The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutARC - RV 09-247 - Linda Recupero CITY OF PALM DESERT DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT STAFF REPORT REQUEST: Request for City Council review of the Architectural Review Commission action denying a request to park a recreational vehicle in the front yard located at 42-870 Virginia Ave. SUBMITTED BY: Kevin Swartz Assistant Planner APPLICANT: Linda Recupero 42-870 Virginia Ave Palm Desert, CA 92211 CASE NO: RV 09-247 DATE: August 27, 2009 CONTENTS: Exhibits (site plan) Photos ARC Minutes dated, June 9, 2009 Recommendation: That by minute motion the City Council reaffirm the action of the Architectural Review Commission (ARC) denying a request to park a recreational vehicle in the front yard of a single-family residence located at 42-870 Virginia Avenue behind a wrought-iron fence. Executive Summary: Approval of the staff recommendation would deny the applicant the ability to park a Recreational Vehicle (RV) in the front yard behind a six foot wrought-iron fence. The applicant received a building permit for a wrought-iron fence and shed in December of 2008. The approved plans identified the wrought-iron fence as a screening mechanism for an RV. However, staff advised the applicant that the RV location identified on the plan was not part of the approval for the fence, and that it would be subject to a separate approval by the Architectural Review Commission. After the fence was constructed, the applicant parked the RV on the property without receiving approval, and she received a Notice of Violation from City's Code Enforcement Department. The applicant submitted an application on May 29, 2009. On June 9, 2009, the Architectural Staff Report RV 09-247 August 27, 2009 Page 2 of 4 Review Commission reviewed the application and denied the request to store the RV in the front yard of the property. Background: On June 10, 1999, the City Council approved Ordinance 915, amending Chapter 8.40 of the Palm Desert Municipal Code relating to Recreational Vehicles (RV) on private property. Section 8.40.050 addresses permitted and non-permitted uses of an RV. The ordinance requirements are as follows: The measurement of a RV shall not exceed twelve feet in height, which this RV falls under, as measured to its highest point.. Furthermore, the Architectural Review Commission may approve and issue a permit to park a recreational vehicle in the front yard in a designated driveway or other city-approved hard surfaced area, provided that an appropriate fence, wall, gate, door, landscaping or combination thereof is deemed adequate to screen the vehicle from adjacent lots and public streets. On May 29, 2009, the applicant submitted an application to store an RV on her property after receiving a Notice of Violation from Code Enforcement. On June 9, 2009, the request to park an RV in the front yard was reviewed by the ARC. After the Commission reviewed the case and discussed it, the request was denied because the Commission believed that the vehicle could not be adequately screened. Discussion: I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The subject property is located at 42-870 Virginia Avenue within Palm Desert Country Club, east of Fred Waring Drive and south of Washington Street. The applicant is requesting approval to store a 12-foot high RV in the front yard behind a 5-foot high wrought-iron fence and gate. The wrought-iron fence and gate were previously approved as an over the counter permit. At that time, the plans identified that the fence and gate were being installed for screening of an RV. The applicant was informed that parking an RV on private property must be approved separately by the ARC. The wrought-iron gate is located 15 feet from face of curb, and the RV approximately 20 feet. The RV is screened from the north side by an existing hedge and tree, and to the south the RV is screened by a large tree which is located in the applicant's