The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2220 Summit Drive 2 of 4 - Staff Report:= S� �`f i 4, 20 ��t �C Item No. 3a. Regular Action MEMOR.ANDUM PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT TO: PLANNING COMMISSION ly3�l�f��l�[�11�1�1�1.i1�[H�]\+/69[�)�I DATE: JULY 8, 2014 RE: LOT LINE ADNSTMENT AT 2220 SUMMIT DRIVE (APN 027-271-090) AND 2202 SUMMIT DRIVE (APN 027-271-340), PM 13-OlA Plannin� Commission Action: It is recommended that the Plamiiug Commission approve the attached lot line adjushnent with the following conditions: 1. Developmental approvals are not part of this action. 2. The lot-line adjustment shall be recorded and a copy of the record shall be sent to the City. Back¢round: This application is requesting to adjust the lot lines to exchange areas between two properties as shown in the attached plan. This lot line adjustment will result in the transfer of approximately 401 square feet from 2220 Suuunit Drive pazcel to the 2202 Summit Drive pazcel. In exchange, the pazcel at 2202 Summit Drive will transfer approximately 99 square feet to the pazcel at 2220 Summit Drive. No pazcel is created or eliminated with this lot line adjustment. The purpose of this lot line adjustment is to exchange squaze footage to provide for school safety improvements at 2202 Sumuiit Drive. A parcel map is not required to adjust the existing lot lines. The current Subdivision Map Act Section 66412 Map Act Exclusions (d) states: "A lot line adjusiment between four or fewer existing adjoining parcels, where the land taken from one pazcel is added to an adjoining pazcel, and where a greater number of pazcels than originally existed is not thereby created, if the lot line adjushnent is approved by the local agency, or advisory agency. A local agency or advisory agency shall limit its review and approval to a determination of whether or not the parcels resulting from the lot line adjustment will conform to the local general plan, any applicable coastal plan, and zoning and building ordinances. An advisory agency or local agency shall not impose conditions or exactions on its approval of a lot line adjushnent except to conform to the local general plan, any applicable coastal plan, and zoning and building ordinances, to require the prepayment of real property U:NI CTOR�Projects�Prrvate�PM13.01 A.doc fees prior to the approval of the lot-line adjustment, or to facilitate the relocation of existing utilities, infrastructure, or easements. No tentative map, parcel map, final map shall be required as a condition to the approval of a lot line adjustment. The lot line adjustment shall be reflected in a deed, which shall be recorded. No record of survey shall be required for a lot line adjustment unless required by Section 8762 of the Business and Professions Code." Lot line adjustments aze categorically exempt as the current California Environmental Quality Act Article 19 Categorical Exemptions Class 15315 Minor Land Divisions states: "Class 15 consists of the division of property in urbanized azeas zoned for residential, commercial, or industrial use into four or fewer parcels when the division is in conformance with the General Plan and zoning, no variances or exceptions are required, all services and access to the proposed parcels to local standazds aze available, the pazcel was not involved in a division of a larger parcel within the previous 2 years, and the parcel does not have an average slope greater than 20 percent." The proposed parcel at 2202 Swxuiut Drive will have a total lot area of 2.66 acres. The proposed pazcel at 2220 Summit Drive will have a total lot area of 6.99 acres. The Planning Departrnent has reviewed this map and all comments are attached. There are no public utilities or public easements that will be affected and this application can be approved by the Commission. The Commission action does not need to be forwazded to Council except on appeal. i tor Voon , . Associate En ' U:\V I CTOR\Projeds�Private�PM 7 3.01 A.doc Item No. 3b. Regular Action MEMO TO FROM: DATE: PLANNING COMMISSION PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT - ENGINEERING DIVISION JLTLY 8, 2014 SUBJECT: TENTATIVE AND FINAL PARCEL MAP FOR A LOT SPLIT OF PARCEL 23-C, KENMORE TERRACE SUBDIVISION, 2202 SLTMMIT DRIVE - PM 13-01 Site Information: Zoning: Existing Lot