Loading...
AGENDA DOCUMENTS AGENDA DOCUMENTS fiB1 CITRUS GLEN MASTER PLAN MODIFICATION On Tuesday March 20, 1990, the City Commission accepted the recommendation from the Technical Review Board that the request to increase the lot sizes along Citrus Avenue does not constitute a substantial change. The Commission did not accept the recommendation of the Technical Review Board that the request to reduce front and rear setbacks in other areas of the Citrus Trail Plat is a substantial change. Therefore, the Commission is forwarding the entire application to the Planning and Zoning Board for final consideration. Copies of staff comments are enclosed. If it is the decision of the Planning and Zoning Board to approve this request, it is recommended that this request be approved subject to staff comments, with the exception of those comments that are in conflict with the approval. PLANNING DEPARTMENT MEMO NO. 90-056 (Agenda Memorandum) (for March 20, 1989 City Commission Meeting) TO: J. Scott Miller, City Manager THRU: Timothy P. Cannon, Interim Planning Director Tc, FROM: Tambri J. Heyden, Assistant City Planner DATE: March 12, 1990 SUBJECT: Citrus Glen P.U.D. (Citrus Trail plat) Master Plan Modification (setbacks and lot size) File No. 432 Delfin Menendez, agent for Citrus Glen Limited Partnership, has requested a modification to the previously approved master plan for the Citrus Glen P.U.D., as outlined in the attached correspondence in Exhibit "A". Exhibit "B" outlines a revised request that supersedes Exhibit "A". The modification requested is desired to allow more marketable, larger, zero lot line homes to be built on 70 of the 103 lots within the Citrus Trail plat (those lots shaded on the master plan in Exhibit "C"). Larger homes cannot be accommodated on the 55 foot by 102.5 foot platted lots which have approved setbacks of 20 feet in the front, 15 feet in the rear and 15 feet on the non-zero lot line side. The 70 lots where larger homes are desired have frontage on either a 60 foot right-of-way (Citrus Avenue) or a 34 foot right-of-way (Citrus Trail, Orange Drive or Temple Avenue). Eight of the 70 lots have frontage on a 60 foot right-of-way (Citrus Avenue) and 62 of the 70 lots have frontage on a 34 foot right-of-way. The applicant is requesting approval of the following changes for the two "frontage types": (Illustrations of the applicant's request are provided in Exhibit "D".) 1) For the 62 lots with frontage on a 34 foot right-of-way (Citrus Trail, Orange Drive, Temple Avenue)- Reduce the rear setback from 15 feet to 12 feet and reduce the front setback from 20 feet to 18 feet. The previously approved sidewalks within the right-of-way would remain and would run along the front property line of these lots. (See diagram 1.b. in Exhibit "D".) 2) For the 8 lots with frontage on Citrus Avenue (a 60 foot right-of-way)- Replat citrus Avenue reducing it from a 60 foot right-of-way to a 50 foot right-of-way. The 10 feet gained would be added to the lots on each side of the right-of-way to in- crease their depth by 5 feet. The previously approved side- walk and bike path would remain, but move 5 feet within the reduced right-of-way. (See diagram loc. in Exhibit "D".) The procedure for approving master plan modifications in planned unit developments is twofold. First, the City Commission must make a determination