Loading...
PC RES 2007-029P.C. RESOLUTION NO. 2007-29 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPT A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION MAKING CERTAIN ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS IN ASSOCIATION WITH AN ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONALLY APPROVE CASE NO. ZON2005-00536, OTHERWISE KNOWN AS GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT, ZONE CHANGE, COASTAL SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT, VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 67532, COASTAL PERMIT, VARIANCE, AND GRADING PERMIT TO ALLOW THE FOLLOWING: LAND USE CHANGE FROM COMMERCIAL RECREATIONAL (CR) TO SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL, TWO -TO - FOUR DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE; ZONE CHANGE FROM CR TO RS - 4; LAND DIVISION OF A 1.42 -ACRE LOT INTO FIVE SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL LOTS WITH NONCONFORMING LOT DEPTHS RANGING FROM 91' TO 93'; ALLOW GRADING PROPOSED TO ACCOMMODATE THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE PROPOSED RESIDENCES ON LOTS 1 AND 2;, ON AN EXISTING VACANT LOT LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF NANTASKET DRIVE, BE EEN BEACHVIEW DRIVE AND SEACOVE DRIVE. WHEREAS, on July 11, 2005, Dana Ireland, the Applicant, submitted a General Plan Amendment Initiation Request application, also known as Case No. ZON2005-00359, proposing to amend the General Plan Land Use Designation and Coastal Specific Plan Land Use Designation to change the zoning on the subject site from the existing Commercial Recreational (CR) to Single -Family Residential, two -to -four dwelling units per acre (RS -4); and, WHEREAS, on August 10, 2005, the subject GPAIR application, Case No. ZON2005-00359, was deemed complete by Staff upon submittal of the required information; and, WHEREAS, on October 4, 2005, the subject GPAIR application was presented to the City Council, at which time, the City Council opined that changing the subject site's General Plan's Land Use Designation from CR to RS -4 may be conducive to making the use of the subject site more consistent with the adjoining Single and Multi -Family residential areas in keeping within the vision of the City's founders. The City Council moved to allow the applicant to proceed with the General Plan Amendment process by a vote of 4-0 (Councilman Clark recused himself); and, WHEREAS, on October 13, 2005, the Applicant submitted applications for General Plan Amendment, Zone Change, Coastal Specific Plan Amendment, Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 67532, Coastal Permit, Variance, and Environmental Assessment to change the land use from Commercial Recreational (CR) to Single -Family Residential, two -to -four dwelling units per acre (RS -4), to change the zoning on the subject site from CR to RS -4, and divide the site into five single-family residential lots, henceforth known as Case No. ZON2005-00536; and, WHEREAS, on November 11, 2005, November 30, 2005, and March 21, 2006, the applications submitted for Case No. ZON2005-00536 were deemed incomplete pending the submittal of additional information; and, WHEREAS, on March 23, 2006, the Applicant expressed his intent to submit plans for five single-family residences on the five proposed lot division of the subject site, to be processed in conjunction with Case No. ZON2005-00536. The applications submitted are a Grading Permit application to be a part of Case No. ZON2005-00536, and Height Variation applications Case Nos. ZON2005-00178-182 for each of the five proposed lots; and, WHEREAS, on April 3, 2006 and May 3, 2006, the applications submitted for ZON2005-00536 and ZON2005-00178-182 were deemed incomplete pending the submittal of additional information; and, WHEREAS, on August 23, 2006, after the submittal of all required material and the verification of silhouette construction and certification for the five proposed residences, the applications were deemed to be complete for processing; and, WHEREAS, pursuant to the provision of the California Environmental Quality Act, Public Resources Code Section 21000 et.seq. ("CEQA"), the State's CEQA Guidelines, California Code of Regulation, Title 14, Section 15000 et.seq., the City's Local CEQA