Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPOUDRE PLAINS SUBDIVISION - PRELIMINARY - 72-87 - CORRESPONDENCE - CORRESPONDENCE-CONCEPTUAL REVIEW • CITY OF FORT COLLINS OFFICE OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES, PLANNING DEPARTMENT October 28, 1987 CBA Development Corporation 1212 Constitution Ave. Suite A-3=153 Fort Collins, CO 80524 Dear Mr. Olt, For your information, attached is a copy of the Staff's comments concerning Poudre Plains, which was presented before the Conceptual Review Team on October 19, 1987. The comments are offered informally by Staff to assist you in preparing the detailed components of the project application. Modifications and additions to these comments may be made at the time of formal review of this project. If you should have any questions regarding these comments or the next steps in the review process, please feel free to call me at 221-6750. Sincerely, 04/43icivAe, Debbie deBesche Project Planner Attachment DdB/bh xc: Tan Peterson, Director of Planning Mike Herzig, Development Coordinator cPioject Planner File rothfl • �rr1xT x r d� # 5" *" tiJ i `--72 r 3 {r y rs z.t 1} b r - *r- sx t 5:.4-1�"4 c�S y sz ,• 5 _ a i. F E^ 4+FLrOi-ttf+ yay, A E„"'f a 1 ✓ , r y r f J r tr �r-c xlr PY7i Pr ..1 # R?r.F�S:f{taf'..t ti+� tr a f r�M J! £jyF J y, OFFICE OF DEVELOPMENT 300 LaPorte Ave. • P.O. Box 580 • Fort Collins, Colorado 80522 • (303) 221-6750 SERVICES, PLANNING CONCEPTUAL REVIEW STAFF COMMENTS MEETING DATE: October 19, 1987 ITEM: Poudre Plains APPLICANT: CBA Development Corporation, Suite A-3-1.53, Fort Collins, CO. 80524 LAND USE DATA: Request to adjust plan to substitute 7 detached patio homes for 13 apartments. COMMENTS: 1. Water and sewer lines exist:. in West Vine Drive. It would be best to connect to the water line on the south edge of the property to provide a loop. 2. There is existing overhead power line(s) on Vine Drive. Future power lines would need to be placed underground. 3. The buildings must meet zoning setbacks. 4. Please contact the City Building Department regarding the requirements for manufactured housing permits. 5. The water line size appears adequate for fire protection, but you may need another hydrant. 6. Some of the;. lots exceed the 660' foot fire access requirement, you may want to explore the possibility of residential sprinkler systems. 7. The streets will be required to meet City Standards. 8. Unless the old drainage report is located a new one will be required for the project. 9. The Staff suggests varying the front setbacks of the dwellings to help prevent a "cookie cutter" appearance. 10. One street tree per lot` is required and a note to this affect will need to be placed on the site plan. 11. City Staff has determined that the right to develop under the approved subdivision has expired. The above comments are general and should be con- sidered when planning the site. I have enclosed a copy of Kenneth Waido s letter dated October 20, 1987 which explains the Staffs determination. , ® - 0 re-`7 CITY OF FORT COLLINS OFFICE OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES, PLANNING DEPARTMENT October 20, 1987 Mr. Robert G. Streeter Aronson-Streeter Partnership 832 Gregory Road Fort Collins, CO 80524 Dear Mr. Streeter, This letter is in response to your letter of October 12, 1987, requesting clarification of the status of the Poudre Plains Subdivision. On Monday October 19, 1987, several City staff members, including Tom Pet- erson, Planning Director, John Huisjen, City Attorney, and Mike Herzig, Assistant City Engineer, and I conducted a meeting to review the points of your October 12 letter. After careful review, we find no evidence