as to whether or not the changes requested are substantial in nature. A determination of substantial change on the part of the City Commission, which has sole discretion in this matter, would require a new application for PUD. On the other hand, a determination of no substantial change allows the forwarding of the request to the Planning and Zoning Board. This procedure appears in Appendix B, Section 12 of the Code of Ordinances. TO: J. Scott Miller Planning Dept. Memorandum No. 90-056,. Page 2 Mar. 12, 1990 With respect to the change requested by Mr. Menendez, the Technical Review Board (TRB) met on March 6, 1990, to review the plans and documents submitted and they are recommending that the City Commission make a finding of substantial change for the request to modify the front and rear setbacks for those lots with frontage on a 34 foot right-of-way and that the applicant be required to submit a new application for PUD. However, with respect to the request to reduce the right-of-way width of Citrus Avenue in order to increase the lot depth of those lots which front on Citrus Avenue, the Technical Review Board recommends that the City Commission make a finding of no substantial change. It was the consensus of the Technical Review Board that the request to modify front and rear setbacks substantially alters the nature of the original master plan approval and creates the following problems: 1. The setbacks approved at the time of master plan approval of this project, 20 feet in the front, 15 feet in the rear and 15 feet on the non-zero lot line side is the minimum standard for building setbacks (excludes screened enclosures, porches and pools) for zero lot line homes for PUDs in the City. A reduction in building setbacks for this PUD would be a deviation from City standards and would set a precedent for future PUD master plans. 2. The Zoning Code requires 2 parking spaces for every single family unit. Garages have been credited toward providing 1 of the parking spaces; driveways provide the other parking space as long as they meet the minimum dimension requirements for parking spaces, 9 feet by 18 feet. With a front setback of only 18 feet, a vehicle parked in a driveway more than likely would overhang into the sidewalk that runs along the front property line unless the vehicle pulls up as close as possible to the building. This is usually not practical since room is desired to move around the vehicle. Sidewalks on one side of the local streets, the side of the street as the affected lots, were previously approved, and provide the only pedestrian system for lots on the local streets. Therefore, eliminating the sidewalk is not a solution to the potential overhang problem since they are required pursuant to the Subdivision Regulations (unless other adequate pedestrian paths are provided). 3. Reducing the rear building setback to 12 feet would result in a 24 foot building separation between units that back up to one another in the rear. Distance between buildings is always a concern to City fire- fighters since small building separations encourage spread of fire and prohibit access by certain fire apparatuses, thereby reducing response time and increasing property damage. 