Guidelines, and Government Code Section 65962.5(F)(Hazardous Waste and Substances Statement), the City of Rancho Palos Verdes prepared an Initial Study and determined that, by incorporating mitigation measures into the Negative Declaration, there is no substantial evidence that the approval of Case No. ZON2005-00536, otherwise known as General Plan Amendment, Zone Change, Coastal Specific Plan Amendment, Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 67532, Coastal Permit, Variance, Grading, and ZON2006-00178-182, otherwise known as Height Variation applications for the five single-family residences proposed on Lots 1 through 5, would result in a significant adverse effect on the environment. Accordingly, a Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared and notice of that fact was given in the manner required by law; and, WHEREAS, the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Initial Study were prepared on August 23, 2006 and circulated for public review between August 23, 2006 and September 25, 2006; and, WHEREAS, in accordance with the requirements of the CEQA, a Mitigation Monitoring program has been prepared, and is attached to the Environmental Assessment and Resolution as Exhibit "A"; and, WHEREAS, after issuing notices pursuant to the requirements of the Rancho Palos Verdes Development Code and the State CEQA Guidelines, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing on September 26, 2006, at which time the Planning P.C. Resolution No 2007-29 Page 2 of 7 Commission approved Staff's request to: review and provide comment on the proposed General Plan Amendment, Zone Change, Coastal Specific Plan Amendment, Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 67532, Coastal Permit, Variance, and the Environmental Assessment; continue the public hearing meeting to November 14, 2006 to review the Grading and Height Variation applications for the proposed five residences, since Staff was not able to conduct view analyses of the proposed project, which is a required component of Grading and Height Variation applications; receive any public testimony and prepare responses to comments received after the date the September 26, 2006 staff report was prepared; and, WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on November 14, 2006, at which time all interested parties were given an opportunity to be heard and present evidence. At said meeting, the Planning Commission directed Staff to: refine the Neighborhood Compatibility Analysis by including the adjacent multi -family residential development, which was rezoned after the city incorporation to RS -4 (the Villas Apartments), and five single-family residences along Sea Cove Drive in the RS -1 zoning district (one dwelling unit per acre); provide information on the applicable "by -right" height on the subject site, be it Commercial Recreational "by -right" height or a Single -Family Residential "by -right" height; and, confirm whether any of the proposed lots are "sloping" or "pad" lots. The Planning Commission directed the Applicant to mark on each silhouette pole where the 16' -high by -right height mark is, and continued the public hearing to January 9, 2007 to allow Staff and the applicant to present these findings; and, WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on January 9, 2007 meeting, at which time all interested parties were given an opportunity to be heard and present evidence. At that time the Applicant provided certified slope analysis performed by the Applicant's engineer, Bolton Engineering Corporation, to demonstrate that the buildable area on Lots 1, 2, and 3 contain a slope greater 5%, but less than 35%, thereby establishing these lots as sloping lots entitled to 16'/30' building height envelope in the event the proposed land use change from CR to RS -4 is approved. Consequently, since the heights proposed for residences on Lots 1 and 2 are within the 16'/30' building height envelope, approval of a Height Variation application for the residences proposed on Lots 1 and 2 is no longer necessary. Therefore, Case No. ZON2006-00178 and 179 (Height Variation applications) have been omitted from the application packet (consisting of Case No. ZON2005-00536 and Case Nos. ZON2005-00178-182), and the proposed residences on Lots 1 and 2 were