indicat- ing a substantial change in position in relation to the land has been made to consider that a vested right be granted to the subdivision. We there- fore conclude and regret to inform you that the_right to develop under-t.he approved-s`ubdivision-has-expired-according-to_City Code. The existing subdivision, or a replat, would have to be submitted for for- mal approval by the City's Planning and Zoning Board prior to any building activity. A Preliminary and Final Subdivision Plat would have to be approved by the Board. There is the possibility of combining the prelimi- nary and final plat review process, however, permission to do so must be granted by Mr. Peterson. If you have further questions, please feel free to contact me. Sincerely,, / / p. Kenneth G. Waido Chief Planner xc: Tom Peterson, Planning Director John Huisjen, City Attorney Y V T) - r.' c. t r t y�T1Jjj�yYj" ?Fs .;t„. • • S 4. u'1~� /F..,•� t•i!'} �:1. 7 lk.}�.tC a',,..,':-•'..-: , �� �.f f 1 „ _t�l.-ya — � s PMSi'F'�r`s Y w-.. y .t )''1 .�+ ./`j1., S t � n f �,.ti' . ! 'I'. f C.-. v.J y¢! r 1-'1 �.'r 1 ,0 s'' T.- r 0� .r r' ti� q 1t:4 :•r 4e'.F �r � R � !,� Fw3lf r �.+� L1 .wM yc r �� i e' s.¢ ,t f sY '}, A � ro.{r r ti, V r. o,trzi-;` .xP•ly!::-Y 3ii v,r t S,C� r4.A-- �:i�e '`"s+ �3�?.r"A rt y ..1{i � ti � v t'` .r} '!''�.t "�i +1^? 'MM� T i r ,A- d r }"c •-,�f 1Y yc�< t'�.,, "S ,r`'e'�..'t '�' xk �t'=� ;lid k. !Tt !rt T. rf �' I ?;j '� .S,h :: ..: ,_40.+� x, 'ri • i.:,,:! s!`... �3'."'d'd'�v . . . ;- r ;' r•.. •'.'.l.. -.4 ;.4)'.?,,t ..c' i -PA'" r y► r$� !.j . v.'Tk' rr -,A �.'"•;.,.:� F't"f�:�, c .'T l.,�fY n.,fF. t' i•1- .N .-L�'J t • s- 1 t �,., F 7 d.*rc:. 1 OFFICE OF DEVELOPMENT 300 LaPorte Ave. • P.O. Box 580 • Fort Collins, Colorado 80522 • (303) 221.6750 SERVICES, PLANNING I CITY OF FORT COLLINS OFFICE OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES, PLANNING DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM TO: Tom Peterson, Planning Director Joe Frank, Assistant Planning Director Paul Eckman, Assistant City Attorney Mike Herzig, Assistant City Engineer FM: Ken Waldo, Chief Planner*L,,, ET: October 14, 1987 RE: Poudre Plains Subdivision About a month ago, Rhys Christensen, Sales Associate with Moore and Com- pany's Commercial Division, inquired (see letter dated September 21) about the status of the Poudre Plains Subdivision, a subdivision-approved-by-the- Tounty__in_1981 acid subsequently annexed into the City in_1982.J Joe and I asked Paul to clarify how City regulations applied to County subdivisions annexed into the. City. Paul answered in a Memorandum dated October 1. I provided Rhys with an answer to his concerns in a letter dated October 5. I have received a new letter dated October 12, from Robert Streeter, asking to clarify the status of the Poudre Plains Subdivision. I have talked to Joe and we think a meeting of all of us should be held to decide if this subdivision has any legal status within the City. If it has legal status, what steps would be required by atbuilder to acquire a building permit(s)? If it has no legal status, what steps would be required to make the subdi- vision "official"? oc1cbe✓ I would like to hold the meeting on Monday, Wyember 19th at 4:00 PM. Copies of all materials are attached. jolt ,v1"97 ? N 4.z.L , +a Z ,,n a '4 0 h a-4. P y . ife #t,y s i ' t OFFICE OF DEVELOPMENT 300 LaPorte Ave. • P.O. Box 580 • Fort Collins, Colorado 80522 • (303) 221-6750 SERVICES, PLANNING ARONSON-STREETER PARTNERSHIP 832 Gregory road Fort Collins CO 80524 October 12, 1987 Mr. Kenneth G. Waldo Chief Planner City of Fort Collins Office of Development Services Planning Department P.O. Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522 Dear Mr. Waido: I am writing to clarify the status of Poudre Plains Subdivision, a legal subdivision recorded in Latimer County in January, 1982, and subsequently annexed to the City of Fort Collins in the autumn of 1982 as part of the Vive-LaPorte-Taft Second Annexation. After the annexation was approved in late 1982, I contacted the City of Fort Collins Planning Department and inquired what, if anything, I had to to maintain the status of the Poudre Plains Subdivision as a legal subdivision. within the city limits of the City of Fort Collins. I was informed by a person named John (last name not recorded) that nothing further was required. I again checked with the Planning Department in early September, 1987, to determine if any action was required to insure that the Poudre Plains Subdivision was on record as a legal subdivision in the City of Fort Collin.,. I was informed that no further action was required until development actually was planned and the various permits would be required. My partners and I have been committed to the development of this property and in fact have installed a water line in the right-of-ways of North Hollywood Road and Plains Court. Due to the untimely death of one of the partners, the property was placed on the market in 1983; We have maintained the propertjas a subdivision by keeping it mowed and by paying taxes on each of the separate lots (22). I have been informed by Mr. Rhys Christensen of Moore and Company that there may be some question on the status of Poudre Plains Subdivision. We have made a considerable investment in the property and have demonstrated due diligence in trying to move this subdivision toward full development and have a valid contract with a group that has the ability to complete the improvement to the subdivision and construct dwellings within a year. Please check your records and assist me in determining the complete. facts and status of this property. Your assistance in clearing up any questions is appreciated. Sincerely, elLIAjC Robert G. treeter • cc: Richard Gast, Attorney Rhys Christensen, Moore and Company II CITY OF FORT COLLINS OFFICE OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES, PLANNING DEPARTMENT _ October 5, 1987 Mr. Rhys Christensen Sales Associate Moore and Canpany 260 East Horsetooth Road Fort Collins, CO 80525 Dear Rhys, This letter is in response to your letter of September 21, 1987, concerning the status of the Poudre Plains Subdivision, a subdivision which was approved by the County in 1981 prior to being annexed into the City of Fort Collins in 1982 as part of the Vine-Laporte-Taft Second Annexation. I have discussed your issue with Joe Frank, Assistant Planning Director, and W. Paul Eckman, Assistant City Attorney. According to the Code of the City of Fort Collins, the right to proceed under an approved subdivision expires after the passage of two (2) years unless the property owner has made a substantial change in position in relation to the land and made substantial expenditures, or incurred substantial obligations. A substantial change in position usually means the property owner has developed, or has committed to the development, of infrastructure, streets and utilities. If these have happened, the owner of the property has a "vested right" in the County approved subdivision. If they haven't, the right to proceed has expired. According to our attorney, it would be a question of "fact," requiring proof that the property owner has made a substantial change in position in relation to the land prior to expiration. If you have further questions, please feel free to contact me. Sincerely, Kenneth G. Waido Chief Planner I IA p.4-0.,.0.._., r a A V f rE l e i.:. v y t�i}5A!f2`'`A t _-.. . X �Sz fta,�+Wti-,� � �*- ' � .