2000-6798 G CZ t Of 'ENGINEERING SER VICES DEPAR TMENT
y
Encini Capital Improvement Projects
District Support Services
Field Operations
Sand Replenishment/Stormwater Compliance
Subdivision Engineering
Traffic Engineering
February 4, 2004
Attn: San Diego County Credit Union
501 N. El Camino Real
Encinitas, California 92024
RE: Stimson, George and Elizabeth
1075 Statford Drive
Grading Permit 6798 -G
APN 258- 344 -07
Final release of security
Permit 6798 -G authorized earthwork, storm drainage, site retaining wall, and erosion
control, all as necessary to build the described project. Therefore, release of the security
deposited is merited.
Assignment of Account in the amount of $29,331.00 has been cancelled by the
Financial Services Manager and is hereby released in its entirety. The document
original is enclosed.
Should you have any questions or concerns, please contact Debra Geishart at (760) 633 -
2779 or in writing, attention this Department.
Sincerely,
Q � ALem Masih Maher J h
Senior Civil Engineer Finance Manager
Field Operations Financial Services
CC Jay Lembach, Finance Manager
Stimson, George
Debra Geishart
File
TEL 760- 633 -2600 / FAX 760- 633 -2627 505 S. Vulcan Avenue, Encinitas, California 92024 -3633 TDD 760 -633 -2700 � recycled paper
SUMMIT DESIGN ENGINEERING
4422 GLACIER AVE. #F, SAN DIEGO, CA 92120 PH — (619) 2841848
f f �t : r
December 4, 2000
City of Encinitas
505 South Vulcan Avenue
Encinitas, CA 92024 -3633
Attention: Engineering Services
RE: Grading Plan for: Proposed addition to Stimpson's residence
1075 Statford Drive, Encinitas, California.
SUBJECT: Hydrology
Dear Plan Checker:
It is Summit Design Engineering's position that the proposed grading on the above
referenced project does not significantly alter the existing hydrology. Therefore Summit
Design Engineering does not feel that hydrology calculations are necessary.
If you have any questions, please feel free to call me.
J " .1 /M.K
Sincerely,
SUMMIT DESIGN ENGINEERING
E1� QROFESSION
Said Mandavi, RCE # 42517, Exp. 3 -31 -04 ��� 5
Q�5 NO C m
14L Exp. 3.31.04
s
l 9 CIVIL
lF O F CALIFO
STRUCTURAL AND CIVIL
BARRY AND ASSOCIATES
1 j
GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING
P.O. Box 230348
' Encinitas, CA 92023 -0348
(760) 753 -9940
i
June 17, 2000 j
1
George and Elizabeth Stimson
' 1075 Stratford Drive
Encinitas, California 92024
1 Subject: GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION
Proposed Addition To Single Family Residence
1075 Stratford Drive
1 Encinitas, California 92024
1 Dear Mr. and Mrs. Stimson,
In response to your request, we have performed a limited
geotechnical investigation at the subject property for the proposed
' addition to the existing residence.
The findings of the investigation and recommendations for
1 foundation design are presented in this report.
From a geotechnical point of view, it is our opinion that the site
is suitable for the proposed addition, provided the recommendations
1 in this report are implemented during the design and construct'
phase.
1 If you have any questions, please contact us at (760) 753- 940.
Respectfully submitted, V 6
r
A.R. BARRY AND ASSOCI
R, QA,�
1 A.R. Barry, P.E. 0 G00119
Principal Engineer C Exp. s131ro2 �/
U� � o
s� rECvw Qp` rte`'
,��
i -� 0 ( 15r .
1
1
GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION
Proposed Addition To Single Family Residence
1075 Stratford Drive
Encinitas, California 92024
Prepared For
' George and Elizabeth Stimson
1075 Stratford Drive
Encinitas, California 92024
' June 17, 2000
W.O. P -1644
Prepared By:
A.R. BARRY AND ASSOCIATES
' P.O. Box 230348
Encinitas, CA 92023 -0348
1
TABLE OF CONTENTS
I REFERENCES ................
INTRODUCTION .................. ..............................2
SITE CONDITIONS ............... ..............................2
' PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT .......... ..............................2
SITE INVESTIGATION ............ ..............................3
SOIL CLASSIFICATION ........... ..............................3
SEISMIC......... ..............................3
LIQUEFACTION .................. ..............................4
' EXPANSIVE SOIL ................ ..............................5
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS—___ .... 5
' A. GENERAL .... ...............................
