The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About141 Costa Rica Avenue - Staff Reportd �� .� : � �1. 3 ,' . A - ., � � ; � t` { �_��..�..�� Pt' �{"` �� "' � . "' ..?"'��'� 5� �-a�y�:;. :,"�`� 3 � �,.. . � a ..+ . r'�!''�.' �"t' . .�e.� Y' "� �� . .. .s..� ��! .: ii"YS•. -9 .�_,,,..,,.r�e�+e-=-��,y„� a' yr` � ' - ' ��+::ft::;3'�m.�� . . . . _ _ �. � �- $r �. � . T'�� ..... �T;': � ��'u..-_�C..� �"�.e.—.-.�+p ��.:=-'- '. �. �� . _. -_ �; — I' -__+ s. r ,t- :: � �- �' ._. .. '�X �'�. �� 5y..r i ' �� _ �rv• �R'4R• �-. �1 f .. �14� . _ ... .... . Sa. •,�� . � ...�... � � ~� v � 'G..,�..,�. ,��n� �_ �—�yie A�' �y �i� ..w-�_ ,�'_ �� '20`' -� � �� 4.. �._„'��— _ �� _ ' .- �... ' '_ '� � .� a'•c..... ---. � City of Burlingame Design. Review a�Zd Special Permit for Heiglzt for a New Two Story Residence Item # 5 Address: 141 Costa Rica Avenue Meeting Date: 7uly 24, 2000 Request: Application for design review for a new five-bedroom, two-story residence with a detached two- car garage; the project includes a special permit for a residence with a height of 35'-0". Property Owner: Larry Morsello Applicant and Designer: James Chu APN: 028,316-030 Lot Area: 6529 SF (50' x 131') Gener�l Plan Designation: low density residential Date 5ubmitted: May 18, 2000 � Summary: Application for design review for new two-story single-family residence with detached two-car garage. A Special Permit for height is required to pernut a 35'-0" height where a maximum height of 30'-0" is permitted. The house would have five bedrooms and requires two covered and one uncovered parking spaces. Staff Comments: Attached � � Table Comparing Proposed Project with Existing and Required R-1 Standards Front Setback - lst floor Front Setback - 2nd floor Right Setb�ck Left Setback Re�r Setback - lst floor Re�r Setback - Znd tloor Height DHE Lot Coverage FAR # Bedrooms P�rking Proposed 24'-6" 24'-6" 10'-0" 4'-0" 41'-4" 41'-4" 35'-0" * ok 2265 SF = 35% 3553 SF= 54% 5 2 cov.+ 1 uncov Existing 23'-6" N/A 4'-0" 10'-0" 45'-0" N/A 1-story N/A 1653 SF=25% 1550 SF = 25% N/A 1 cov+ 1 uncov Required 24'-6" 24'-0" 4'-0" 4'-0" 15'-0" 20'-0" 30' - 36' with special permit see code 2612 SF= 40% 3589 SF=55% N/A 2 cov.+ 1 uncov. * Project requires a Special Permit for Height for a height of 35'-0" where a maximum height of 30'-0" is permitted. , � Study Meeting: At the Planning Commission study meeting on July 10, 2000, the commission reviewed the proposed permits and requested that the applicant provide more specific design details for the eave, gutter and window trims, and that the applicant should add decorative wrought iron trim to the window above the stairway to match the front windows with this trim element. The commission voted to place this item on the consent agenda when revised plans were resubmitted to the Planning Department. � In response to the commission's comments, the applicant resubmitted sheet 4-A with additional detail of the eave, gutter and window trim and a decorative wrought iron grate on the window above the stairs. No other changes to the plans were made. Findings for Speci�l Permit for Height: In order to approve a special permit, the Planning Commission must make the following findings as adopted by Ordinance 1603 on September 23, 1998: (a) that the blend of mass, scale and dominant structural characteristics of the new construction or addition are consistent with the existing structure's design and with the existing street and neighborhood; (b) that the variety of roof line, facade, e�erior finish materials and elevations of the proposed new structure or addition are consistent with the existing structure, street and neighborhood; (c) the proposed project is consistent with the residential design guidelines adopted by the city; and, (d) removal of any trees located within the footprint of any new structure or addition.is necessary and is consistent with the city's reforestation requirements, and the