front yard. Staff informed the applicant that additional landscaping should be installed on the south side to provide more screening of the RV. G:�Planning�ICevin Swaztz\Word�[vtisc\virginia ry CC.doc Staff Report RV 09-247 August 27, 2009 Page3of4 On June 9, 2009, staff presented the applicant's request to the ARC. The applicant stated that the RV had been parked at this property for two years and that she had never heard or received a complaint. Commissioner Van Vilet asked if the RV could be pushed back further. The applicant said, "The RV will only be able to go back another two to three feet because of the fireplace." The Commissioners believed that moving the RV two or three feet farther away from the street would not be enough to adequately screen it. Commissioner Levin stated that unfortunately any screening would not be high enough to totally screen the RV from the front. The Commission discussed the idea of placing moveable potted plants in the front of the gate and RV, and the idea of painting the wrought iron gate an earthtone color. Commissioner Vuksic stated that after looking at these RV cases over the past few years, he believed that RVs in the front yard cannot be adequately screened because it ends up looking like a big block of odd looking landscaping. Commissioner Touschner thought it was a shame that the RV couldn't be up against the house and become a mass of the house. Ms. Recupero stated that it would be expensive for her to have someone come out to cut the gate and fence and move the RV back, but she said she would do it if that is what it takes to get approval. Commissioner Gregory said that it looked like she had room in the front if she were to push the gate further back and maybe gain another four feet. Commissioner Lambell thought that would help considerably coming down the street with it not being so close. Commissioner Vuksic made a motion to deny the request because he believed that the applicant could not adequately screen the RV, Commissioner Van Vliet seconded the motion. Commissioner Gregory said that some homes were larger and have the opportunity to park an RV on their side yard. He wondered how this applies to lots that are not as large with less of an opportunity to park between houses or on the sides. He expressed that there is no definite, specific setbacks or dimensions given to the Commission. Commissioner Touschner stated that some lots are appropriate and some lots aren't appropriate. Commissioner Gregory stated that on the other hand there are neighborhoods where there are a lot of RVs. Commissioner Levin stated that the Commission believes that the proposed screening methods were a band aid and that it wouldn't adequately screen the RV in the front yard. The applicant stated that she would adequately screen it and she would like the opportunity to do that. Mr. Bagato explained that the Commission believes that when an RV is in the front yard it cannot be adequately screened. Commissioner Vuksic stated that their decision comes from their experience with seeing results of people's attempts to adequately screen the RVs in the front yard and the screening looks just as bad G:�PlanningUCevin Swaztz\Word�Misc\virginia ry CC.doc Staff Report RV 09-247 August 27, 2009 Page 4 of 4 as or worse than the RV because it looks so contrived and odd in the front of someone's home because it's out further to the street and is a huge mass. The motion was moved by Commissioner Vuksic and seconded by Commissioner Van Vilet, to deny the applicant to park an RV in the front yard behind a wrought iron fence due to inadequate screening. The motion carried on a 4-2-0-0 vote, with Commissioners Gregory, Lambell voting no. II. CONCLUSION: The case was denied by the ARC at the June 9, 2009 meeting. Staff is recommending that the City Council reaffirm the Architectural Review Commission's decision denying the request to park an RV in the front yard behind a wrought-iron fence and gate. The proposed location cannot adequately screen the RV so that it blends with the architecture and sitting of the home. Submitted By: Department Head: �, , Kevin Swartz Lauri Aylaian Assistant Planner Director, Community Development Approval: ,-- � o M. Wohlmuth Ci Manager CITY COUNCILA ON APPROVED DFNiF,D RECEIVED OTHER MEETI G DATE � �`a AYES: '�5��1.