• ;4 pr Cp l ; ��i :, h'< #f ^ , 7 y f ' l +,e� Lxif`4 P�i 1f� ! ,i <; 4` t,, : AS Nr . � - 5. � Y4 Sr(6. i � ir ��F4 1.+ Wl * , i- r�e v i yYI .r'�i� f• ; Yi , yt`' #xk4r} A } 4--1, 2r;e:K N 4il,,, F ? . Kt' 7 `is a 1r i M'F a ; *h t r' « y, .1.a . - ! p ,.: : 'i f - d 24 st 1_, ti, `„ v ri f OFFICE OF DEVELOPMENT 300 LaPorte Ave. • P.O. Box 580 • Fort Collins, Colorado 80522 • (303) 221.6750 SERVICES, PLANNING L ! t • 110 CITY OF FORT COLLINS MEMORANDUM TO: Joe Frank, Assistant Planning Director Ken Waido, Chief Planner Yi),10() FROM: W. Paul Eckman, Assistant City Attorne DATE: October i, 1987 RE: Status of County Subdivisions Upon Annexation Last week you inquired as to the status of County subdivi- sions once they have been annexed into the City. The two areas of concern that you expressed were as follows: 1. County subdivisions which are fully built out or partially built out. 2. County subdivisions which are not developed. The questions that you have asked with regard to these types of subdivisions pertain to whether the approval of the subdivisions ever expires, as they do in the City after the passage of two years, and whether the City can require that improvements constructed in the subdivisions be brought into compliance with the City's standards as a of the building permit process. The answer to these questions hinges on the issue of whether the owner of the property has a "vested right" in the County approved subdivision. The basic common law rule with regard to vested rights is not often addressed in the Colorado cases, but is, generally, that a land owner will be held to have acquired a vested right to continue and complete construction of a building or structure, and to initiate and continue a use, despite a restriction contained in an ordinance or an amendment thereof where, prior to the effective date of the ordinance, and in reliance upon a permit or approval validly issued, he has in good faith, (1) made a substantial change of position _in __._relation_ to the land, and (2) made substantial expenditures_, or_(3) _incurred substantial obligations. The issue of vested rights relates closely to the issue of the legality of retroactive legislation, which legislation is clearly suspect in Colorado. It is because A Z • f OFFICE OF THE CITY 300 LaPorte Ave. • P.0.Box 580 • Fort Collins,Colorado 80522 • (303)221-6520 ATTORNEY • Joe Frank/Ken Waido October 1, 1987 Page 2 of the general concept that a citizen ought: to be able to rely upon the propriety of his actions based upon existing law that the concept of nonconforming uses has arisen. Merely because the nonconforming use is vested does not afford it a special privilege against regulatory ordinances of the City. A regulatory ordinance enacted under the general police power is not encumbered by the nonconforming use provisions conferred pursuant to the zoning ordinance or by the application of the doctrine of vested rights. , Such a use is still subject to collateral regulatory ordinances enacted for the. protection of the public health, safety and welfare. Norton Shores v. Carr 265 N.W.2d 802 (Michigan 1978) ; Cranberry Lake Quarry Company v. Johnson 231 A.2d 837 (New Jersey 1967) ; Town of Hempstead v. Gold Blatt 172 N.E.2d 562, 369 U.S. 590 (New York. 1961) . Accordingly, a regulatory ordinance enacted under the general police power setting forth the manner in which the non- conforming use may be carried on and the facilities directly related to health and safety which my be required, will generally be upheld. It would be my opinion that County subdivisions