HomeMy WebLinkAbout3284Ordinance No. 3284
(Amending or Repealing Ordinances)
CFN=961 - Growth Management Act
Passed 3/19/1996
Establishment of Standards and Procedures for Compliance with the State
Growth Management Act and Adding a New Ch. 12.11 entitled "Concurrency
Management"
Amended by Ord. 3960 (Sec. 12.11.090)
ORDINANCE NO. -3A
AN ORDINANCE of the City Council of the
City of Kent, Washington, relating to the
establishment of standards and procedures for
providing compliance with the concurrency
requirements of the State Growth Management
Act; and adding a new Chapter 12.11 to the
Kent City Code, entitled "Concurrency
Management".
WHEREAS, the Growth Management Act provides that public
facilities and services shall be adequate to serve development at
the time development is available for occupancy and use without
decreasing current levels of service below established minimum
standards; and
WHEREAS, the Growth Management Act mandates that local
governments adopt and enforce policies and regulations which
prohibit development approval if the development causes the level
of service on a transportation facility to decline below the
standards adopted in the transportation element of the
Comprehensive Plan unless transportation improvements or
strategies to accommodate the impacts of development are made
concurrent with the development or within six years; and
follows:
ca-ncrurr�Pinc2�
WHEREAS, the Kent Planning Commission, after numerous
meetings and public hearings, recommended a Comprehensive Plan,
including a transportation element, to identify changes which
would help improve the balance among land use, transportation
investment and transportation capacity and a capital facilities
element to identify appropriate levels of service standards and
funding strategies for capital facilities; and
WHEREAS, the Kent City Council reviewed the Planning
Commission's recommendations in the Comprehensive Plan, including
the transportation element and capital facilities element; and
WHEREAS, the City Council desires to implement the
requirements of the Growth Management Act and the Planning
Commission's recommendations; and
WHEREAS, this ordinance is adopted pursuant to RCW
35A.11.020 and 35A.63.100(1), (4) and (5) for the purpose of
complying with the Growth Management Act, RCW Chapter 36.70A,
including the concurrency requirement of RCW 36.70A.070; and
WHEREAS, the City of Kent has complied with the State
Environmental Policy Act and with the City's Environmental
Procedures Code; NOW, THEREFORE,
2
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENT, WASHINGTON, DOES
HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. A new Chapter 12.11 is hereby added to the
Kent City Code, entitled "Concurrency Management", to read as
follows:
CHAPTER 12.11. CONCURRENCY MANAGEMENT.
Sec. 12.11.010. Purpose.
The purpose of this chapter is to set forth specific
standards providing for City compliance with the concurrency
requirements of the State Growth Management Act (GMA) and for
consistency between city and countywide planning policies under
the GMA. The GMA requires that adequate street capacity is
provided concurrently with development to handle the increased
traffic projected to result from growth and development in the
city and region. The purpose of this chapter is to ensure that
the City's transportation system shall be adequate to serve the
future development at the time the development is available for
occupancy, hereinafter referred to as "concurrency", without
decreasing current service levels below established minimum
standards. The intent of this chapter is to establish a
Transportation Concurrency Management System (TCMS) to ensure
that the necessary facilities and/or programs needed to maintain
a minimum level of service can be provided simultaneous to, or
3
within a reasonable time of new development as required in the
GMA.
The GMA requires that a specific set of standards be
developed to measure and ensure compliance through the inclusion
of:
A. Standards for roadways that balance congestion
management with land use objectives.
needs.
B. Traffic zones tailored to area characteristics and
C. Level of Service Standards for each traffic zone
which include availability of other mobility options and use of
an area -average method of evaluating roadway system adequacy.
Sec. 12.11.020. Definitions.
apply:
For purposes of this chapter, the following definitions
A. Affected Arterial. Any street which can be
identified as significant to the area in which it serves in terms
of the nature and composition of travel and which will be
impacted by new development. Arterials serve major centers of
activity and carry the major portion of the traffic entering and
leaving the city.