4. For those lots which back up to the collector road, the main road through the PUD, approval of the reduced rear building setback would allow units to be constructed 12 feet from the collector road right-of-way. 5. Several units are under construction having the previously approved building setbacks. Although tastefully staggered, building setbacks add interest to the layout and design of a project, haphazard stagger- ing does not. A change in the front building setback J. Scott Miller Planning Dept. Memorandum No. 90-056, Page 2 Mar. 12, 1990 at this point could potentially lend disorder to the layout of units yet to be constructed. 6. There is a 12 foot drainage and utility easement not shown on the master plan that exists within the front 12 feet of the affected lots. As discussed in detail in the Utility Department memorandum in Exhibit "D", a reduced front setback may result in having to relocate water meters and could make servicing utility lines with large equipment within this 12 foot easement precarious. 7. There are additional staff comments in Exhibit "E", which relate to the substantial nature of this request. If the City Commission forwards and the Planning and Zoning Board approves this request, in whole or in part, approval should be subject to the attached staff comments from the Building Department in Exhibit "E". '.--" , l ~ ~ C~u\A- j. ~ . TAMBRI J. HEYDEN.' ~ TJH:frb Encs A:PM90-056 ~' EXHIBIT "A" ........... ........... .......... DESIGN GROUP ARCHITECTS · ENGINEERS · PLANNERS 630 SOUTH DIXIE HIGHWAY, WEST PALM BEACH, FLORIDA 33401-5835 4071659-5701 February 26, 1990 Mr. Timothy Cannon Acting Planning Director 100 E. Boynton Beach Boulevard Boynton Beach, Florida 33425 Re: CITRUS GLEN P.U.D. PROPOSED MASTER MODIFICATION TO CITRUS TRAIL SECTION Dear Mr. Cannon: At the request of Felix Granados Jr., Citrus Glen Limited Partnership, we are submitting for the consideration of the City of Boynton Beach, a modification to the Citrus Trail Plat Master Plan. (P.U.D. South Side). The objective of this request is to be able to build larger units on the 102.5 feet depth lots of Citrus Trail. The market demand for these larger units has been bigger than expected and for such reason we are offering different alternates to handle the situation. As records show, the original Citrus Glen P.U.D. was approved with 24 feet roadways and without sidewalks. At the request of the Developers we asked a Master Plan Modification (January 15, 1988) and later approved an increase in the roadways width and build sidewalks in one side. Lots were increased from 1001 to 102.51 or 107.51. In order to accommodate these deeper units in the 102.51 lots (shaded in the Master Plan) we are offering two alternates for those abutting the 34' roadways and another two for those abutting Citrus Avenue (601 R/W), as follows: 341 Roadways: Citrus Trail, Orange Drive and Temple Avenue. ALTERNATE 1.- Reduce to 15 feet the front setback. This will reduce the distance from the front wall to the edge of the road from 30 feet to 25 feet. Although the Developers are willing to build the sidewalk this creates a conflict with pedestrian circulation if cars are parked in the driveway. ALTERNATE 2.- Increase the lots size to 107.51 feet depth, through a replatting process, keeping the front setback in 20 feet, reducing roadway easement to 29 feet and eliminating the sidewalk. Alternate 1 is preferred to avoid the replatting process. ~VA ~ 0' A Subsidiary of L. ROBERT KIMBALL & ASSOCIATES . 