mitigation for the removal that is proposed is appropriate. Design Review Criteria: The criteria for design review as established in Ordinance No. 1602 adopted by the Council on September 23, 1998 are outlined as follows: that the proposed addition is compatible with the architectural style and existing character of t$e neighborhood; 2. that the proposed addition respects the parking and garage patterns in the neighborhood; 3. that the proposed architectural style, mass and bulk of structure is acceptable; 4. that the proposed addition interfaces well with the structures on adjacent properties; and 5. that the landscaping is acceptable with respect to its proportion to mass and bulk of structural components. Findings: Based on the reasons stated by the Commission in the attached minutes of the Planning Commission's 7uly 10, 2000 preliminary study session for the project with the applicant's modification of the plans by providing specific detail of the ea.ve, window and.gutter detail and adding the wrought iron trim to the stairway window, the proposed two-story residence and detached garage are found to be compatible with the requirements of the City's four special permit findings and five design review guidelines. Planning Conunission Action: The Planning Commission should hold a public hearing. Affirmative action should be made by resolution and should include findings made for the requested design review permit and special permit. The reasons for any action should be clearly stated. At the public hearing the following conditions should be considered: that the project sha11 be built as shown on the plans submitted to the Planning Department date stamped May 18, 2000, sheets A-1 through A-3, including landscape plan, house section and site survey, and sheet A-4, showing the window wrought iron, eave and gutter detail, date stamped 7uly 14, 2000; . t ' Design Review and Special Pern:ii for Height for . , New Two-Story Residence 141 Costa Rica Avenue 2. that any changes to the size or envelope of the house or garage, which would include changing window size or location, or changing the roof height or pitch, shall be subject to design review; 3. that the conditions of the Chief Building Ofiicial's May 22, 2000 memo and the City Engineer's May 23, memo shall be met; and 4. that the project shall meet a11 the requirements of the California Building and Fire Codes, 1998 edition, 'as�amended by the City of Burlingame. Janice 7agelski Planner c: 7ames Chu, applicant 3 City ofBuwlingame Planning Commission Unapproved Minutes July 10, 2000 Reference staff report, 7.10.00, with attachments. City Planner and Commission discussed the report, reviewed criteria and Planning Department comments. Five conditions were suggested for consideration. Commission had no questions of staff. Chairman Luzuriaga opened the public hearing. Terri S. Linenbach, property own�r', and Ray Brayer, applicant and designer, represented the project. Mr. Linenbach noted that the project was 'initially submitted in February, the design has been improved, and the neighbors like the proposal. He also thanked the Commission for their help in designing a house which is beneficial to his family and the neighborhood. The applicant submitted a petition signed by several neighbors in support of the project. �::�� :. �� Commissioners discussed the proposed addition: Commission n�ted that this project has dramatically changed since the initial submittal and suggested that 6" x 6" wood mem��rs be used for the outriggers, as drawn on the plans, the outriggers are too thin and need to be larger. Applicant agreed and noted that there are several good examples in the neighborhood to study. There were no other coinments from the floor and the public hearing was closed. C. Dreiling moved to approve the project, by re�lution, with the following conditions: 1) that the project shall be built as shown on the plans submitted to the