HomeMy WebLinkAboutRE Young Subdivision Survey Map (6)Rocky,
Again, I thank greatly you for your assistance.
It is indeed appreciated.
Best regards,
Charlie
From: Rocky Randels [mailto:R.Randels@cityofcapecanaveral.org]
Sent: Tuesday, March 17, 2015 8:34 PM
To: chartley@cfl.rr.com
Subject: RE: Young Subdivision Survey Map
Charles, Thank you for the information. I better understand the
problem, and can ask an intelligent question when we discuss the
situation. Just from a common sense view, this doesn’t sound doable.
I will follow this closely, and ask if the lots follow our established
code to protect the purchaser of this so called new lot. I think the
last time this was asked, our City said no to Mr. Young.
Thanks again, Rocky
From: Charles Hartley [mailto:chartley@cfl.rr.com]
Sent: Tuesday, March 17, 2015 2:21 PM
To: Rocky Randels
Subject: RE: Young Subdivision Survey Map
Rocky,
To clarify the parcel at issue -
Bill and Sandy Young, under Sandra Butler Young Trust, owner, have made
application for a subdivision of the lot on which they reside. Their
entrance to the parcel is connected by an access driveway to the
residence of Vincent and Tammy Marino. The Marino’s own the driveway.
The Young Trust has restrictive easement rights to the Marino’s
driveway.
There are two cross access easements. One is for an existing cross
access easement to other property (Marino’s driveway) to access the
parcel being subdivided. The other is a proposed cross access easement
on the parcel being subdivided (Young Trust) to provide access to and
from each lot that is being proposed in the subdivision of the parcel.
The preliminary questions posed in my email pertain to compliance. What
the codes ask are what I’m really asking, how does this plan work? I
don’t understand it. Also, I don’t understand why the City chose to omit
important recorded documents that apply and which have a direct bearing
on important initial code and standards issues. I must ask, if I or you
or anybody else buys either one of these subdivided lots, what have we
bought? I think you or I or others would assume that the City made sure
through its review that the subdivided lots complied with codes and
standards. Do they?
Thanks for your assistance.
Best regards,
Charlie
Charles Hartley
399 Holman Road
Cape Canaveral, FL 32920
321-783-8367
mobile 321-795-2775
chartleycrm@cfl.rr.com <mailto:chartleycrm@cfl.rr.com>
From: Rocky Randels [mailto:R.Randels@cityofcapecanaveral.org]
Sent: Sunday, March 15, 2015 8:30 PM
To: chartley@cfl.rr.com <mailto:chartley@cfl.rr.com>
Subject: RE: Young Subdivision Survey Map
Charles; Thank you for the encouragement. I am not aware of the entire
plan, but I
believe it results from the purchase of the section of Holman Road in
front of Earl
McMullen’s home. Our previous sewer line is now in his section of the
street, I think.
I will meet with our City Manager on Tuesday to better understand, and
try to explain
what we are trying to achieve. Thanks for selecting our Community as
your choice
for your Home. Rocky
From: Charles Hartley [mailto:chartley@cfl.rr.com]
Sent: Saturday, March 14, 2015 9:38 AM
To: Rocky Randels
Subject: RE: Young Subdivision Survey Map
Rocky,
Thank you. I really appreciate your interest. I certainly understand a
busy schedule and how involved you are. I’m complimented that you’ve
taken the time to respond.
I’m simply confused over this submittal and seeking clarifications. I
must emphasize one thing that I’m really baffled about and just don’t
understand is this interpretation for a narrow review of the Legal
Description with the omission of important recorded documents pertaining
thereto. I look forward to the City’s comments.
Thanks greatly for your assistance.
With kindest regards,
Charlie
Charles Hartley
399 Holman Road
Cape Canaveral, FL 32920
321-783-8367
mobile 321-795-2775
chartley@cfl.rr.com <mailto:chartley@cfl.rr.com>
From: Rocky Randels [mailto:R.Randels@cityofcapecanaveral.org]
Sent: Friday, March 13, 2015 10:38 PM
To: chartley@cfl.rr.com <mailto:chartley@cfl.rr.com>
Subject: RE: Young Subdivision Survey Map
Charles; Thank you for keeping me in the Loop. Sometimes we as City
Council
are the last to know of these events and that is when they are on our
Agenda,
for a vote. I have not received the information yet on Mr. Young’s
request for
his renewed interest for this Lot Split, unless it was in a recent
weekly City
Report, as I have been in Washington, D.C. working on a Grant from
Dept. of
Transportation for improvements for A-1-A . I will inquire Monday.
Thanks Again for the heads-up. Rocky
From: Charles Hartley [mailto:chartley@cfl.rr.com]
Sent: Friday, March 13, 2015 4:39 PM
To: Kim Kopp; David Dickey
Cc: Patrice Huffman; Angela Apperson; David Greene; Rocky Randels;
johnpekarpe@gmail.com <mailto:johnpekarpe@gmail.com> ; John Cunningham;
info@campbellsurveying.com <mailto:info@campbellsurveying.com>
Subject: RE: Young Subdivision Survey Map
Kimberly,
I look forward to your response.
Thank you for giving this further consideration and review.
Best regards,
Charlie
Charles Hartley
399 Holman Road
Cape Canaveral, FL 32920
321-783-8367
mobile 321-795-2775
chartleycrm@cfl.rr.com <mailto:chartleycrm@cfl.rr.com>
From: Kim Kopp [mailto:kkopp@orlandolaw.net]
Sent: Friday, March 13, 2015 12:52 PM
To: chartley@cfl.rr.com <mailto:chartley@cfl.rr.com> ; 'David Dickey'
Cc: 'Patrice Huffman'; 'Angela Apperson'; 'David Greene'; 'Rocky
Randels'; johnpekarpe@gmail.com <mailto:johnpekarpe@gmail.com> ; 'John
Cunningham'; info@campbellsurveying.com
<mailto:info@campbellsurveying.com>
Subject: RE: Young Subdivision Survey Map
Good afternoon Mr. Hartley,
We will review your questions and circle back with you early next week.