B. Affected intersection. A designated signalized
intersection as set forth in Section 12.11.100 within a traffic
zone (mobility management zone) in the city over which the city
51
has operational responsibility and which will be impacted by new
development.
C. Application. Any development proposal and
accompanying traffic analysis as required in this chapter used to
determine the impact on each facility and/or mobility management
zone it affects.
D. Area -Average level -of -service. The sum of volumes
on critical arterials and at key intersections as defined in
Highway Capacity Manual Special Report No. 209 dated December,
1985, divided by the sum of the capacity on critical arterials
and at key intersections within a mobility management zone.
E. Background traffic. The volume of traffic that
currently exists on the street system prior to date of occupancy
of a proposed development. Background traffic includes all
existing traffic and the anticipated traffic from all development
proposals which have been approved under this chapter.
F. Capacity. The maximum traffic volume that can
pass through an intersection or arterial during a given peak hour
as measured by the sum of critical volumes as defined in the
Highway Capacity Manual Special Report 209 dated December, 1985.
G. Capital facilities plan (CFP). The 6 -year plan
for capital improvements that support the City's current and
future population and employment growth. It contains level of
service (LOS) standards for each public facility, a financing
plan for necessary facilities, and requires that new development
is served by adequate facilities for which concurrency is
5
required under this chapter. The CFP also contains broad goals
and specific policies for all public facilities.
H. Capital improvement. Land, improvements to land,
structures (including design, permitting, and construction),
initial furnishings and selected equipment. Capital improvements
have an expected useful life of at least 5 years and a cost of at.
least twenty-five thousand ($25,000) dollars. Other capital
costs, such as motor vehicles and motorized equipment, computers
and office equipment, office furnishings, and small tools are
considered to be non -capacity capital expenses in the City's
i
annual Capital Improvement Plan budget, and are not capacity
capital improvements for the purposes of the Comprehensive Plan,
or the issuance of development permits.
I. Concurrency. Requirement of the 1990 Growth
Management Act (RCW 36.70A.070(6)) requiring that the City may
only permit development approval if a development would not cause
level of service to fall below the city's adopted standard,
except for transportation facilities where revenues are or may be
secured to complete mitigating transportation improvements or
strategies within six years. When a development fails to meet
the concurrency test, mitigation will require improvements or
strategies to accommodate the impacts of the development. Demand
management and other non -roadway strategies may be used for
transportation mitigation. Concurrency is further defined in
Section 12.11.050.
V
J. Development. Construction and/or substantial
modification of structures or improvements to land which will
alter, modify and/or expand a use of land in a manner that may
cause adverse impacts.
K. Development permit or approval. Any document
granting, or granting with conditions, a rezone, plat, planned
unit development, conditional use permit, shoreline substantial
development permit, building permit, or any other official action
of the City having the effect of authorizing the development of
land.
1. Final development permit. A building permit
or any other development permit which results in an immediate and
continuing impact upon public facilities.
2. Preliminary development approval. Including,
but not limited to, a rezone, plat, planned unit development, or
shoreline substantial development permit.
L. Director. The Public Works Director for the City
of Kent, the Director's authorized representative or any
representative authorized by the Mayor.
M. Degradation. An increase in the volume/capacity
ratio (V/C ratio) above the area -wide level of service (LOS)
standard for a mobility management zone as established in
12.11.060.
N. Funded project. A project in the most recently
adopted capital facilities plan (CFP) for the city or similar
capital program of another jurisdiction which has sufficient
7
revenues secured for construction or which meets the facility
concurrency requirements of Section 12.11.050.
0. Level of Service (LOS) Standard. For the purpose
of this chapter, level of service (LOS) shall mean a qualitative
estimate of the performance efficiency of the City's
transportation facilities and is tailored for each of the City's
(22) twenty-two mobility management zones (MMZ), reflecting
distinct roadway conditions and multiple community objectives.