included to be a part of Case No. ZON2005-00536 as Site Plan Review applications. At the same meeting, the Planning Commission directed Staff to solicit the City Attorney's determination on the appropriateness of revising the Neighborhood Compatibility analysis to include the eight Villas Apartment structures in the RS -4 zoning district and five single-family residences along Seacove Drive in a RS -1 zoning district. Further, the Planning Commission instructed the Applicant to reconstruct the collapsed silhouettes of the proposed residences on Lots 3, 4, and 5 to ensure Staff may conduct adequate view analyses from the viewing area of 6619 Beachview Drive. The Planning Commission continued the public hearing to March 13, 2007 to allow Staff and the Applicant an opportunity to address the Commission's instructions; and, P.C. Resolution No. 2007-29 Page 3 of 7 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing on March 13, 2007 at which time all interested parties were given opportunities to be heard and present evidence; and NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES DOES HEREBY FIND, DETERMINE, AND RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT Sectionl: The subject applications would permit the land use change from Commercial Recreational (CR) to Single -Family Residential, 2 -to -4 dwelling units per acre (RS -4), and zone change from CR to RS -4, the division of the existing 1.42 -acre site to five single-family residential lots, and the construction of five two-story single-family residences. The Planning Commission finds that the proposed project is consistent with the General Plan and the City's Coastal Specific Plan, and would not result in significant adverse environmental impacts. In making this finding, the Planning Commission considered the project's mitigation measures that address the issues of Aesthetics, Air Quality, Cultural Resources, Hydrology and Water Quality, Public Services, Transportation/Traffic, and Utilities and Service Systems. Section 2: That the land use change, the creation of five single-family residential lots, and the construction of five two-story single-family residences is consistent with the type of land use and density identified in the City's General Plan, Single -Family Residential, 2 -to -4 dwelling units per acre; and, as conditioned, is consistent with the City's Development Code for projects within the RS -4 zoning district, and will not significantly impact the required land use. Section 3: The proposed project will result in land use change from CR to RS -4, the division of five single-family residential lots, and the construction of five two-story single- family residences, when permitted and developed, will not alter the location, distribution, density, or growth rate of the human population in the area above what is forecast in adopted City plans and policies, nor will the proposed project affect existing housing, or create a demand for additional housing beyond what is proposed. The project will not create a significant additional demand for fire or police protection, or other governmental services. Section 4: The land use change, the division of five single-family residential lots, and the construction of five two-story residences will not unreasonably interfere with the free and complete exercise of the public entity and/or public utility rights-of-way and/or easements within the tract; and that the dedications required by local ordinance are shown on the Tentative Tract Map and/or are set forth in the attached conditions of approval. Section 5: That the discharge of sewage from this land use change, the division of land to five single-family residential lots, and the construction of five single-family residences into the public sewer system will not violate the requirements of the California Regional Quality Control Board. P.C. Resolution No, 2007-29 Page 4 of 7 Section 6: The project requires 4,007 cubic yards of associated grading to prepare the site for residential development. As such, the Planning Commission finds that the proposed project will not result in significant adverse effects to topography; destruction, covering, or modification of unique geologic or physical features; impacts to archeological or paleontological resources; or expose persons