Planning Department date stamped��une 12, 2000, sheets AO through A7, and that any changes to the footprint or floor area of the building sha,l� require an amendment to this permit; 2) that any changes to the size or envelope of the first or second floor �vhich would include adding or enlarging a dormer(s), moving or changing windows and architectural feature r changing the roof height or pitch, shall be subject to design review; 3) that the two skylights shall be ti d; 4) that the conditions of the Chief Building Official's December 13, 2000 memo and the City Engineer's ecember 13, 2000 memo shall be met; and 5) that the project shall meet all the requirements of the California ilding and Fire Codes, 1998 edition, as amended by the City of Burlingame. The� motion was seconded by C eighran. Discussion on the motion: Commission commented that�he design has come a long way and that the design is more cohesive. The front porch works well with �the house and supports the request for the front setback variance. This is a learning process for some. The Commission reviews approximately 200 design review projects in one year, and project demonstrates that design review sees things that individual may not see, is pleased with the project. Chairman Luzuriaga called for a vo�ce vote on the motion to approve. The motion passed on a 7-0 voice vote. Appeal procedures were advised. This item concluded at 9:52 p.m. � , 'DESIGN REVIEW STUDY ITEMS 141 COSTA RICA AVENUE - ZONED R-1 - APPLICATION FOR DESIGN REVIEW FOR A NEW TWO- STORY SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE (LARRY MORSELLO, PROPERTY OWNER; JAMES CHU, DESIGNER AND APPLICANT) City Planner presented the staff report. Noted letter from Sue O'Connell, 144 Occidental Avenue, is concerned with the proposed height of the new house. Commission asked staff to require applicants to denote the 30' maximum height limit on plans for future projects. There were no further questions about the project from the Commission. Chairman Luzuriaga opened the public hearing. James Chu, architect, and Larry Morsello, property owner, represented the project. Commission noted that the stairway window on the right elevation should contain decorative wrought iron similar to the windows on the front elevation. Commission asked what portion of the roof extends Unapproved Minutes pag0 -8- + • � 4 City ofBuPlingame Planning Commission Unapproved Minutes July 10, 2000 above the 30' height limit; applicant noted a 10' x 10' area extends above the height limit. Subtleties in the construction will make the project work. For example, a small scale fascia is used for the dormer on the right elevation, if a greater scale fascia were proposed it would not work, suggested using O-G style gutters. Design needs to be carried throughout the house; fascia, gutter and eave details are all important to the design. Commission noted that when the project is resubmitted for review, would like to see eave details, window type and gutter details. Adding the details to the drawings will make a complefe submittal. Commission noted that in general a lean set of drawings should be submitted for Commission review so that changes can be made if needed. Suzan Cvitkovic, 144 Costa Rica Avenue, noted that she lives across the street from the proposed project, listened to Commissions' comments this evening for all design review projects, appreciates comments about architectural details, is pleased with the design and use of a detached garage, using quality windows makes the house look nice and fits in with the neighborhood, staying within the same footprint of the existing house. There were no other. comments and the public hearing was closed. C. Keighran noted that the design is nice and made a motion to place the project at 141 Costa Rica Avenue on the consent calendar at the next meeting with the direction that the applicant revise the stairway window by adding decorative