Thank you,
Kimberly Romano Kopp, Esq., LEED AP
Brown, Garganese, Weiss & D’Agresta
Senior Attorney
111 N. Orange Ave., Suite 2000
P.O. Box 2873
Orlando, Florida 32802-2873
Phone (407) 425-9566
Fax (407) 425-9596
Kissimmee (321) 402-0144
Cocoa (866) 425-9566
Website: www.orlandolaw.net <http://www.orlandolaw.net/>
Email: kkopp@orlandolaw.net <mailto:kkopp@orlandolaw.net>
Any incoming e-mail reply to this communication will be electronically
filtered for "spam" and/or "viruses." That filtering process may result
in such reply being quarantined (i.e., potentially not received at our
site at all) and/or delayed in reaching us. For that reason, we may not
receive your reply and/or we may not receive it in a timely manner.
Accordingly, you should consider sending communications to us which are
particularly important or time-sensitive by means other than e-mail.
Confidentiality Note: This e-mail, and any attachment to it, contains
privileged and confidential information intended only for the use of the
individual(s) or entity named on the e-mail. If the reader of this
e-mail is not the intended recipient, or the employee or agent
responsible for delivering it to the intended recipient, you are hereby
notified that reading it is strictly prohibited. If you have received
this e-mail in error, please immediately return it to the sender and
delete it from your system. Thank you.
From: Charles Hartley [mailto:chartley@cfl.rr.com]
Sent: Thursday, March 12, 2015 4:50 PM
To: 'David Dickey'
Cc: 'Patrice Huffman'; 'Angela Apperson'; 'David Greene'; 'Rocky
Randels'; johnpekarpe@gmail.com <mailto:johnpekarpe@gmail.com> ; 'John
Cunningham'; Kim Kopp; info@campbellsurveying.com
<mailto:info@campbellsurveying.com>
Subject: RE: Young Subdivision Survey Map
Dave,
I just noted, please correct Question Four to change “Marino’s
easement” to Marino’s access driveway.
Thank you for your assistance and response.
Best regards,
Charlie
Charles Hartley
399 Holman Road
Cape Canaveral, FL 32920
321-783-8367
mobile 321-795-2775
chartleycrm@cfl.rr.com <mailto:chartleycrm@cfl.rr.com>
From: David Dickey [mailto:D.Dickey@cityofcapecanaveral.org]
Sent: Thursday, March 12, 2015 3:38 PM
To: chartley@cfl.rr.com <mailto:chartley@cfl.rr.com>
Cc: Patrice Huffman; Angela Apperson; David Greene; Rocky Randels;
johnpekarpe@gmail.com <mailto:johnpekarpe@gmail.com> ; John Cunningham;
Kim Kopp; info@campbellsurveying.com <mailto:info@campbellsurveying.com>
Subject: RE: Young Subdivision Survey Map
Charles - thanks for the comments/questions related to the Young’s
application for a lot split on Holman Road. I will be discussing your
email with the City Attorney’s office. Dave
From: Charles Hartley [mailto:chartley@cfl.rr.com]
Sent: Thursday, March 12, 2015 2:53 PM
To: David Dickey
Cc: Patrice Huffman; Angela Apperson; David Greene; Rocky Randels;
johnpekarpe@gmail.com <mailto:johnpekarpe@gmail.com> ; John Cunningham;
Kim Kopp; info@campbellsurveying.com <mailto:info@campbellsurveying.com>
Subject: RE: Young Subdivision Survey Map
David,
Thank you for meeting with me and providing a copy of the plat survey
and review comments of the City Engineer John Pekar, PE and John
Cunningham, Assistant Fire Chief.
I also thank you offering an opportunity to seek a better understanding
of this proposed development. As you know my property joins Holman Road
and the Marino’s access driveway.
My preliminary questions pertain to code interpretation arising from a
review of the Young’s Subdivision Plat survey and documents pertaining
to that plat survey. Based on the City’s file, this plat survey and the
“Opinion of Title” appears to be the only development documents provided
for City Staff, Fire Safety and City Engineer review?
1. My first question – does the proposed lot split achieve code
compliance for a legal cross access easement?
According to the plat survey that was provided to the City, there’s a
“ingress and egress, utilities and access” easement on the lot to be
subdivided which is 20 X 150 ft and runs parallel to and borders the
south property line of the Marino’s property. The plat survey shows the
20 foot easement overlapping the 10 foot setback line. The easement is
shown to be within the property included within the new lot No. 1 and
not a part of the existing parcel that forms Lot No. 2, which contains
the residence of the principal property owner.
Importantly, the west property line of Lot No. 1 crosses the entire
width of the parcel. This not only creates a landlocked situation for
Lot No. 2, but Lot No. 2 becomes dependent on Lot No. 1 to grant an
ingress and egress easement for access road and utilities.
This is not a platted easement as per Surveyor’s Note No. 1, and it is
not show otherwise or it’s intended use clearly stated in the Plat Notes
or Plat Report.
Please see Sec. 98-41 Information required, (a) (5) (D) which read as
follows:
(5) Show, at a minimum, the following existing conditions on the plat:
(D) Easements, including location, width and purpose.
The ingress and egress easement shown on Lot No. 1 described above is a
proposed easement and it does not presently exist. No legal description
is provided for it. An ingress and egress easement cannot be created by
a preliminary plat survey drawing. Logically the ingress and egress and
utility easement would flow from the primary property owner to a new lot
owner and not vice versa. Therefore the one who owns the land and who is
creating the new lot is the party who would grant easement rights to
another party by deed.
It is an established tenant of Florida law that an owner cannot grant
an easement to themselves. A property owner cannot assign or deed a
cross access easement to themselves as a matter of law.
If a cross access easement doesn’t exist on Lot No. 1 nor be legally
created and recorded, can legal access be achieved and importantly, does
a legal cross access easement exist?
2. Second question - Again pertaining to a review of the
submitted plat survey and legal description, the legal description in
neither the plat survey nor the “Opinion of Title” included page two
(2), “See Reverse Side,” of the original recorded Jahn-Butler Deed, or
the “Restrictive Covenant” that provided the language regarding legal
access and entitlements to the existing easement.
Please note: The legal description provided reflects a corrected
scribner’s error for Bk 6929, Pg 121. Page 2 is found on Bk 1629, pg
122. The scribner’s error correction did not reform page two of the
original deed legal description. The Restrictive Covenant was recorded
after this correction was made.