' B. FOUNDATIONS ......... ..............................5
C. SLABS ON GRADE ...... ..............................6
' D. RETAINING WALLS ..... ..............................7
E. DRIVEWAY ............ ..............................7
F. DRAINAGE ............ ..............................8
' G. FOOTING INSPECTION .................8
H. PLAN REVIEW ......... ..............................8
' LIMITATIONS ................... ..............................8
' APPENDICES
APPENDIX A ............ LABORATORY TEST RESULTS
VICINITY MAP
Figure 1
Figure 2
' APPENDIX B ............ GRADING SPECIFICATIONS
June 17 2000
w. #P - 16 4
ge 2
REFERENCES
' 1. UBC 1997 Addition
2. Maps of Known Active Fault Near - Source Zones in California and
' Adjacent Portions of Nevada, published by I.C.B.O 1998
' California Division Of Mines and Geology (Figure 1)
3. Planning Scenario For A Major Earthquake San Diego Tijuana
' Metropolitan Area, published by I.C.B.O. 1990 (Figure 2)
' INTRODUCTIONS
This report presents the results of our geotechnical
' investigation. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the nature
and characteristics of the earth materials underlying the property
' and their influence on the proposed additions to the structure.
SITE CONDITIONS
The property is located on the east side of Stratford Drive,
between Santa Fe Drive and Melba Road, in Encinitas California.
' The property slopes upward from Stratford Drive to the east at an
average rate of approximately 11 per cent, with a level building
' pad, residence and detached garage in the center of the lot.
PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT
Plans for the additions were prepared by Shanna Kellogg McGriff of
Encinitas, California. Additions to the existing residence will
consist of a subterranean garage, work shop, play room and bath.
The first floor level will consist of two bedrooms, two baths,
l� 2
t 10 7
FROM B;RRY & ASSOCIATES FA}( NO. : 760 7539940 Feb. 22 2001 07:37AM P1
June 17, 2000
W.O. #P -1644
Page 3
living room kitchen, deck patio area and laundry room. The second
story will consist of master bedroom, master bath and deck,
SITE INVESTIGATION
For the purpose Of verifying the soil classification, one hand
excavated trench was provided adjacent to the existing footing in
the front of the residence to a depth of two feet. Earth materials
encountered were visually classified and logged by our field
engineer. A bulk sample was obtained and transported to our
laboratory for verification of the field classification and to
perform a Proctor test in order to determine the maximum dry
density and optimum moisture content.
Soil Classification
The field classification was verified through laboratory
examination in accordance with the Unified soil classification
System. The classification is sM (fine to medium grained tan silty
sand with a small amount of silt,
Seismic
The review of available geologic maps including Maps of Known
Active Faults Near - Source Zones in California and ,Adjacent Portions
of Nevada published by ICBo (1998) indicate that the nearest active
fault is the Rose Canyon Fault located approximately 4 kilometers
west of the subject site. The Rose Canyon Fault is a class B fault
JAN-16 01 10:18 FROM:UCSD /ORTHOMED 858 -625 -0606 T0:7 604360859 PASE:01
Ali
1 X? 17
1 ' `� April 1.2
A , 2000
W.Q. #P -1644
1 Page 3
i encountered were visu ly classified and logged by our field
r engineer. A bu� sample was obtained and transported to our
laboratory fob- rerification of the field Classification.
r
r The field classification was verified through laboratory
1
examination in accordance with the Unified soil, Classification
System The classification is SM (fine to medium grained tan silty
sand, moderately dense below 3 feet.
i
►
EXPALSiv
Detrimentally expansive soils were not encountered in our
f
exploratory trenches and are not expected to be encountered during
Construction. The potential for expansion is in the very low range.
I
Llauefaction
The soils on the site are not considered subject to seismically
induced liquefaction due to s«ch factors as soil density, sand
particle size, and lack of groundwater.
-CONCLUSIONS AND RECQMMENDATIC
Gen eral
The on site soils are suitable for Pr
Proposed project and for the
support of the proposed struct es, provided the recommendations in ,
�� c
June 17, 2000
W - 4
' age 4
capable of generating a magnitude 6.6 earthquake. The following
sismc factors are in accordance with the 1997 Uniform Building
' Code.