wrought iron similar to the windows on the front elevation and to provide eave, gutter, and window details which apply to the entire structure. The motion was seconded by C. Osterling. Chairinan Luzuriaga called for a voice vote on the motion to refer this item to the consent calendar. The motion passed on a 7-0 voice vote. The Commission's action is advisory and is not subject to appeal. The item ended at 9:05 p.m. 1755 BAYSHORE I�GHI�'� A NEW FOUR-STORY, '77-F AND APPLICANT; LEE GA ZONED O-M - STUDY OF AN APPLICATION FOR DEVELOPMENT OF �M HOTEL (SATURN INVESTMENT GROUP, LLC, PROPERTY OWNER AND ASSOCIATES, ARCHITECT) Planner Hurin briefly presented t e staff report. Staff noted that this project would return as a study item with a revised environmental document. mmission asked if this would be an appropriate time to ask questions regarding the environmental document and a one-way parking lot. Concerned with on-site circulation, hotel customers will have to drive out onto Bayshore High and loop around if no parking is available. Traffic study will address on- site circulation. � � . n Pate a licant and Lee Ga e Lee Ga e and Associates Chaum�n Luzuriaga opened the public hearmg. A oop 1�, pp , g, g , architect, represented the project. Architect noted that they�had tried to eliminate the front setback variance by reducing the new tower at the front to 49' . The depth of he setback, understood that the front setback was determined by drawing a 45 ° towards the building, peak of ower building 50' , could set tower back to 50' . Commissioner note that hotel. This area is getting more street life and buildings need to b��ac other uses nearby within walking distance. Would like to see a gr a worried about front setback variance. It is important to have the� street. Asked applicant to explain why the entrance is on the side of th� were studied, need to keep in mind the needs of the hotel franchise the site. Architect also noted that they tried to keep 77 rooms to m� at front of building is 49' in height and the there is a concern with the orientation of the :essed by people. People will want to access er presence of the building on the street, not �trance at the front of the building facing the building; architect noted that several designs �d owner, felt this was the best solution for ke�the project feasible. Further Discussion: Commission noted that the key to interior desi is recommended relocating the elevator to a more accessible location; applicant to the front counter. Commission highly recommends that the building have� the location of the elevator and :ed that it should be located closer Lgreater presence on the street and Unapproved Minutes page -9- DATE: May 18, 2000 ROUTING FORM TO: �CITY ENGINEER X CHIEF BUILDING OFFICIAL �FIRE MARSHAL _SR. LANDSCAPE INSPECTOR _CITY ATTORNEY FROM: CITY PLANNER/PLANNER SUBJECT: Request for Design Review for new two-story residence at 141 Costa Rica Avenue, zoned R-1, APN: 028-316-030. SCHEDULED PLANNIl�TG COMIVIISSION ACTION MEETING: June 26, 2000 STAFF REVIEW BY MEETING ON: Monday, May 22, 2000 THANKS, Maureen/Janice/Ruben � ZZ ��ate of Comments G�� 7� �.�� oa � t�� oN�,`�� U c i�c� �� r f� � b o��-� �,�� 5� If� .� ��-�� i�°�'� ��6��t�% / L�''J�� ^ �0� l�aP�4i�l,9�c— T"6 Si�� / v \ / � � PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT (650) 696-7230 The City of Burlingame CITY HALL - 501 PRIMROSE ROAD BURLINGAME, CALIFORNIA 94010-3997 CORPORATION YARD (650) 696-7260 May 23, 2000 To: Planning Department From: Syed Murtuza, Senior Civil Engineer Re: Comments on 141 Costa Rica Avenue for a new 2 story residence • A properly survey by a licensed land surveyor is required for the project. The property survey shall show all property lines, easements, and shall show all property corners existing and to be set. • All site and roof drainage shall be made to drain to Cabrillo Avenue. The site plans shall show elevations demonstrating