�e � SL�1'1 f'?2 " Pl� c� - � NOES: �� ABSENT: Na�►� ABSTAIN: VERiFIED BY: � � � Original on File with City rk's Office G:�Planning\Kevin Swartz\WordUvlisc\virginia ry CC.doc �_�,� CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA � � �� REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL REVIEW DECISION OF THE: Architectural Review Commission (Name of Determining Body) Case No. RV 09-247 Date of Decision: June 9, 2009 Project Proponent: Linda Recupero Address: 42870 Virginia Avenue Description of Application or Matter Considered: ` COPYTO Approval of a request to park an RV (trailer) in the front yard ________ DATE....�� — � � �� Member of the City oun il FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY Date Filed: � � Received by: �' Action Taken: Date: Rachelle D. Klassen, City Clerk W:\City Templates\City WordPerfect Templates\cncl req for review-no lines.wpd 5/21/03 � � �r ; � ' � y�� r `� ` , `�� J . � w'" -r � ,�,,� , , � ` �iTY (3F F��,� DESERT � : D�PART�ay��T OF C��f1�AUi�IT1( DEVELOPMENT � A��oveD aY: E� `` ( ❑C:.C.RES.NO. STAFF LETT'�R � i�. , i K. � �" r tJ R C. RES.t�j'O:, r►A�ACT10N�ORM Iv ,�,. � BY� �J �_. 'u1 ,�,/�/" �'`, � ! a '� I Z' i 'S -� 4�� o.�. � Q i i� (°, C�ldSTRE7CTV�JN��C��!S��I�CE WITHIN e f b + OtyrYE;,�OFTf;�sa',�rRGI'AL .,��' . �" � ,4, / t=y; { ,�__ I �-----> � � Jl.l � �� , � a 54� � � 4 �. ' , � .,� 1 � S�^f� , �� W� � �`. �� 4� � � � � C� L _.,.. _''��, . � _ _,_:_:. . _,...__ .�. -- �, .,..-•...`�r'/'v��S�.T. 1 ..,,,L ..._ r C.�.� .j..t�.`:..,6 �* ' �r �= .. `�"...,.. �:;�- �5 r�r• c.� o i c� ;� -� �.�+�J,. , , �� 4 y E + APPROVED BY � , ��,�_t r� ca . � P U B U K S 'i��. . � � � . , .._ __ _ _ .. <<, ___ _ _ _ `. i � / -�I � y�� j� ' DATE ` � I'�... � ' t�"�,G..J�", �I.� .. , ('�� Y ',f. I �� 4 � �-�� . �� . t " � f I, . ._, • r� i \. `� �/� �..:�,�. »..�..,..�.... ............ ..... .... . ......_._.�_.f...�.. ..�! � � �`�'� ' `. f � "j�C OF PALM ESERT . � t , � µ � � �E�AR',fM��BUI ING 8�SAF�TY _ i- .. � � �� „� `` �, ` APP�i�JV�D:,� � �C . ' �. , � , r,� -�� i . � , � � �',r ��r�� ' . , � ; �f. E THIS APPFiOVAL BECOME3 NULL 8 D IF ►� • {,., � � � ,I P IS NOT HECORDED WRHIN 1B0 C1AY OF I liMCE.ALL ` ' `� f WORK SHALL BE DONE IN A ORDANCE W1TH � � APPR01(ED PLANS.THIS APPRO AL SHALL NO7 8E ,' CONSTFIUED 1'O BE A PERMIT FOFik AN APPROVAL OF: ; � ANY VIOUITION OF ANY OFTHE PRbVISIO�IS OF i37AT�E (p+�,t.�.. �" � 6 ClTY ORDINANCES OR R.AYVS.TNfe3gET OF f.PPF�r�,�D ""� ` �..`�,""" : -1 PLANS MUST BE KEPT ON THc JQG'�i�IfIL COPAFLi: t7 � __ 1 �<<I �___ ______ _._. _�._ _, _ _ _ �. � , �. �. . � ,,, u ` / _„... � y , , r � l �'�i. �y \ , s �'�•' �� i�� _ � � Y � � � 7 </ . n ` � 1 � � d'� ,r � � 7 ; i ; i . � f V � � ' , d� ( ' f / f � . . . ( �d !" ..,.._. ..,. f A f`. �7 r t r ,. ^ s `+, ` � ; ____.�._.__ ___ •; , �� 'h�'". ' f �� r � � 3 � � �; ui� j� l r I+i + �`'' j i,?��ti K: l+ �rt�r� ��' � , ; F. �`� ,r ' G F ,r�- , "w� a�:�.. i p;r \� A.•Ji 'S �' � P�,�8 � 4 ;s . ,� i �'`' � �i �� e" �� '2 4 -� v � � ` j .. � � ` i , � � � � -- #►G! ...,,. .M.,, : � 4 } � ��:� , j� M.., . _ { � f� . l �ig__ _ ��•�� CITY OF PALM DESERT � � ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION • ' MINUTES June 9, 2009 I. CALL TO ORDER The meeting was calied to order at 12:30 p.m. II. ROLL CALL Commissioners Current Meeting Year to Date Present Absent Present Absent Ronald Gregory, Chairman X 10 1 Chris Van Vliet X 10 1 John Vuksic X 11 Karel Lambell X 11 Pam Touschner X 8 3 Allan Levin X 6 1 Vacancy Also Present Lauri Aylaian, Director Tony Bagato, Principal Planner Kevin Swartz, Assistant Planner Diane Hollinger, Landscape Specialist Hart Ponder, Code Compliance Manager Janine Judy, Senior Office Assistant III. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: May 12, 2009, May 26, 2009 & revisions to March 24, 2009 Action: It was moved by Commissioner Van Vliet, seconded by Commissioner Levin, to approve the May 12, 2009 meeting minutes. Motion carried 5-0-1-0, with Commissioner Touschner abstaining. It was moved by Commissioner Touschner, seconded by Commissioner Levin, to approve the May 26, 2009 meeting minutes. Motion carried 6-0. ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION MINUTES June 9, 2009 It was moved by Commissioner Lambell, seconded by Commissioner Touschner, to approve the revised March 24, 2009 meeting minutes. Motion carried 4-0-2-0, with Commissioners Gregory and Van Vliet abstaining. V. CASES: A. Final Drawings: 1. CASE NO: RV 09-247 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESS): LINDA RECUPASE, 42870 Virginia Avenue, Palm Desert, CA 92260 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Approval of a request to park an RV (trailer) in the front yard. LOCATION: 42870 Virginia Avenue ZONE: PR-4 Mr. Swartz presented the project and summarized the staff report. The applicant is requesting to park a twelve-foot high RV in their front yard behind a five-foot wrought iron gate. The gate is located 15 feet from face of curb, and the RV is located approximately 20 feet from face of curb. The RV is screened from the north side by an existing hedge and tree, but the landscaping is located on the neighbor's property and not the applicants. To the south the RV is screened by a large tree which is located in the applicant's front yard. Staff suggested to the applicant to add additional landscaping on the south side to help screen the RV. Palm Desert Municipal Code, Chapter 8.40, Recreational Vehicles on Private Property, states the measurement of a RV shall not exceed twelve feet in height, which this RV falls under as measured to its highest point of twelve feet. Furthermore, this chapter states that the Architectural Review Commission (ARC) may approve and issue a permit to park a recreational vehicle in the front yard whether in a designated driveway or other city-approved hard surfaced area provided that an appropriate fence, wall, gate, door, landscaping or combination thereof is deemed adequate to screen the vehicle from adjacent lots and public streets. Staff believes the location and screening is inadequate as the RV exists in the current photographs. Mr. Swartz indicated that a Notice of G:\PlanningWanineJudy\Word FilesW Minutes�2009�AR090609min.doc Page 2 of 10 ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION MINUTES June 9, 2009 Pubfic Hearing for this project was mailed to the neighbors and staff has not received any comments in favor or opposition. It was also noted that there was no one in attendance in favor or opposition. Mr. Swartz stated that staff was concerned because from the front there was nothing to screen the RV. Ms. Linda Recupase, applicant stated that she would be covering the RV. Commissioner Gregory asked how she would be screening it. The applicant stated that she wanted to place stained wood slats on the front gate but staff told her that it would not look good cosmetically. Mr. Swartz said that anything facing a public street cannot be wood. She explained how the gate in the front would not have an open look to it and that she would also be planting more hedges. She explained that six months ago she came in to get a permit to build a fence around the RV on the opposite side of the house but was told that there wasn't enough room there, so she placed it in its current location. Commissioner Van Vliet asked if she could push the RV back any further. The applicant said that it would only be able to go back maybe another two to three feet because of the fireplace. Commissioner Van Vliet didn't know how she would be able to screen it and not have the screening look bad in