racicot would benefit from being able to earn a living at home. Attorney Tom Nagle said he thought is was an appropriate use and reiterated his client' s willingness to live with reasonable conditions which might be set by the ZBA. Bill Brandt moved to close the Public Hearing. Dr. Laband seconded the motion which passed unanimously. Bill Brandt said he had really wrestled with his decision on this case. He said that he thought a car restoration business could in fact be allowed but pointed out that there cannot be any outward manifestation of the business. Brandt said he found it hard to believe that there would be no outward manifestation of Mr. Racicot' s business. He visited the site that day and could hear grinding from outside. Brandt said that he would vote in favor of granting the home occupation but did not think that Mr. Racicot would be able to do much business because of the many conditions which the ZBA would attach to the Special Permit to protect the interests of the neighborhood. Brandt suggested conditions to limit noise pollution, obnoxious odors, vibrations, glare, fumes or electrical interference which would be detectable to normal sensory perception beyond the lot line, but said he would defer to the end to say what restrictions he felt should be placed on the permit. Mr. Brandt said he favored what Mr. Racicot did, but in a much more restricted way than it is now. There should be an annual application so that the ZBA would know that the applicant is adhering to the restrictions set by the ZBA. Brandt said that Mr. Racicot must pay attention to the concerns of his neighbors. Dr. Laband said he agreed with Brandt. Laband said the history of this case goes back quite a few years when the ZBA had granted a variance which was overturned by the Court. Laband said that possibly at one time the Board had felt that there was a compelling enough reason to grant Mr. Racicot a variance, but said he couldn't verify the correctness of granting the variance because it had been overturned later by a court decision. Laband said the application before the board was for a home occupation and he agreed with Bill Brandt Is assessment. When you think of a home occupation, car restoration is not one of the first things to come to mind. The Law Department said it was a factual decision for the ZBA to make. LaBand said he would vote in favor of granting the permit but would like to spell out very specifically what conditions would apply regarding outward manifestations. Laband said at the time he 3 i ZBA Meeting of October 21, 1992 uncharacteristic of the neighborhood. Miranda said he did not see how the ZBA could find that Mr. Racicot's proposal fit into the criteria for a home occupation. Mr. Miranda noted that Mr. Racicot was conducting his business in an accessory building, not in his home, and he did not feel that Mr. Racicot's garage qualified as an accessory building under the ordinance because the building had been used as a garage business for the last 25 years. Miranda also noted that the use of the building for a garage business for the repair of cars has been well documented over many years. The use of the garage for repair of cars as a business is not a customary use for an accessory building. Miranda said that the additional traffic that is generated from a car repair business is not common to that neighborhood and is a burden to the neighbors. Councillor Michael Kirby spoke in support of Mr. Racicot' s application. Kirby said he felt that Mr. Racicot has quite an investment in