Size: Proposed Lot Size: Required Lot Size: Required Street Frontage: Background: R-1 Residential 115,524 Square Feet (2.65 Acres) Lot 1= 109,854 Square Feet (2.52 Acres) Street Frontage = 60 Feet Lot 2= 5,972 Squaze Feet Street Frontage = 50 Feet 5,000 Square Feet 50 Linear Feet This parcel map application proposes to subdivide one lot into two lots. Both Lots 1 and 2 meet the required slreet frontage of SO lineaz feet and minimum lot size of 5,000 square feet. The tentative map indicates a portion of the sanitary sewer main pipelines to be outside of the existing sanitary sewer easement aligiunent. The sanitary sewer easement alignment was found to be depicted incorrectly in the previously recorded parcel map. As part of this application, the sanitary sewer easement will be adjusted such that the main pipelines are the centerline of the easement as shown on page two of the tentative map. Page 1 of 3 Tentative map was routed to various departments for comments which were addressed by the applicant. This lot split is categorically exempt as the current California Environmental Quality Act Article 19 Categorical Exemptions Class 15315 Minor Land Divisions states: "Class 15 consists of the division of property in urbanized azeas zoned for residential, commercial, or industrial use into four or fewer pazcels when the division is in conformance with the General Plan and zoning, no variances or exceptions aze required, all services and access to the proposed parcels to local standards are available, the pazcel was not involved in a division of a larger pazcel within the previous 2 yeazs, and the pazcel does not have an average slope greater than 20 percent." This application is being processed concurrently with a lot line adjustment with the Burlingame School District. The lot ]ine adjustment will need to be recorded prior to the recording of this proposed parcel map. The Engineering Department has reviewed the map application and has the following comments: A final pazcel map for the lot split must be filed by the applicant within the two-year time period as allowed by the Subdivision Map Act and the City's Subdivision Ordinance. 2. No developmental approvals are part of tlus mapping action. 3. Final map shall include note to indicate that portions of the existing sanitazy sewer easement were realigned as shown on page two of this map. 4. All property corners shall be set in the field and be shown on the map. 5. The final map shall show the widths of the right-of-way for Summit Drive and Canyon Road including the centerlines of right-of-way, bearings and distances of centerline and any existing monuments in the roadway. Page 2 of 3 This application will be forwazded to City Council for approval. This mapping action should be considered as a Tentative and Final Pazcel Map for the lot split to facilitate processing. Staff will see that the Fina1 Map is properly prepazed following City Council approval. Attachments: Assessor's Map, Tentative Map U:\V IC'fOR�Projects�Private�PM 13-0Ldoc Page 3 of 3 CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANNING COMMISSION UNAPPROVED MINUTES Monday, June 23, 2014 — T.00 p.m. City Council Chambers — 501 Primrose Road Budingame, California 6. 2202 SUMMIT DRIVE AND 2220 SUMMIT DRIVE, ZONED R-1—APPLICATION FOR TENTATIVE AND FINAL PARCEL MAP FOR A LOT SPLIT AT 2202 SUMMIT DRIVE; AND APPLICATION FOR LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT AT 2220 SUMMIT DRIVE AND 2202 SUMMIT DRIVE (WARREN DONALD, APPLICANT AND PROPERTY OWNER; BURLINGAME SCHOOL DISTRICT, APPLICANT AND PROPERTY OWNER; WAYNE HASS, B& H SURVEYING INC., LICENSED LAND SURVEYOR) (82 NOTICED) All Commissioners had visited the project site. There were no ex-parte communications to report. Reference staff report dated June 23, 2014, with attachments. Associate Engineer Voong presented the report, reviewed criteria and staff comments. Forty-two (42) conditions were suggested for consideration. There were no questions of staff. Chair Bandrapalli opened the public hearing. Warren Donald represented the applicant: School approached applicant for lot line adjustment to provide area for crosswalk. 