LOS standards for arterials, transit and pedestrian/bicycles
within each of the twenty-two zones are set forth in Section
12.11.100 below.
P. Mitigation. For the purposes of this chapter,
mitigation shall mean transportation demand management strategies
and/or facility improvements constructed or financed by a
developer which return a degraded area -average level of service
to the standard established for that area. If an area is already
exceeding the standard prior to the development proposal,
mitigation shall mean transportation demand management strategies
and/or facility improvements constructed or financed by a
developer to return the degraded area -average level of service to
at least the level -of -service established for that area.
Q. Mobility management (MMZ) zones. Distinct
transportation areas within the city limits and the City's
potential annexation area with boundaries based on certain
criteria as set forth in the City's Comprehensive Transportation
Plan, which is a supporting document to the City's Comprehensive
Plan. Mobility management zones are set forth in Section
12.11.100. Some mobility management zones include intersections
and arterials outside the City's jurisdiction.
R. Peak hour. The consecutive sixty -minute period
between the hours of 4 p.m. and 6 p.m. which experiences the
highest sum of traffic volumes as determined by the city on a
roadway segment or passing through an intersection. This is also
referred to in this chapter as the "p.m. peak hour".
S. Peak hour trips. Total vehicular trips entering
and leaving a project during the peak hour on adjacent streets,
as defined in the most recent ITE Trip Generation Manual,
published by the Institute of Transportation Engineers. Other
trip generation sources subject to approval by the director may
be used where ITE data is based on a limited survey sample or
where there may be special trip -generating characteristics of the
proposal.
T. Phased Development. Any development involving
multiple buildings or improvements where issuance of development
permits would not occur at the same time, but be phased over a
period of time.
U. Public facilities. The capital improvements and
systems of the transportation facilities and/or services
requiring concurrency.
V. Site specific improvements. Improvements made to
transportation systems, the need for which results directly from
a development permit or decision made under the Kent Zoning Code
C
or other provisions of the Kent City Code relating to development
permits. For transportation facilities, such improvements may
include, but are not limited to, site access, turning lanes,
traffic signals, changes in traffic signal operation and
modification of intersection geometrics. Site specific
improvements include right-of-way and related frontage
improvements when they are required to be dedicated or
constructed at the time of building permit issuance.
W. Supplemental links and intersections. An
intersection or roadway link which contributes to the system
function within each mobility management zone. System
intersections within the mobility management zones are listed and
mapped in Section 12.11.100 with levels of service for each zone.
X. Transportation Demand Management (TDM). Public
and/or private programs designed to increase the efficiency of
existing capital transportation facilities, including, but not
limited to, transit and ride sharing incentives, flexible working
hours, parking management, and supporting non -motorized
enhancements to decrease single occupancy vehicle trips.
Y. Transportation facilities. Streets, roads,
highways, sidewalks, street and road lighting systems, traffic
signals, non -motorized enhancements, and related systems and site
specific improvements.
Z. Under construction. When a construction contract
for a project has been awarded or actual physical alteration or
improvement has occurred on the site.
IR
AA. Volume/capacity ratio (v/c ratio). The proportion
of available intersection capacity used by vehicles passing
'through an intersection as defined in the Highway Capacity Manual
i
Special Report 209 dated December, 1985.
iSec. 12.11.030. Administration and application.
A. Administration. The public works director shall
be responsible for the administration of all activities relating
11
'C to this chapter and shall coordinate with other departments, as
appropriate, in implementing the provisions of this chapter. The
;!,public works director may implement administrative policies
,deemed necessary and/or appropriate to implement the provisions
of this chapter.
B. General Application. This chapter applies to all
land use development applications as defined in Section 12.11.020
i
i
including, but not limited to, the following types of development
activities:
1. Phased Development. The requirements of this
rchapter shall be applied at the time of approval of the initial
phase and shall be adjusted for each subsequent phase based on
the cumulative impact of all the phases.
2. Chance in Occupancy. This chapter will apply
to applications for tenant improvements if a proposed new use or
an expanded existing use will generate new p.m. peak hour trips.