' Parameter Table Symbol Factor
' Seismic Zone Factor 16 -I Z 0.4
Soil Profile Type 16 -J - S
' Seismic Coefficient 16 -Q Ca 0.44Na
Seismic Coefficient 16 -R Cv 0.64Nv
' Near Source Factor 16 -S Na 1.2
Near Source Factor 16 -T Nv 1.3
Seismic Source Type - B
---------------------------
Maximum Moment Magnitude L7
Slip Rate, SR > 2mm/yr.
Liguefaction
In accordance with reference #3 (Planning Scenario For A Major
Earthquake, San Diego Tijuana Metropolitan Area, published by the
' California Department of Conservation, Division of Mines and
Geology) the site is not located within an area of seismically
' induced liquefaction. In addition, the soils on the site are not
' considered subject to seismically induced liquefaction based on
such factors as soil density, sand particle size, and lack of
groundwater.
June 17, 2000
W.O. #P -1644
' Page 5
Expansive Soil
Detrimentally expansive soils were not encountered in our
' exploratory trenches and are not expected to be encountered during
construction. The potential for expansion is in the very low range.
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
' General
1 The on site soils are suitable for the proposed project and for the
support of the proposed structure provided the recommendations in
this report are implemented during the design and construction
phase.
Foundation
Footings for the proposed structure should be a minimum of 12" and
' 15" wide and founded a minimum of 12" and 18" below grade for one
and two stories respectively. A 12 inch - by -12 -inch grade beam
' should be placed across each garage opening. Footings founded a
minimum of 12" and 18" below grade may be designed for a bearing
value of 1200 psf and 1500 psf respectively.
P y.
The bearing value indicated above is for the total of dead and
applied live loads. This value may be increased by 33 percent for
' short durations of loading, including the effects of wind and
seismic forces.
1
Resistance to lateral load may be provided by friction acting at
the base of foundations and passive earth pressure. A coefficient
June 17, 2000
W.O. #P -1644
' Page 6
of friction of 0.3 may be used with dead -load forces. A passive
earth pressure of 250 pounds per square foot, er foot of
p depth of
' fill penetrated to a maximum of 1500 pounds should be used in the
design.
Minimum steel reinforcement should consist of 4 - #4 bars, 2 placed
' 3" from the bottom of the footing and 2 placed 2" below the to p of
' the footings, or as required by the structural engineer.
' Slabs on grade
If slab on grade is planned it should be a minimum of 4.0 inches
' thick and reinforced in both directions with No. 3 bars, placed 18
' inches on center. The slab should be underlain by a minimum 4 -inch
sand blanket which incorporates a minimum 6.0 -mil Visqueen or
' equivalent moisture barrier in its center, for moisture sensitive
floors. Utility trenches underlying the slab should be bedded in
r clean sand to at least one foot above the top of the conduit, then
backfilled with the on -site granular materials, compacted to a
minimum of 90 percent of the laboratory maximum dry density.
However, sufficiently compacting the backfill deposits may damage
or break shallow utility lines. Therefore, minor settlement of the
backfill in the trenches is anticipated in these shallow areas. To
reduce the possibility of cracks occurring, the slab should be
' provided with additional reinforcement to bridge the trenches.
' June 17, 2000
W.O. #P -1644
' Page 7
' Retaining Walls
The proposed retaining walls should be designed in accordance with
' the following parameters:
' Equivalent Fluid Pressure (p.c.f.)
Conditions Level 2:1 Slope
t Active 35 45
At -Rest 45 90
Passive 250 --
' To design an unrestrained wall, the active earth pressure should be
used. For a restraining wall, the at - rest pressure should be used.
' Wall footings should be designed in accordance with the foundation
' design recommendations. All retaining walls should be provided
with an adequate backdrainage system. Temporary cut slopes greater
' than 3.5 vertical feet should be trimmed to a gradient of 1:1, as
previously indicated.
1 Driveway
The following recommendations are submitted as preliminary
' guidelines for pavement construction and are based on a non -
expansive soils condition in the upper 12" of subgrade.
' Asphalt Concrete
The driveway section should consist of 2.0 inches of asphalt over
a 4.0 inches of Class II base. The Class II base and the upper 12
r
June 17, 2000
W.O. #P - 1644
Page 8
inches of the subgrade deposits should be compacted to a minimum of
r 95 percent of the laboratory maximum dry density. The
Y upper 12 of
' subgrade should consist of non - expansive soil.