60 I Road: Citrus Avenue ALTERNATE 1.- Reduce to 15 feet the front setback and keep the sidewalk and bikepath where planned or move both 5 feet inside the right-of-way or move only the sidewalk and eliminate the bikepath. It shall be noticed that this road does no longer need such right-of-way because it dead ends at the boundary with Citrus Park. ALTERNATE 2.- Increase the lots size to 107.5 feet depth, througb a replatting process, keeping the front setbacks to 20 feet, reducing the right-of-way to 50 feet, moving the sidewalk and bikepath within the reduced right-of-way. As in the 34 feet roadways we prefer any of the solutions of Alternate 1, to avoid the replatting process. If you have any questions or you need further clarification about this Submission, please contact us to respond. Sincerely, M.S.M. DESIGN GROUP () Delf n F. Menendez Senlor Architect cc: Felix Granados Jr. DFM/bd t:,.VJ ~ o A Subsidiary of L. ROBERT KIMBALL & ASSOCIATES EXHIBIT "B" ........... ........... .......... DESIGN GROUP ARCHITECTS · ENGINEERS · PLANNERS 630 SOUTH DIXIE HIGHWAY, WEST PALM BEACH, FLORIDA 33401-5835 407/659-5701 March 6, 1990 Mr. Timothy Cannon Acting Planning Director 100 E. Boynton Beach Boulevard Boynton Beach, Florida 33425 Re: CITRUS GLEN P.U.D. PROPOSED MASTER PLAN MODIFICATION TO CITRUS TRAIL SECTION Dear Mr. Cannon: At the Technical Review Board Meeting of March 6, 1990, about the proposed master plan modification for the project of reference, described in our letter for Submission, dated February 26, 1990, it was agreed by the Developer's Representative and us as the most acceptable solutions for the objective of this request, the following alternates: For the 34 feet roadways, a modified Alternate 1, as shown in the enclosed drawing. In it we reduced the front setback to 18 feet min. and the rear setback to 12 feet min.. This alternate was accepted as the most viable after a general consensus among the TRB Members, the Developers Representative and us, was reached. This alternate does not interfere with the sidewalk and drainage system, and minimize the impact in the existing approved setbacks, for the rest of the development. For Citrus Avenue (60 feet R/W), Alternate 2 was agreed on. Therefore, we respectfully request to include this letter in your package to the City Commission for their review and resolution of this petition. Sincerely, M.~DESIGN ~UP D~ndez Senior Architect cc: Felix Granados Jr. DFM/bd ~VA ~ 0' A Subsidiary of L. ROBERT KIMBALL & ASSOCIATES EXHIBIT "e" Ii i....i.....II.fI.'" "'IIIU"'I"II.ffllll",,,,.I ,"nl..,...,n'I'" If" ,...1 f """'11"""'1' IIIf II.n...IIII.'II.....tI......,tI'......,..........".....I.., .1I1...........tI............N..........U....,...................".....1 I il !I ~CJI;i I I '~I ~!.'iI' ~. J; ;I!'!; ~ I J II III!I.. ; I'a ',1ft n i II;~' I ! =-1I:r. I ~ i:sU I I !IJ~~ i i ~~ I ! 1.1.' , il,. ~I I ~ B~~.I', ,. ~. -..=- "10. . .J. ([)i P' ~ .. I" .. I I is: ~ I I I I ~~ . . I 0 ~CJ) ..... i~ o -t . "0. ~h; I ;~= ~m . ;: .. ::0 ' .~= ..... p .. ! ..0.. . . . ...... .. ~ ~c .. .. .... -.. .2 CI!! 5~ is C;~W: 0 2 ..0 I" .. .c:2 .. =m . ~i~ .. 0 0 .-z" .. "r "'~n ! ~.=! :; i~~ ~O 0 " i 0 '"a .. .20 :"'0 is ".2 ; .s: ' I z ==- I: . =m .. !II ..00 !'- ;~ g ....c ~ -~! 00.. ..... I 00" I ==1 . ~. 0 f "'0 .. ~ 0 : .. .. Ii"i Ie ! z .. ~ IlmD 1 '"Il - t J~! ,~ i i i 5 e il !! ili! III! ~J .ii: t= .