30 feet of frontage provides area for crosswalk, and also better turning radius to get into the school. Plans show potential building footprint to show something could be built there. Bottom of lot is a blight, difficult to maintain. No water or power to maintain anything. Commissioner questions: Who will own private road? (Donald: Sold the property last year, with option to subdivide. 14-foot access to the rear lot. Meets the fire code. Also this will add one more unit to the City's total.) Public comments: Carla Iverson, 2841 Canyon Road, spoke on this item: • Has easement agreement with 2202 Summit. Concerned will need to realign driveway. • Splitting the lot implies there will be development. Don't knowwhat the developmentwill look like or how nonconforming construction will impact the neighborhood, the school, daily traffic, fire, and first responder safety, utility reconfiguration, existing easement, possibly rerouting existing driveway. • Applicant sold property, wrote letter dated February 19, 2013 that the property looked like a vacant lot, and that loiterer and weed abatements were issued in the past. • Previously had a parking lot on the site with 8-12 cars, which was dug up and covered with dirt. Had been the entrance to the school. Should restore to parking. • Though the letter says splitting the lot will solve the issue of maintaining it, itwill continue to look like a vacant abandoned lot. � Proposed lot meets minimum requirements, but concerned doesn't knowwhat developmentwill look like. Elmira Kaponat, 2109 Summit Drive, spoke on this item: Lives directly across the street. Every winter there is significant water flow down the driveway of 2202 Summit. CITY OF BURLINGAME PLANN/NG COMMISS/ON — Unapproved Minutes June 23, 2014 Wants drainage of new driveway to be taken into consideration, otherwise will create flooding problems. Street will be very narrow. Multiple stop signs. Traffic on street. Valerie Carlos, 2818 Easton Drive, spoke on this item: The area is problematic for the drainage. Creek in the back of 2202 Summit — water runoff. Removing parking and adding dirt gave some relief, but not sure what the impact will be with a house. Steve Epstein spoke on this item: • President of Burlingame Hilis Improvement Association. Represents 423 households, including approximately half of the parents who will be attending Hoover Elementary in the fall of 2015. • Best use of lot would be as additional off-street parking for staff and parents. This was how it was used before the school district sold the property. • Feasibility of the school will depend on how much off-street parking is available. • Off-street parking benefits the school district by increasing the chance that the traffic plan will be able to convince the judge to allow the school to open. Susan Chiiton, 2840 Canyon Road, spoke on this item: • Concerned with density: lot is approximately 6,000 square feet, is a small lot for this neighborhood. • The lot split and developing a house would be incongruous to the neighborhood. • Feels like it is shoehorning a house into the end of a driveway. • School had wanted lot line adjustment previously, but now waiting for results of the environmental review. Fred Chilton, 2840 Canyon Road, spoke on this item: Has not seen a situation where all the neighbors adjacent to a piece of property are questioning the value of the project. Supports the school, but it seems odd to place a house next to it. Timing is odd, given the court orderwith the school. Should not be building a house when the school may need the properly. Warren Donald spoke on this item: • Has not offered to sell the property to the school, and it has not asked to buy it. School just wanted to the crosswalk location and the 30 feet of frontage. Not sure how much parking could be accommodated. • Even if it were sold to the school, would still need to be subdivided. • With the easement there is no reason the driveway at 2841 Canyon Road would need to be realigned. • When school was sold, parking reverted to 2202 Summit property. Taking out parking has helped alleviate some of the drainage problems, and building a house may alleviate even more. • School has plenty of room for parking with 6 acres. Commission questions: 2 CITY OF BURL/NGAME PLANN/NG COMMISS/ON — Unapproved Minutes June 23, 2014 ■ Not owner— option to buy if the lot is split? (Donald: Yes, if the lot is split.) • How was the size of the lot determined? (Donald: Just the way it worked out. City explained