Paved areas should be protected from moisture migrating under
' pavement.
r Drainacte
All roof water should be collected and conducted to the street via
non - erodible devices. Roof gutters are recommended. Pad water
should be directed away from foundations and around the residence
to a suitable location. Pad water should not pond.
1
' Footina Inspections
Structural footing excavations should be inspected by a
' representative of this firm prior to the placement of reinforcing
steel.
1
' Plan Review
A copy of the final building plans should be submitted to this
office for review, prior to the initiation of construction.
Additional recommendations may be necessary at that time.
i
r LIMITATIONS
' This report is presented with the provision that it is the
responsibility of the owner or the owner's representative to bring
1
' June 17, 2000
W.O. #P -1644
Page 9
the information and recommendations given herein to the attention
' of the project's architects and /or engineers so that the may y be
' incorporated into the plans.
' If conditions encountered during construction appear to differ from
those described in this report, our office should be notified so
that we may consider whether or not modifications are needed. No
' responsibility for construction compliance with design concepts,
specifications or recommendations given in this report is assumed
' unless on -site review is performed during the course of
construction.
' The conclusions and recommendations of this report apply as of the
current date. In time, however, changes can occur on a property
' whether caused by acts of man or nature on this or adjoining
properties. Additionally, changes in professional standards may be
r brought about by legislation or the expansion of knowledge.
Consequently, the conclusions and recommendations of this report
may be rendered wholly or partially nvalid
Y by events beyond our
' control. This report is therefore subject to review and should not
be relied upon after the passage of three years.
' The professional
judgments presented herein are founded partly
' on our assessment of the technical data gathered, partly on our
understanding of the proposed construction and partly on our
' general experience in the geotechnical field.
' June 17, 2000
W.O. #P -1644
' Page 10
If you have any questions please call us at (760) 753 -9940
' Respectfully submitted,
A. R. BARRY ASSOCIAT
�R. --�r SS /O�
' L// ��Q�• R.
A. garry, P. E. .� � G,
Principal Engin er 0 G00119 m
Uj
CC Exp.3/31102
9 �OF CAUF
1
� APPENDIX A
W.O. #P - 1644
1
APPENDIX "A"
' LABORATORY TEST RESULTS
1 TABLE I
1 Maximum Dry Density and Optimum Moisture Content
(Laboratory Standard ASTM D 1557 -78)
Sample Max. Dry Optimum
Location Density (pcf) Moisture Content
1 T -1 Q 2' 113.0 8
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
SEE MAP
- --
x s7Arn M R w o BRIGGS AV I ME BA I RD
vnwov,vr M t ST _ E o cQ o ° -- _ ° z� 9n' of ° MELBA 8A o z, WNW
I STREET I aVav T w a sI - T .i, c.
z ° z SAN
VIEWPOINT $ J N of �� �°. DIEGDITO � '. NI `
1 pD L �V _ o w < p WINE < V HS z ^— H� p
' ° C C7
M K ~ �
SWAMIS r" �M SU MMI T RUB TEIN FAITH AY KIN- SANTA �� o.