that garage, with a lift and a lot of tools. Kirby said home occupation applications should be treated the same whether they were for blue collar occupations or white collar occupations. Kirby said as long as Mr. Racicot meets noise conditions and avoids emitting noxious odors into the neighborhood, the ZBA should grant his permit for home occupation. John McKenna, 1345 Burts Pit Road, neighbor, spoke in opposition to Mr. Racicot's application for home occupation. McKenna cited a long history of complaints he had against Mr. Racicot that went back many years, and to which he had addressed the Board at the last meeting. McKenna also noted a court order dated June 28, 1991 in which the judgement made by Judge Ryan was that he found Mr. Racicot in violation of running a business without proper permits and fined him $1, 000. The fine was suspended until June 28, 1994 as long as there were no further problems. Racicot was supposed to cease and desist his business operations immediately, which, according to Mr. McKenna, he did not do. McKenna asked the ZBA to refuse to grant a special permit to Mr. Racicot. Councillor Richard LaBarge, Jr. spoke in support of the home occupation request for Mr. Racicot. LaBarge said he believed that Mr. Racicot has the right to earn a living and that car restoration is covered as an occupation under the home occupation ordinance. LaBarge said that Racicot has been running a business at his property for many years. He also noted that Mr. McKenna runs a masonry business out of his home on Burts Pit Road and complains about Mr. Racicot next door trying to have his own business. Councillor Paul Bixby spoke in support of Mr. Racicot's application. Bixby said the original intent behind the home occupation ordinance was to let the City have more control of 2 • ZBA Meeting - October 21, 1992 Continuation of Public Hearing -- Robert Racicot -- Request for a Special Permit and site Plan Review under §11. 11, page 11-33 of the zoning ordinance for a home occupation at 1 Pine Valley Road. Present and voting were: Chairman Robert C. Buscher, William R. Brandt, and Dr. Peter Laband. Chairman Buscher opened the continued Public Hearing which had been opened on September 16, 1992 . He stated that the same Zoning Board members who had sat for the first meeting were present to hear the continuation. Attorney Tom Nagle, represented Mr. Racicot, at the hearing. Nagle said he thought there were some conclusions about the sandblasting to which his client does not agree. Dr. Laband had noted that there seemed to be a bit of a problem about the sandblasting and whether it could be done within the confines of the building. Nagle said his client would abide by any of the conditions which were set by the ZBA. Mr. Racicot estimated that he might spend as little as 10-12 hours per year doing sandblasting work, and noted that the sandblasting would be very difficult, if not impossible, to do within the garage. Mr. Racicot said that in the past he had done sandblasting on the side of his garage which might produce an echo of noise to disturb the neighbors, and suggested that if he did his sandblasting work in the back of the garage, the noise problem would be eliminated. Racicot also said that he didn't think the sandblasting 'was any noisier than a lawnmower or a chain saw. He said the sandblasting definitely could not be done within the confines of the garage because there was not enough room. Dr. Laband asked whether the building could be brought up to compliance for the City electrical