This is a compliance issue of Sec. 98-41 (g), Information Required and
Sec. 98-66 (c) (2), Lot Splits. Can proper review be accomplished
without a complete legal description including all legal agreements for
property rights and in particular, entitlements pertaining to easements?
This could have an impact on code interpretation and review
considerations for the development.
I understand that the City Attorney has given an opinion that the
recorded “Restictive Covenant” between the Marino’s and Young’s that
clarified the benefits and burdens of the Jahn – Butler and now Marino -
Young easement is a private agreement and as such, the City does not
have to consider it at all. However, this does not relieve a
Professional Surveyor from preparing a survey map for real property
improvements to show the complete legal description on the plat survey
map along with any Notes or Reports. Any descrepancies and
inconsistences between the real property description and the survey map
must be shown, i. e., right-of-ways, easements and other real property
concerns. The plat map survey, submittal and layout must conform to the
requirements of FAC 5J-17.052.
The recorded Restrictive Covenant runs with the land and specifically
refers to the Young’s “proposed lot” and to the language found on Pg 2
of the Jahn – Butler Deed. It specifically states on Pg 3, par. 1 that
“the easement [is] for the benefit of both the existing and proposed
lot, subject to the following covenants and restrictions, which the
parties agree will run wih both parcels of the above described land and
bind both parties, their respective heirs, executors, administators and
assigns.”
I further also understand the City narrowed the scope of City’s review
of the interpretation “to whether said access exists.” The issue is not
just “access” for purposes of ingress and egress only. The issue is for
a “perpetual cross access easement,”see Sec. 98-66 (f) (4). The City’s
definition of “access easement” means an easement “dedicated and used
for utilities and utility vehicles.” Please note that the requirements
for an easement arise from Sec. 98-41 (b) (5) (D), “Easements, including
location, width and purpose.” The issue is therefore, whether the