0
L) BEACTI ST SU
§FA CT MUNEVAR J
SEA N toYE Lx ••• ITO CATHY LN
S N I I
CLIFF S
SAN c� -�. ^ $ o OCEAN CREST RD GRANG
p S L
.N LL f
'y < KINGS CROSS OR
Z AVM 'O j ` sCT VINO
\ r cc > BRIDGE EEK
NAY ` cARETr NY -: = •�. N
2 i T E SAI�CASTLE
v 0� 9G ° NOLBEY
FALCON HILL
�A V U ' CT z
SAN
Lc _
ELIJO `•
STATE AV
BEACH
� W
1 3 IB,E B
OQ` DR
I NCHES
SAN
CARDIFF ELIJO
STATE LAGOON
BEACH
Z
R1
� A �
E
SECT K7
1 VILLA HERMOSA CT 20 MOUAlILLO Cr 7J
' 3 vuU� A CT 22 C� A y
A TOLUA Cr 23 JALAPA CT
• 6 SINALOA CT 25 LAS CAMAS CT $
1 SALTILLO Cr 26 CM 0 LS VILLAS
B SALIVA CAUZ CT 27 ALLENDE CT S1
2 CT
lO SALAM 29 CELAYA CT s
11 REYNOSA CT 30 CHAPALA Cr TIDE
19 31 COLUEL Cr BEACH
13 RF1mI05 Ci 32 OELICIAS CT PARR.
11 NAVA N7 33 LTAMO Cr
19 MATMOII05 CT 34 TPESHILLA CT
16 LAS CkW W 36 GARUATO Cr
11 MO ELIA Cr 36 CHAPALA IN
' 16 IAYA Cr 37 FRM ILLOI W
1 M
ETOGLLI CT 38 FM Cr Cf �
FLETCHER
COVE P
BEACH •
• PAW I
3
Ml
i
� APPENDIX B
1
1
1
1
1
i
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
' APPENDIX B
' RECOMMENDED GRADING SPECIFICATIONS
GRADING INTENT
' The intent of these specifications is to establish procedures for
clearing, compacting natural ground, preparing areas to be filled
' and placing and compacting fill soil to the lines and grades shown
on the accepted plans. The recommendations contained in the
preliminary geotechnical investigation report are a part of the
' recommended grading specifications and would supersede the
provisions contained herein in case of conflict.
INSPECTION AND TESTING
' A geotechnical engineer should be employed to observe and test the
earthwork in accordance with these specifications. It will be
' necessary that the geotechnical engineer or his representative make
adequate observations so that he may provide a memorandum that the
work was or was not accomplished as specified. Deviations from
these specifications will be permitted only upon written
' authorization from the geotechnical engineer. It should be the
responsibility of the contractor to assist the geotechnical
engineer and to keep him apprised of work schedules, changes and
new information and data so that he may provide the memorandum to
the owner and governmental agency as required.
' If in the opinion of the geotechnical engineer, substandard
conditions such as questionable soil, poor moisture control,
inadequate compaction, adverse weather, etc. are encountered, the
contractor should stop construction until the conditions are
' remedied.
Unless otherwise specified, fill material should be compacted by
the contractor while near the optimum moisture content to a density
that is no less than 90 percent of the maximum dry density
determined in accordance with ASTM Test No. D1557 -78 or other
density test methods that will yield equivalent results.
CLEARING AND PREPARATION OF AREAS TO RECEIVE FILL
' All trees, brush, grass and other objectionable material should be
collected, piled and burned or otherwise disposed of by the
contractor so as to leave the areas that have been cleared with a
neat and finished appearance, free from unsightly debris.
' APPENDIX B
Page 2
All vegetable matter and objectionable material should be removed
by the contractor from the surface upon which the fill is to be
placed, and any loose or porous soils should be removed or
compacted to the depth determined by the geotechnical engineer.
The surface should then be plowed or scarified to a minimum depth
' of 6 inches until the surface is free from uneven features that
would tend to prevent uniform compaction by the equipment to be
used.
' When the slope of the natural ground receiving fill exceeds 20
percent (5 horizontal to 1 vertical) , the original ground should be
stepped or benched as shown on the attached plate. Benches should
be cut to a firm, competent soil condition. The lower bench should
be at least 10 feet wide and all other benches at least 6 feet
wide, ground slopes flatter than 20 percent should be benched when
' considered necessary by the geotechnical engineer.
FILL MATERIAL
' Materials for compacted soil should consist of any material
imported or excavated from the cut areas that in the opinion of the
geotechnical engineer is suitable for use in construction fills.
The material should contain no rocks or hard lumps greater than 12
inches in size and should contain at least 40 percent of material
smaller than 1/4 inch in size. (Materials greater than 6 inches in
' size should be placed by the contractor so that they are surrounded
by compacted fines; no nesting of rocks will be permitted.) No
material of a perishable, spongy or otherwise improper nature
should be used in filling.
Material placed within 36 inches of rou h ra
material that contains no rocks or hard lumps de should be select
' in size and that swells less than 3 percent when compacted (as
specified later herein for compacted fill) and soaked under an
axial pressure of 150 psf.
' Potentially expansive soils may be used in fills below a depth of
36 inches and should be compacted at a moisture greater than the
Optimum moisture content for the material.
' PLACING, SPREADING AND COMPACTING OF FILL
' Approved material should be placed in areas prepared to receive
fill in layers not to exceed 6 inches in compacted thickness. Each
layer should have a uniform moisture content in the range that will
' allow the compaction effort to be efficiently applied to achieve
the specified degree of compaction to a minimum specified density
with adequately sized equipment, either specifically designed for
soil compaction or of proven reliability. Compaction should be
continuous over the entire area and the equipment should make
' APPENDIX B
Page 3
'
sufficient icient trips to ensure that the desired density has been
' obtained throughout the fill.