the drainage is to the frontage street or otherwise. • Sheet A1 shows the removal of the driveway at the frontage of the property. The Driveway profile shall be shown on the plans and it shall comply with the City of Burlingame standards. Any work in the public right of way requires an encroachment permit from the Public Works Department. • A sanitary sewer lateral test is required for this project. The test shall be performed in accordance with the City standard and if required, the sewer lateral shall be replaced in accordance with the City standards. • It is not clear from the submitted plans as to if any basement is proposed. If any basement is proposed, plans shall show how the underground drainage from the basement is handled. U:\Syedmurtuza�privatedevelopment\141Costa Rica ave-comments.wpd ROUTING FORM DATE: May 18, 2000 TO: �CITY ENGINEER X CHIEF BUILDING OFFICIAL �FIRE MARSHAL SR. LANDSCAPE INSPECTOR _CITY ATTORNEY FROM: CITY PLANNER/PLANNER SUBJECT: Request for Design Review for new two-story residence at 141 Costa Rica Avenue, zoned R-1, APN: 028-316-030. SCHEDULED PLANNING COMIVIISSION ACTION MEETING: 7une 26, 2000 STAFF REVIEW gy MEETING ON: Monday, May 22, 2000 THANKS, � Maureen/Janice/Ruben j�� 1��(..� � _. s � ` �-`��I Date of Comments - ' � � � �/ � Cit /Ar V*� CITY OF BURLINGAME euRunqwMc ��...�i APPLICATION TO THE PLAI�INING COMIVIISSION Type of Application: X Special Permit Variance Other_ �S � S�N �,v�' Q,�.� ProjeCt Address: 141 Coasta Rica Assessor's Pazcel Number(s): 028-316-030 APPLICANT Name: ,TamPG rhLjT,_a_rry Morseilo Address:_aa WPfit 4�ra Av _n»P City/State/Zip: San Ma o, A 440'� Phone (w):_��n-3.��-q2�6, ��rt �� (h): . � � • : ARCIiITECT/DESIGNER * Name: rramPG rh,� Address: iA WPct. 4�rA A�TPT117G City/State/ZlP: San Ma .Po, CA 94403 Phone (w): 650-345-�2�F,, Pxt. 14 PROPERTY OWNER Name:_ Larry Morsello Address: 1353 Bernal Avenue City/State/Zip: R„ r i i n g a m F+ , � A �a a n i Phone (w): . � � � : . � . � . Please indicate with an asterisk * the contact person for this application. �) � f�: 650-345-9287 PROJECT DESCRIPTION:�1ew two story�; ng� fami �� dw � �; na w� tr wo r�ar l�P�af�}1p/� ctarage- nPmo1 i�l� xi G i n� 4l1'lg1 P Story r Gi d nr-a arid aaraae. AFFIDAVIT/SIGNATiJRE: I hereby certify under penalty of perjury that the information given herein is true and conect to the best o,f�my knowledge and belief. 's Signature I lrnow about the proposed application and hereby authorize the above applicant to submit this application to the Planning Commission. Property �� y �� s Signature Date •-FOR OFFICE USE ONLY ---------------------------------------- Date Filed: S• l�� v D Fee: 510 .-f- S Ot'�. Planning Commission: Study Date: Action Date: .. R��. c�rr o.n � RLJNOAME , � �+..... � The Planning Commission is required by law to make findings as defined by the City's Ordinance (Code Section 25.50). Your answers to the following questions can assist the Planning Commission in making the decision as to whether the findings can be made for your request. Please type or write neatly in ink. Refer to the back of this form for assistance with these questions. 1. Explain why the blend of mass, scale and dominant structural characteristics of the new construction or addition are consistent ivith the existing structure's design and with the existing street and neighborhood. The new proposed two story residence is inconsistent with the existing pattern, but the�garage:iS consistent with the existing and the neighborhood. The mass is broken up with offset in the wall planes and integrated steep roof shapes. The proposed residence's mass and scale is consistent in the larger neighborhood of the "West side��. 