Loading...
Minutes-PC 1995/10/30SUMMARY/ACTION AGENDA REGULAR MEETING OF THE ANAHEIM' CITY PLANNING COMMISSION ~., MONDAY,v~;TOBER 30, 1985 11:00 A.M. - PRELJMINARY PU4N REVIEW 1:30 P.M. - PUBLIC HEARINGS BEGIN (PUBLIC TESTIMON~'j BpYDS7UN, BRl$TOt, ;~TR~Iq~GE7~ IiAAYER, • PERN7J~ coMMtssloN~ ~~~~ ABSENT; NUPIE STAFF PRESENT. Selma Mann Deputy City Attorney Greg Hastings Zoning Division Manager Jonathan Borrego Senior Planner Sean Gerber Associate Planner Bruce Freeman lode ~~ra~nsportaU ~~~ner Altred Yalda Prindp Melanie Adams Associate Civil Engineer Margarita Sotorio Senior Secretary orator Qly Fernandes Senior Word Processing OP ~~ (;pMMlra^~ION PUBLJC HFIIRINGS pppCEDURE TO E7if'EDRE t, The proponents in applications which are not contested will hsve flue minutes to presentlheir evidence. Additional ti;ne will be granted upon request if, in the opinion of the Commission, such additional time will produce evidence important is the Commission's consideration. IicaUons, the proponents and opponent will each be given ter. minutes to present their case unless p, In contested app addtional dme the length of time a parUdpan speaks, but ather~tay~whet is said• mi~on's conaido-:atlone are not determined by ('ppies are available to 3 Staff Reports are part of the ee~idence deemed received by the Commission in each hearing. the public prior to the meeting. q, The Commission will withhold questions until the public hearing is dosed. 5 The Commission reserves the right to deviate from the foregoing it, in its opinion, the ends of fairness to ell concerned will be served. g, All documents presented to the Planting Commission for review in connectio~dence, shall dbeflretainadnbY ~e photographs or other acceptable visual representations or non~ocumeMa<Yns Commission for the public record and shall be available for public lnspecti ~ on items of interest which are ~. At the end of rile scheduled hearings, members of the public will be allowed to ape or agenda trams. Each speaker will be allotted a maximum of within the jurisdiction of the Planning Commission. and/ five (5) minutes to speak. MI951030.WP -1- OCTOBER 30, 1995 ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION - ACTION AGENDA ~~~ 1, REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS: rONDI'flONAL USE PERMIT NO 355 -REQUEST FOR Terminated A. TERMINATION: David S. Collins requests for a termination of Conditional Use Permit No. 3555 (to permit a recreation vehicle and boat storage facility with waiver of parkin areasrad oin g into ftont setback areas and isg~ to nali~ Pa1514 West BroadwaY• residential zones). Property TERMINATION RESOLUTION N0. pCAS-138 rONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO 3~8 - REQUEST FOR Determined that B. revised plans are ~r raSTANTIAL CO..FORMANCE DETERMINATION. John in substantial con- Schroeder, 1440 S. Anaheim Blvd., Anaheim, CA 92804, requests a substantial conformance determination for Conditional (o~ PP ~h~prev- Use Permit No. 3688 (to permit a private outdoor roller hockey exhibfts rink in cols located at 1440 South Alnaiheim BNd eet facility). Property ~ Mat Etchison, Manager of Sports Promotions, Anaheim Indoor Market Place. fie indicated there -~ are two corrections to be made in the staff report, as follows: 1. Item 13, reads `five (5) feet from the east property line" and ft should read "five (5) feet from the north property 11ne"; and 2. Item 15, second paragraph, reads'four (4) foot high scaffolding supports along the 220 foot length" and it should read 'ten (10) foot high scaffolding supports along the 220 foot length. " Commissioner Masse stated it would also change the Recommendation language, Item 17b. oncert d11d cause^some omplaints.eHe stated that he is awareEheyido not presently haveua~l c P.A. system. Commissioner Peraza asked ff they will have a P.A. system. Mr. Etchison said ff theo dlowould one, ft would be very small, which would face towards the northerxl of tho property be attached to the end of the building and be projecting towards the rink, in a northerly fashion. -2- ~.....,T.. o~ eNIJ~W[; COMMISSION - ACTION AGENDA OCTOBER 30, 1995 AryAnGm v~ ~ . ~ ••••••....-. - - GONDITIONAr rrsF PERMIT NO 2992 - INITIATiO~E C. C`N PROCEEDINGS: City- ODIFICAT Initiated revocation or modffication ~ p~/OGATION OR M Initiated (Code Enforcement), __..... Anaheim Blvd., Anaheim, pr~~ings CA 92805. City initiated request to initiate revocation or _ (to e s Conditional f o or pe~ is meted at morlffication proceedings P perrnft a tree service contractor's yard). 507 S. Lemon Street. r•nNDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO 829 1060.3041 AND p Terminated , VARIANCE NOS 1884 AND 2858 - REOUESS FvR TERMINATI~ Kevin Nolan, American Stores Properties, Inc., 348 E. South Temple, Salt Lake City, Utah 84111, requests l Use Permit No. 829, 1060, 3041 and termination of Conditiona is located at 239-279 South Euclid r P ty rope Variance No. 1883. Street. TERMINATION RESOLUTION N0. pCGF-139 a E. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NOS 1a'~T- 1491 AND 5 - lie Kaku C/0 Westmark L Terminated es RE E T FOR TERMINATIQN: +~ 865 South Figueroa, Los Angeles, CA LLC ~ , Realty Advisors, requests zermination of Conditional Use Permit Nos. 90017.2543 , 1491, 1437 and 3658. Property is located at 5614-20 E. Santa A..a Canyon Road. TERMINATION RESOLUTION N0. PC95-140 VARIA C NNE 0 4182 REQUEST FOR A RETROACTIVE Approved EXTENSION OF TIME TO COMPLY WITH CONDITIONS OF (To expire 5-18-96) APPR VAL: Blash Momeny, 24015 Catamaran Way, Laguna Niguel, CA 92677, requests a retroactive extension of time for Variance No. 4182 (waivers of required lot frontage, minimum building site area, minimum building site width and required orientation of single-family stru' S'r~ s9'9t6o `'Property is I located atily residences) to expire on May 2260 W. Orange Avenue. -3- ..,.~~~.. rrrv o~ eNNING COMMISSION - ACTION AGENDA OCTOBER 30, 1995 G, ONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO 370~OUEST FOR APProv~ 9-7-96) umnN OF TIME TO COMPLY WITH CONDITION$S~1E R ~ APP OVAL: Lewis R. Schmid, 1725 South Douglas Rd., Anaheim, CA 92806 r ova~o a~ ditional Use Permit No. 3703 with conditions of app (to permit a 22,000 square foot commercial retail center with a 14,000 square foot semi-enclosed restaurarn) to expire on September 7, 1996. Property is located at 2610-20 E. Katella Ave. -4- .....-... new m euwNG CrMMISSION - ACTION AGENDA OCTOBER 30, 1995 h,.„..