3. Rezones. The city may approve a proposed
rezone only if the full facility impacts of site development are
11
disclosed at the time of application assuming full development of
the property under the proposed zoning classification using the
highest trip generating permitted uses. Lack of concurrency will
not be a basis for denial of a rezone, however, any subsequent
development is subject to the concurrency requirements of this
chapter. Specific requirements for public facility improvements
to mitigate the impacts of a proposed rezone and assure
compliance with this chapter may be imposed as a condition of
rezone.
4. Concomitant Agreements. Unless the agreement'
specifically provides otherwise, this chapter applies to any
development application that is subject to an existing
concomitant agreement.
5. Reconstruction of Destroyed Buildings. If a
building to which this chapter did not apply at time of
construction is destroyed by fire, explosion or Act of God or
war, and is reconstructed in accordance with city code, it will
not be required to comply with this chapter unless the
reconstructed building produces public facility impacts in excess
of those produced by the destroyed building.
C. SEPA. This chapter is not intended to limit the
application to the State Environmental Policy Act to specific
proposals. Each proposal shall be reviewed and may be
conditioned or denied under the authority of the State
Environmental Policy Act.
12
D. Traffic impact analysis. As part of the land use
development application, the applicant will be required to submit
a traffic impact analysis to identify all traffic impacts upon
key arterials, intersections and nonmotorized facilities within a
particular zone. The traffic impact analysis shall be done
consistent with the City of Kent's Administrative Guidelines for
the Requirement of Traffic Impact Analysis of New Development.
Sec. 12.11.040. Exemptions.
The portion of any facility used for any of the
following purposes is exempt only from the concurrency
requirements and not from the application and processing
requirements of this chapter or for the requirement to do site
specific improvements:
1. Day care facility for children, as defined in the
Kent Zoning Code, if not operated for profit;
2. Privately operated not for profit social service
facilities recognized by the Internal Revenue Service under
Internal Revenue Code;
3. Low income housing, which is defined as housing
which is affordable to persons whose income is below fifty
percent of the median income for the persons residing in the
Seattle Metropolitan Statistical Area. Not more than ten percent
of the total number of units in a project shall be exempt under
this subsection;
13
4. Development that is vested by RCW 19.27.095, RCW
58.17.033, RCW 58.17.170, or KCC 14.11.
5. Single family homes on legal lots of record.
6. Any development creating less than 10 peak hour
trips as defined in this chapter.
Notwithstanding the exemptions provided herein, the
traffic impacts on public facilities resulting from an exempt use
shall nonetheless be included in computing available capacity.
Sec. 12.11.050. Adequate Public Facility Concurrency.
The issuance of development permits shall be
conditioned on a determination that there is concurrency
(sufficient capacity remaining on a public facility to meet the
level of service standards for the impacts of existing
development and impacts of the proposed new development), and
shall be determined in accordance with the following:
1. Where adequate capacity exists at the time
development permit or approval is issued; or
2. The City has in place binding financial
commitments to complete the necessary public facilities or
strategies within six years, provided that:
a. The capital facilities plan as defined
in the Kent Comprehensive Plan must be financially feasible; and
b. The City uses a realistic, financially
feasible funding system based on revenue sources available
according to laws adopted at the time the Capital Facilities Plan
is adopted; and
14
C. The Capital Facilities Plan in the Kent
Comprehensive Plan must demonstrate that the actual construction
of the roads, nonmotorized and transit facilities are scheduled
to commence during or before the sixth year of the Capital
Facilities Plan; and
d. The Capital Facilities Plan must include
facilities necessary to eliminate existing level of service
deficiencies as well as those necessary to maintain adopted level)
of service standards to serve new development.
Sec. 12.11.060.
standard.