and building codes. Mr. Racicot said he did not think his building had to conform to City building and electrical codes because it was not a new building. Dr. Laband told Racicot that the Law Department's opinion was that the building would have to meet with the codes. Attorney Tom Miranda, representing Mrs. Carolyn Schorge, an abutting neighbor spoke to the Board. Miranda said that after the last ZBA meeting, Mrs. Schorge had received a threatening letter from an attorney hired by Mr. Racicot, a copy of which he gave to the ZBA to become part of the record. Miranda also noted that Mr. Racicot's application was for a home occupation, and that by the very definition of a home occupation all work must be conducted within the building and there should not be any outward manifestation of the home occupation, such as traffic congestion. By the very nature of bringing in unregistered cars to the property, they would have to be trucked in on tow trucks. Miranda suggested that the noise generated by Mr. Racicot's business is 1 r Pursuant to Mass. General Laws, Chap. 40A, §il, no variance, finding, or special permit, or any extension, modification or renewal thereof, shall take effect until a copy of the decision bearing the certification of the City Clerk that twenty days have elapsed after the decision has been filed with the City Clerk and that no appeal has been filed, or if such an appeal has been filed that it has been dismissed or denied, is recorded in the Hampshire County Registry of Deeds and indexed under the name of the owner of record or is recorded and noted on the owner's certificate of title. The fee for such recording or registering shall be paid by the owner or applicant. It is the owner or applicant's responsibility to pick up the certified decision from the City Clerk and record it at the Registry of Deeds. The Northampton Zoning Board of Appeals hereby certifies that a variance, finding, or special permit has been deniad. : and that copies of this decision and all plans referred to in it have been filed with the Planning Board and the City Clerk. Pursuant to Mass. General Laws, Chapter 40A, section 15, notice is hereby given that this decision is filed with the Northampton City Clerk on the date below. If you wish to appeal this action, your appeal must be filed pursuant to M.G.L. Chapter 40A, Section 17, with the Hampshire Superior Court and notice of said appeal filed with the City Clerk within twenty (20) days of the date this Decision was filed with the City Clerk. DECISION DATED: October 21 , 1992 DECISION FILED WITH CITY CLERK: October 28 , 1992 :Z� Robert C. r &4 wiiiizL . Brandt Dr. Peter Laband DECISION DATED: November 5, 1992 DECISION FILED: November 16, 1992 I certify that the above Special Permit has been granted and that copies of it and all plans referred to in it have been filed with the Planning Board and the City Clerk. 0 0 C---�!=i-stine Skorups Cylerk 3 3 . The criteria under §10. 11(6) for Site Plan Review was met. Protection of adjoining premises has been provided for by screened fencing around the storage area which will protect the neighbor's view. There will be no impact on safety of vehicular and pedestrian movement within the site or on adjacent streets. There should be no increase of traffic as a result of allowing vehicle storage on site. There is adequate parking on site. There shall be no mitigation or adverse impact on the city's resources as a result of allowing car storage. The Conditions are as follows: 1. No more than a total of six (6) cars or parts thereof shall be allowed to be stored on the property. 