~.....,... - -- 1 2a. ~Ef~iA NEGATIVE DECLARATION 2b, 11VAR'ER OF ODE RE©UIREMENT 2C, ~,QNDITIONAL USE PERMIT N0.3784 OWNER: JEFFREY GRADLOW, 10577 Wilkins Avenue, Los Angeles, CA 90024 AGENT: GENE MITCHELL, 624 S. Grand Avenue, #900, Los Angeles, CA 90017 LOCATION: 2929 West Ball Road. Property is approximately 1.36 acres located on the north side of Ball Road and approximately 130 feet west of the centerline of Gaymortt DrNe. To permit an 80-foot high cellular communications tower with waiver of minimum structural setback (deleted). Continued ftom the September 6, 18, October 2, and 16, 1995 Planning Commission meetings. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION N0. FOLLOWING IS A SUMMARY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION. Continued to November 27, 1995 OPPOSITION: 3 people spoke in opposition AGENTS COMMENTS: Gene Mitchell, Applicant, 624 S. Grand Street, Los Ar+.geles, Suite 900. He submitted material to the Planni m ~m0 ISSHe then gave aepresetMation eferencing theomaterial. lion towers as requested by the Co OPPOSITION: again, to Lena Tapia, 2950 Linrose Drive #H3, Anaheim. She stated she is before the Commission, speak on behalf of her neighbors and children that INe in the area. They are opposed to an SO-foot tower and asked the Commission ff they would like to have an SO-foot tower in their backyard. She stated their concem relative to putting the subject tower in a reskential area. She feels the tower would entice young children. She stated Anaheim is very large and asked why are they considering putting an 80-foot tower on the borderline of a residential ar~aa. Leslie Noble, 2950 Linrose #M2. He stated he is before they Commission, again, and expressed his concem relatNe to the safety of the tower. He also reiterated ftom I He statted9he Commissia Ws uld hinder access for emergency vehicles utting the overhead wires underground and asked why would trying to beautffy the subject area by p -5- OCTOBER 30, 1995 ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION - AC17ON AGENDA '( they than conskler putting an fj0-foot tower in the subject location. He stated he is opposing the `~-~ ~ subject request and asked the Commission to take consideration of the issues raised. Bonnie Richards, 2950 Llnrose DrNe #C2. She stated she is before the Commission, again, and explained that the tohat the tower may impose a healtheproblem and why~takethe hanceh Shevis her opinion, saying opposed to the subject tower. AGENTS RESPONSE: Gene Mitchell. He stated he addressed the health issues at the last meeting. He refterated that technoogy hae ~e.aHe explained thatethe~towers are an asset in cease of an emerge y~ provide very needed Bernard Woods, resides in Fullerton, works with Telecom Solutions, Incorporated, Virginia, Consulting Firm. He referred to the earthquake that occurred in Northridge, the electrical lines collapsed and the phones were not in operation. He stated their phones were in operation and they received a Certfficate of Commendation from Northridge because they saved lives. He feels one tower is beneoi ehahat mveans there slla problem and they willtfakeucare pf ~ er would not have a hum, ff it makes THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. STAFF'S COMMENTS: "" Jonathan Borrego, Senior Planner, indicatedotva~t ohP atime lit taUon be placed on the facility. The "that in the event the subject request is app purpose of the time limitation is because, in the future, ff there is an alternative method of transmitting the signals other than a monopole, the tower may need to be brought down raih~entth~an ~~ng~ ck open ended approval. If in five (5) years, technology doesn't change, the app before the Planning Commission and ask that the condition be removed or modified. Chairwoman Mayer asked ff Mr. Borrego would explain the map that the Commission received in their packets. Mr. Borrego stated the Commission There were five oth r I tocationisuwestdof Eudkl Street. surrounding subject area, plotted on a map. Mr. Borrego stated he will give the applicant a copy of that map. r Dale Junior high is in the Commissioner Boydstun stated quite a few towers ar~inn ahre on 0 n~ge and beach, she stated a subject vicinity. In the vicinity, there is also a big pa 9 9 9 smaller tower could be on top of that garage and she asked ff those locations were considered. Commissioner Bostwick asked ff Page 3 could be explained more in-depth. Mr. Mitchell stated the color cudachievee rieeneverywheretheynpossibly~can~ Talleatowers have strongersignal strength. are trying to 9 Commissioner Masse indicated he wished they would have brought information showing what is goingnon need coveragre~CommissrionePHenn nger clarified relatt~e to thetyellowtlinesr that f< is curve y viewed on the first graphic. -fi- ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION - ACTION AGENDA OCTOBER 30, 1995 Commissioner Bostwick stated also on the agenda today is Air Touch Cellular requesting approval of -- a taller tower at Western High School and he asked if that location could be utilized for this tower. Mr. Woods saki ft is north of where they are trying to cover, and the further away they get, the higher the tower would Head to be to cover the area. Mr. Mftcheil responded they are currently working on some agreements with Air Touch Cellular. Air Touch C911ular has five sites they would like to utilize and they have five sftes Air Touch would Iika to utilize. He stated they were not aware of the site at Western High Scholl, but he feels ft would be too far north. Commissioner Messe asked If there are any alternatives to the she. Mr. Mitchell sakJ they era looking, but currently they have no alternative and he understands they are at risk for the subject location. He feels they will suffer the same issues anywhere they go, in the subject surrounding area. Further discussion continued relative to other locations. Commissioner Bristol stated he thought the applicant was going to have alternative sites today. He understands the sftuation, but could not support tho subject location. Mr. Mitchell stated they would do whatever is necessary to mitigate the impact of the tower. Commissioner Henninger suggested they can take out one of the existing light poles, in the front parking lot of the shopping center and put the subject tower there with a light standard, instead of having ft in the back adjacent to the apartments. Commissioner Bostwick gave his opinion recommending several locations that may be utilized rather than the shopping canter. He stated he doesn't agree wfth the subject location. Commissioner Masse asked N the hem was continued and the applicant found a different location would the CUP be applicable. Mr. Borrego indicated if ft is on different property, they would have to apply for a new CUP. Mr. Mitchel anti staff agreed to continue the subject item so new plans can be submftted relative to undergrounding the