standards, surveyor drew up a lot thatwould conform to standards. Minimum lot size is 5,000 square feet—this lot is larger.) • Does the applicant need to be the property owner? (Strohmeier: No. Mr. Donald is the applicant but does not own the property.) • Would it be possible to approve one but not both applications? (Strohmeier: Could not approve the lot split without the lot line adjustment.) There were no further comments and the public hearing was closed. Commission questions/comments: • The Commission is not reviewing the development application, it is reviewing the lot split. (Strohmeier: Correct. TRG study was to demonstrate that a home could be built on the lot that would conform with setbacks and lot coverage regulations, and stays outside the various easements. Planning requires this before a lot split may be approved.) • Would there be a requirement to control runoff from a project? (Voong: Would look at how water is drained from the property.) • Development of the lot could improve the condition — would require proper drainage. • The design review process would make sure the development is appropriate and fits in with the neighborhood. The owner could also choose to develop it as parking (Strohmeier: Would need to be sold to the school to use the lot as parking. Surface parking is not a permitted use in the R-1 District, but school property is under state regulations.) Staff requested that the item be continued to follow up on some of the items presented, such as the drainage and easements. Staff would like to obtain some additional clarity for when the application moves on io the Ciry Council for review. CommissionerGum moved to continue the application to the July 14, 2014 Planning Commission meeting, by resolution. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Loftis. Discussion ofmotion: None. Chair Bandrapalli called for a voice vote on the (Commissioners Sargent and Terrones recused, Commission's action is advisory and not appealable. motion to continue. The motion passed 4-0-2-1 Commissioner DeMartini absent). The Planning This item concluded at 10:34 p.m. Commissioners Sargent and Terrones retumed to the dais. 3 Warren and Jennifer ponald 2202 Summit Drive Burlingame, California 94010 (650)307-4999 Fe6ruary 19, 2013 City of Burlingame Planning Commission 501 Primrose Burlingame, CA 94010 RE: Proposed Land Swap with Burlingame School District and Lot Split 2202 Summit Drive Our property 2202 Summit Drive is located next to the Hoover school. Hoover School is in the process of being reopened by the Burlingame School District. We were approached by the district regarding the need fora safer crosswalk. The district determined the safest location for the crosswalk would be located over our property. At the same time, we were in the process of a lot split regard�rrg the same portion of our property involved with the crosswalk. In looking at the district's proposal for the crosswalk, it was determined that a land swap would be beneficial to the distrid and to our parcel. The district receives a safer location fortheir crosswalk, an extra parking space and a safer approach to the drop off/turnaround. In return our parcel receives land ifiai "squares it ofY' and makes the parcel more uni4orm to the �eighborhood. (See letterfrom Burlingame School District, dated 12/10/12) Our reason for pursuing the lot split was to make the area in question more uniform to the neighborhood and to solve some reoccurring problems associated with the land. (See Parcel Map, Hoover Elementary School) Our entire property is approx. 3 acres. The bulk of our property is separated from the proposed lot by a long driveway. (See Parcel Map, Z202 Summit) The proposed lot is approx. S,SOOsq.ft. fronting Summit Drive. From Summit this area looks like a vacant lot. Over the years we have had significant problems with unwarranted parking, loitering and weed abatement. No matter what we have done, pavement removal, plantings and posting of signs, nothing has solved the problems associated with this vacant area. We feel the lot split and land swap will greatly improve public safety, offers many benefits to the community and will complete the neighborhood. The land swap provides the school distrid with the safest location for the crosswalk enabling children the safest path. Also provided is a safer approach to the drop off and an extra parking space. The land provided to the parcel from the school district enables a square off of the left property line making the proposed parcel more uniform to the neighborhood possibly allowing a better home to be built on the parcel. The community benefits from these negotiations because the school is able to provide the best possible safety plan for the children and pedestrians. The neighborhood benefits from a parcel that is not vacant and can be developed compatible with homes in the area. - _ .. . ' _ .