2 . All unregistered vehicles must be stored within the fenced-in area as shown on the site plan. Pursuant to Mass. General Laws, Chap. 40A, §11, no variance, finding, or special permit, or any extension, modification or renewal thereof, shall take effect until a copy of the decision bearing the certification of the City Clerk that .twenty days have elapsed after the decision has been filed with the City Clerk and that no appeal has been filed, or if such an appeal has been filed that it has been dismissed or denied, is recorded in the Hampshire County Registry of Deeds and indexed under the name of the owner of record or is recorded and noted on the owner's certificate of title. The fee for such recording or registering shall be paid by the owner or applicant. It is the owner or applicant's responsibility to pick up the certified decision from the City Clerk and record it at the Registry of Deeds. Pursuant to Mass. General Laws, Chapter 40A, section 15, notice is hereby given that this decision is filed with the Northampton City Clerk on the date below. If you wish to appeal this action, your appeal must be filed pursuant to M.G.L. Chapter 40A, Section 17, with the Hampshire Superior Court and notice of said appeal filed with the City Clerk within twenty (20) days of the date this Decision was filed with the City Clerk. 2 City of Northampton, Massachusetts Office of Planning and Development City Hail • 210 Main Street Northampton, MA 01060 • (413) 586-6950 $FAX (413) 586-3726 •Community and Economic Development �< •Conservation •Historic Preservation • Planning Board •Zoning Board of Appeals • Northampton Parking Commission DECISION OF _ NORTHAMPTON CITY COUNCIL APPLICANT: ROBERT RACICOT APPLICANT ADDRESS: 1 PINE VALLEY ROAD, NORTHAMPTON, MA 01060 OWNER: ROBERT RACICOT OWNER ADDRESS: 1 PINE VALLEY ROAD, NORTHAMPTON, MA 01060 RE LAND OR BUILDINGS IN NORTHAMPTON AT: ° GOAD At a meeting held on November 5, 1992, the Northampton City Council voted 7:2 in favor of GRANTING the request of Robert Racicot for a SPECIAL PERMIT and SITE PLAN REVIEW under the Provisions of Section 8. 10.1(k) of the Northampton Zoning Ordinance, to allow storage of unregistered vehicles at 1 Pine Valley Road. Present and voting were Council President Paul Bixby, Patrick Goggins, Michael Kirby, William Ames, Leonard Budgar, John Morrison, John Fitzgerald, Jr. , Richard LaBarge, Jr. , and Raymond LaBarge. The findings were as follows: - 1. The criteria under § 8.10 for storage of more than two unregistered motor vehicles have been met because storage will be screened from public view and abutting public ways by enclosure within a sight impervious fencing. 2 . The criteria under §10.10(3) for Special Permit have been met. The storage of unregistered vehicles will not create undue traffic congestion or unduly impair pedestrian safety. The storage of vehicles will not overload any municipal systems. The storage of vehicles will not unduly impair the integrity or character of the district nor be detrimental to the health, morals or general welfare of the neighborhood because the storage will be screened from view. 1 Cr r , �*'1C o tit H A ww H Ha w H \ xO o a Q a w I•. w O W � xH �• xQ ,�.. � � •� y o � _ vi w A A � � E' p �. .. � o a P' o A Q " H W E� U] ° wW W \\ WO ; ` Wx U a � a . � � '�. Cry H A W > ; �\ Cn3 E-+ x ' w cn En \E4 W4 In \ J I N �] En U W U PG C4 Q Pd L�En \ w (n w �. P4- a > A Z o w xQ z x d mot' 0 A w z a �D E-+ A 4 W x ' Ln rl U Cz, PDX PINEN:. jr F k 's 4 i i i 4 14 4 sc ALE l �• _ `y 1 1 — ON G JO NO• i CITY COORDINATES X= 9,264.43 J Y= 10,287. 