which are fully built out or partially built out are "vested" because the landowner has made a substantial change in position in relation to the land and made substantial expenditures or incurred substantial obligations. County subdivisions which are not developed may or may not be "vested" depending upon whether the landowner has made substantial change of position in relation to the land and made substantial expenditures or incurred substan- tial obligations. This would be a question of fact. In the absence of a "vested right" the City could provide for the expi- ration of those developments, which provision, I would recommend, should be enunciated by . ordinance. If the rights are vested, subject to the provisions of Senate Bill 219 which shall take effect on January 1, 1988, they do not expire. With respect to Senate Bill 219, a copy of which has already been forwarded to you, §24-68-104 (1) C.R.S. provides that a property right which has been vested shall remain vested for a period of three years. Accordingly, after January 1, 1988, unless the County development has been approved pursuant to a development agreement which allows for a longer period of vesting, we may assume that the vested property right expires after a period of three years unless it should become vested pursuant to common law, in which event, the vesting continues indefinitely. The purpose of Senate Bill 219 was, I think, to create, by statute, a vested right in the approval of a "site specific development plan" even though no substantial change of position has occurred or substantial expenditures or obligations been incurred. Nevertheless, the statute imposes a limitation on r.� Joe Frank/Ken Waido October 1, 1987 Page 3 the length of vesting, in the length of three years, unless otherwise established in the development agreement. If the development agreement is to provide for a vested right in excess of three years, such development agreement must be approved by the City Council as a legislative act subject to referendum. I believe that if a vested right exists, either pursuant to Senate Bill 219, or pursuant to common law, the City is obliged to permit the construction of street improvements in accordance with the provisions of the approved plan. If the approved plan is silent on a particular street improvement design criteria, then I believe that the City may impose its requirements, after annexation. The City may impose building permit requirements pursuant to the plumbing, electrical, mechanical, etc. codes since the approval of subdivisions and unit developments by the County does not specify, I assume, those requirements. County subdivisions which are built out, and are not in compliance with the City's zoning ordinance would be nonconform- ing uses subject to termination upon abandonment, as provided in - the Code. WPE:kkg ® III ._ _. .. ., , :. , ,, ..,„ ;,....„,:_, ,, _:.. „ rOOxandcomporcy ; COMMERCIAL September 21, 1987 Ken Waido Development Services/Planning P. 0. Box 580 Fort Collins , CO 80522 Re: Vine-LaPorte-Taft 2nd Annexation Dear Ken, Bob Streeter, the owner of the property we discussed gave me a copy of the plat for Poudre Plains . You' ll note the plat was recorded by the County on January 14, 1981 in Book 2098, page 170. On September 21, 1982, the property was annexed by the City as part of the Vine-LaPorte-Taft Second. Annexation. Thus, the subdivision did exist when the City annexed the property. The. City is not showing the platted lots on their maps . This appears to be a mistake and should be corrected. Please look into this matter as soon as possible. We have the property under contract and need to resolve this issue quickly. Thank you, Warm egards , LI Rhys Ch±istensen Sales Associate ,-, z-=z7t�1.