to seismic ground failure, landslides, or other known hazards; affect any plant or animal species or result in the removal of any sensitive Plant Life or Animal Life; or create a wasteful or inefficient use of the energy already being consumed on the site. Although on-site grading is proposed, a Geotechnical Report addressing the scope of the project grading has been conceptually approved by the City's Geotechnical Engineer in the Planning Stage, further reports will be required to be reviewed and approved by the City's Building Official and the City's Geotechnical Consultant prior to issuance of grading or building permits. Furthermore, the Geotechnical Report shall provide the developer with applicable conditions for which the project shall be constructed, along with other conditions that the City's Building Official and the City's Geotechnical Consultant find necessary to ensure the project is constructed in a manner that does not jeopardize the public's health, safety, and welfare. As such, the mitigation measures will ensure that the proposed project will not cause any significant geological impacts or other significant adverse impacts to the environment. Section 7: The proposed project will not change the current, the course or the direction of water movements in either marine or fresh waters, since the project site is not located in such a setting. A proposed drainage plan shall be submitted to the City for review and approval pertaining to the implementation of mitigation measures that address potential impacts to water patterns. Furthermore, in compliance with the Federal Clean Water Act, an Urban Stormwater Mitigation Plan shall be submitted to the City for review and approval prior to the issuance of grading and building permits, as it pertains to implementation strategies that reduce stormwater runoff. As such, the Planning Commission finds that such conditions will ensure that water patterns will not significantly impact the surrounding environment. Section 8: That the proposed land division into five lots will not generate traffic volumes that create substantial impacts to circulation patterns, parking capacity, or traffic congestion, as discussed in the Initial Study. Section 9: Although the construction of the proposed project is anticipated to generate noise levels uncommon to the surrounding environment, such noise will be temporary in nature and that the City has imposed conditions, in accordance with the City of Rancho Palos Verdes Municipal Code, that limits construction between the hours of 7:00 AM and 7:00 PM, Mondays through Saturdays, with no construction permitted on Sundays and legal holidays (as identified in the Municipal Code). Furthermore, mitigation measures require that all construction equipment engines be equipped with standard noise insulating features and are tuned to the manufacturers' recommendations. As such, the Planning Commission finds that the mitigation measures imposed will ensure that noise levels do not adversely impact surrounding properties. RC. Resolution No, 2007-29 Page 5 of 7 Section 10: In regards to aesthetics, the City's Development Code requires new residential construction to be developed in a manner that is consistent with the surrounding neighborhood, as it pertains to size, mass and bulk, architectural style and front yard setbacks, in order to preserve the character of established neighborhoods. As such, mitigation measures require that the design of the residences be reviewed under the City's "Neighborhood Compatibility" analysis. As proposed, the project will not affect a scenic highway in that the proposed heights of the residences conform to the height restriction set forth in the Coastal Specific Plan or cause any other significant adverse impact to the environment. Section 11: Grading of the site may cause some impacts to air quality as a result of air -borne dust particles. However, to ensure that there will be no significant impacts, mitigation measures have been added that require the applicant to take specific actions to control air -borne dust particles. Section 12: For reasons discussed in the Initial Study, which is incorporated herein by reference, the proposed project will not have any potential to achieve short-term, to the disadvantage of long-term, environmental