� f",,, � _D ..li �� l'��.� L ;��_�. �_�.� . i V: �" � i'�1.�„'� _.1 [ _ •_�,i.l:�'^`_=.1�:�\�IY�� ri:'. It has been a pleasure working with the Burlingame School District. As we are current residents of Burlingame we feel that granting this Request for Variance truly will be an improvement to the area and will help to provide much needed safety for the anticipated students and families of Hoover School. We will be happy to meet at the site if there are any questions. Thank you in advance for your help and consideration. Sincerely, "j 4"�l'/�� l �"�/�-�i�.i! r Warren and Jennife�N3onald 2202 Summit Drive Attachments — -- -- �._ -- � `i !" �i � � =E:; . . 2.... c:-. c-- ; °,,•_ c;-:.=:.-.��:, .•:�^... I- BURLINGAME SCHOOL DISTRIGT BOARD OF TRUSTEES Michael Barber Davina Drabkin Liz Gindraux Mark G. Intrieri Gregory Land DISTRICT ADMINISTRATION Maggie MacIsaac, Ed.D. Superintendent Jud Kempson .Assis[ant Superintendent, Educational Sen+ices Robert Clark, Ed.D. 9ssistan[ Superin[endent, �Chief Business Offrcial Dennis Hills Direc[or of Curriculum, /ns[ruction and Assessment 1825 Trousdale Drive Burlingazne, Ca 94010 (650)259-3800 htto://www.bsd. k 12.caus 10 December 2012 Warren Donaid 2202 Summit Drive Burlingame, CA 94010 Dear Mr. Donald: I am writing to express to you our gratitude of pursuing the lot line adjustment between your property of 2202 Summit Drive and the District's Hoover Elementary School of 2220 Summit Drive. While on the surface based on the square footage in question, it would appear the District is on the receiving end of an unequal transaction. However, quite to contrary, the District is benefiting greatly. The lot line adjustment involves approximately 400 square feet of District property to go to you and approximately 100 square feet to be transferred to the District from you. The 400 square feet of District property is a sloped area that would be difficult and costly for the District to develop and is located along the perimeter at the far end away from the center of the designed school. The 100 square feet of your property is located on the frontage. The District's receipt of the area will allow the District to "square ofF" the boundary, add an additional parking space to the front drop ofF area, and to place a crosswalk at a safer location. We are looking forward to the completion of the transaction and anticipate the Board action at our January 8, 2013 board meeting. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me. Regards, Robert Clark, Ed.D. Assistant Superintendent/Chief Business Official �.:.:� r:_-. .E.o c�.' F�. !c�' F-., 1::= �I=_ " L„_ L p ; '_' � :3 ' _ i.�-., 4c>,' �—� e : �-� _-. - �=EB 2 t' 2�`, ci : �� oF ��.�-�;;,:,>{�.,�� Gv�-F:.-., ...,ri+'3 �... rF � ��v �� .�� _��i�� CITY OF BURLINGAME Communiiy Development Department MEMORANDUM Plans Date Stamped May 14, 2014 Victor Voong Erica Strohmeier, Associate Planner SUBJECT: Lot Split and Lot Line Adjustment for Parcels with Assessor's Parcel Numbers 027-271-340 and 027-271-090 at 2202 Summit Drive and 2220 Summit Drive The proposed Lot Split would create a new parcel from existing Lot 1(2202 Summit Drive); Lot 1 would be 110,551 square feet in area and Lot 2 would be 5,275 square feet in area. The proposed Lot Line Adjustment would transfer 302 SF of lot area from 2220 Summit Drive to the proposed Lot 2. 1. Lot Size • Lot size of 2202 Summit Drive (Lot 1) will decrease from 115,524 SF to 109,854 SF (5,000 SF minimum lot size required per CS 25.26.050 c). • Lot size of Lot 2(new parcel) will be 5,972 SF (5,000 SF minimum lot size required per CS 25.26.050 c). Lot size of 2220 Summit Drive (Burlingame School District parcel) will decrease from 304,854 SF to 304,552 SF (5,000 SF minimum lot size required per CS 25.26.050 c). The proposed Lot Split and Lot Line Adjustment comply with the minimum lot size requirements. 