shelter, thereby only leaving the pcle visible wfth the light mounted on. ACTION: Continued subject request to the November 27, 1995, Planning Commission meeting in order for the applicant to submit revised plans. i/OTE: 7-0 7- OCTOBER 30, 1995 ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION - ACTION AGENDA ~, CEOA NEGATNE DECLARATLOfJ (Previously Approved) 3b. WANER OF CODE iiEQUIREMENT 3c. COND~ ~ D~ PERMIT N~ (Readvertised) OWNER: ~ Vega Bivd. #11008 Encino CAG 91436 AGENT: 210~OStatel~ geABlvd. An helm, CA~9280G-6118 LOCATION: '~~n North Tustin Avenue (California Auto De lam Ex h n .Property is approximately 34 acres located on the east side of Tustin Avenue and approximately 220 feet north of tho centerline of Miralama Avenue. Petitioner requests the amendment of a conditional use permit to expand an existing automobile auction aril recondftioning facility with waiver of minimum landscaping requirements acrd permitted encroachment in to required setback. Continued ftom the October 2, 1995 Planning Commission meeting. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION N0. PC95-141 FOLLOWING IS A SUMMARY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION. OPPOSITION: None AGENTS COMMENTS: Approved Approved Approved amendment Anaheim. He indicated concerns Tom Kieviet, Farano & Kievlet, 2100 S. State College Boulevard, were raised at the previous meeting regarding transport parking on auction day. He stated from their review and analysis, they found some transports out there, but in their opinion, nothing to generate a concern. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. STAFF'S COMMENTS: Alfred Yalda, Principal Transportation Planner, stated he made a field observation around Tustin Avenue, Miraloma and Orangethorpe, there were about sbc transport carriers, but they were not parked in any traffic lane and were not creating any traffic hazard. They also did a 24-hour count on Tustin Avenue to see what Impact the auto dealership has in the area, and the Impact was mirdmal. He stated he also contacted the City of Placentia, and they stated they thought it was a new adr;ition. cohncem s nce itywasn'trae xpa scone MrtYalda answered~'that is co~rrectplacentia, are no longer a -8- ANAkEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION - ACTION AGENDA OCTOBER 30, 1995 Commissioner Henninger stated the cul-de-sac is about 750 feet song and asked if !here is a reason why they can't put 750 feet worth of landscape. Mr. iGeviet reiterated after their review and analysis, they are willing to landscape the Etchandy Street area to conform with the landscaping of the surrounding area, but were concerned relative to the setback requirement. They currently have a fence on the property line which they vivould like to maintain and to provide landscape from curb to fence line so ft conforms. They would Ilke to basically obtain a setback waiver for that location. Commissioner Henninger asked why the fence Can't be setback another five (5) feet, thereby being able to put In the norms! required landscape. Mr. Kleviet explained the five (5) foot setback would reduce the vehicle storage area and also would impede the traffic lane that currently exists on top of the cul-de-sac area, on the side of California Auto Dealer's Exchange. Commissioner Henninger interjected and asked ff a graphic is available, showing the on-site circulation because he can't visualize ft. Commissioner Messe asked ff he Is referring to a travel lane. Mr. IQeviet answered yes', he stated the storage is not so much the concern, although ft wui Impact ft, but ft is the traffic lane or. the sfte. He explained the concern relative to moving the fence line and the conflict ft would have on the traffic lane because ft would create a curve which may result In a potential hazard. Commissioner Henninger stated ft is not unusual for lanes to have curves and he asked staff ff he can view the aerial photo of the subject area. Jonathan Borrego answered they can bring the Commission the aerial photo, but ft's about 10 years old and may not show ft very well. Chairwoman Mayer continued the hem (after Item 6 was completed), the aerial photo was then viewed by staff. Mr. Kieviet stated the aerial photo is about nine years old and the parking pattern is different from what is shown on the diagram, he explained the current layout. He indicated they would be willing to landscape the existing setback area that currently exists and in the event there is development in the future, they would then be willing to push ft back. He stated they would like to maintain the setback as ft is curently and landscape ft. Ha stated he feels ft would then be in conformance with the surrounding properties. Commissioner Boydstun asked ff a condition can be adJed, noting when the City puts sidewalks in, that the fence would be moved, with landscape five (5) feet wide behind the sidewalk. Commissioner Messe asked staff when is the City expecting to put sidewalks in the subject area. Melanie Adams, Associate Civil Engineer, responded they do not have plans as of yet and are requesting that any landscape to be done, be limited to ground cover only, no shrubs or trees. ACTION: Determined that the previously approved negative declaration is adequate to serve as the required environmental documentation for subject request. Approved Waiver of Code Requirement Approved amendment to Conditional Use Permft No. 2334. Added the following condtion: That the owner/developer shall provide a 5-foot wide landscape planter providing ground cover and an irrigation system wfthin the City's right of way along Etchandy Lane. ~. -9- OC7O8Eli 30, 1995 ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION - ACTION AGENDA Further, that at the time sidewalks are installed along Etchandy Lane, the owner/developer ~„~`` shall, at their expense, relocate the existing chain Iink fence five feet ftom the front property 11ne and landscape that area according to Code. VOTE: 7-0 -10- .....~.~~ur_ r•_n~uMlSSION - ACTION AGENDA rFnA NEGATNE DECL4RATION ....n-eo AF r`ODE REQUIREMENT (DELETED) ND TIO_.NAL trSE PERMIT NO 7~` OWNER: LEMON PARTNERS, 1150 N. Lemon Street, Anaheim, CA, 92805 AGENT: HANAN STANLEY/SUNWEST METALS, INC., 1874 S. 2100 S. Anaheim AvdEl Anaheim?~A, 92E~ FARANO, ANAtIKIM V~~ ~ r•r••••••. 4a. 4b. 4c. n North Lemon Street. Property is approximately 1.5 LOCATION: 11 acres located ximateiy 900 feet north of thercenterline of La located app Palma Avenue. To permft a large collection and recycling facility with wa ces odeleted) ~ roof signs (deleted) and minimum number of parking spa ( Continued from the October 2 and 16, 1995 Planning Commisslon meetings. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION N0. ,,,,_-- FOLLOWING IS A SUMMARY OF THE PLANNING COMiNISSION ACTION. OCTOBER 30, 1995 Continued t0 November 13, 1995 OPPOSITION: Nune ACTION: Continued subject requestee t etitionermber 13, 1995 Fanning Commission meeting as requested by P VO"fE: 7-0 -11- OCTOBER 30, 1995 ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION - ACTION AGENDA Previous) A roved) Approved ~ 5a. rEQA NEGATIVE DECLARATI N ( y pp Approved 5b. TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO 12695 and FINAL SITE PLAN OWNER: THE PRESLEY COMPANIES, 19 Corporate Plaza, Newport Beach, CA 92u^=3 LOC„TION: Property is approximately 2.8 acres located at the northwest comer of Sunset Ridge Road and Serrano Avenue and further described as Tentatve Tract Map Igo. 12695 within Development Area 8 of The Highlands at Anaheim Hills Specific Plan (SP87-1). Petitioner requests approval of a Tentative Tract Map and final site plan (to establish a 2.8 acre, 3-lot condominium subdivision, including 2 residential lots and 1 lettered lot) in order to develop a 32-unit attached condominium complex. Continued from the October 16, 1995 Planning Commission meeting. FOLLOWING IS A SUMMARY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION. OPPOSITION: None OWNER'S COMMENTS: Joe Boyle, David A. Boyle Engineering, 2098 S. Grand Avenue, Santa Ana, Representing the ovallof Companies. He stated on September 6, 1995, the Planning Commission recommended app General Plan Amendment No. 339, in conjunction with Specific Plan Amendment for the subject item. Commercial to Hillside Resident al inHe contnued explain g the proposed requestGeneral THe PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. ACTION: Determined that the previously apprav xi negative declaration is adequate to serve as the required environmental documentation for subject request. Approved Tentatve Tract Map No. 12695 and final site plan. VOTE: 7-0 Selma Mann, Deputy City Attorney, presented the 22-day appeal rights. -12- OCTOBER 30, 1995 ..~... n~rv o~ eMMING COMMISSION - ACTION AGENDA AryAnc~m v... - - - i ga. ENVIRON""FNTO~ IMPACT REPORT NO 281 (Previousiv Certified) App`~~ ffn~ 6b. ~"'""G TENTATIVE TRACT MAP N0 1`24 site plan FINAL SITE PLAN OWNER: SHEA HOMES, 655 Brea Canyon, Walnut, CA 91789-1841 AGENT: HUNSAKER & ASSOCIATES, Attn: Dan Hossenzadeh, 3 Hughes, Irvine, CA 92718 e TrpM Map NO 15074 within LOCATION: Vestin0 Terrtativ D v I m nt Area 204 of th mmR or Nnetieim it Specific Plan (SP88-21.. Property is approximately 71 acres located at the northwest comer of Oak Canyon Drive and Running Springs Road. Petftioner requests approval of Vesting TentatNe Tract Map No. 15074 subdivisioneincluding 40 residentialllots and one ope ospaCel o~mily FOLLOWING IS A SUMMARY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION. OPPOSITION: None Commissioner Henninger abstained, stating his company conducts business with Shea Homes. AGENTS COMMENTS: Alan Tofley, Shea Homes. He stated present today is their Civil Engineer, Landscape Architect and their Architect that designed the plan are present to explain alternative designs to Plan 3, relatNe to the 3-car garage, consisting of a 2-car gaoval of Tract i150741and final site plan and they agreeewith staff. He stated they are requesting app staff s recommendations. Clark Forest-B~ss~6 ~ t ey acknowledge the 3iCar gtarage situation forra nxrrowpot subdivis on and Commission a have attempted, in the design, to come up with three different ways to addr es the Indicated there He explained the design of Plan 1, 2, and 3, relatNe to the 3-car garage ~ are photographs in the packet showing existing products in Southern Caiffo~mS not the same garage styles and he stated it has been done successfully and aesthetically very pl 9• Bill Laman, Laman Landscape Archftects. He presented an eXhib$ and indicated $ shows~a nHeber of alternatives in which a split 3-car garage can be designed and have a pleasing front ya explained four different design alternatives, AltematNe 'A", "B', 'C and "D', relatNe to a splk 3-car garage and stanedHe also IndHcated he feifels 3t-car garage styles~can be done attracttivelyvorablo to the Commissio 1 -13- ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION - ACTION AGENDA OCTOBER 30. 1995 THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. ~,; STAFF'S COMMENTS: Jonathan Borrego, Senior Planner, reiterated stafFs concem relative to the 3-car garage options, is that ft doesn't provide for any on street parking in front of the residence because of the continual curb cut. Also, it looks as ff the skla yard is the only landscaping provided that actually goes up to the front property line, and that no landscaping is in the front of the reskence which would be a concem. Alfred Yalda, Principal Transportation Planner, stated they have the same concem. They only allow one curb cut per single family dwelling, and it appears in the picture that the whole frontage of the house looks like a parking lot and he understands that they will be eliminating the majority of on-street parking. He continued explaining the curb cut standards for a single dwelling. Discussion followed between staff relative to the curb cut. Commissioner Masse asked ff Plan 3 could be eliminated, since they have other plans with 3-car garages. Mr. Leman Indicated Plan 3 is their biggest plan and they would like to provide it to the public as one of their three design choices. He also clarified that the setback is not shown too well on the diagram and explained that ff the drNeway is chosen, there would be ample space for parking since there would be 22 feet between the 2-car garage and the 1-car garage; and he indicated that ~aetween two houses, with one having the 2-car garage and a 1-car garage (3-car garage, split), that there would be 20 feet between the two drNeways, which would provide ample parking. Commissioner Masse stated there would be a single cum cut and indicated staff feels people wouldn't park at a cum cut. -~ Discussion followed between the Commission and Mr. Leman relative to the cum cut and relative tot e amount of homes to be built in proposed Plan 3. Chairwoman Mayer Garified and asked Mr. Leman, if he indicated they could utilize Alternate 'C, which shows one driveway entrance and then curves out. Mr. Leman answered "yes'. Discussion between staff and Shea Homes representatives followed relative to the alternatives presented. Commissioner Bristd asked ff Lots 12, 32 and 40 are the best place for Plan 3, relative to the drneway being right on the comer. Mr. Leman stated they planned not to allow the option of the drNeway in Lots 32 and 40, but would be open to moving the plotting