goals, nor would the project have impacts which are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable. Section 13: The applicant has consulted the lists prepared pursuant to Section 65962.5 of the Government Code and has submitted a signed statement indicating whether the project and any alternatives are located on a site which is included on any such list, and has specified any such list. The Lead Agency has consulted the lists compiled pursuant to Section 65962.5 of the Government Code, and has certified that the development project and any alternatives proposed in this application are not included in these lists of known Hazardous Waste and Substances Sites as compiled by the California Environmental Protection Agency. Section 14: The mitigation measures set forth in the Mitigation Monitoring Program, Exhibit "A", attached hereto, are incorporated into the scope of the proposed project. These measures will reduce potential significant impacts identified in the Initial Study to a less than significant level. Section 15: For the foregoing reasons and based on its independent review and evaluation of the information and findings contained in the Initial Study, Staff Reports, Minutes, and records of the proceedings, the Planning Commission has independently reviewed the initial study and negative declaration and determined that they were prepared in accordance with the provisions of CEQA and has determined that the project as conditioned and mitigated will not result in a significant adverse impact on the environment and therefore recommends that the City Council adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration making certain environmental findings in association with Environment Assessment to allow the Genera! Plan and Coastal Specific Plan land use change from Commercial Recreational (CR) to Single -Family Residential, two -to -four dwelling units per acre, zone change from CR to RS -4, the division of the existing 1.42 -acre site to five (5) single-family residential lots at a minimum lot area of 10,000 square feet within the RS -4 zoning district in P.C. Resolution No. 2007-29 Page 6 of 7 the Coastal Zone, a variance to allow for nonconforming lot depths ranging from 91' to 93', which do not meet the minimum 100' depth requirement, and grading to accommodate the construction of the proposed residences on Lots 1 and 2, and deny without prejudice the grading proposed for the residences on Lots 3, 4, and 5, and the Height Variation application to construct two-story single-family residences on Lots 3, 4, and 5, subject to the Mitigation Monitoring Program contained in Exhibit "A" and the Conditions of Approval contained in Exhibit "B" attached hereto and made a part hereof, which are necessary to protect the public health, safety, and welfare. Section 16: Any interested person aggrieved by this decision or by any portion of this decision may appeal to the City Council. Pursuant to Section 17.80 of the Rancho Palos Verdes Municipal Code, any such appeal must be filed with the City, in writing stating the grounds of the appeal and with the appropriate appeal fee, no later than 5:30 P.M. on May 9th, 2007. PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this 24th day of April 2007, by the following vote: AYES: Commissioners Knight„ Lewis, Ruttenberg, Tetreault, Vice Chair Perestam, Chair Gerstner NOES: None ABSTENTIONS: None ABSENT: Commissioner Karp Joel 0j3S, Alf Dire tor of PI.n' ing, Building and Cod Erforcement, and, Secretary to the 9anning Commission Bill Gerstner Planning Commission Chairman P.C. Resolution No, 2007= 29 Page 7 of 7 aCD . I ir) o u_ CT, z w o 0. N 0 < z ,—uJ 0 4 < 0 C.) C.) r:4 „ a. z u) z N t- 0 z w z z < 0 a 11J Lr) Q<CD z C:j 1— < ;.• z LU (.9 w 1—> Iz- XWf la z w • W < Z —1 ▪ C° 111 Z LU • z z U.1 O • 2 5z ZW LU p 0 2 1 -c' c • 0 0 cp 0 — E.... , c 0. 0 00 0 -a ct E .ff 2 a. a. "5 Z, 5 E 03 E 0. o)t) a)co8---- c cp*E0 LIJ -c) a) c c co E oW1. t; 0)i o 0 w co c -5 0 a) a) ..- —c -5 g 0 . 0. 0 0 a) 0. 0 0.. lf 2 "ff 2 ff 2 a. a_ 0_ a. a_ a- 0 0 a) as m ci)c co 0 cn _- .0 o 0 o = To ."c- wo) 0 0-) i- V) LEE • - ,_ c o.c) - c o o) ..- `5 2 2 0 7 • a ,_ a) 0 rao ca• 0 o 0 a_ o) o _ o) a) -.c.5 a) co 10 co_2 2 -c 4-E.o • a) • 0 U.) IC"' -• § > Ch Z 0 ▪ • Z 0.01Ti 00 (132 2 co co &,3 (0 w 0 = 0 a) •0 C4-• 0 CI) 0.) r) 5 _c C) .