“location, width and purpose” will permit the necessary services for
utilities, vehicles, fire and emergency vehicle access in compliance
with building codes, ordinances and standards. It is broader and deeper
in scope and meaning for the purposes of plat survey review than just
access for purposes of ingress and egress to the property.
We do not know how or to what extent the language found on Pg 2 of the
Jahn – Butler Deed and the “Restrictive Covenant” that clarifies the
scope and use of existing easement would have on the review and approval
process for this new lot.
Again, this, is a compliance issue. I urge the City to reconsider the
application of a complete recorded Legal Description to the plat review
process.
3. Third question - The plat survey included “Easement
Dedication” for public use, fire and emergency access and the
installaton and maintenance of utilities, but did not specify which or
what easement; however, it stated, “no other easements are dedicated or
granted,” please see Sec. 98-41 (b) (5) (D). The plat needs to clarify
what “easement” or “easements” are to be dedicated?
4. Fourth question – Again, the City’s definition of “access
easement” means an easement “dedicated and used for utilities and
utility vehicles.” If the answer to No. 3 above it that the dedication
applies only to the utility easement within the site plan itself and
does not include dedication of utilities within the Marino’s easement,
where is the utility easement(s) which provide utilities to the new lot
No. 1 per Sec. 98-41 (b) (5) (D).
Thank you for your assistance and response to the these initial plat
map review questions.
With kindest regards,
Charles Hartley
399 Holman Road
Cape Canaveral, FL 32920
321 783-8367
chartley@cfl.rr.com <mailto:chartley@cfl.rr.com>
Florida has a very broad public records law. As a result, any written
communication created or received by the City of Cape Canaveral
officials and employees will be made available to the public and/or
media upon request, unless otherwise exempt. Under Florida Law, email
addresses are public records. If you do not want your email address
released in response to a public-records request, do not send electronic