the neighborhood. Commissioner Levin stated that unfortunately any screening would not be coming up high enough to totally screen it. The Commission discussed movable, potted plants in front of the RV. Commissioner Touschner felt that if the applicant could place landscaping along the one side where there is none and then see what the pots would look like in front of the RV. She also stated that the fence is so far in front of the RV and suggested pushing the RV back as far as it can go. The applicant stated that she could push it back another two to three feet and said that it is even pushed back further than what was required to build the fence. Commissioner Touschner also thought that if the fence was painted a darker color it wouldn't stick out. Commissioner Vuksic stated that after looking at these over the years he felt that they cannot be screened adequately in the front yard, it ends up looking like a big block of odd looking landscaping. He suggested that she remove the chimney so that it can be placed on the side yard. Ms. Recupase stated that she couldn't because the way the yard is situation. She explained that the property line is G:\PlanningWanine Judy\Word FilesW Minutes�2009WR090609min.doc Page 3 of 10 ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION MINUTES June 9, 2009 wide in the front but as it goes towards the back it is angled so the RV wouldn't go back very far. She pointed out on the photos how her yard is angled and what she has proposed. Commissioner Lambell asked where the trailer had been before. The applicant stated that it has been in the same spot for two years and none of her neighbors have complained. Commissioner Gregory wondered if the fence was painted a darker color, if hedges were provided of substantial height on both sides, and an effort was made to put movable pots in front of the gate. Commissioner Touschner thought it was a shame that it couldn't be up against the house and becoming a mass of the house, but this is in the front yard. Ms. Recupase explained that she would make it look like a side yard with the hedges and rock. Commissioner Gregory stated that it would still be the same setback from the street and stay exactly where it is now. Ms. Recupase stated that it would be expensive for her to have someone come out to cut the gate and fence and move the RV back, but she said she would do it if that is what it takes to get approval. Commissioner Gregory said that it looked like she had room in the front if she were to push the gate farther back and maybe net another four feet. The applicant agreed. Commissioner Lambell thought that would help considerably coming down the street with it not being so close to the street. Mr. Jose Menjivar, in attendance asked how far back the trailers should be. Mr. Bagato answered that the further away from the street the better, but staff and the Commission prefers to see them on the side yard not coming past the front of the house. The most difficult ones are the ones that are in the front yard even if they are screened because it is still somewhat unattractive. Commissioner Lambell stated that if they could paint the fence a darker color, get adequate screening, move the gate back and add movable pots with plants taller than the gate that would be the best they could do. Commissioner Vuksic made a motion to deny because he felt they could not adequately screen the trailer and Commissioner Van Vliet seconded. Commissioner Gregory asked for discussion. He said the one concern that he had was that some homes were larger and they have the opportunity to park an RV on their side yard and wondered how this applies to lots that are not as large with less of an opportunity to park between houses or on the sides. He G:\PlanningWanine Judy\Word FilesW Minutes�2009V1R090609min.doc Page 4 of 10 ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMISSION MINUTES June 9, 2009 expressed that there is no definite, like specific setbacks or