Application - transportation level of service
1. Degradation limits of mobility management
zones. A development proposal will not be approved which causes
the congestion to exceed the level of service (LOS) standard in a
mobility management zone (MMZ) and not mitigated by: 1) the
existing street network; 2) fully funded projects; 3) street
improvements under contract as part of other approved development
proposals which are fully funded and/or; 4) developer mitigation
in accordance with Section 12.11.090.
2. Area -average level -of -service standards.
Level of service standards are tailored for each mobility
management zone, reflecting distinct conditions and multiple
community objectives, with an area -average approach used to
measure system adequacy. The area -average method measures the
15
average level of service on critical arterials and at key
intersections within each mobility management zone.
Sec. 12.11.070 Development application procedures -
approval/denial.
A. Application. Any application and accompanying
traffic analysis which is subject to this chapter shall be
reviewed by the Director and used to determine the impact on each
mobility management zone it affects. A proposal will not be
approved under this chapter if there is no concurrency with
public facilities as required in this chapter. Additionally, the
director will determine if mitigation is required and appropriate)
under this chapter due to lack of concurrency and, if so, whether
any mitigation proposed by the developer meets the requirements
of 12.11.090.
B. Final Development Permit. No final development
permit shall be issued by the City unless there is sufficient
capacity of public facilities available to meet the standards for
levels of service for existing development and for the proposed
development as required in this chapter.
C. Preliminary Development Approval. Except for
rezones, no preliminary development approval shall be issued by
the City unless the applicant obtains a determination of the
capacity of public facilities as part of the review and approval
of the preliminary development approval.
16
D. Processing of Applications - Approval/Denial.
Issuance of final development permits and preliminary development
approvals shall be subject to the concurrency requirements set
forth in Section 12.11.050 and further subject to the following:
1. Determination of Capacity - Expiration. The
determination that facility capacity is available shall be based
on information provided by the applicant to the satisfaction and
approval of the director. The determination of capacity shall be
binding on the City at such time as the City determines that
adequate capacity is available or the applicant provides
mitigation or assurances, as set forth in Section 12.11.090. The
determination of capacity shall be valid for the same period of
time as the underlying development permit or approval, including
any extensions thereof. If the underlying development permit or
approval does not have an expiration date, the capacity shall be
valid for a period not to exceed one (1) year.
2. LOS Service Areas. The standards for levels
of service of transportation facilities shall be applied to the
issuance of development permits on the following geographical
basis:
a. Transportation facilities which serve
less than the entire city shall achieve and maintain the standard
for levels of service within their assigned mobility management
zones. No development permit shall be issued in an assigned
mobility management zone if the standard for level of service is
not achieved and maintained throughout the assigned mobility
17
management zone and other applicable mobility management zones
impacted by the proposed development;
b. No further determination of capacity for
the subject property shall be required prior to the expiration of
the determination of capacity for the proposed development
provided that the capacity has been reserved for the proposed
development. Any change in the density, intensity, or land use
that requires additional public facilities or capacity is subject
to review and approval or denial by the city.
3. Funded Projects. The developer may rely on
capacity provided by funded projects, including projects in the
current Capital Facilities Plan (CFP) and by street improvements
under contract as part of other approved development proposals.
The approval is subject to the requirements that the applicant
must fully fund or mitigate any impacts as required herein. If
the list of funded projects is modified after the time the
proposal vests, the applicant may elect to rely on the new
capacity provided by the modified list of funded projects
provided that such election must be made prior to issuance of a
development permit.
E. Non -Assignability of Determination. The
determination that facility capacity is available runs with the
land and is not personal to the applicant. The determination is
not assignable or transferable.
W-1
Sec. 12.11.080. Appeal of Director's Decision - Hearing.
A. Any person aggrieved by the action of the director
based on a determination of capacity issued under this chapter
shall have the right to appeal such action to the hearing
i
examiner by filing a notice of appeal with the director within
ten (10) days of notice of the refusal to issue or renew. Such
appeal shall be processed pursuant to the hearing procedures set
forth in Chapter 2.32 of the Kent City Code. The hearing
examiner shall set a date for hearing such appeal. At such
hearing the appellant and other interested persons may appear and
be heard, subject to rules and regulations of the hearing
examiner.