email to this entity. Instead, contact our office by phone or in writing
Florida has a very broad public records law. As a result, any written
communication created or received by the City of Cape Canaveral
officials and employees will be made available to the public and/or
media upon request, unless otherwise exempt. Under Florida Law, email
addresses are public records. If you do not want your email address
released in response to a public-records request, do not send electronic
email to this entity. Instead, contact our office by phone or in writing
Florida has a very broad public records law. As a result, any written
communication created or received by the City of Cape Canaveral
officials and employees will be made available to the public and/or
media upon request, unless otherwise exempt. Under Florida Law, email
addresses are public records. If you do not want your email address
released in response to a public-records request, do not send electronic
email to this entity. Instead, contact our office by phone or in writing
Florida has a very broad public records law. As a result, any written
communication created or received by the City of Cape Canaveral
officials and employees will be made available to the public and/or
media upon request, unless otherwise exempt. Under Florida Law, email
addresses are public records. If you do not want your email address
released in response to a public-records request, do not send electronic
email to this entity. Instead, contact our office by phone or in writing
Florida has a very broad public records law. As a result, any written
communication created or received by the City of Cape Canaveral
officials and employees will be made available to the public and/or
media upon request, unless otherwise exempt. Under Florida Law, email
addresses are public records. If you do not want your email address
released in response to a public-records request, do not send electronic
email to this entity. Instead, contact our office by phone or in writing
Florida has a very broad public records law. As a result, any written
communication created or received by the City of Cape Canaveral
officials and employees will be made available to the public and/or