- RC/vp SEP 2 41987 PLANNING DEPARTMENT 260 EAST HORSETOOTH, FORT COLLINS, COLORADO 80525 303/223-5555 REA®If ; ..'1 7:__ �: ,4 , �, l';;'' • • BK2098 ' tc0') 7 A '*h .. j Z+s's i�v.0p t, a s�nr ,rn; 1 3= La•„',..` ...•'' , �'. 1 2L AT. • };0:..r7 c'' 14. r t • . i • • . POI/ORE •., • • • OR W OF THE 6" PM SITUATE IN TIlE A K,. a • 4L69 a xt, . • t s'' ` f STATEMENT Of OWNERSHIP SUBDIVISION, DEDICATION, AND DECLARATION •. ''r OF PROTECTIVE COVENANTS: /CHOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS: That the undersigned, being the owners of Me following . • . '' described land, to wit; A tract of Lend situate in Me Northeast 4of Sec/%on 9, Township ' 7 North, Range 69 West of the 6tA P.M. Lerin,er County, Colorado, which, considering /he , • Nor/A tine of said Ner/heist Y as bearing 589•54'30'W end with all Deering* contained herein re%/ire hereto, it canto/mid within the boundary liner which begin at a point which bears • SL19.5I'30'W 77/.95 feet from the Northeast corner of se,d Section 9 and run thence . 5001170'E 66/.04 fret) thence Se9•3f'30'W Slade feet; thence NOO•/7'W 260.00 feet, thence N89•JI'5O'E 2b/.30 feet; thence NOO•/t'30'W 40/.02 feel; thence NE9•St'3O'E • r 260.00 feet to Me point of beginning, eon/aining 5.6233 acres,more o.' Iess, hare caused the some/s be suirvojed and subdirded //o /o's and streets es ,hewn on this plat 10 be . known as POUORE PLAINS, and do hereby dedicate and convey to one' for-pub/.i ✓se, ... • •i1 ' ' Isere,hereafter, ine streets ao h..d eel and de{ignited on this.p/.t, and does i/se rarer• • • Peroeteial ea:Omen/s for the ins/a/l.lien and awn/ f oddities, and far array+lien and d♦.iiage •fie/bries es ape led out and designated on this 'het . •• ' ' .�, OW bonds indt and teals this Slitday of N...L AD.,/979. • - - "dtfeeZi G°Qet eea 21.J 57 S 1z.*. • • • a1�iterK. • ?fdt/ /7sv1`ee, Sate of Co/oradvltas County of leaving,. J , The foregeiny instrumeet was acknow/edged before inc this 5'!r: day of ljteitek A.D.,/979 . � $ fe. n hb/try Public + ,4ff• aelir,I/ commission 'spires / o 9 TL . .0r i ENGINEER'S CERT/F/CATE': Rriesrd A..Rutherford a Professional Enyi.eer and Lend Surreyer ender /he laws of Me State of Colorado, being duly sworn on his oath, deposes and says Mat /he survey and P%t• t of Poudre Plains were made under his supervision, that si%d plat is en decorate de/inea/ion of said server, Mat he has reed the statements /hereon, and /ha/ the same are 4j 7 Mere of his awn knowledge. ^^•• '' , n ��// '�1• j' Richard A. Ruttier foe d "r ''n:;{'��1 Professional Engineer L Land Surveyor C�f!r�;l • �''' Subscribed and sworn /e before ma /his.6"7L day of fllnAf.6• A.O. /979. ir. O y . (O JQel./tJte/ ei o �.t s / b 4 ., .NoJ+r Public •.} �. kNj ae/ind eswnr,as,en aspire, Nrg7 <1�i"'?;'1' • 3 " rit `slt.A APPROVED kir ' ,By lee laria.ar. County Meelth Authority /Ais2-1i day of M,y A.D. /980. All conetruetion on 'a'Ais iibdir,iien or any.tot //grim, lee/whips, the derv/o,oment Of domestic. water,and the a �.F. . proniion en sewage treatment, shah' As done in a'manner which "di meet di/ the require/nenIs �� ✓ 1 ; .f.the Colorado Deperlmont"of Wealth and the Lorimer County•.Pubbe Nea//h Deportment;and \ + is '''s' 'leo offiears aelhorie ed to enforce •eveh requ�//m�"�'y.ent•s //��� % r�f,7� • "• i• trot 'ft?11 ' i' •' ♦ .ZCL ,s,fie !. b g C K itt e p ! Lorimer County Health Av/horny r' • 5' i`,RJt •9 'r'K3 .�� It -, u _ - r _.'/!1 rs/. REDA.P,FOiIM/D y '�, �{APPROVED �" #"s ?i i,'. ,� ca S AD /980. - 4:- ! d+ f�LiTIKI[fICY ,, , By.the Laynrar, aunty 0/innmy Commisa,en an this !n y P -.� r-y�.- ,- .s..1'. ,, i - .1: •F.