2. Explain how tlze variety of roof line, facade, ext,e�iorfinislz materials and elevations of the proposed neiv structure or ad�lition are consistent ivith the existing structure, street and neighborhood. The new proposed residence is located within a variety of styles and shapes in this neighborhood,with mix gar�ge pattern and building mass. Compatibility is achieved by building/garage placement, and by the articulation of the steep roof to minimize impact on adjacent neighbors, and will fits well by using similar trim, detailing, and materials used. 3. Hoiv �vill tlze pmposed project be consistent ivith the residential design guidelines adopted by the city (C. S. 25. 57) ? The proposed residence is consistent with the residential design guidelines. The proposed $tyle with a detached two car garage matched the existing placement/p�ttern,.and fits in the neighborhood.. with similar bui�l�ling materials used. �� 4. Explain how the removal of any trees located within the footprint of any new siructure or addiiion .� ;is necessary and is consistent with the,city's reforestcrtion requirements. What mitigalion is proposed ` for the �reritoval of any trees? Ezplain ivhy this mitigation,is; approprzate. , 5omb�:small .:fruit •trees are. to�:be��removed, c�u��zto :new :two �.car :'': : garage.. A new landscaping�.ar.e _ proposed :for �,the �entire lot. �` T .. . . . , ., . . . .. . _ . ;, . sp.frni/II /98 : 0 n CITY OF B URLINGAME A copy of the application=and plari`s��for�tHis�,project;may be reviewed prior to the meeting at �the� Planning, Department at�501 Primrose Road, Burlingame, Califocnia �,„�� : � �`� � �„�� . ,�.� � �� t:. If you chai nge the` ub�ect applicattg�(sj� in, couit, ou ma � be limited to raising onl}�� hose'`.�ssuese�you �or so�rieone else raised�at the� �blic hearing, . �-��-�-o�:.��.� a= d,..�.,,.�..�. _ � � n n�wr�tten o esp ndenc�-°d,eliver d to the city descnbed i t e�ot�c r�t � � �� .� ; `�` '"�.`' � � �; � �-�: �: � � at or prior t t�e p1��ili� �ea��g p.� �a' �,. � �. �,�+ t. t �'__ O— C� An�? ,,R : i-,s-.� Property ov� ers wno recc� G�lll� �1��;�� tenants abo�t thi ^-no i� or ��dditi� ��t 558-7250. T ank Qu. �• � '' �� Y h�� '4 r �� Margaret o�� '�� "�' � City Planner �� ` ,� ��"' � ' , t^'r^�..�� f ,..c. ��3 � PUBLI �AF (Please refer to other side) ming their call (650) ¢ � � �� . � TICE i � �r�, ciTr o� CITY OF BURLINGAME I BURUNC�AME P�NNING DEPARTMENT I 501 PRIMROSE ROAD � BURLINGAME, CA 94010 � �,,,,,,, �„ TEL: (�50) 558-7250 I � � i I 0 i 141 COSTA RICA AVENUE APN:0c8-316=030 e• Action on �n application for design review PUBLIC HEARING I. for a new two—story singl�e—fanily residence NOTICE �. at 141 Costa Rica Avenues zoned R-1. ` The City of Burlinga�se Rlanning Cao�ission Iannounces the following public hearing on IManday, July 24, 20�0 at 7:00 P. M. in the ��,�IZ City Hall Council Chaabers located at 501 }��jj{��. Primrose Road, Burlinga�e, California. �(3Z 1 . Y�vYv. : � I ' Mailed July.14, 28� - I . i I(Please refer to other side) I .. ; RESOLUTION APPROVING CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION for DESIGN REVIEW AND SPECIAL PERMIT FOR HEIGHT, FOR NEW TWO-STORY RESIDENCE RESOLVED, by the Planning Commission of the City of Burlingame that: WHEREAS, a Categorical Exemption has been proposed and application has been made for a_design review permit and s�ecial �ermit for height to_construct a new two-story residence at_ 141 Costa Rica Avenue, zoned R-1. Larry Morsello pro�erty owner APN• 028 316 030; WHEREAS, said matters were heard by the Planning Commission of the City of Burlingame on July 24. 2000 , at which time it reviewed and considered the staff report and all other written materials and testimony presented at said hearing; � NOW, THEREFORE, it is RESOLVED and DETERMINED by this Planning Commission that: 1. On the basis of the Initial Study and the documents submitted and reviewed, and comments received and addressed by this commission, it is hereby found that there is no substantial evidence that the project set forth above will have a significant effect on the environment, and Categorical Exemption, per CEQA Section 15303 (Class 3a) Existing Facilities, Single-family residences not in conjunction with the building of two or more such units. In urbanized areas, up to three single-family residences may be constructed under this exemption is hereby approved. 