19 _ - o` ��y , O / Z k/VCSTI E Z-11,4 A �f t f z-EO , cotic gD po'�f fV R N 03-24-18 E PQirjT f 278.00 t� t0 o a t-� ~ S 03--24-18 W vt rIVY, 200.00 t p. M'' so -Z4-4g1N-- -- its C. PCO fog . ro It T °. Pt a poll h� °I FPi0J1/CT' TL'J7 �' /7APGA.PE T�r m 0 o� ,asvc� AQf�kt 1 1 s. recton,q„19r cOOroinote system north us. !tote coora;nutt X minus 264,0040 st�'E C"'Jino'e Yminos 469,700 .Aer i / CROSSHATCHED SECTION NOT INCLUDED IN PROPOSED EASEMENT i r� S2 17 9F S ai P POBE'PT E .PAC/Cp T •- o Z- lk ��• SG J� `o. 01 1 3 —12W 297. 7' o ° A• ° ROBE RAC�TAN - --J pooh'1368 PDB�•P 5 T�GNC 70 22/TZ S� \ / PG.36 8 T z8 -3/6 E T�.✓NN� W/L L/A M /.4�P0 L '� 9¢ / 8 1 j I 4 SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION 1. The restoration of automobiles will be preformed within the garage. The cars awaiting work and cars restored will be held within an existing fenced enclosure. Auto parts will be salvaged from vehicles in storage. 2. We would request the City Council to allow the additional storage of six or more unregistered vehicles as the Council in its discretion may allow. The use of the unregistered vehicles is twofold: firstly some will be the subject of restoration, and secondly some will provide the parts to complete the restoration. 3. With regards the waivers of the site plan requirements the Applicant would state that no additional construction is contemplated; all work will be done within existing structures. However, two additional plans are submitted to address some of the specifics. tEPARED : U7 / 1a/ > c CITY CF NCRT�ANIPTCN SAGE . 2 CFFTC ? AL AELTTEH ' S LI -ST SLPJECT LCCATICK : FINE VALLEY RD ------------------------------- --- - ------------ ---- ------------------- - ---- -- ;ACICCT RCdERT E 8 JCAN A 1 PINE VALLEY RD FL 25 - 175-CU1 1 PINE VALLEY RD =LCRENCE NA C1C6C ;ALE STANLEY H & CLAIRE M! 6y7 RYAN RD FL 15 -C65-CU1 E57 RYAN RD :LCRENCE YA C106C IIKLCKI NARY A & YARK A SAFRCN ; YAN RD FL 35 -C66-CC1 :C1 RYAN RCAD ,CRTHAMPTCN YA 0106C 'IKUCKI VARY A & YARK A SAFRCY 6E1 RYAN RD FL 35 -Cb7-CC1 EE1 RYAN RD :LCRENCE VA C1C6C --------------------------------- ---- ----------------;-- -------------------- --117 ASSESSCR ' S CERTIFICATICN ��� / -�� �� CATE ------------f�i�/C` --- =REFARED : u7 / 1 2 CITY CF NCRTHrMPTCN PAGE : 1 OFFICIAL �BLTTER ' S LIST SUEJECT LCCATION : FINE VALLEY RD GLEY MICHAEL E a KATHERINE _ 4: PINE VALLEY RD 35 — 174—001 4C FINE VALLEY RD +CRTHA,MPTCN NA 0106C )LSSEAULT RCEERT E 8 MARY P 1373 BUNTS FIT FC 35 — 172—COl 1373 BURTS PIT RC NCRTH AMP TCN MA 01060 :ELISLE NARY GERTRUDE EURTS PIT RD 35 —C34—001 :/ C MESSICK 'y2C RYAN RC 'LCRENCE NA C106C (C6aAL JOANNE T 1363 BURTS FIT FD 35 — 171 —COl : /0 JCANNE KCkAL LASTCWSKI 13E3 EURTS FIT RC �ORTHAMPTCN NA 01060 ECYLE JUCY A 1357 BURTS FIT PC 35 — 17C—CC1 1357 EURTS FIT RC �CRTHAMPTCN MA 0106C ICKENNA JOHN L & JUDITH A 1345 BLQTS FIT RC FL 35 —16S—CC1 1345 BURTS FIT RC ;LCRENCE NA C 1 C 6 C 3CHCPGE RAYMCND C & CAROLYN V 7 PINE VALLEY RD FL 35 — 179—001 7 PINE VALLEY RD LCRENCE NA C 1 C 6 C 1IMITZ RCEERT E SR 8 HELEN J E PINE VALLEY RD 35 — 178—CC1 8 PINE VALLEY RD CRTHAMPTON NA C1C6C TARTER MARIANNE 3 PINE VALLEY RD 35 —180—001 3 PINE VALLEY RD CRTHAMPTCN NA 0106C 'LRKEVICZ JACQUELINE N & GARY L 8 4 PINE VALLEY RD 35 — 181 —COl �LDCLPH PINE VALLEY RCAC :LCRENCE NA C1C6C :ELISLE NARY GERTRUDE FINE VALLEY RD 35 —176—COl :/C MESSICK ►2C RYAN RD :LCRENCE NA C1C6C :HILDS RCNALC L 3 CYNTHIA M 