•-,•,- -.;� ,.i ':y y ; ,.,%y,c: .` %'.�'1.4.bil.G-1.-e' ,.. a Stet t s • ,' , •,t f i 1: Chrrrman �t;$`t,f•Y a APPROVED y .i. ,+' , Ti! • - �,I)�1a ,,• ' Y Yy,��•,• By the Larimor.Cewrtj•Bear!of County Cemm%rsJsnsrs./Aa�d+y e!Mnv i � A O. /980. i+ti�,i 4 Al/:dedicateem are hereby accepted on behalf of.the pubbe Th,i approve/ doer not p, / eenstilula eeeep/ante. of responsibility by the County for the -construction,elks;, repah-, ontd, 4,14. ..ream, of any s/riots, highways, a/'eys,.'ardges,r,,Ats•af j,�: p 't t $ dominated'on M p/el • .` F �:{. „u'• ,Z J r' s y �j • ti •' 6 :!'. �� bairn, f • i �. .. ; i i. `./ ,t r-: tti sv., •%11.4 ,. r.•;A 4 ?, ;•.c i 1}..1. :•,,ft,.-r.an�'t< `, S ' r .'' i• ' i'., !F..'K :'V: '.4 4• i' 1. ••d• 17) #,Y,.:L. I�I.. e.i��,sl�.; Y:y.'sy • +r'1 , 'tCd T ,r?.. , i4.�. .'� � 1� •'O �'! 't , •r c,rS •,f . �ALy,'• a(y 4i ,„:„ 1 . .,:. n ws,.l< ti `,,kv -'a4 s i' , „., i, . �� x-':)A)'i 1:r {r Vf,/Ay���,�:�f'•`t�a'�L�'(.yLr,�'1yt �+-��,Z'f 4;�T{�.0 „� �yW�ar• A,'- •i:� r .. � . _•-. 0 .... 0 F a-t-cc)t,7_ 0 I NG r` / 3959 1 DI .41I I1 NI II 09 P L AT OF COUNTY OF LARIHER STATE OF COIORdDO — . — . A N aQ ,cam i, C(1. YORE PLAINS • o ,�-L � «<�s� / cis t It V---k d� V t wi- E NORTHEAST OF SECT/ON9, T. 7N•, is 0,Foy-4-0—10,F{ s YE 6'h P.M.. L AR/Mf R COUNTY, COLD. A w,>�-,c , 1 a�, rr Eso.4 ,— - P.K.NAK,JE7 Sc'C FCi\r,kl.`c'42. p10c,w-t rZg/45 . ° _.. __. NB9•54'3C E -26000....___ _. 77G95'(o/s). AyrlA_Iine See:9J• . 's WEST V/NE DRIVE °o NE Co,,,.' Section 9, V�'i T.7/y.,R691Y,Clh PM. N09'9a'70"G NPl'S6'3D"E t e �� 22' ���,.. i 017.,t4..... 0 +il •R•'pf a •ss o nI {yi.ry o •�C'. h . .Li/•' 7soo SIt W n 0aee o f d`•J. e NJ9V8J07.10000'1 I / ..a!1.1 o8,89'4e 307/000o', ' N aI ; 8 0 o 7500 .57'r to O % • n. 4j 7500,Sr t „i a I I, r NJ948707/0000 i k m*6.I�NIy[,..•A IN85_Ie'J0.E /00.OOa La • 0I N -3 ,h o• 7500 Sr. 4j in o C O n d Q n 7500 Sf t to; - o Ne9 fe'a?.-i0C.00'I Q I I • .'o/,.5y[,.•,.� 3 Ne9'4e'0-/oo.oa\. • /9 I ;,,I C °o • O 0 4 7500 se r ^ ,O O .O O O O to I i 3 2 ^ - uoo aft K b %'' rrJ -- - N897dl0.7 A70.00'-# I s/B /t6a4.Q,FOUND N89 4a Jo? /00.00' 4 QC 0 —i0'Energeney Aoeess Road O /B 00 I S I '� C NB9.54'50 e 2B/30 4j 7500 sr n oo $ pp o.. _- .:•_.O�. L K 7500 Sft , .O .rowil5 t„..' ' $ o N8948JO'E/0000'. c • O ge e, I' „N89_48307 /0000', , O t9000SI r Z., 80©Sf r „ 8r®SFriri° ..e pro. •t0 0 © g - w e. 1 ��_ b - ` n 75o05fe ?J e•-' „j 7500 Sf-• O'a U/r.'IS C...7 8 O •} 1' h 14,89 66 0 90 00�—'_—80.00'——_ B/:48'— , - 84.97'— o13 I O N89•54.50.E 366.//' .NS9V8 J0 f /000Q'y • t0( Tawpe ery Ca/•I.s,e %///////'/j N Ci 111 E a',, PL 4/N5 COURT ;& o oq � i` N89 34'50'6' 36585' - ^ ,475oe sit LL-y, .✓ II ^� n 79.00•—�r- 76.00'_o,_ 75 00 eo 75:00'^ 6Q 85'' d • e �\_� ,00 B'r,;w, tr..r.�o tl (e1 �5 y1�o a9'IBJO-f I00.00'1• . o O '0 /© 1 // �I,O lib.1 4. R.50 I u I� p 7SE�sf t O 7300 S!Y C 7soo Ss r O 7500 St'7 :' ,1 ►y (4 I1 p by/ (.19 t,,. O ,o Q -�ry\�9750s/r Ca6de r.e •�.y rr. ° _ 73-6• _v: i6-�0'---g-75:v-a—t,-5-o='^ 00' c. co.o'' .., /00.>56': /•�- .. . `-�. �. 589'54'SO"W 54D.BB' /ovll,,fn:i. s'vrinYj[,.r. _ SW Cor NW 4,NE.',\\ /i '/8 R5,4R w OLASnC G/,No./650,JrET. • "OAR,FOI/NO� A'E$, Sec: 9 CrielA, Ci17 of 0..CaN.'v SoulA /re NW�j,NC 4,NEi,Sse:l-.T6! \20".w/rr bra Note t't Mointenin•da of s// road, and d ,irr5e T"4%•Iiee in Perdra P/hips• ar4+N de Me eo siA.%ty of/ne properly owners in Ma .svbeirisrbn //50-o✓9h Ma Nemeo.rnrra As,00•,,/,oir. P//,.re 'o rdafo.c/a/y ini<n/sin Mete roods snd dram45a f/0i/itias 5Ai/1 Perr// in , Ain upon, /he /o/t rffacJed. _ ta) ✓e1Ay aan:rare -fewer a/e✓atiens pr.:or rb cb/¢r n,y sio dboj perm.* .4.- basnn,enta on arty /ot to +hie S✓bd:r.•a/a.. • `