2. Said design review permit is approved, subject to the conditions set forth in Exhibit "A" attached hereto. Findings for such design review permit as set forth in the minutes and recording of said meeting. 3. It is further directed that a certified copy of this resolution be recorded in the official records of the County of San Mateo. DAVE LUZURIAGA, CHAIRMAN I, Ann Keighran , Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Burlingame, do hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was introduced and adopted at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 24th day of Julv, 2000 , by the following vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: ANN KEIGHRAN, SECRETARY EXHIBIT "A" Conditions of approval Categorical Exemption, Design Review and Special Permit for Height for new Two-Story Residence at 141 COSTA RICA AVENUE effective AUGUST 7, 2000 1. that the project shall be built as shown on the plans submitted to the Planning Department date stamped 2000, sheets A-1 through A-3 date stamped May 18, 2000, including house sections, landscape plan and topographic survey, and sheet A-4, showing the window wrought iron, eave and gutter detail, date stamped July 14, 2000; 2. that any changes to the size or envelope of the residence or garage, which would include changing the size or location of windows, or changing the roof height or pitch, shall be subject to design review; 3. that the conditions of the Chief Building Official's May 22,2000 memo and the City Engineer's May 23, 2000 memo shall be met; and 4. that the project shall meet all the requirements of the California Building and Fire Codes, 1998 edition, as amended by the City of Burlingame. ' 2 . �� I �, .� ,� '� � � S 4 ` � :�� :� �- �: .�� a , 1// � � . � x � � � �1 42� "� �� Ns � �.e_._ • ( � 1 . 1 �. !e " ,� _= `"'� � ; � c�: - � � L�, � "� �� w � . � I� '� • � \1V �� •. ^Y � 's� I ��*�' �' �� f, a * �'� � � •� ; A r,� � r :., ��t-: . r °` S � 4.`� ��,' � �t � r c�� ,a�- ,,;. .��'` i > ., „� k � O ,� �r�-,:�,. .�� i :�^ � ,}Iw ,. j� �� .� �y � �G � . ,, '�t y� �. � r�. �_ ,, �. . � • ��y. % �� , . � ; ..' + � t��.. . 3 : � . �� .. �„d��,'�C� . � � �� 'y ; � ,k�y ,�e� `� :.� E � '' �i€`�' ' ' �. "'` f ' �. -* �, ,�"� �.L�, R i�, 1 t �� y1 • '+ ��i•:.e �ri. - � . S / � � 1i�� e � �k _. �\ T � � � .♦ � t.�' a.�� `.� �� ,. T' � � ? :;G � � ��, ,. . .'�, � l ''� �yy � �.5� � y��r � '` .. _ ., .� � +� �� 31�� . � { I� �`� ,� +� �'� ^ � r � w r z i . � . ` > ..,' ' �: . '. ; + 4 y � . � ._ .-. p �. , � �' � ., .' � ." �F. r� �'f � ti. . �1. .i , r� �' . ,� ,,�, , ` �� (�j , ' PEiZs}j � � � $ �. � � � `�` �.J . �� ,� �f1 R K . i "� � . f,` P. � . .�,�, �Y `� �?; �Q � `` ,;. � ,e� � - ,� � � F �S .;5 `� � �; ,� ' , ` `�.• �.. �� p� � � r ,O`; l � 5��' 4 Y� �r: �. � � � �: - ��rt ., � �: �� v � -�. � _� . . ��'„�� .. ., , �;F Y' �F ' � .��..��:. . ��! ��{�'�. ' "Sl. .;r � � � ("' � � f '� � � � �� ..-� s . .:�� is� . :,rti, l , .�' ,. � �� " x � ,�, `` �i�; /y�' ,,:;,'� � .,. �' '"� •:;5,� � / ^:�t' � � � � y � �►'� i�� , j 4 S _ � �� , 4r f, � �� .. �� ',. , k .,!- ^�� F'• � �� r • ' �r � � � f � ��`'"�. , �o ,. - �;� �P � � � �� . � � ^ . � ' .�* . r �y '""'� - s � � '' � , -y �� -� �'�"" � � : G. , , d ,�. ,. �., � e _ �. � �: / � � � � . . i� �� . ��^� +a'' � 6 . S:. � � � � -� ,� i �' � �'` � .'� �-`' ► 4," �, � ,r ,�:I .� . �- ` .�� . • � ,� ,,� s� .�.. �; � . � , ` ,� y. y ,:.. . . : ' .. . � ` . .. � d,"�' • ... . . , ..,: _, �� .. �`� , � ?� �� - . .s'. ' � . � . . ,� � �� ' d` i �� t ,�.��:. .� �' ��:s, . . � -� _ � .O'r 4 ',�� ; _I� {. , °yt� 3 . .. :;¢"i:^. A � � �. ' �� .. � F 4 \. � fr�� '._ . . ' `� ;�' .: ' ,.. . - �� ' _ . -. . : o��- ��-b� . �,� � ��- �. � ��- �. � � �... _ .