34 PINE VALLEY RD FL 35 — 185—CC1 34 PINE VALLEY RD 'LCRENCE NA C1C6C s REP ARED : 07115152 CITY CF NORTHAMPTCN PAGE ; 2 CFFICIAL ABLTTER ' S LIST SUEJECT LCCATICN : 1 FINE VALLEY RD FL ACICCT ROBERT E FINE VALLEY RD 35 - 177-C G1 PINE VALLEY RD LCRENCE MA C1C6C ' IMITZ RCEERT E SR & HELEN J 8 PINE VALLEY RD 35 -178-001 8 PINE VALLEY RD CRTHAMPTCN NA 01066 TARTER MARIANNE 3 PINE VALLEY RD 35 - 180-001 3 PINE VALLEY RD CRT HAMPTCN NA 01060 C E E R T S NELSCN H FINE VALLEY RD 35 - 183-CC1 PINE VALLEY ROAD iCRTHAMPTCN FA 0106C 'URKEVICZ JACQUELINE N & GARY L 8 4 PINEE VALLEY RD 35 - 181 -COl iLDCLPH PINE VALLEY RCAD LCRENCE NA C 1 C 6 C :HALLET RALPh G 8 ETHEL M 5 PINE VALLEY RD FL 35 -182-CC1 5 PINE VALLEY RD :LCRENCE MA L106C (CEERTS NELSCN H 6 PINE VALLEY RD 35 -184-COl 6 PINE VALLEY RD iCRTHAMPTCN MA 01060 :ELISIE MARY GERTRUDE FINE VALLEY RD 35 - 176-001 :/ C PESSICK 'r2C RYAN RD :LCRENCE NA C1C6C :HILDS RONALD L 8 CYNTHIA M 34 PINE VALLEY RD FL 35 -185-CC1 34 PINE VALLEY RD ;LCRENCE MA C106C :CLEY MICHAEL E 8 KATHERINE E 4C PINE VALLEY RD 35 - 174-CC1 4C PINE VALLEY RD VORTHAMPTCN PA 0106C RACICCT ROBERT E 8 JCAN A EURTS PIT RD EXT 35 - 252-CC1 PINE VALLEY ROAD ICRTHAMPTCN MA 01060 NATUSKO EDWIN G 8 JULIA S 1397 RYAN RD FL 35 -186-001 1397 RYAN RD FLORENCE MA C1C6C DALE STANLEY H & CLAIRE M 897 RYAN RD FL 35 -C65-001 897 RYAN RC FLORENCE NA C106C REPAkED : U7 / 1 ITY CF NC -i7 T F • CFFICIAL AiEL TER ' S LIST SUEJECI LCCNTION : 1 PINE VALLEY RC FL REEK DANIEL E 6 C N 1357 5URTS FIT PC 25 -Co2-C C1 1367 BURTS FIT RC CRTHAMPTON NA 0106C OTT CHARLES E 8 JOYCE A 1383 BURTS FIT FD FL 35 -173-COl 1363 BURTS PIT PC LCRENCE NA LIC6C LSSEAULT RCEERT E � NARY P 1373 BURTS FIT PC 35 -172-CC1 1313 BURTS FIT RC y CRTHAMPTCN NA 0106C ELISLE NARY GERTRUDE EURTS PIT RD r 35 -C34-CG1 / C NESSICK 10 RYAN RD LCRENCE NA C1C6C CWAL JOANNE T 1363 'BURTS FIT RC 35 -171 -COl / C JCANNE KC6AL LASTCWSKI 1363 BURTS PIT FD CRTHAMPTCN NA 0106C CYLE JUDY A 1357 BURTS FIT RC 35 -17C-CC1 357 BURTS FIT RD CRTHAMPTCN NA U1C6U CKENNA JCHN L & JUDITH A 1345 BURTS FIT PC FL 35 - 16S-CG1 1345 BURTS FIT RD LCRENCE NA C1C6L ARVER JCHN R 8 CHARLCTTE 1335 BURTS FIT RD 35 -168-001 1335 BURTS FIT PC - CRTHAMPTCN NA 01060 AGDALENSKY STANLEY N STEVEN D 1331 BURTS FIT RD 35 -167-COl AGDALENSKY 1331 BURTS FIT RC CRTHAMPTCN MA 0106C ELISLE NARY GERTRUDE 839 RYAN RC FL 35 -166-COl / 0 MESSICK 39 RYAN RC CRTHAMPTCN NA 01060 CHORGE RAYMOND C & CAROLYN V 7 PINE VALLEY RD FL 35 -179-CC1 7 PINE VALLEY RD LCRENCE NA C1C6C CNSKA MARTIN J 8 JOYCE E 817 RYAN RD FL 35 -165-COl 817 RYAN RC LCRENCE NA C106C ;o i J� N� �J Cn cn L I a cn I T -- f \ I J MILL f J h - cc - � O v 3 f x V � C�J1 flk r ®Q 175 j 6aT rI va ly 3q 171 P� protect natural resources & water supplies ' C.) Estimated daily and peak hour vehicle trips generated by the proposed use, traffic patterns for vehicles and pedestrians showing adequate access to and from the site, and adequate vehicular and pedestrian circulation within the site. CONSULT ZONING FOR INFORMATION REQUIRED FOR MAJOR PROJECTS. Site Plans submitted for major projects shall be prepared (and stamped) by a registered Architect, Landscape Architect, or Professional Engineer A. LOCUS (show where your project is on this or another map) (delApb\siteplan.pb 3/6/92) SITE PLAN REQUIREMENTS--OPTIONAL REQUEST FOR WAIVER The application MUST include a site plan and documentation with the fallowing information. Upon written request, the Planning Board may waive the submission of any Of the required information, provided that the Applicant provides some written information on each of the items and explains why a waiver is appropriate. For each requested waiver circle the item number and fill in the reason for your request in the space provided. Use additional sheets if necessary. See the Zoning Ordinance for all site plan requirements. 