2. Averane Lot Width • The average lot width of 2202 Summit Drive (Lot 1) will not change based on the City's definition of lot width which is "the horizontal distance between the side lot lines measured at an approximate right angle to the lot depth midway between the front and rear lot lines" per CS 25.08.470 (50' average lot width required per CS 25.26.050 a, 1). The existing parcel has an average lot width of approximately 51' based on the City's definition. The average lot width of Lot 2(new parcel) will be 51' as °measured at the horizontal distance between the side lot lines measured at an approximate right angle to the lot depth midway between the front and rear lot lines" per CS 25.08.470 (50' minimum lot width required per CS 25.26.050 a, 1). • The average lot width of 2220 Summit Drive (Burlingame School District parcel) will not change (50' average lot width required per CS 25.26.050 a, 1). The existing parcel has an average lot width of greater than 500' based on the City's definition. Community Development Department Memorandum May 14, 2013 Page 2 3. Frontape • The proposed lot frontage for 2202 Summit Drive (Lot 1) will decrease from 139.96' to 60' (50' minimum lot frontage required per CS 2526.050 a, 1). The proposed lot frontage for Lot 2(new parcel) will be 50' (50' minimum lot frontage required per CS 25.26.050 a, 1). • The proposed lot frontage for 2220 Summit Drive (Burlingame School District parcel) will increase from 503.91' to 533.87' (50' minimum lot frontage required per CS 25.26.050 a, 1). 4. Setbacks • Both 2202 Summit Drive and 2220 Summit Drive will be in compliance with setback regulations with the proposed Lot Split and Lot Line Adjustment. A diagram was submitted to the Engineering Division that indicates that a house can be built on Proposed Lot 2 in compliance with the City's setback regulations (CS 25.26.072) and in compliance with all existing and proposed easements on the property. 5. Lot Coveraae - With the proposed Lot Split and Lot Line Adjustment, the lot coverage for 2202 Summit Drive will increase from 2.1 °/o (2,440 SF) to 2.2% (2,440 SF) where 40% is the maximum allowable lot coverage on any R-1 lot (per CS 25.26.065). • With the proposed Lot Split and Lot Line Adjustment, the lot coverage for 2220 Summit Drive will only slightly increase based upon the overall reduction in lot area. Planning Staff does not have any records with regards to the existing lot coverage on site, but does have records that indicate that the existing Floor Area Ratio is well below what the maximum lot coverage would allow. • Both properties will be in compliance with lot coverage regulations with the proposed Lot Split and Lot Line Adjustment. - Any project for a new house on Proposed Lot 2 will need to comply with the City's Lot Coverage requirements as outlined in CS 25.26.065 (40% maximum lot coverage allowed). 6. Floor Area Ratio • With the proposed Lot Split and Lot Line Adjustment, the floor area ratio for 2202 Summit Drive will not be increasing (0.04 FAR existing and proposed, 4,672 SF, where 8,000 SF is the maximum house size allowed on any R-1 lot per CS 25.26.070 e). • With the proposed Lot Split and Lot Line Adjustment, the floor area ratio for 2220 Summit Drive will not be increasing (0.07 FAR existing and proposed, 20,933 SF school building, where 8,000 SF is the maximum house size allowed on any R-1 lot per CS 25.26.070 e). • Both properties will be in compliance with floor area ratio regulations with the proposed Lot Split and Lot Line Adjustment. • Any project for a new house on Proposed Lot 2 will need to comply with the City's Floor Area Ratio requirements as outlined in CS 25.26.070. Community Development Department Memorandum May 14, 2013 Page 3 7. Off-Street Parkinq • The driveway width of 2202 Summit Drive will maintain a minimum width of 14' at the narrowest point (where a 9'-6" width is the minimum requirement per CS 25.70.025 b, 1) because of the proposed "I & E EasemenY' that is indicated as a dashed line on the proposed Tentative Map. - The proposed Lot Split and Lot Line Adjustment will not affect off-street parking or the drive aisles on the property at 2220 Summit Drive. • Any project for a new house on Proposed Lot 2 will