~ lil= I~I~ 5! !!l! , 1- 1- II .... I ! '!i Iii I! !!!i I I iIi 'ii ,I~! I I ..il ~-! i;!!!i I Ii; ill iii= I I I S 'i~ :;; ! i a I ! ! - I .- W_. I i! iii ; . i U~ !I ill ~ i :II~! 111':111 i~;I;q ! :"1: If I~inlj: ::;.:11 i.. I !!-' ~ilS I 5 ~i i= izi :i~i - ~i ,I ii~ Ili- I ;o~ BI . ! ,I I ; -.....~._:-... ,..e; J ! hil.;,i~i;,il .ii. I!! !I!I~~~~!I !I~~. ~ --- I J~~ ~ '-'- ~mE u !I!l!l~" !. II!!!' i! m. i i h ,....~,.I . ~nl i !I!l!l!l 1..=__1:1 ."I! :ziti:ziicil 1I;r I , . i ~fI1t 1111;-1 CD .--.. ii c=: I ..., ~" ...' o ~I! ...~ .... I...... ____~: . .mH' '2-%4./' ___ _ll:!~!~~... ~ J~./;~ . ,,_Ii. :~. - ':." .r ~: ~ -- I r "'" ;';'Y I~i Ii Ii i hi ;1 c~ I !. 'Iii i .r -I!! - ,. J · II i I I 5 I l III I" ~_.--:-~_._--.. :;-.:r..;;..,.:: ':--t. prcJect't."";, nu~~~,. ..."!i,.. -j ''''';;'-''':..r' . '.I- . IY'OIf _a-. ~ ~"'.-. .' ~~.~'..~ ~"jtr'",,~.:~. ~. . .~~~~.~~..~~~~::. . .~ .~~:~.. .T(.'....~'>.::.,~.. '!:'.~~.~: ..}-d.7......!)~-~c.~.:""-.... . '~"';~,..,." .,~I . -.._.1.... . -'W -- .....' !If_I ".r:--." ~ EXHIBIT liD" PROPOSED NEW UNIT IN TYPICAL LOT 11'-0' 11'.0. 1 1 I l ~ .. - i :- :- I i .. , ;" .. o 11'-0' o M.1t IS'-O' IIIN .....AO. ....~__ n.......c--.,.., ....- ~-#l""~c.....,., ~ tr,l;".i - , I' I' I i ~l : I I I I . jt~t' I it ;. .1 ,i 0' .. I I ZI I "I --- - .~!__..___.L.. r o . i .. . ~ Lr---- . -- J . I ? ;. ---------------_!~~~~~~~~~ PROPOSED LOT LINE ~: i 010 'C ;'0 l ~ .. . . ? ;. .. I 1-- I I 010 .. c "0 .... I l I I -l- ---- .. * CITRUS TRAIL, ORANGE DRIVE, AND TEMPLE AVE. LOTS (34' ROADWAYS) ALTERNATE 1 IIEIlUC( FlOIT $Eruct. tEA"1I& UI lll"llUlll. TIlE SIDOIlU. ., ,i AL TERNA TE 2 IlEPLAT. 11C1lU5111& lOT sin AIIJ El'"IIUlTl. TIt: SIDUN.t. ~!!'QPO_S_ED~!- TE~~~ JES l.Q!N.9Rq~ELUNII. SIZE _ _. .. _ (5u~~D sy DIA0~AM lib]) SCALE: 1/'. : t'-O. Ilttl ...... ti. "Ii ..' ..... -~: - . ~-.~ I : i ~ .-_1 : ........~.. .....1. "'-- ~, .. ;. oi : J iI r 1...... ... ( - .",~-'................, " . "2 .- ..r , .. j ~--_\ i 'It is ~ , L-- -* crrRUS TRAIL ORANGE DRIVE AND ,JEMA.E AVEt LOTS (34' ROADWAYS) * RECOMMENDED. ALTERNATE (6u..Pce.s~ DIAGl2.AN @) l1.b..J s.......... ............ .........P- DESIGN GROUP _,,~!III:.1"'. --.; "'... -.....~1:[.U.:I~...:.1 ~.. - '".::2~U_ l108iJUIHc-"IHl'1.oMA' ...,'\I..A.I..,..'....'IOlt'llAUIt'JI.Il~ ..,/. '1,;fJl PROPOSED NEW UNIT IN TYPICAL LOT ....0. "'-0. o , . :-i ~. ..- ~. '1' "~. :..:....'J".,.....,: "': 11' . COV,"Pb ~H I ....". ",""0011, " I _ i , '.1 :-J_l".... 't-;'~':"::. ~ I '\" . . I ;I~ ~~~;F~Lii',r ; ~.......,~"'.,,'-'TIt' :1 :.~:.~ I '," ('VI"" ODD; . '.. It 'Jl ~ ~ . ~, :11,11i 1'1 /. . :. ' jl<i'(ii . " !"'\:"'liI/"::' ~ . '. ' . ,I' ,. [ ,. , " ,j I I,! .-..oll!.'""''''' ,....tj.'"i' -.' \ ....~f-; ~ ~~: f}~F(; ~ '~;..."t ~ ,.' . I: ,+-1 1. Il.-..::-*-,,:l" V 1 -I..;.J.j~ ~ iJy"'l :, ~i~~n:in":~I'll , J l l 1 r.)' I! . 1f - . , I IIfllAOOO1!' " IJ .1 " .' '. _ , . , to --.-1' L~~.~ ~Lr" ~S :!;:~t;.. M" ,.("" , ',.,,11"',..........-<1:"]1.1 I '1 . ., .' " .,.' i ,.1 ,I I eov''''D_1 . ......n:. .'I:lIIOO.. , I .......,..... .. :~I::l!~{{~Jr~~:...1'l:.. . . \ "1!~ti:lIli";J. ,I: I ! Ii 1~'~ml11r;.. ~' ,.,. 1~~"1 ~~ " , ~.~.I'.~).i.:!ljl~'I...~.~~d.;"........ ~J11. fr' t tr ~~ I_oil' ~-., \! -".f> : tlft1 ' . r ,'~jiIJt; ,," i. ~;:~_~ "';~:' i . ~ :,' .]l~";J ~ l::=Jl:~,,' , :1" .1 r.1~ ITIlf., 'm7 I "V': ~~ I : l[ll;lInf~~! '-0' ,f-II ,- - · I' , - I I '~~'ll~,_~~~ ' ..