When moisture content of the fill material is below that specified
by the geotechnical engineer, water should be added by the
' contractor until the moisture content is as specified.
When the moisture content of the fill material is above that
' specified by the geotechnical engineer, the fill material should be
aerated by the contractor by blading, mixing or other satisfactory
methods until the moisture content is as specified.
The surface of fill slopes should be compacted and there should be
no excess loose soil on the slopes.
' UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION
' Identifying Criteria Group Symbol Soil Description
COARSE - GRAINED (more than 50
' percent larger than #200 sieve)
Gravel (more than 50 percent GW Gravel, well - graded
' larger than #4 sieve but
smaller than three inches) gravel - sand mixture,
Non - plastic little or no fines
' GP Gravel, poorly grad-
ed gravel - sand mix-
ture, little or no
fines
GM Gravel, silty, poor-
ly graded, gravel-
' sand - silt mixtures
GC Gravel, clayey,
' poorly graded, grav-
el sand - clay mixture
Sands (more than 50 percent SW Sand, well - graded,
' smaller than #4 sieve)
gravelly sands,
little or no fines
' SP Sand, poorly graded,
gravelly sands,
little or no fines
I
APPENDIX B
Page 4
SM Sand, silty, poorly
' graded, sand -clay
mixtures
' FINE - GRAINED (more than 50
percent but smaller than
#200 sieve)
Liquid limit less than 50 ML
Silt, inorganic silt
and fine sand, sandy
Silt or clayey -silt-
sand mixtures with
slight plasticity
' CL Clay, inorganic clay
Of low to medium
' plasticity, gravelly
clays, sandy clays,
silty clays, lean
clays
' Liquid limit greater than 50 OL
Silt, inorganic,
silts and organic
' silt -clays of low
plasticity
MH Silt, inorganic,
' silts micaceous or
diatomaceous fine,
sandy or silty soils
elastic silts
CH Clay, inorganic,
clays of medium to
' high plasticity, fat
clays
' OH Clay, organic, clays
of medium to high
plasticity
' HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS PT
Peat, other highly
organic swamp soils
I
I
' APPENDIX B
Page 5
'
INSPECTION
' Observation and compaction tests will be made by the geotechnical
engineer during the filling and compacting operations so that he
can state whether the fill was constructed in accordance with the
' specifications.
The geotechnical engineer will make field density tests in
' accordance with ASTM Test No. D1557 -78. Density tests will be made
in the compacted materials below the surface where the surface is
disturbed. When these tests indicated that the density of any
layer of fill or portion thereof is below the specified density,
that particular layer or portion should be reworked until the
specified density has been obtained.
' The location and frequency of the tests well be at the soil
engineer's discretion. In general, the density tests will be made
at an interval not exceeding 2 feet in vertical rise and /or 500
' cubic yards of embankment.
PROTECTION OF WORK
' During construction, the contractor should properly grade all
excavated surfaces to provide positive drainage and prevent ponding
of water. He should control surface water to avoid damage to
' adjoining properties or to finished work on the site. The
contractor should take remedial measures to prevent erosion of
freshly graded areas and until such time as permanent drainage and
erosion control features have been installed.
1
I
I
0 •
5,
` w
•
4r
NOW
�1
ip
.�! 'ice y '(• 1 �t', /1.
�� - ..C�� if/� + ��. a �7 III♦ , / - r
�. ',���_��� •yam t �' '�!�, �LJ �u_I_`_ti ,^` � � .
�o r
�T� 1 ���iil, °A"r�1�1 W ,�. '� •, -
IN
or g
SAM
OT
y
�.
no
•
r ..A
Mot •`� s��'�1. �'�'•�� ' •��% ,���'" Ali„ — ,
R it
IN El SNtiM
P 36
1 1
0
• • • r.