- a) • 46 c° c.) Ta a .4 tn ce E t) a _c.) -a cep O -7•_•-- o a) (I) 't o z, PT .2 .:7) 0Q) To E .:E.-- 8 0. 0- - a E >-. -5 .c ,.......> „..c 0- 2 0 0 a) - ...- co 0 3 oEu 2 : , -0 1 - a) c =_co2E ...E 0 co 5 c •G • a 4c2 8 ti .- ,,,, an z cw.g ,..8 ,-=. 0 c ::_. '15 -c -G 0 • cu :E 12 o 0 co R E Th -I-1 fo -,..,52 -4 1-3 hi "c2I • ,, = .c a) f on 0 .,.- < -... 0 1- 2 a) To 0-(1)""E Ts3 0 8 c)- o .c cv, -0 -o 2 •ui 0.>, 0 Cr; CL()8 21 7. :ci 1 'I 15 > a) 0 2 76 .5 Ir.-. - • o .1= 0 4- • (0 co To- ui- E CO 17 M c CV- 2 Zo o co -1--, c 1= C • 04 0 a o a) • •—• 8 To •- -o ci- - C $2 c 0 Z-. 0 -C) '-o= 0 - ' - 0 '45 7.3 tv 0 ,... a) cr) = .4- = 4= -5 0 C” .0 C CO 2**) 0 ..E3 1- (r) "" W • -.• 't • — cn u 0 CD c -C ..c/)EQ • cu c > o a) cn ci) ..c •--, .1.1 E c_ a) 0 _c 7, '5 'di o 0 r 0) 0 0) To a 0 0 0)2 1 - en co 0 1 No mitigation is required co 0 0 74. 0 YA, .9 .45 0 9 • .0 4-• •-•• -•"" 0 0 0 0 0 ?) 0 --•• 0 0 00001 • •-•• 5 (r) 0 ti) c6 0) . e 0) co 0 06 0 0 0 0 •—c. • C -o c. 0) ) • (15 CV° Ca. a) (te 0) 0 e 0 co •T1). 0•1:0- 0) •-5, 0 0 -0 -0 le, 0) 1!) 8 ?) 15)9- (11 .S (./c.).1?a•S`n e 3 0 o o 4.6 • u 0 0) 0 0 Zo 0 0- 0 a.. 0 V - 0 0 0 0 0. 0 0 ca '2 0 0) a) 0 •0 0 00. 0 (2. G. a - o lb - 7. 3 0 o .92,*5 ▪ o 4-- • .0 co e 0 0 c •c :in co c -ia• 0 -0 • ccz `10) 0) cia- 0,••• e • ... „., .01),..0•>ece. o 0 0 • t•-• IS. 0 0 z '2 e a) o u•-• To 'e o E t• e-f8,24 1-13 0 0 CO 0 0.CO 3 co 't fi) ,9- 0 0 0 5 0 • a. 0 o 0 0 s cis .c 5* (e) tn ..„.c., ...• ,n 0 -6,0 ,, to 0 • In 0 ty. t) 'i) td)- 60-) ... .0 .., .0 -0 ...., 7 0, w 0 0 U)n 0 cla o • ,- -c, ow) tc- i ?, to. ?1, 5 co in ..c 9- ..-:-.-- o ..c o 0 N. 0 R. -IIS 0 c o o , 0 ..F., -o o Efin co o -6 e c0 o0 to .5- 0• .cooc9-•-•0 c•..., 0 .--.0..-x-•00. •z0 co 0 oz50 ouj.-S u6 0 ° rn e S S in 0 -0 0 in 0 -0 0) 0 0 CO 0- ID „et ;12 O2 ..... u-/., ci 0 ,-- 0 0 0 — t — ti) CI) tn I'a Z 3 •-- '7- • 1V-0 '5 51V -0.O `“), t 0 %-..-; 2-S (1 0 0 as (NI 06 6 0. *6 %. 0 0 C a) a ta o 3 4. Z V. sa o 0 z. 1•4 0 A., --7- -1 ' t) ..Z. ..... ° 0) •C- la --0..• (E)r) 0 in .6), di En En 0 .... 0 1 ••• •• 0 0 tn 0 0 ..0 ., , 2.,,) o- 'f), S -15 S ;...• -5 11) (I) te, tO c +.- ci) co ..0 • •6 % 3 0 . 3 6 -•-• 0 • 16- ..0 11. C. O 9, co 3. --3 0 S S ,c) .7.... 0 .-.C. u.1 u) Z. L.... 3 ciS ...... 0 , 15 • ct e .7.... .7-• 0 0 '715- -0 0 -6, 0 ,--,-... 0 0 s co,. .(1-5 a) o- 004 - -.0 ':-••• o31 JD 0 • -:-.. % 3 --a 0 .7. u., .90 •:_—_ 0 is. 0 a 7, 0 ••••-• • t. 6 1-•)) a) sa - p.,, o 4 O 11) ";•.. 5.... e c , .., :0 .... .... 0) 0. s) 0 co c4 V— n V© V' N V Z W a a_ N cc QLuN O— LU gZLLij CD Qa CL EL W 0`n ZNO IYF.:U OZa �WZ OQ CV Z W a<w Z izaa I I-. W g•« Z _ 1-> Z W N CO QZ (r) 111 w Z> Z W 0o 5Z Z W W M Q 40 cuTS 43) LL E eDE Cr) O N 15 c O d m '0) N 0) 0 Lu 0 IL >, Z CL 0 0 0 0 -45N a) CCC coa coa o_d 0`2 _Q_ a) CD o N Z o os) 0E O O 0 •c fn d Q a) p) o m"= -O w C cu a .m O) N o c92 co c co'° ° CO 0 O,c •.al, co w Oc e o ° 0 c o E v Nog _N.c cY _� _•0 (,� •o; -c � °c =°>, eo n = •- 1- a' rn L' 3 cn v a) •-0 m a' a co a c °- E ° c maico>, -a`)co'sa)a)c0o•„ coom .2�m°.o`- cn )— O co a='®. o , cn O Nr a0 a)cn'U c c) - ,. �o o cn oo c co ,, _ a) .2 R a •O W O O > L7 1 -mo -EZ -c 75 U O O 5 g a g d 2 -Y c U> g E cmN 0 0=m E E rncn s c w° Qo..�_(I) �,� '- c2---4.1.5.=.cE�ocoz�o Qc,-. 0 cn OcEooc�.w-5.c �. �° >v� i0 Z -E a) c`)cam°CD4'.p5. °o �$'X(n°>,°w•� v'E Na) a) � = a) m a) L cdU a.2= >,c ° 0,coc 0cn a) a) w cco aom5 0 oo) 0) w a'.,. E= a 2 i z W m o N cc la ° b.-' LO O fo Z o = O -c v-. �° 2 "=+ >, L '5 a) a ~a' E av' CD o c 40 o o m w Q ax' o�c w 0 m° a' a):e c o o m o c m o.° c m a c aoi oa`) °"" g m g 8 07S -c o° ' N mo o.° O o -t ate,, i a,m w� c. ° .. N acid c- c 0 m U coo caa ti o.. .,_, c o m - , .„ •- o w co M P •- co 2 ... ? c a) CD^S ca a) _c ac) c°' ° Esq c a c cc cwyrii c-°� �' a'• c' cU,E ° a m ° a) w 3 .i.,n"�q)a'.v'_V.o �'o 000?5°a),-A,E�m o-a)o ' ,� V a�2u' N v' oer a o� rna)0 a) b c cw oa) 0°vcoo Ecf) .- ° o -° o,_ ac ° .o a'c(•-�> ' m L a'o_v' o E� a> c E L° c `b y � mc wO > 0 co Q co ooa)y m o cn 2.O -CE ' c.oc c U c O m °J2NNO2aOOV p .L2 =�a0°°Ec o aa.c oE=N mo0c a °0 c0)0) cCLo° ca°c MmOiOM a0.o252ca.QI0OUScoVQ'ccarn Wt. 2Z 0) a) cm 2 w 5 oj 0 0 _ _ 2 2 a) O 22 Z12) 0 0- 0 `� z a. N No a oo 01 CD E d 0 �e cc 0 4 o r 1 02; w N 0) R 0) Z7 0 oS