7 Site plan(s) at a scale of 1" = 40' showing- B-1. Name and address of the owner and the developer, name of the project, date and scale of clans; B-2. Location and boundaries of the let, adjacent streets or ways, location and owners names of all adjacent properties and those within 300 feet of the property line, and all zoning district boundaries; �3. Existing and proposed buildings, setbacks from property lines, building elevations,. and all exterior entrances and exits (elevation plans of all exterior facades structures are encouraged); B-4. Present & proposed use of the land and buildings- \,1-5 Existing and proposed topography at two foot contour intervals, showing wetlands, streams, surface water bodies, drainage swales, f1codplains, and unique natural land features (for intermediate projects the permit granting authority may accept generalized topography instead of requiring contour lines)- B-6. Location of;arking & loading areas, public&private ways, driveways,walkways, access & egress points, proposed surfacing- B-7 Location and description of all stormwater drainage facilities, (including applicable calculations and drainage public & private utilities, sewage disposal facilities, and water supply �B Existing & proposed landscaping, trees and plantings (size &type of plantings), stone walls, buffers, and fencing- B-9. Location, dimensions, height, color, illumination of existing and proposed signs; J rV' - �B-1 Provisions for refuse removal, with facilities for screening of refuse when appropriate- 1 1 An erosion control plan (for major prciecs only) and other measures taken to CITY OF NORTHAMPTON SPECIAL PERMIT AND SITE PLAN APPLICATION 1. PERMIT AUTHORITYOES): ZBA Planning Board Council 2. Applicant's Name: Ao �er i�Q C r cof Address: / -Pr Telephone: S g(. 3. Property Owner: e Address: Telephone: 4. Status of Applicant:OwnerK Contract Purchaser Lessee Other (explain) 5. Parcel Identification: Zoning Map ��_ Parcell73+1 7�oning DistrC:S� Street Address: 6. Special Permit requested under Zoning Ordinance Sec'.ion Pa - 7. Site Plan is for:Intermediate Project�cr Major Project 8. Narrative Description of the Proposed Project (Use additional sheets if necessary): To use y7ps-�0 re 9. How does project comply with Special Permit criteria: (See Applicant's Guide fer criteria-use additional sheets is necessary) r f uJ ` 1L'i-t- '!dam' A d�dF f 0% l y n f 0_,-i'S .6� S ee h-e 10. Site Plan, with any requests for waivers, must be attached. 11. Certified Abutters List from Assessors' Office must be attached. 12. 1 certify that the information contained herein is true and accurate to the best of my knowledge. Date: Applicant's Signature: r i Q tz u c ale ri ea: rue ( ) (delApb:siteptan.pb 3/6i92) CITY OF NORTHAMPTON SPECIAL PERMIT AND SITE PLAN APPLICATION 1. PERMIT AUTHORITYOES): ZBA,,L�_ Planning Board Council 2. Applicant's Name: WO�er -/- 9 a-C r col Address: 411 L `%a-l/e kc lol Telephone: S 34 3. Property Owner: -?e Address: Telephone: 4. Status of Applicant:Owner_K Contract Purchaser Lessee Other (explain) 5. Parcel Identification: Zoning M2 Parcel 173 11Lning District: - Street Address: / f i AL e U�l l Po�z 6. Special Permit requested under Zoning Ordinance Section 11 JL PgJL- 33 7. Site Plan is for:intermediate Projector Major Project 8. Narrative Description of the Proposed Project (Use additional sheets if necessary): 7o r,�s e -xi 5-fi4 gS -Q-f, IM 9. How does project comply with Special Permit criteria: (See Applicant's Guide for criteria-use additional sheets is necessary) of n-r' 7 lo- Ll a !read s s r 4a IP Ltk i� �4-d d,'f,�-►� n �,i s terP d v--el�r��. �,ct�/ .