imp" dw
° o o >aOnN N �O5- .D�C�O= c, v_ nti (n •\ k;,
O TN 2TT CpDDNZNj apT Dm Dm Y
n OZtiJI�N.y N2N DnO�DD n mZ J \
ZTa v X
O <pn; mC VD < mT Da a�2 AH, m?�> DD ZD
.\ y0 > fD 2 >m�jmOOCO Oj OD m �_
r �1 D Or 2Dmti ti -2 Z
_ 1 , T 8 T r.DZp41NT2CI Ll -IpTC 220nN(r� O m fT1O
1� D a <2CD'1Dn? -7 -T >O NDrD -.DRD T ^' T D
O J � - mi2am OmOxc ; ;O ;rp =amw gncmr> -a m� .0 0 t v /,
Cb Z 0 vcN xa >mv=i> 8 DOD
:j ON C Nf >r m a 2 C Y
�y�D� mNm O cZm6mc Z' %<ym Zr nma Oz m Z
2 D<n
D<>O >nOD �D mN= O
o ;- y4 Z , Ta <202 mma -tia n n20 = fnm
o m Oa < p. Txp c m m ;D. {
a yOmm vN��moOiz mix N mK L, F v_t''be ��...IVerr r
voox >O DS m
2 0 >p N m O ZE
Z' m - m n SO SDODti C
Z �� rTn' nr• li,n . t
' V jZti >D p ;- T<� ON 2 T 2 O� F <Z V 4 1
` 2xxN OTDmm -O a O T2 nD y tT .�
�V O l� �ymm ma mm 2a y -Dm m 2C Z
Y <(n
pp 1V N
rr }} DL Oy I11'Nmm N >2y�(m(nnZ $ p $ a O T •n (�'m X \.
r V\ �•�•� �' OT O2 N > O �> < 5 N
1 0 > <L� Z <rj m�Om D_mm>tiD ; Om y� Zm
ry >�Zr1 �aayr O S- 0 Nti C mn Om m ZZ
O
.' u hh
o ,..� � 1. 1
t '
t
CL Alf 1
c,e�1 -¢ fin v,n
/
�r
P „s sv r +
Y
7 1
...
t ip
Y; x
! a t
C
a
</�
tv
°W
a
E°
-
I+ /
t� t
r+
y
d
T
s a s 1
7 :
a
t�
t 2N, Y
_ F / J
rn � I
b
° ��
4
! , _
+ras ! r Gl ..k7F { 5 • (iS ! � tS / '� • � c.
' , r
r r
•� +
x
` r
�t y �
f T /
f � � � � "�' ` � art., {�.� J � ��•.. �' 'F� 1 '� "� ,M� \ �
V
{ r
f ,
{{
.. {, \ ..
'T
s
+
y ,
Y
:
A t
• 'c 0 . n r a,. � `t�j/ - __ =� 1 s
/ < I !! \ L:
ti
r •
-
a •�f
n , • „ „ '" wn 5 ! � ' j Fi. e• � � • i r '�ul'°•, , l
i t
LB
....� � vtid v:• 7 , ,,. s �� T ,, � j}'• t ! rV�r � f� l d C� � .. rr; � .,. �.
r
tY Y
L
-
� � ' r � � J.;' { tY r " ,'� u d � � '� � r' A � � �-` � � � �� 1 � J� f J -��. 4 t.,,, • � r � '
„
r
r. 1p
,
• C \ 6" %, V =.. �.. - + �, a ,,� � .n, . r�
n
� y
, mac
t'r t
I'
j ' ^ w �l,. ' � �� '•3 tii � � p f � - 1 4V � Y f t f � �-r � � � ���
v
F gU STRg No
p
•i4 4 ��i� '` V r � �" 8 � � ,- �m 1. �, '�✓ Y �� �
1
n_ 1a
i
V�
s {.:a" :. }..f : -: ! ... 1..:•::::., •rte:...:• T fnu' / t
w•
f 4 I
,
y
/
y i
b'
"
' -
A
4A d r,
=r�rr 'FV ! L �T• OY 2 / S
, V
32o3p, I +
i
i
Bi
• ! '� Q fQC r P -. v F ) 1 i ,, ,'� rte• '.••, ,. } 3 � a SS, 3333
/ •� C aai
V _.. afpc y *., *..� ? \ n k `m 3 8 ,X�", s a 3 f ^ ' 1� O r
�- '. w A 2 ` ma y - Y.• VAf...
la
G � � O O
z
5 1 S }n dddY
Q m r 3 1 /� '
!' /moo' jgt 5_ � ° �� Y' = O O • �J
DL
A a r 0 (D rl U)
a„L I y� �.y p N, .•c' l� r ,2 T _ 2 � ��$
ig Al a V ill g o
t • n �� I ` r '"..- K`le T .a s ° � +• o�_� rn
Ji 1 � Q
,
N N
Le
rn
�.�-•a J D
a
t 4e r �; am
N
8