around. Jonathan Borrego indicated ff the Commission was in agreement to the 3-car garage option, that staff would recommend. Commissioner Masse asked Mr. Leman ff he was aware of staff s concem relatNe to the setback of the houses. Mr. Leman answered 'yes', and stated they will comply with that, ff there is probability of pushing the house back and still meet the minimum setback. ACTION: Determined that the previously certified EIR No. 281 is adequate to serve as the required ernironmental documentation for subject request. Approved the final site plan for Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 15074 with the fdlowing changes to conditions: -14- OCTOBER 301 1995 ..I.. alC1^^ rrrv ar ONNING COMMISSION - ACTION AGENDA MI~/"II,r.... ~.. . Modffied Condition No. 2 to read as follows: ~~' 2. That the owner/developer shall utilize Alternative "C of the 3-Car garage option for Plan No. 3 as shown on the exhibit submitted at the October 30, 1995 Planning Commission meeting and, further, that Lots 12, 32 and 40 shall not be developed with the 3-car garage option of Plan No. 3. Deleted Condition No. 3 Added the following condition: That the units shall haves ~ (which exceed thesminimoum depth required. sible due to the existence of rear ya VOTE: 6-0 (Commissioner Henninger declared a conflict of interest) Selma Mann, Deputy City Attorney, presented the 22~1ay appeal rights. -15- OCTOBER 30, 1885 ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION - ACTION AGENDA ^~^e a~rATNE DECLARATION (Previousty Approved) Approved ~a• Readvertised) Denied amendment 7b. ,CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT N0.345~ ( 7c. REQUEST FOR RETROACTIVE EXTENSION OF TIME T~OMPLY eOeMniedoreq~eust eor •~°T" ^^NDITIONS OF APPROVAL OWNER: WILLIAM C. & VINCENT C. TAORMINA, Attn: Richard B. Winn, P.O. Box 309, Anaheim, CA 92815-0309 LOCATION: side of thie Riverside (9) Freeway and being located rth approximately 400 feet west of the centerline of the southerly terminus of Whfte Star Avenue. (a) Petitioner requests •: ,odiflcation or deletion of a condition of approval pertaining to the limitation of time to retain a previously approval expansion of a recycling/resource recovery transfer facility (for overflow parking of collection transfer operations roiling stock) with waiver of minimum yard requirements. (b) Petitioner requests aone-year time extension (retroactive to September 23, 1995) to comply with conditions of approval for subject petftion. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION N0. PC95-142 FOLLOWING IS A SUMMARY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION. OPPOSITION: 1 person spoke in opposition AGENTS COMMENTS: Richard Winn, 1131 N. Blue Gum, representing William C. & Vincent C. T ~ rmina. He sltav rytdf~cult, have had a number of plans that they were not able to bring into fruition, a property and they are asking fora 12-month extension. He feels they would be able to do something in a year or they will then come back with other plans for the subject property. OPPOSITION: Phillips Shwartze, representing Coykendall Property, adjacent to Taormina property. He stated ave opposition. They are several years ago when the Conditional Use Permit was approved, they g present today, to reiterate their opposition. He pointed out and explained the landscaping that was put on the recent adoption of the Northeast Area Specific Plan and the requirements that were made bty tfreeway should be r jest andkrecommend that the Conditional Use Permit be dienied Jacent to THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. -16- ....~~~^^ ..~„~ e~ euu~tur. rn~urulSSIAN _ ACTION AGENDA OCTOBER 30, 1995 AGENTS REBUTTAL: Richard Winn. He stated the parcel is about 700 feet long, 100 feet wide, it was originally suppose to be part of a road. The City requested them to request an abandonment in order to change the plans. They complied with the City's request, in hopes of uttl(zing the parcel. I :e stated h may not be the best use for the parcel, but it would be a temporary use and' they would like the opportunity to make use of the subject property. STAFF'S COMMENTS: Commissioner Boydstun commented she agrees because it is the window off the freeway and asked ff some sort of landscaping could be put along the fence to obstruct the view. Mr. Winn stated last time this was done, he believes a condition was made to put vines on the fence bordering the freeway to obstruct the view. Commissioner Boydstun stated the vines along the fence have not been done and she asked ff they would do that. Mr. Winn stated currently there are not trash bins in the subject area. Commissioner Boydstun stated she understands, but it would be nice for something to be planted along the inskle of the fence so ff the trash bins do come back. Mr. Winn stated they have been focusing on the La Palma and Blue Gum areas, and admft lately, they have not focused on the subject area. Commissioner Masse explained recently they have gone through a long, had, specific plan for the area (overlay zone west and north of the subject site) and he feels the proposed request for the property is not what was fn mind when the Specific Plan was created. Commissioner Henninger feels the proposed request is not the right use for freeway frontage. ACTION: Determined that the previously approved negative declaration is adequate to serve as the required environmental documentation for subject request. Denied request to amend Condtion No. 15 of Resolution No. PC94-25. Denied the retroactive extension of time for Conditional Use Permit No. 3455. VOTE: 7-0 Selma Mann, Deputy City Attorney, presented the 22-day appeal rights. -17- ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION - ACTION AGENDA OCTOBER 30, 1995 ga. ~,EfiA MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION Continued to 8b. WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT November 13,1995 8c. ~,ONDITIONAL USE PERMIT N0.3801 OWNER: U.S. BORAX & CHEMICAL CORP., 26877 Tourney Road, Valencia, CA 91355 AGENT: PENHALL INTERNATIONAL, Attn: Richard Reel, P. 0 BOX 4609, Anaheim, CA 92803 LOCATION: 1751 West Penhall Wav (vacant Iandl Property is approximately 6.1 acres located on the north side of Penhall Way and approximately 430 feet east of the centerline of Crescent Way. To permit aroad-base materials processing and storage facility indudfng on-sfte concrete/rock crushing and stock-piling activities, together wfth a large equipment storage/rental facility and a commercial truck fabrication and assembly plant wfth waiver of minimum sfte enclosure and screening requirements. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION N0. FOLLOWING IS A SUMMARY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION. OPPOSITION: 3 people spoke in opposition Approximately 45 people indicated their presence in opposition AGENTS COMMENTS: Richard Reel, 1751 Penhall Way, Anaheim. He explained the proposed request is to develop six acres of bare land adjacent to their present facility and to establish two permanent businesses and one temporary business on the subject sfte. The permanent businesses would cor+.sist of 1) Penhall Reynolds, a construction rental yard and 2) Penhall Truck Center which will fabricate and install specialized truck bodies on their trucks. The intended temporary facility would be Penhall Recycle which would occupy the northern most 3 1 /2 acres of the subject sfte, which would be an aggregate rock crushing site where they would bring materials from their demolftien projects and convert them, by use of a crusher, into road-base material. The temporary facility would be in use throughout the period of the Santa Ana Freeway widening through Anaheim. COMMENTS IN CONCERN: Thomas Lee, Fullerton, member of the St. Thomas, Korean Catholic Church. The reason he and members of the church are present is not to oppose the Condftional Use Permit, but they would like to express their concern. He stated prior to the purchase of their property, next to Penhall, that Penhall provided them a letter stating "that their work might cause some noise and nuisance to the neighboring area.' He stated they are concerned of the third ftem mentioned by Mr. Reel being the -18- ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION - ACTION AGENDA OCTOBER 30, 1995 rock crushing, concrete crushing and rock piling. They are concerned about possible noise and dust emission from the operation. He is glad to hear that it is temporary, however, while it is in operation they want to ensure that the Commission does all the necessary studies and research to make sure that h would not be harmful and ~oximat lI 45 peo1le were presetn~n(n concem~ the members of the church to raise their hands, app Y P P William Im, 725'Rancho Circle, Fullerton, member of the St. Thomas, Korean Catholic Church. He stated they are confused and worried about the subject request because they received the hearing notice less than a week ago and they just received the staff report. He stated currently, they are not opposing the subject request, because they don't know the entirety of the project and indicated before they can say ff they approve or disapprove, they ask the Commission to continue the item to gF~a them adequate time to un.-lerstand the project. Austin Park, 2230 Hillview Circ?e, Fullerton, member of the St. Thomas, Korean Catholic Church. He expressed his concern of the proposed project and he feels no business activities should hinder normal church operations. He stated praying and rock crushing, singing and noise are not compatible and he asked the Commission to take the necessary measures needed to protect the church. John Kvicky, 328 N. Adams, Fullerton, member of the St. Thomas, Korean Catholic Church. He explained the hard work and many years h took to gain the sufficient Capitol to purchase the property of St Thomas' Church. He read a portion of a letter from Penhall Corporation dated August 29, 1994, advising the St. Thomas' Church of the equipment/activities/noise that may occur at Penhall's Corporation. He stated by that letter, the decision was made to go forward (n purchasing the property. Now, they understand the proposed rock crushing operation will take place bordering the church's children recreational area. He continued expressing his concern relative to the additional traffic created by the proposed request and are asking for a continuance of this item. AGENTS REBUTTAL: Mr. Reel. He read a portion of the August 29, 1994, letter to St. Thomas' Church and pointed out the expansion should not come as a complete surprise. The church moved into a general industrial area and did not move into a tranquil environment. He stated the question Isn't ff their facility will produce objectionable noise and dust, but whether the noise and dust that (s produced will be within the allowable limits established by Alr Quality Management District as well as the City's standards. Commissioner Messe asked Mr. Reel to explain the rock crushing operation. Mr. Reel stated the operation is proposed for Monday -Friday, 7:00 a.m. - 3:30 p.m. They would bring materials on a regular basis, five (5) days a week, and when the storage has sufficient materials, at that time, they would need use for the crusher. He explained that over a course of a year, the crusher would be on- sfte approximately 4 months, one-third of the time. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. STAFF'S COMMENTS: Commissioner Peraza asked H the business could be located in the back and the rock crusher in the front. Mr. Reel stated the rental and the equipment fabrication business is acustomer-oriented business and he would rather not have customers driving through the crushing site to get to the businesses. -19- ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION - ACTION AGENDA OCTOBER 30, 1995 Commissioner Henninger stated generally in the past they have had a policy of not allowing church ~,`' facilities in industrial areas and Indicated this is the reason why, because they are a conflicting use. But, he stated he does feel these two uses can be made compatible and he would like to see them meet together, so the hours of operation can be fully understood. Mr. Reel stated h is their inisnt, they have already set-up a meeting with the church members. Commissioner Masse asked Mr. Reel if he could provide to the church members the Speciflc Environmental Services Study of noise and dust. Mr. Reel answered yes'. Commissioner Henninger pointed out to the church members that the property they purchased is an industrial area and the subject request is the sort of use you would see In an industrial area. Commissioner Masse reminded the church members that the subject prope;:y is a vacant lot and there are many uses that could be built on ft, which would irnoke more traffic and objection than the subject request, so in many ways, the subject request is a low use. ACTION: Continued subject request to the November 13, 1995 Planning Commission meeting in order for the applicant to meet with the church members present at the public hearing. VOTE: 6-1 {Commissioner Boydstun voted no) -20- ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION - AGTION AGENDA OCTOBER 30, 1995 ~~~~ ga, rFnn yEGATIVE DECLARATION Approved 9b. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO 3802 Granted for 3 years (fo expire 100-96) OWNER: ELVA M. WEST and NADINE C. WEST, 5201 E. Crescent Drhre, Anaheim, CA 92807 LOCATION: +~~o East Lincoln Avenue. Property is approximately 0.79 acres located on the south side of Lincoln Avenue and approximately 1,480 feet west of ttie centerline of Cliff Rose Street. To pemtit a pawnshop wfthin an existing shopping center. CONDITIONAL. USE PERMIT RESOLUTION N0, PC95-143 FOLLOWING 15 A SUMMARY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION. OPPOSITION: None AGENTS COMMENTS: Carolyn Staehling, 18200 Avenida Bosque, Murietta, CA. She is present and stated her husband will respond to the Issues raised by staff, since he will be managing the proposed pawnshop. George Staehling. He stated ft will be an up-scale pawnshop with retail sales. He indicated the staff report states the building is in an `existing commercial shopping center and clarified, in his opinion, ft is a freestanding building with one other suite. It is more suitable for a small insurance company, office or travel agency, as was the previous tenant. The building shares a common driveway wfth a small mental health clinic to the west. He stated he doesn't feel the term "commercial shopping centerr applies to the subject location. He referred to the staff report, Page 2, Item 7, relative to the description of the retail area. He stated there is a change in the plan he submitted, he will be using a product called `slap board', which is more attractive and durable then'peg board". He referred to the staff report, Page 3, Item 15, giving his opinion, relative to the distance between the subject site and Lincoln Elementary School/Park. He continued and gave his opinion to the staff report, relative to the shrubs and chain-link fence which separates the back property line of the park and the back property line of the subject property. He also gave his opinion relative to the burglary reports and narcotic-related arrests which occurred in the immediate neighborhood of the subject site. He explained ft will be an up-scale pawnshop and he relayed the actions he will take to achieve that. He commented relative to the recommended hours and days of the operation, if the subject request is approved, and he stated Saturday is a crucial day to be open, as ft is the most productive day of the week for a retail sales business. He asked to operate the business, Saturday -10:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m., and to remain open until 7:00 p.m., Monday through Saturday, during the holklays. He explained the extensive procedures a pawnshop owner has to accomplish before obtaining a license through the Department of Justice. He stated he has met all of the requirements necessary to -21- ANOHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION - ACTION AGENDA _ OCTOBER 30, 1995 operate a respectable, up-scale, pawnshop. He will be dealing primarily with gdd jewelry, mustcai ~„_~ lnstrumerrts and only high quality merchandise. He asked for the Commission's approval of the subject request. Alva West, owner of the subject property. He stated they do not want anything in their buildings that would be a detriment to the community or to their buildings. For that reason, they have fumed down many lessees. He stated once he fully understood the proposed request and the ways Mr. Staehling would operate the pawnshop, he then accepted Mr. Staehling's request to lease the subject site. He stated ff the operation is approved, he would include in the lease, "if the operation hasn't been up to the recommended standard by Mr. & Mrs. West, that the lease would not be renewed' He commented relative to the reported burglaries and the narcotic-related arrests, and stated they had a few burglaries before the wrought iron gates were installed on the doors and he stated they never had any narcotic problems at the subject site. He commented relative to the chain-11nk fence that he feels the fence gives a good, high protection, it is 12 feet high. He asked for the Commission's approval of the subject request. Mr. Staehling, presented two photographs, 1) from the rear of the subject property showing the park and 2) showing the entrance of the park, looking towards the subject property and he stated the sign in the back of the store 'Blue Anaheim" carpet sign will be taken down. Mr. West asked to remove the condition relative to the driveway on Uncdn Avenue. Staff is recommending it to be !econstructed to accommodate 10-foot radius curb. He stated the curb Is straight out, but the drveway is exceptionally wide (approximately 15 feet wide), and he doesn't see any point in reconstructing it, except for .aesthetics. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. STAFF'S CdMMENTS: Selma Mann, Deputy City Attorney, stated earlier today, the Planning Commission expressed ~an interest to place restrictions relative to the identity of the people who bring items into the pawnshop. She stated the Commission is free to add requirements to the State's statutes as long as they don't go against the legislative Intent, 'to aid iri the prevention of thefts and recovery of stolen property" and she stated the Commission has a right to add any other conditions that would be related to the land use. Commissioner Boydstun clarified to Mr.Staehling if he stated, 'they are required by law to f(ngerprint all people who bring in merchandise". W1r. Staehling said "yes", he also indicated, when financially able, he will buy a camera that will photograph every single person who makes a transaction. Commissioner Bristol asked ff other merchandise, that is not pawned, will be sold. Mr. Staehling saki "yes", there will be brand new musical instruments. Commissioner Bristd asked how about guns. Mr. Staehling answered "no", only if a friend wants a gun ordered, he will do it. Commissioner Messe clarified to Mr. Staehling ff he Indicated, '°he will sell guns.' Mr. Staehlinng answered 'yes', and he stated he knows; a gun dealer in Azusa who he could sell the guns wholesale to. -22- OCTOBER 30, 1995 ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION - ACTION AGENDA Commissioner Boydstun asked ff he would be willing for the Commission to add a condtion, stating ~:' within 90-days that a camera or video would be in place in the subject sfte. Mr. Staehling said 'no", because the camera is about $10,000. Commissioner Henninger asked how long would ft take, for him to afford the camera. Mr. Staehling said about one year. Commissioner Henninger asked ff he would accept a condition stating to have the camera in one year. Mr. Staehiing stated he would be comfortable with 1 1 /2 years, since he can't predict, financially, the outcome of the store. Mr. Staehiing asked the Commission ff they are