media upon request, unless otherwise exempt. Under Florida Law, email
addresses are public records. If you do not want your email address
released in response to a public-records request, do not send electronic
email to this entity. Instead, contact our office by phone or in writing
Florida has a very broad public records law. As a result, any written
communication created or received by the City of Cape Canaveral
officials and employees will be made available to the public and/or
media upon request, unless otherwise exempt. Under Florida Law, email
addresses are public records. If you do not want your email address
released in response to a public-records request, do not send electronic
email to this entity. Instead, contact our office by phone or in writing
Florida has a very broad public records law. As a result, any written
communication created or received by the City of Cape Canaveral
officials and employees will be made available to the public and/or
media upon request, unless otherwise exempt. Under Florida Law, email
addresses are public records. If you do not want your email address
released in response to a public-records request, do not send electronic
email to this entity. Instead, contact our office by phone or in writing
Florida has a very broad public records law. As a result, any written
communication created or received by the City of Cape Canaveral
officials and employees will be made available to the public and/or
media upon request, unless otherwise exempt. Under Florida Law, email
addresses are public records. If you do not want your email address
released in response to a public-records request, do not send electronic
email to this entity. Instead, contact our office by phone or in writing
齘꽙뽚콛㽷佲⽌㽍臿猟璯疿盏矟磯竿／ύ⽼㽽佾彿澀퇈ㅠ毨礠逊鸠貀铠濁℡䀋゜홮�⁑ꗿ鳠麰ꆐ漠舌虯蝟ｯ羈辉龊꾋뾌쾍�郿鋿錏鰟韟華葿ꚏ侙徚澛뾪辝龞Ｏ꿿녟龿ꇿꈏꌟꐯꔿⵏ禴彂阱東¯獤㫿귿긏꼟뀯딿＿侶德澸羹辺龻꾼ﾦ뿿ꦟꨟ쀿싿쌏툟ｯ㿅俆忇濈翉迊鿋꿌췵䎻íɲȠ칑쾯꿓뿔쿕�࿚Ί����쵟탿ￏ�俣忤濥翦쿵鿨꿩隽풐䠠냹ｴ禰뿱쿲履ﳿﴏἯ㿿伀弁漂缃㤳᤹汯퀡聟潒﹡դٿޏ࢟যિ
－༏ἐ⼑㼒伓弔䍘灡ₖ䀦㩮牁ⓓ幐䘀ᕌ㉐ၦ鄚ᢏᦟᮿᷟ＞༠ἡ⼢㼣伤縔ぬⴠ㠷ⴳ8㜶⟿⣏⧟⫯⳿ⴏ⸟⼯缿估弱漲缳輴鼵꼶ᡭ扯䍩㞐㦤ⴵ㋰㜷㠵㥿㪏㮟ﾯ뼼켽�｀གὃ⽄䔏䘿䝏㰮땨Ⴞ呦懑遈䁖怺ԡ⌅呣䀠晣幕⺰遞塭昜ꃡṬ兤専덐隐瓐䡻夀䕐䱒义晋嬠小紜嵽嶡狰猊⁊屜ㅀ畜ｬ殺｟鍜ݎ䡍ᩥ貲䯽懲罊轋齌꽍뽎佇像凟柯〱兩Ｏ鲳潦ὰ归潓罔轕齖埿墯梿樯欏？⽬㽭佮彯罴ﾲ佻뽳蟿袟覯調痏瘟眯砿꽏役潺辍굙镢抻襢䛔鑲㫰ὧ頯