- .~' II. . ~.' ., I J~.l'";' ft . Li,;;. ,t..I;... - t5'-0- II,N 'I : ; , .S' I OAUD' I, I I ~..", .=',~~!' I : I J I , =~~~--~\i~j~y, 0..,- ....",..... cn.-l...." ,. L, o " , . , io 1S'-0. II'N ~1 ;" . ------t-- Y I io _ _ _ _ _ _ !R,!_,!,!! .!:.O! !;"!!_ 'f ;., -_._-~.;...~---- PROPono LOT LIIlE I. , , .E. _IOE.ALII: LO.CATIO.!.3__ ~ io I Z ~\ . ~ I . . ------, I o " ~l 00 .1.... .0 or I l ___.L 00 .' c .0 "" , o . , o . I -f- i I ., 0, ~t Zt ~ io 4ciTRUS AVE. lOTS -C8cr R/vI) - - - ,~ ; ~; · .r. .1It! PAT. LOCA TIO. -r J ~4 .,11 r PAT. Al TErmATE , :t"'t~,~:m ~'~",:W,tl~:'~~ :~~(mr.r.N~I'I'" m, f*' ALnRNAn t - , m, S'.WIlI - ........ IUCf ".,..-.., .. . m' '1IllI1CII lII'lAn,. /l.eJ II' tJl'" 111-""171 """ rir'fWVtng '" t.hn pr'bPfOl't.v 01 the ..rohlt.,nt.:t ,,"" mAW' Mal h" u,.fIIld or 8't.fJred ft'I whol.. Of" In P"f"t. w,t.h. out tht"'" e_"l'Tlntll ~rt. t.." f)or"".fIIIlun drf'lYlln by ct,ecll:ed by' rPv,QtonA Z Q<e: .1-0 C <(- .U~ ::) _0 . u..... D. cu. ZO:i w~o ..J....<e: ,"::;;: I&J ""'~ID (I) I- Z ::)enO a:~1- ....~~ --0 O~ID P U OJ 5' L Q II. i: III a: LU z ,.. c a: 0 c ii: II. 0 fila:~ ,..111 . illl% :ig~ zCw wZ lD a:o IIICI~ is' !::wo UlLD. L o ~ ........... ....,...... .,......,.. DESIGN GROUP .f"'ehl,,-==~. . .'Vt'-..... pi....,....... Q..., I ~ -q-~ ~ \,; I; ,- ~I 1 2 ... 87014.8 EXHIBIT "E" STAFF COMMENTS CITRUS GLEN MASTER PLAN MODIFICATION Building Department: Engineering Department: Utilities Department: Planning Department: See attached memo See attached memo See attached memo See attached memo LC'CATION MAr CITRUS GLEN & CITRUS PARK PALM BEACH COUNTY ELEMENTARY SCHOOL up. , , ;, LA WRENCE LAKE .;~~~i1rJ;->~ LA WRENCE ' I' ' u r:'Ks~3J1l,1 % t>.!J~~1 ~ ~ GROVE 01, ;_.;~J _ ~ :'''I( -. ~ \I/....l,.., c"C" "'".. , "c'. i ~/.~~ ~ . (' ] ~ ~~iL~~'~ ~/1'9/B~ ~. ~~~~.~-~~ d~ ~ ~ { "~ ~ l,-( ~\y ~ ..f:.[V ~~ \B E:! I ~ ........ ),.~,;).) ~ ~ ~~ ~ >-VI rl Imtl v I) I. ..n -_ w ~ I J I' . ....Yj"" '"", T 1 : = ( " \ 1 ~ 1 DATE','-.J! J J d ~:'~~~, ~:;:;{I I~"l, ''1J~ ..... 'W.AI-ftL~- - J~l~-.A; . ~. ..-.. ~ - -. .. - .- k~.~~!6 i~_? " -~ \~, ~ I lr'~ ~ 5 7/85 PI:(l!'~i N '~I if /7 J. 8 5 _ LJ.J I ~ ' ~; !~~ ',' , ~ ~I ,Y"I 6/1 8/85 i: ~ ~ ~) 'F 12 ~ "M.'. -~~ ' .T' .! ! .~ ~ ~ " 'r~ ~ " ~~ ~ "..: ~, . ., 'l~ _ 1 / 2 1/86 : !: :1I":::::1!IMEiNttn~R~ ' : 1::... ::: .a~~lHH:.~Jl:!l .... .. 1:I~~."".Irn~". () J_.'.) I Q ~ ~ : H:::::::;:::::lm:;::!::;::::;;;mm::m111111 & :~l;!!:~::~"~____~. - , ..~......_ L:__~W_-__I- __ J: ....' __ ____ ____ ,$/3/86 ' ' ~\,t~~ t~~~:::'~-"'(RIGHTS-OF-WAY ! I~ DI;~~ ....." ~.... A..... --'1_- I 1 )~ \ ... · ~ L.JI L ,'"'..,. 1"'111:.- _ L .1:1". M~ ..,_ rA~/n iI -, '... ft T._ "" Illlnlno t; r5A n ::-d,. ., I. " , · "" ~ - - " ,__I 1'-17"'" t -- ~, ~ ~ III I I ., . _1- ..-J L ~ ! SI ~ 0 I,r -, 1/8 I 1/4 'daJQcIAII. ..:.-~"AK. S'. - ~1 ~~ ~L~ . MILES ~ . P~l I: 2 f:j~/ 1 $/ f 6 '- , ,- - '. --.4 ~r - I I - T I rJ ' rl-1Ii 7. t!9B T " D I ~ T~ -."" ~~'--II !J; j ..,.~ 'A'? r-:-----tJ I I' I 0 · ,:"..J"" . ~ T I !', I ~ T I II . . - --60YNn~---. -.--n__._.T. ----J----- --- -.. - - -.. - CANA6<t__.. I I r ::,LLJ r I, .- i'*' '- '\ ill /./ ' W~Tfi~ CLt~~,~= ~~ ...- --- .1: .., ;'.. - -.. .It 1111 I I III '0 400. 800 1600 FE~T - al ,.... :.... .DED'1'.IO/S- I I I T I I I I 1 I.. .. .. .-