referring to a video camera. Commissioner Henninger stated yes', a video camera as seen in liquor stores for security. Mr. Staehling stated he was referring to a special camera that efts on the counter and has a microfilm reel, which takes a still Commisspon agreedtthatthey are Howe referring o the same camerambeing aarvideohcam a~ othe securfty as in liquor stores. ACTION: Approved Negative Declaration Granted Cordftional Use Fermft No. 3802 for 3 years wfth the following changes to condtions: Modified Condition No. 1 to read as follows: 1. That the hours of operation shall be Iimfted from 9:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m., Monday through Saturday. Deleted Condition No. 2 Added the following conditions: That an Interior video surveillance camera shall be installed and in operation within 90 days from the date of this resolution. That subject use permit shall terminate three (3) years from the date of this resolution, on October 30, 1998. VOTE: 7-0 Selma Mann, Deputy City Attorney, presented the 22-day appeal rights. -23- OCTOBER 30, 1995 ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION - ACTION AGENDA ~,f 10a, cecllA NEGATNE DECLARATION Approved 10b. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT N0. 3800 C'm~~ OWNER: ANAHEIM UNION HIGH SCHOOL DISTRICT, P.O. Box 3520, Anaheim, CA 926033520 AGENT: AIR TOUCH CELLULi,R, Attn: Joe Milone, P.O. BOX 19707. Irvine, CA 92714 LOCATION: .~2 West Oraroximatel 38.84 acres IHocated at the,. Property is app Y northwest comer of Orange Avenue and Western Avenue. To permit a 116 foot high cellular communications tower. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION N0. PC95-144 FOLLOWING IS A SUMMARY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION. OPPOSITION: None Commissioner Peraza has a conflict of interest and abstained from this item. AGENT'S COMMENTS: Joe Milone, Air Touch Cellular, 3 Park Plaza, Irvine. He stated he is before the Commission today and is requesting approval of Conditional Use Permit No. 3800 to allow a modification of an existing cellular communications tower, to launch their digital technology. He stated they agree with staffs recommendations. He pointed out two corrections in the staff report 1) under Item 7, relative to the type of antennas that is proposed on the subject facility, where it reads'3 microwave dishes' he corrected they will have 'S microwave dishes" and ~:) under Item 9, relative to the wording 'increas,ng the height to 116" he explained that the existing cellular facility already has 116 feet because the whip antenna extends above the existing 100 foot pole, therefore, there is no height Increase. He referred to Item 18 of the staff report, relative to the approval for fNe (5) years and C+e stated he is not surd of the intent of the condition and he feels it is unnecessary and asked that that condition be deleted. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. STAFF'S COMMENTS: Commissioner Messe staled there are high towers that are not being used to their full extent, the tower is high and the antennas are midway, and nothing is being done relative to removing the top of the tower. Commissioner Henninger stated they would like to see a shorter tower and antenna in those Incidents. Mr. Milone stated the particular tower is sectionally bolted together and ff they do go lower they can remove sections of the tower. ~. -24- OCTOBER 30, 1995 ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION - ACTION AGENDA Jonathan Borrego, Senior Planner, stated there is one other reason for the five (5) year condition, he explained that ff in the future there is aitemative technology other than using ~~~ a ~~ ~ lon9the be interested in using the other technology. He also clarffied, in that five (5) y applicant has the opportunity to come back before the Commission to amend or delete the condiion. Commissioner Masse asked ff they would be willing to habe`~o~ needsluicoorclion between the tw° it tower. Mr. MUone answered they have done that before, for their companies before the site is constructed. Mr. Milone explained that they lease the property cellular towers. He stated ownehe He relayed tvyot~uations tthat mayaoccu rrei alive to hart ming of negotate wffh the property le in the same general area). the other company's Interest (sharing of poles or adding an additional po Commissioner Henninger stated he would like to add three conditions, 1) to consider co-locations, antetnna heightvand 3) to remove the pole~en'tirelymff h is No longedr n peerationered to the new ACTION: Approved Negative Declaration Granted Conditional Use Permit No. 3800 wfth the following changes to condtions: Deleted Condition No. 2 Added the following condftions: That the applicant shall negotiate in good fafth wRh other cellular service providers in the event that co-location opportunfties exist for this faclllcy. That ff the antennas are ever lowered in farms of their location on the monopole, the _. monopole shall also be lowered to the new antenna height. That both the monopole and the equipment shed shall be removed from the sfte at such time when ft is no longer in operation. VOTE: fi-0 (Commissicner Peraza declared a conflict of Interest) Selma Mann, Deputy City Attorney, presented the 22tiay appeal rights. -25- OCTOBER 30, 1995 ANAHEIM CITY PLANNING COMMISSION - ACTION AGENDA ~ 11a CEOA NEGATIVE DECLARATI N ~~ 11 b. WAVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT 11c. CONDITIONAL "SE PERMIT N0. 3804 OWNER: CHENG-I AND JINSU HOU, 17561 17th Street, Tustin, CA 92680 AGENT: PETER HAHN, 616 E. Ball Road, Anaheim, CA 92805 LOCATION: 125 East Ball Road. Property is approximately 1.24 acres located at the northwest comer of Batl Road and gaudina Place. To establish a motorcycle sales and service dealership wfth waiver of minimum number of trees adjacent to right-of-way, required setback adjacent to an arterial highway and required setback adjacent to a local street. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION NO. FOLLOWING IS A SUMMARY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION. OPPOSITION: None Continued to November 13, 1995 ACTION: n order for thej petitioner to be presen during the public hearing~mmission meeting VOTE: 7-0 MORNNNG WORK SESSION A~ 0:00 A MT FOR A C.D.B G. WORK SHOP. NING COMMISSION Resp Ily submitted, ~/T,~R,~QnoL~ Elly Fe ndes, Senior Word Processing Operator Planning Department -26- s~ t ~ ~ t+ ' .G~ r 4~ taxf~+ µ~ .,,(' ~i 4 J ki M ` ' } 1 .~t'N't x iv.~+ ~.r c. p ~ t~3 r~~}~...F J' i r ~ ` r ~ .w 3 Yy N j ,;l ,? ~t~ :W`'1~t1~. j^ +L. i`Z , l7C S3b ~'S "!~ i`h' "~" '~ yr +~ . 3 t ~ `` w' r a ~ E ,c ~, ~~ ~ ,~ r. i.` f~ _ ., ~~ . t.~ . .. Y ~t