� see--e k e� _ Ly I_ ew is i -Fl VLced t ci_.re�- 10. Site Plan, with any requests for waivers, must be attached. 11. Certified Abutters List from Assessors' Office must be attached. 12 1 certify that the information contained herein is true and accurate to the best of my knowledge. Date: Applicant's Signature: r r�USE ate ea: rue (�A/ (de1Rpb:sftep1an.pb 3/6i92) 4.• r � 1 Date Filed N File No. ZONING PERMIT APPLICATION (§10.2) 1. Name of Applicandbbert Racicot Address: 1 Pine Valley Road Telephone: 5863174 2 . Owner of Property: same Address: Telephone: 3 . Status of Applicant:XOwner Contract Purchaser Lessee O her (explain: ) 4 . Parcel Identification: Zoning Map Sheet# 3S Parcel# /7A,/ 7r Zoning District(s) (include overlays) Street Address ;-_o_ Required 5. Existinq Proposed by Zonin Use of Structure/Property A S (if project is only interior work, skip to #6) Building height D %B1dg.Coverage (Footprint) Setbacks - front I - side 5 - rear 5 Lot size Frontage {� Floor Area Ratio %Open Space (Lot area minus building and parking) S6 Parking Spaces Loading 2 Signs Fill (volume & location) 6. Narrative Description of Proposed Work/Project: (Use additional sheets if necessary 662 - f�) s r 7. Attached Plans: ,s(f- Sketch Plan Site Plan 8 . Certification: I hereby certify that the information contained herein is true and accurate to the best of my knowledge. Date: Applicant' s Signature: - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - THIS SECTION FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY: ,,, ,% Approved as presented/based on information presented Denied as presented a s o n f enial: ignat e of Blil ' g Inspector Dat NOTE: Issuance of a zoning permit does not relieve an applicant's burden to comply with all zoning requirements and obtain all required permits from the Board of Health,Conservation Commission,Department of Public Works and other applicable permit granting authorities. U, o eo AD SYLVESTER " a W ,Rlo y o u „ L. �■■�� ■■ i�i�i■■ ■ ■mmm■ booms ON N N cN u •. 0 j5� 9 y 0e O� �►� • .� Ito ■ ■■mm000■oo■mmmmmmmomommmmmm■ ■mmmmmmmmmmmmm■■mrrom■■r � O � �• to N o V v � I Lp � I J71' cn �401' oot, i g ° O O o r n lk $ w O N V � r ►�90� $ u OQt� ■ A o' 6 1. v N 00 £ o u� �O N ep It o C71 0..s o W 6` oOt ■ \/' ■ `` o • � p ~ p % � ■ O •tq4� ; '00" \/Q N 0 0001 0't, q N N pL1 CD 290 L lam" °' `► W 90 202 N 0". �I � 06` 00Y/ Opt o�JO pO► 0�� o 00► .o 14 n�=° " - I 3ia 0o a W` W 6 — / 7 %\ g 4►96 o N N gyp ' _ Ow . ° 0t� �! y (p W O v J a U1 b, 4�• O 200 . ■■mmmmm■mm �� 20 0 0 p Op p 0,o 0 -4 oo 0J° 'qw 0 m N 22 2 u 2o oot — loo 0 00,� Oo — o Is �♦ ' IO Op? Np too zaa — e ��� • W 2 v NP Oo_p4, ■ -4 co ,p Q1 � 20� 1 J 4 ��Q• o~� o. V Vt N P V �►qt D � O 00,X o as 4 �p.0/ \ vp� 4q •0 O O 4q J.o f�. \ • NO —► — w 4qV l4 ■ lR N cn �• �O Z_� °p lO��wv \ k Irl 40 OPO ! 1 ' r '+� � � i,Yf ', •: C 7 "� 'S' ,4o- w •, ''� ' !J i n:�� N - � O c o o � Bn. 3 3 0 0 7:7. A N U O ' r OD 10 ,--I \ � y w �a oA � � a °° rn o S84"58 •1� o cv < (n \ `b p62Z �I \ P ;^ ti ti 3 r, co a \ y � OD '0 �- - ------ ---- \ yZll o �� 0 U �N 10 D joo D emi �v 19 c' 3 0 r, M aZ 0 cp m Al>� ce -;i .__- _