B. Appeal to the hearing examiner shall constitute
final administrative review.
C. An appeal of the decision of the hearing examiner
must be filed with Superior Court within twenty-one (21) calendar
days from the date of issuance of the hearing examiner's derision
as provided in RCW 36.70C.040, or is thereafter barred.
Sec. 12.11.090. Mitigation.
A. General. If mitigation is required to meet the
area -average level of service standard, the applicant may instead
choose to (1) reduce the size of the development until the
standard is met, (2) delay development schedule until City and/or
others provide needed improvements, or (3) provide the mitigation
19
as provided for in this chapter. Mitigation must be acceptable
to the City in form and amount, to guarantee the applicant's pro
rata share of the financial obligation for capital improvements
for the benefit of the subject property.
B. Mitigation approval. If concurrency does not
exist as set forth in Section 12.11.050, to obtain concurrency,
the applicant may provide mitigation to the satisfaction and
approval of the director as follows:
1. Payment for and Timing of Improvements.
a. Payment for developer -funded
transportation improvements affecting critical arterials and key
intersections within the City's direct operational control
necessary to meet the requirements for concurrency must be made
prior to issuance of a development permit, final plat approval or
other approval requiring improvements under this chapter. Any
such improvements required to be constructed by a developer to
meet the requirements for concurrency must be under construction
within six months after issuance of a certificate of occupancy,
final plat approval or such other approval for the proposed
development. All improvements shall comply with the City's
construction standards, as adopted pursuant to Ordinance No.
3117, and as thereafter amended. Furthermore, the director shall
require an assurance device to guarantee completion of such
improvements in accordance with said construction standards. The
finance manager shall be responsible for maintaining all
mitigation funds received under this chapter.
20
b. Payment for or the requirement of the
developer to construct any transportation improvement necessary
to meet the requirements of concurrency which is partially or
wholly outside the city's direct operational control must be
submitted for approval by the appropriate agency(ies) which have
control. Should the appropriate agency(ies) elect to postpone
the proposed improvements, or refuse to accept the proposed
mitigation, the director shall collect and hold the amount
estimated for mitigation until the improvement is made as
required in this chapter. An assurance device satisfactory to
the director may substitute for the payment required in this
subsection.
C. The project proponent may provide
funding in an amount equal to the cost estimate of the director,
for necessary traffic improvements. The director may require
actual construction rather than provision of funding. Funds, or
other commitments, for projects to be constructed by the city
must be paid in full by the project proponent to the city prior
to issuance of a development permit, final plat approval or such
other approval for the project.
2. Transportation Demand Management. As a
mitigation measure, the project proponent may establish
transportation demand management (TDM) strategies to reduce
single occupant vehicle trips generated by the project. The
project proponent shall document the specific measures to be
implemented and the number of trips to be reduced by each
21
measure. The TDM program may be denied based on the criteria of
subsection 3 below. The director must approve the strategies and
shall monitor and enforce the performance of agreed upon TDM
measures. The director will determine if performance measuring
devices shall be imposed, and may require annual documentation of
the continued effectiveness of such measures. The director may
require that additional measures be implemented if the agreed
upon measures fail to result in the reduction of the stated
number of trips.
3. Decision Criteria -Acceptable Mitigation.
Acceptable mitigation requires a finding by the director that:
a. The mitigation is consistent with the
Comprehensive Plan.
b. The mitigation contributes to system
performance.
C. Improvements to an intersection or
roadway may not shift traffic to a residential area.
d. Improvements to an intersection or
roadway may not shift traffic to other intersections for which
there is no acceptable mitigation available.
e. Improvements to an intersection or
roadway may not shift traffic to intersections within another
jurisdiction which would violate that jurisdiction's policies and
regulations.