攪䐠쀦摩ꂜ捩欲倅嬠ᾗ鵚⹄鶋尔椰ₒ景♣肠딦鄮枠｝ൟ鿿ꂟ憮扯ꑺꔿꅏ魃꽥뾖졧蹝絻轐荤䮷襢谱抱镲岹源뇡쾰䲯龝⾘ힳ卸湥䂕羭⾛㚜䑔畨₧慤❹䴠董捠‰㈱‧ꀧȱᔵ㩐㠳倠罍澱羲辳龴꾵뾶뢿ｔ聽뾸쾹㚜꿁齚ᐅ㽜ꇿꏿ式息ꞯ戏揍｟�迄⽨⾾㾿俀忁濂頹䏬쑣앿鲏倧ౡ牴瀦畈晦ᗁ㯑䄠杮僋ト䅬♰콠漐⇠뒜筇킞炸ᘰ鴐鴰剠ᕵ擠僋�죏樽潨湨怦葫♠䁠柾艟Ὴ⿋㿌ῥ◦꿎쿿��톟퉯퐯趜ムС異湮肔枊逄䬰浩僴鎟罀젯鐮暀쥯禠扰
胧炻퀦ｹ俦忧濨￪꿿אַﹿ퓟헟㿯ￖ㼄Ῑ㿛㊸扵樞날龸鿝ᢜ䕒栺夠枰뱩楳⃡籰ｯ罽澁羂较伈꾅龎燿Ͽ᧯ᪿᯏ᳟ᷯ郿／ᾑ⾒㾓侔徕澖缒�绿翯ᓟᗯ᠏Ｏ弢漣缤輥鼦꼧뼨ᗜ킃㢁猠ⴠ琠胐滼㵫P㖠㵰䢐䉱롭獱焯㵵瑀ᇏ㴱鹐㛐瓠鱥㧰Ʞ㌾匐鼫㠣ⰷ瀅栲倽ꂥݰ꧰㿠ﭒト㩬㞠䓠䔡ᅀᡁ潈愱⳿䦫眠ꂨ냏Dž‐捳㝵ꤠ뮰⁰彥䦂㶱嶐㌾ꥃ㩀犱ဈ뽹콆གᵃ삩胹郟䴮／�뼭⾯㾰体耵놜℈⫿⭏⽟くㅟ啯㍯㒏ﾟ
꼵뼶켷�Ｚ㼩潗壿兿剟塯姏嫟寯毿ｏ⽟⾌･弡佲彳潴痿彿惏懟拯擿攏砟缿伊弋㾙꼍㼠掜ｈ铐羝翐迸鿹꿺龊﷿ꜿ躟톏ȿҿ껯ￏ潔辕輆鼇꾙뼉澂羃렟蕟몟뭿벏㊓㔺㏾⾽�ﾜྞᾟ迃ꆯꉟ�䑤胟䱫￭뾦쾧�ﾪ鿛ᾭ⾮��褏＿辌龍࿀翪꾐侳꿭뿮鏿쫯랟븏/俸㿂促쿑迼⿆忌뿿훿ǿ쯟찯Կ뀏놟늯쾳�缌뿟쾸꼏뼐ᇿ柏毿泯滿漏瀟焯＿�漟￩濴翵迶鿷꿸竿箏粟綯线翏胟Ｏ㿮潩罪迮鿯꿰뿱⼉️？/Ŀɏ͟ﭯ礄掼Ԭدਿଯి
ｏ弍漎缏輐鼑꼒뼓켔ᗿᛟᣯᥟݯࡏय़ᩯￏ�㼬༟ἠ⼡㼢伣⓿╟♯❿ꎊ㷠䪱㷢ﷳ뀾㽥䮁㺣䎰뷰糀瀠ꂄ膼뉊ꂉ烓ｰ肽ၐ區⁄傺6蓬觓볐斀㵷淡Ⴁ佻䯲䗨悻ǣ䓎뽐悤킍巎悤䩁ံႻ楆킉熇郔曾籐㾘这꼨鼬꼭뼮⿿䟏㇟㋯㓿㔏㘟㜯＿伸弹鼧轈뼩켪�䫿䳿䴏丟伯倿兏剟�罓轔齕꽖鑠䉉뷠㹯㭡㸶晀錽僬쿻斱瑰냎㉁ꁧ큥㯿襐�栐䆠컑붰�酄茽䌾წ∽크ꁭꂼ뷛沠ၧ剀䐮㬱湫䁯洀肽䇏쥁픐멁澰뭬봁븱뱡㲠䃲ꓢ梁潐轙⏠㈸㜱�烠塠䃹憐
멣撐烰멠ﺠꑷ䕀䚏悟塿岯嶟ﾯ뽞콟�｢ཤὥ⽦柿栿楏聟篯姿媿諏ￏ彽潾罿辀龁꾂뾃쾄薿蛟蟯觿訏輟䵱ቲ풟쾠魰鎐뵐熀硵‼₼셯煲Ⴡ僬煭烓뷽⃐邛䅮冞功뫷暁䀽胏ბ딿㺿豓痏盟傺촾擺傽䁵齔㲵洲歱뤾ⁱ顂瀠䁁￦쾣��쾓낖퓿馀䉐澠㺔䃍곢굏鑑〲겭넳伸ꥰ箁䇬䄾㱔馀두뗟㇢귽㒬槪샀傓遀煭�㸐齣汰エ祰誨䌽烷㭁䆲匣lꁂ厾킿ြ㒨ⱁ됿謿｟澌徐澑羒输龔꾕뾖響飏駟髯鳿鴏숟썿ﾏ羍辎龏ￅ࿇忖⿉쫿�퇼�쯿찿㩈
䑌偱惚メä桰탻ㄤ챸꿔뿕ῦﾯ뿰쿱�㞻↞셮ޟ굟멃㘝ᦻ邨x搾濿烶㺰㻡㲰瞀䗁뵁ｐ咠⅀ꌻ炢郍柾烐ヌ䀽ᅸ핷ꁭ䃿쉒퍯흯����ﾟ鿠꿡뿢쿣��혯ίя՟ᅯݿ羟꼉忌濍翎迏鿐쨌ａ茽鰾Ꭺ選禾䇵댢渢뢰궿癏ꝯ�鸧甼ﬞｵｐ鄽悞ꋿĽ爭ዷ⯂ᒚ‘⁄뀞耼㿿ⷠ瞤⟔릟뫟ìꭆ�鋼䒼?䕷﵀Ꝁꂠ遀퀨堠탥ᠵﲀ瑦侯徰Ἢ疲猿聮濻ு沑耛僿煭源↱ᴓṐ㞰狠鸷ﾀ끁潴ἥ⼦鉷㙲ⁱ哲㴡桳큱ꓻ
ㄸ₿ﳷ㖡뵘牐䀚쁬ꎩ脣䕆ꁭ扴큷遫숿䒿㕴潗䖱ꂒ밓睱倱ꭐ犤ᴷᫀ田挷硋쇟熰ﳠ᪒燐ㄠꌱ쁀﷿㠑㧯㯿눏ᡵ㖱ꏁﰔ硥儋䉬넘脽⊪뿓ᬡ⃀乌㈵Àꐷ봀鿀ﯱⶤ빱ﻑꍲſtꅌᡩﾰ牐䨷滁ﾰ챸弎伒弓演缕輖鼗ᪿᯏ᳟ᷯ式ﾯ뽚漏缐轩⽝㽞轭惿慟扯捿撏斟暯枿﷏�﹉眠樰뵰뷀⌀怢㆟⼿坕ꁎ珿闻샻䬲摠Ŀ協牄煊俿밂￣뭰ꃰ⟐癒㲐쾐炽၉킡畴䒡⊿嗽扩{塕憼Ǿ釻肠믿㳠ꢐ信偟牯뉏ꅵｱ섋솽뀱缪輫鼬⵿⺯⾿㗏︪ﾳﳤ愐ㇿ㳑㆑裼覿櫏渿Ｏ㽯佰
影侘罳轴齵꽶矿碿秏竟槯頯毿汏｟潭徚澛羜辝龞꾟뾠ꇿꋏꏟꓯ꜏넟舄Ｓ喂퉄傃熐ꚓ舢퇁叾쌡ﾩａൃ킵傃仿蕔㇐ﶲ舁䕕㖒ⓐ２恋J퀵킳倱㾾便ൃ룿菀蝐閑썁떡0䝀煅₩犼畍⅐셲㱂ﯰᆅ揉蝒籠闑響뀏ᾩྭᾮ⾯㾰侱徲澳듿땿뚏랟뢯릿폏츟Ｏ⾪㾫ￜ迏鿐꿑뿒쿓퓿헟훯����ꇡ惉䈀녈恀虓仠邀㠹㐭ꁎ湉ɕ萯垤胠撡킅愨⧪ó䐱ンᑖↃ㇟㳑藰㴀䕐㪱违鿞Ῥ㿮俯㿵俶꿟樂ײַﳯ⼀㼁伂弃樄勳匮녊ᕭ楠
ﱭ浵࿋ῌ鼍뾍쾎咴匂嚷㝱萠즲䯱ﾵ䆼⿵⼆ᰊﾐྒ씛＊ഏฟ༯ဿᅏ፯ｿ輔鼕꼖༝ﲎ鼡꼢⳱ㄠ㠴瀊쀇ᔯ菱硐胇灖〽늄㫾쁀ꁙ꼲缶伇弈찶ㇸ㘵焊戹뼥漿켣⓿䇟♟⣿⤏⨟⬯ⰿｏ弭漮缯輰鼱漻佉輽㻿原咏喟嚯垿壏姟ｚཛྷὝ⽞㽟你彡潢揿摿斏暟枯梿槏櫟ｫὮ⽯㽰佱屲菳䖺ꖓ蕳凐䴀異倠᾿荡蓱薣胐郤灒삽쫿羰쫰㟼䊯䛿䞟䢯콉�ｌཎ⽐㽑勿罏稿獏璯覿笟粯콽ᾍﾀྂᾃ⾄㾅蛿蝏멟ᥟ醟㒿㖟�悔ヴ䂖ꅥ䓓뼏ὅꙵ랼僲䇲뭌ס鏁유玀
牣扩잽憑킙銻ᆼ顲ㅹ骼ᓂ潤ꋂ肨짿盠좱ὑ솓隰瞰ꊠ뭰䂚▧묣ꡱ皁恸쟯쏑쇱䆰쾡ꢼ睽滐ꋂ邧ㇴ犼惈抨汥မꂙ悑惈⇿靂봠ꟃ㨠ᾰ셂ꚰ邙큷ဟ鱹鵯鹿뒏�삔⋉羮ᒢ邚녩韐鹿ꢼ潷„ꆭ℟ꃴ邨淾炧憙䆲醨惃쌡쥠뇀㮀썀ἐ�肰˂ꋂ悭셣ꡰ獲셡鲰쇑ｰ⋉ㄻ쇳삫↦Ⴍ⋉ₖ뻿뺑삂귢뀁ΐ짢봢ﾦƭ̡悑꒺킡肾냷꾀ꞧ杰삐凁憽솾뿿쓑둤땏뙟띯녵ꝑＰ탲ヱ澉羊澎羏辐龑鋿鎯钿闏雟韯駿騏？⾛࿌῍辋龌꾍翎迏탿�틯펿퓏헟훯�Ῑ㫛
썉㧣ꪁ�纐녢ꛐ관놑눐뀐漁짭䚐‟炧녤뮰Ｐ鈘䆦ν㖰瓅⋯⚩뷟띑놰ꣀ猀↮庼냿웁꙰쭀놢ꝱﭠべ䆨뽣꼠읁濤疷섘怡Ⴑ䃧臰쬱�？㿧俨忩濪翫迬鿭���ฏ?Ǐ˟㼒༅ἆ⼇㼈伉弊漋ಿﯭꥏꨵ渒�⏠㈸㜱⬑ꂣꠖ엿ꮱꙒ㭜ᤠ낰ꮡꯣ１횰芾鄺膭ㆰ햫냅检敩¨뇿秠ᘠ씀ꮑ瘐꫰輡䎫錄𢡊ᛟ疷㼣１뼎�뼓켔ᗿ㗟᧿ᨏᬟᰯᴿｏ弞漟꼍༶켲�漷㣿㥿㪏㮟㲯㶿㻏㿟㫢ꭌ偡ꁍ聐コ桰䓻丿㈤汹ｈ潕罖埿
墏妟媯宿峏巟廯濿འὡ⽢靵⥓븱熑痶凯슬긭갰䌀널ﾐꆼσ抽悭놽臰럻닢抰ꇽ텸禲芾盯쇰ꭳ柿뻱ꥀ쟠㽂ꎻ禲爧뽣䄤〲ⓥ㎜ᡣ灏煨憦臰呞큀潰牱㒜꒷䏉㼐疀芭큐쁧ꂺ⠠⤲끬彴罱牷暋날劰䄫炿낰ﵓ熭砬痏癯⾀〿㽏佣禷퇰Ńᆬ☩䨠慴䍨䈠D큀ｄ뇋끬ｯ潹罺셉ꁀ捰ꂹƨꝃ蘲齿�籶珱㞭痁畧냿淠⤰썠⨂ꈋꨳ瓰２돆䎫˃ꚯ䱕뾀臿䛏䤏䯿䰏䴟锯侯ｏ彐潑꼿뽀콁�ｄ雿詟撯拏響颿駏髟ﾛྜྷᾞ⾟㾠価徢澣ꐻ깿偤愢늾㩥뿿液栏踁뼆
돱觠Ⳁ䄩℩扪鉭빢ꝁ⽏嬥ㄢ䂼Ɔ虦䈁呫㘠急氹傰낒缱炾〧こŸ₫냀ꝵꄦ㘱䋁셰ﾒさ玹쾼�謹▼鉳迿邠맠錡鑯깿荟묕ｱ䆳�镩잃쾹Ⓞ澉睂낲䢄晡닽肎죱퉹땂淠啰Ꙍ꪿ﾯ뾫쾬�ﾯྱᾲ⾳듿딿뙏띟�헏꣏꿤㿗俘忙꿨翛远鿝��맾펀釓ʼ楬炐懂漟荰쮡晐➡㤰ⴸ㒒倧木酸湉勍玐箒柰椐傄琫㙤砶捠砩♤叒醑➠䌰턩Ⅸᙩ⫛獤邎湷슁ﮰ쀢䗸橥콠湿眒桲ﾑ鿉꿊濭ᖃᄨ灓쁻釿쁴ﺲ⧐茐遐Ꞥ肒畣냱汲ⱨ