need to comply with the City's Off-Street Parking regulations as outlined in CS 25.70. �CITY OF BURLINGAME COMf�liUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT BURLINGAME 501 PRIR4ROSE ROAD �BURLINGAME,CA94010 '�,; PH: (650) 558-7250 e FAX: (650) 6963790 www.burlingame.org Site: 2202 SUMMIT DRIVE 8 2220 SUMMIT DRIVE ' The (ity of Burlingame Planning (ommission announces the following pu6lic hearing on MONDAY, JUNE 23, 2014 at 7:00 P.M. in the CiTy Hall Council Chamhers, 501 Primrose Road, Burlingame, CA: Application far Tentative nnd Final Parcel Map for a Lot Split ai 2202 SUMMIT DRIVE; nnd Application for Loi Line Adjustment ut 2220 SUMMIT DRIVE & 2202 SUMMIT DRIVE zoned R-l. APN 027-271-909 & APN 021-271340 Mailed: June 23, 2014 (Pfease rerer to ofher side) PUBLIC HE�lRIWG NOTICE DEMARIA 720 CONCORD WAY BURLINGAME, CA 94010 Ci� of Burlingame A copy of the application and plans for this project may be reviewed prior to the meeting at the Community Development Department at 501 Primrose Road, Buriingame, California. If you challenge the subject application(s) in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing, described in the notice or in written correspondence delivered to the city at or prior to the public hearing. Property owners who receive this notice are responsible for informing their tenanis about this notice. For additional information, please call (650) 558-7250. Thank you. William Meeker Community Development Director PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE (Please refer to other side) r.: „� .,3 " r,� � �`� � -- .� �� ; `, �� d- , � ,.'� , � , _ � � �` �� *� � � � � �� , �` . � ' � �d�y ` � U 3 � cN � . � , • � .. /'�-.. <:",�+ f > „ .,r.� � . y ..s�% � ��. : . ' � .. �f., .. �.� ,� ,� � ��,Yv y,t �. . -� ,\y� P � �. �` . f�� - � 1 y i,� t �� /. � .� � i . fA ,.� r �� . � . ,2.. \t �� r ` � A � , (� � . � �n� . �. �� ' ` `�,Q� 'a �� .'�1 �/� y � \ / y �, � Y j � � : :'=. ' f ' `✓� '��' l'7 � D4�� ,. _ a .. -� �{�" 'r�.f�'x�Y �. _�'s�' . , �, rs^ i' lc � ,� : . �.. ;i ,� ... . �Y : ` �f , f:. � .. ,.I`i , ' �Y _ > �/ . � � \� �� -:.� . ' . .� � �� ' .3 � ' (I/ � , - �� . f��Y }. r ,�i%��• 9 � '�f�M1 ��'� �• . f � ' q�(�j� • � \' � � � � "9�� . ��. ;� � �. .. . -ika � � 5 �\ ` . '�. .. . , t , '�a �,. � � �F a... � L� ",: � � ` ; _� .�� ,� ` �� ~ �'F� _� � ':� � � � ./ � / l n 1 A� �� /� s �� .� . N � � �✓ � ,� �. � � �; � � �: = ` -�;� 3, � � � �, f.�-� ��, '; � :.� -.� � ��. � _ �� ` „ ��.. � c �+ � � ' r"'t .'I' ,�Q, �'y". '; " �• I ��.�.�, �, � ,F'� "� � .. t� jY'" L t _ � .. . . .,.�i y'�t�" . tg ��. I� ` �� 6 � � #4!z' �' ,..... �` F . `�F' � � r�� `s` „ ,_ . . - . . � � �y , e � • . �;;' �� , - ... �� , , e ,,, .� � � �,�(� :- � ` , i � � i '_-��l�O;,.,�� .., , �_:. � .. , � ?�� "- � ' )1 . - �I . �` +�, � �, 13'�� :.,� '. �1 F� -� // . . . : - I ' ' O ,.- ♦ � ��~_ ❑'�' � �,., � � .,, �`�% ��' ,� �� ' � I �� •. - � -- / � � y:Y � i r �� `"�wy ', j � , a ' �y>��'"" �', ��r t / ' �� . -��R^ `�\ `�, :. � ``� `• � � r;; � Ay "`: �` ' . . . :'..' � . ! , "� � �� ,�� v.'� . :,'/( / �• ��-' ' �S.'� �� v�.� -T . �� . '. � y : .. �A. , . �s.'.��.�. t y .' .� ._ � �� .' �` ~ _ ,. i� ` .� /'�� . `� . �� `� �, . . . �y�} � �:.. .:X' . I � � 1 � �-i F/ y `�2- �. � . � �, 5 � ��I�i"__ l�� /i � � � � � �'_ ��" �, � .� k�,.�r II ,� a� `+� ii�� _ ,f . 4:. . . �: ��.;� t� : �", rN � � �, � f' � '. i - -a: �� 1 y , � . • � �' • A , �� .. _ •�'` �� . '<'�... � �� i mi7 � ' �`. � ` �\�in�". � � . ��`. `F� , � f �. �Sk� "� F: �� ,`�.`, `,�J �.N .`.` e "'�: - . i.�� 'e1. '4 j 'r` P � \ � . /�3�SAi � .. '� �. '\ .. , r Tn • o- 1 . %- 1 � '��'; . .4� �� -. '"is�,� . � � 'N' . � � d `. ' �% —�•-< N � � ...-�- �r . . � � .� �\ ') �\ �� Y �./4¢i . �� . G' . . q";� ` . � .,_ ��. ��` �` �. �A , � ti, .,- �� , _ ,, � , � .�- ,- �; . '�. '�la�- Y ,, , � � � =; -.� �;� r � E,.., . � � \ �� r`.? '� ...,� j'�` �' f� � �< '�, � � �;� .\ �i �_. �. f. � u �, �/ � � z� v ��i �'�� >: r , � �- �� ' ;�� s., ♦ �, , �, ,: �_ , ,.�-� f% �,�� = ,�,,` :.�, 1 ., � !( c `x�, ;.��.,,,� , '� ♦I — ,✓ =. '�;=.�; • . � y'.� . ��\ , ��"�f�` -'; . ` -'oCd . i�.. � - a� �a' �� . . . \ . � � �-. . /1 „�� , :. � . � 4 . ... � � ... . . . - "�'j��y . ;>.:. �'tX. "i:, `.. ' �li:r �k ! ,i l;�.. � ` i��i �v� � !� � . E " .+.�.,ee . �_ . _ �:..1 ' . :+� .% -1 ,. . , 6- .;:..a i d �