22
f. Improvements to an intersection or
roadway may not shift traffic to another mobility management zone
and violate that zone's objectives and standards.
g. The effect of the improvement would not
result in a reduction or the loss of another transportation
objective, including but not limited to maintaining high
occupancy vehicle lanes, sidewalks, or bicycle lanes.
h. The adverse environmental impacts of the
facilities improvement can be reasonably alleviated.
i. The improvement will not violate
accepted engineering standards and practices.
Notwithstanding the foregoing, the director has
the authority, in the director's sole discretion, to require
correction of a documented safety-related deficiency.
C. Mitigation denial -appeal process. If the director
determines that the proposed mitigation does not meet the
requirements of this chapter, the director may deny the proposed
improvements and determine the project is inconsistent with this
chapter. The director's decision may be appealed by the
applicant to the hearing examiner pursuant to the provisions of
Section 12.11.080.
Sec. 12.11.100. Mobility management zones and standards.
Mobility management zones and the system standards are
set forth in Table 1 as follows:
23
SECTION 2. Adoption of this ordinance shall not
invalidate or otherwise have any effect on any development permit
application vested on the effective date of this ordinance.
SECTION 3. Severability. If any section, sentence,
clause or phrase of this ordinance should be held to be invalid
or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction, such
invalidity or unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity
or constitutionality of any other section, sentence, clause or
phrase of this ordinance.
SECTION 4. Effective Date. This ordinance shall take
effect and be in force thirty (30) days from and after its
passage, approval and publication as provided by law.
ATTEST:
C I TY CLERK 1 DE PUT/
'J) DiUNA .5W /4 LJ
24
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
4�"
ROGEA. UBOVICH, CITY ATTORNEY `_,
PASSED day of CD4�Ch-� 1996.
APPROVED day of ��. 1996.
PUBLISHED day of
19 9 6 .
I hereby certify that this is a true copy of Ordinance
No. , passed by the City Council of the City of Kent,
Washington, and approved by the Mayor of the City of Kent as
hereon indicated.
concur3.ord
( S EAL )
CITY CLERK} 7)EPu7-Y
:DoA-)AuA Sb)Aw
25
:J
` I —
3
Q
I
En
z
-
c
c
Y_
N
QQz
Z v;
T
r
—
O,
Q
Z
z—
v T
T
GO
�
— a
<
:J
U
I
c
c
T
r
—
O,
Q
x
x
x
x
a
r
C,
x
x
x
x
x
x
r
c
o
c
c
rr�-
rr
>>
>—
<
—_ —
—
= v
<
<<
< z
<
< <
<
00
33.
Ic�zo
cr
N
N N
N
N
N
�
—N
..i N
c h
N r4
N
n
.�
rr r; Er
vrrr
cr333
s,
r
s
}
='
—3r
—�—
c
ss
ss
,
>
t�
_ ..i >•
— — — x
N N
N.r:
^✓ =
N
jC �c
�' •_
N �O
- N
= �"
N N
r
r✓=
rrry
rrv)
rc
r
`�
3
—r
Lr cc
=-r
—
rr
Lr
cr
ti
>>
a__
Nom^
a_
r
:r;
✓; ✓;
CC/—
:n
�n ✓;
✓:
-
>
.moi
<
> <
<
< LIc
< _
_ _
_
_
_
—
-
<
N
< N x
^ c �c
^ x—
Ir
N
N`
�-
Ste;
N
N N
.,i
N
}
.`
N
N --'-
r
✓ r
C z: / r !r
c V, r
L/
r r
r
G
3
r—
U /�
✓-/
/ !
r U
r
T
T
u � ^
1 - u
n L
U
_ U
_ 1
:J
•
0
0
o
c
'
>>
>> >
< <
< < <
U
r
-Z
V
Jr :/:
V7 Cn lr
N N
N Cl N
_
v; rn s
v]
>
>> >
O
<
< < <
cq
—
N N N
—
M M M
Y
>
>>>
_
CO
J
fV
10 IC IIC
N
�
=
s
cn v; s
T
:J
.^ U
y
Z
r
oc
C,_
N