횒㽳듷䀩《郿跠覰⧱⯑郑♐⦃｀灭Ⅾ㇓䀁ӻ䍩曽珁腼聓牬Ј芎灭⯽汐ᾓ뿥꿩뿪쿫ｏ念濶鼘꼓쿦�缢༕ᜟᠯᩏ᭟ᱯᵿ쾏鼞꼟뼠켡⁉쇂ⅼ⍯晰跡躣䎂聮䁫﵁愳湲歠赀醰㎰言ａ퀱瑳眶垄伤辇龈觿㪿譿盟ﾚ硐笰㧀ₒ⩍㏐漐缾ῆჽ夂뇂Ⰳ潃罄놑늍⿻沁晀ჿ撎僿恮৽戵k灭焑鑩㼃伄⮿荏萕㫢䝏㼳㛍ꥶ藿ဵ漂槠䉰朴䖑鋣ￇӸ뀽삍턍蘇凒澙捰汨㞴搃浯ﾀኹ鐍톑또惂넀넀什䣐큓ɼ뉬釓坘傄አ栱僱遦玁텫歓쀃몂췰蒁⹐！
鉨i畯퀲怯닀傄텫ࣿ먡釱h匀軑⽌㽍低ᖃ輁舎鉟㏿ᆰ鉠°དྷ毱밠란ꅋばﴰ䇲淿平瞁｠ऐ奆っ㺠缠熐歁ᱠ㐶懄顨깭ふﾠ慂滲ၛ數埐ၛ缭ⷀ烔ﹹੳབ㏳蹐徐姾｡炐逷Ǿ芹㉨ལὤ⽥莟引梒宄栐技m｠瀣㆐ᄐ逯큝ꄀ⍱慙촿酓蓕ﭐ醃䭴䛁⁁⁃䨵䜭Ｐ(��켧�Ｊ༬ⷿ⸟⼯〿ㅏ㉟㍯㑿ﾏ켢辀Ｅ༧ﾂ྄鏿號蜯蠿襏詟譯豿�龍ﷶꤹ˒쉲ী｀鍩拎゜ɗᄐ႒悼텉揾턆턈肻♽ｆ䢿쀏꜡㯟㱯ﹻ潲遳콿쥡㽽䁏潟緤ꕄ杁痾닍Ꟃ臁낔㗎콏�
凛勯䓷䇏탹桉ꕡ翩뽶콷엌ᄶ䍪䎳Ｓꇃ炗탹ヺ猶羴ﾫ笼칫呢寷郓ᅝ뺗㲞痾《ᦻ畊뉋旼浸币Ⴣ광迟䣆흠솔㫄稠櫳ǔ♽ࣿؠ叠ௐ폒㻀औ퉄㖣愑ၛ퍷垀枀￢㉬與䄀㾹侺徻쿃쑿ꓟa楁움骓泠ꫯ짍쪏뎙憵섽筐ꗒ퍥퐏씟齉䮰Ａ嗖苏ῗꃻ싍ꗯ㷡猲硂퀹ꆠ拣懼筤ୀ변嘁ქﻠ畧뻱꾟䂯辛避钏ｿ辕龖꾗뾘쾙�ﾜ黿鼏ꀟꄯ釿銟ﾯ뾓快濬翭쿼鿯꿰뿱㐏曬遨璿ॣࢰ㖠㚼췥爰䇿炠찕痰䬰㞲拓ꡏﯯ嵈䥶台돠洐︠干柁ྂ뽿
삯妼杀냎聁牴慳ꁙ｣六䁬⏇�繀㉶偛棷ᲀ塂檓㉱⼙漕笼ᣟᵄ䀿徜烒遨⋈䯿庣췁�텬퉏뱟ꔩﾒ끦ȥ녧Ⴙᑶ朜퉟_ở궟ጌ䆑늀简析Ｐト쾪鿜⫅䘘蕳翟迠쪿⯖ℯ䃯玛垐叠퀹欁㤠ⴸ㘶⠠曤㤩㐰瘩༔ဿｏ弑慛ꅊ郤瑧'强㼬㊯㔟㛏⏟獖ꖰ沐ｂ⽂弿歀톢톸璥燿ꈰ忡퀀㵀沱䨵群じ䁡쇎퀆༙ὃ�ｐ퀆腳鉘ᅙ劾潽텟伥⛿❟⡯셷庸価廑㠓劖븴⠠㥢㕡愹�嬩䰐䞟䁟䕫虳彘ョㄏ氚没䥵楐깡｠煉腧野ဘ덩퇇켲㏿哟䰅䶏ᮟ᰿瑉Ꙣﶰ〆칥ធ슔姯婏彟ｿꂥｒཔ뽜콝
뽠콡쫿楬搏⋟탼⸲笂偁�Æ鈠퀀뀍聛ቲ₠ﾑ届郎ٌ郎耽莥䅑ࡻꓰ挀㘘ဉ幭䩰ꗐ횐꓀护ၑｬ⍟燚郎놢ဉ瓍ã擐罌㿻䳼㊸鄪抾僤ሌꆥ킢１䉾ꐎ銥≅狇ꛂᨤ끾僷⩱穐攰芦ꈒ⽭㽮痿및빥핁ᷠᠳ⍅ⓟ￤瑼㐩ᖧ뀆ྂᾃ蓿履ﻟǿȏ？⼃㼄伅弆漇缈載鼊闿队鈯鏟霟颏馟ﾯﾨ쾛�ﾞྠᾡ⾢ꎻꐿ坊凚瀌ᱫﷰ퀒롨슑ឲ偒Ꭰ⇂ꉐᇛ絰숀작㖽䂪ꗙ慊ᑨ㬿畄쵶⌶䈩ザ³傰ｄゆ덉龼辧㮄콨�勶䇚쵃쌅皿⊏卐놱偖耽焤栎핉Ⱦ羳嗒瞷
»끿侊律귿赿륵�㵁僡ኤ�﨣酰皑脮醑ꞎꁐ순ዻ毁瓰뀹ྥᾦྪᾫ곿괯긿꽏끟녯뉿뎏ﾟ꾴뾵쾶�㿁係侩�������龿쿠�￣杁泿푡泲⩰⮑縀㥣ﾰꀋ聲솺䜍䄗쁧뀎偅栐펕䪡泐㸔車ផ쉐뀎邀ꅉ⥌⸠삁ffꀎ偖㵰釃褦ሲ풅ＵᲒ濏翐Ὺ㿬俭ӿￏ�ῥ㿧俨忩伆弇ࡿ९ஏಟද䳁춝偁瀜借•桰༓㏴ᾒ７漤缥輦⟿⢟⦯⪿⯏ⳟⷯ⿿／ἰ⼱晦䁼䂇Q뇆툽ⷾ쌹⪉푞ꅉ輲쿄齚嗿샳䤀当㣁젟䓿蹌ﻴﵢ䨡簂紟踢膅倲ﾢ熁選灐臽⎇
뇸톹绿迣竁翩覀䥐蝐례Ｒ뀳W烋삉䁨恉恿Ə맻孤㭵늸ခ킑䇹冉ᗳ倐搠ĬϿ㈏负ｵ㼼⼹⭫ジꃽ獨뙕ᆁ䃿﹑㯡샂輡∁䍁䢁ￍ༽Ἶᆉ닍ź惻ｖ͘囿㘐禇䡰醰쬃䘴뤒ﾁ㽒齍⭫뛍彙体ೊƏ峿嫏孯偿彃巿쫟倌↑偢㿉ｉཋἕ᧿ᨏᬟᰯᴿṏὟｿ輡鼢ｪ�轶彬淿湯潿炏熟犯玿瓏礟穯虿蟯觿／ᾊ⾋㾌侍徎澏羐辑鋷鎟쪯䚄»遾灆휵长봏뺯ﮗ顤髿㜂憽㉜梔끁烼䑮ﾁ蓽ཡꭎ敁作ཤὥ쫿䂓䇐䇐춲꒨ꆿ仯嶺�甼⮅惎饩痌䗿푐䒲챇䑤ﭓ튰䙐뽁ꀏ汣႟䅼�衽蘠
ﮟ뾥뭉䟑ﳐ墑ﭠၖ쀳ቀ툐䡑쩁뿣닒狽ꇋ能ﭬﾳ뇒뽧콨徫엑횰룍郻䛿퉀ﲔ﹐aﶱﮐ첐ﵬ䇁擡쭯䖡㝲調ᩄ諀쭍䕑둰鵿ඟ뛍၀う큏䋺ꏒ躿⣼噳䚰팴ﳂ꽡éｅ䗕玸灖쁅䂂㿆雿鐟뱏봿癏矟篯糟ｽཿᾀ⾁㾂－༏ἐᇿሯ蔿핟훏퇟툏ﾯ㿘俙忚꿩翜违鿞꿟埼䅠毐项꼀念蒡ｑ썃퉁烨ㇼ鍦ˁǁ嗿ꁱＣQŠ㔅ￖ�꿦鿪꿫뿬쿭�џ／뿧쿨缀輁鼂ӿֿۏߟ࣯૿ଏట㸍쁗₡ṫ㝰᳐⇽ꀵ쁄㼎伏㼓伔ᗿᙟ
ᝯᦏᮯᲿￏ�？弢漣弐漑缒⓿●⛟㛯⤿⨏⬟Ⱟ弿伭弮漯缰許奃爐뇩₡㩈瑀䁀�ἳ㟿㠏㤟㨯㬿㱏㵟㹯㽿輿齀꽁뽂콃쉋㤳㤲聅汯⁓ツ潒懼䙤䜏䠟䤯䨿䭏｟潌罍轎齏꽐뽑콒�哝䏯ý膜₯녡葐튠鱬䙀롌㊰႟⅛埿堏够娯嬿屏嵟幯ｿ轟齠꽡뽢콣�๕낵†㠷ⴳ選㜶棿楟橯歿沏涟溯澿ￏ�ｲུή⽶㽷쾫懨栠ヽ葦鱁礐ސ⁺ꑅ捀汦牲挮킆貇ႠჂ搞犀邋₺筴H偙剅䥌䭎羊見絽ろ祳岐肋괱辬蘿�⾳愶羓渶ꎲ穡神ｺོώ⽾㽿侀征澂菿葿薏蚟螯㚿顯㐯＿伵
ﾦ辙龚꾛ﾪ쾝�놩ㅫ꠰⼡₺ꕶ侕쾱ྠᾡ⾢㾣侤徥ꝯꦏꪟꮯ겿귏ﾯྱ⾶㾷侸徹澺묧뱿욏䙶쭬楰ᝤƊ샹朠祡戠爆녖郼扵楬ᝣ⇽ᄢ쨠矐䇮苑쇺炑杴퇀㛰텷츐斠聖畭ﱽ挰샼냊ヽ샼띥ꃺ凹덥훰扱ﯭ䎂အ셯晠�鴑ﱣ텡嬨斑ﱭ梠祯䕥睡胼꽢惺耡샹蹶懑郒旾䯈¿㓉柅馑ⷜ烉ﯟ퉕冀쎁즀浠烖惼冀ﷱﴡ枣햰䖀㝑灅郎郻�﯀攡畸⇚퍴喐無惉�烓끧⃚톎샹遤�慅០郓셉怒拓ﭤ湠郎냔샸탼菹ﴛ찡쨐훠칱祖誻ﴀ瓒툭�쳲ﰐ
瑣⃒釕ץ叻úლ흐贱훑摀䰢ￜ��謙慐샭郖ꇹ�暑흠灡﹨切怒䇪싔僎빧뼏쌟쐏？⿅㿆俇忈濉翊迋鿌췿캯쾿탏퇟틯퓿픏？㿗俘忙濚翛述鿱�？㿨俩忪濫翬迭鿮ኯጯ？⿸㿹俺忻濼翽迾侳듿땟㑯ＯÏӕۿ？⼈㼉伊弋漌缍輎鼏ჿ⒭ᔄᚏសᆯ⚏㚟똔�：༜Ἕ⼞㼟⅏≟⍯⑿䂏⥱⩟ｯ猫ཋὌ⽍缬輭鼮꼯ヿㆿ㋏㟟㧿㨏㬟㰯＿伽弾漿罀轁齂꽃뽄䗿䛏䟟䣯䫿帏弟是＿低彏潐网轒齓꽔뽕囿埏壟姯寿小崟笯ｼཾ潡罢轣齤꽥
뽦柿棏槟櫯泿洏渟漯＿佰影潲罳轴齵꽶뽷磿秏竟軯郿縏缟耯＿侁徂澃羄辅龆꾇뾈觿諏诟賯軿갏귏釟＿侒従澔羕辖龗꾘뾙髿鯏鳟鷯鿿ꀏꄟꈯ＿侣徤澥羦辧龨꾩뾪뿏샟껯냿넏눟댯＿侴徵澶羷辸龹꾺뾻볿뷏뻟��슿쌟쐯＿俅忆ῲ翈迉鿊꿋뿌췿컏쿟탯틿팏퐟픯＿俖志濘翙迚鿛꿜뿰�＿俧忨濩翪迫鿬꿭뿮ྏ＿Ｂ忹濺翻迼鿽꿾뿿ÿǏ˟ϯ؏ܟ＿伉弊漋缌輍鼡꼢뼐ᇿዏᏟᓯᜏ＿会弛漜缝輞鼟꼠漿䃿⍿ⓟ◯⟿⠏⤟⨯匿伫敔
〱㰯癐圹厸峼Ⱖ⸛⽏たｯ缱輲鼳꼴뼵켶�㧿㯿㰏㴟㸯氲䈀振１网轒～ꕁ罃轄齅꽆䟿䢿䧏䫟䯯䷿丏伟Ｏ㽐佑ｳࡵ⭚歟㖄嘸扱摯啹뭞㽜ꉔ嘷塱宂細