dimensions given to the Commission. Commissioner Touschner stated that some lots are appropriate and some lots aren't appropriate. Commissioner Gregory stated that on the other hand there are neighborhoods where there are a lot of RVs. Commissioner Gregory called for the vote and a motion for denial was granted. He stated to the applicant that she can appeal this decision to the City Council. Mr. Bagato informed the applicant that she has fifteen days to file a request to appeal in the City Clerk's office. Ms. Recupase asked why they denied her request. Commissioner Levin stated that the Commission feels that what was proposed was more like a band aid and that it wouldn't adequately screen the RV in the front yard. The applicant stated that she would adequately screen it and she would like the opportunity to do that. Mr. Bagato explained that the Commission feels that when an RV is in the front yard it cannot be adequately screened. Commissioner Vuksic stated that their decision comes from their experience with seeing results of people's attempts to adequately screen the RVs in the front yard and the screening looks just as bad as or worse than the RV because it looks so contrived and odd in the front of someone's home because it's out further to the street and is such a huge mass. ACTION: It was moved by Commissioner Vuksic and seconded by Commissioner Van Vliet, to deny Case RV 09-247 due to inadequate screening. Motion carried 4-2-0-0, with Commissioners Gregory and Lambell voting NO. 2. CASE NO: MISC 09-240 APPLICANT (AND ADDRESSI: MICHAEL BERG, 42662 Sussex Street, Palm Desert, CA 92260 NATURE OF PROJECT/APPROVAL SOUGHT: Final approval of a wall exception. LOCATION: 42662 Sussex ZONE: R1-9,000 G:\PlanningWanine Judy\Word FilesW Minutes�2009WR090609min.doc Page 5 of 10 '� ,�. , � �_�x� xwY> � �k ' ,�... �1•`i °.^R� 3 f a ^R m , �n. r 4 r�t . ` � 1- ✓ ''�I l �1: � /t , 1 '��:3,-� rs � , " �r� � t rt ui �f i � � '� M _ iA 4n;t•� N '" � � �4iv^ '' '� M.e �5� b�t +° 4 #�k.�va� d�� .� U� .t��_ . t {y� 5� .: � v '/ ,f + � ��i .�� J�� a+i^"vd14 ) .� F 'W"' .t � i � � �� d iq � q vi . � ^ t 4 � f � �. �, � y � r ( ' A / ll }A� � � .�: � . 'x• u �. . . y �.a� �' . � �� , r a�Y ra; �. . � : _. } � .�.iff � � }�{ �/ '3 aY��T i.� � ,��, _.� °.��€� d ( . �1'1i Ilf��l�� ' .�� .. � w� ;� � . r xR' ��.,r ��S`� �k.�. U ' 1 1 r . � ,: MFµ�.=>. � .y �~ . Hv�k 'y .. o. _. �.iri.al i ..i� 1 .v r k`.^' _ :u; , - . , . ,. . .. .. ,. •_,,;;�:. s ...,;,r, .-,.. .µ;;.y� t ,... �,.. . . . . ... �., . � , ,�. . ��. " ., � , , . .a�{,.. �,� . .. . � � y wv,Y . . � , .w... � '. -� °� �'.- . . -, , � - ' - w .,, .n'� � `'�" ` . 4 � � .. \�r �. �� r .�� .. . � . � ��.�b 1�� . . 4� +/.. � �� C. JI B� �F . r�5b ' c ��.. .I* 9 k ,i�. _':. s v-� � 8�A�4k.r.a,.xs:,. �<;.r�r ;I ...: . � ' _. � . . . _ �111f�n�.'� .�S'� � Y Y � - . . . ...� �... ,z I ' �� r � ��l i� , ' � �r � � I� � i� - .�.'Y ; {„ :?e, ^ � �:y' :. a�:4- .. � � - .�� ; o � ,� � v RK Z� ,�:K. � J.1 d.,: .a 1 � ��., � � 9 . Y. � .v� .�P ti i y t i lf.' ` �F'1� � �, v."�+`� rv��t ty� , +�'ar �� '�t .f-�,��a � 3> * rs\� { i.�: e�.�v�� t. .d�`_ .,fp. T �r v��, , � ��i � � 4 '' �„ ,, � ' .F ,.<j � �+ � � ' � �� s :.i �k7� � "��1 -t 4e�� .. 'S , RI- . ..�.._. ... ,_.'� . '*{ — .. . . .. •'i.�u,.� 4� � l �II �JHIt �� ¢ pp II r� ,� �� 191��s �� wl d ��{I$�G�3�n�'�£��"�..��Pt im l , �ii�� G I i I 1 Ih 11 ��1 E '`�f Y Y Y ."� f ! i i4 �i� i, � �d$� Ir�� +� di h- ; S`5 � i , h. h��t,�€I�tw�i �i ,,+fi�' .�1 'I+*d° s� ��'a i�, `' 7 a, YI� r , F : ' i .i.l °^ 1 ig" i ,'-r x C u.:S. w�,! 4 . �, . a �' M ' .t't. �� " . � 3v . . . . •i � . �. a � � ..ifY 4 A ..� ... ny� �.• � l � � y� . . 4 v�• • �. sti.. d � f� � � ^n�! ). .:y •..� C a t w.� � . � � .'6 . � � *a'.,. . .' J�-'.' � i g��f y � "�"ab ' �l`. � � h �� /r r"'. � 4 � rt k .� 4, yt$ . � '�. �� . ,��r yk . � f a'ir � � � �� , ly,f,,�,.�.;. .� I�nY(� �....wFi" Y' Xa i` �.� :� Rti ! ��, t'�A��i�� .!,?��. � .M ,y . . , :� 'l ; . .� F_n Ft 'S`[ 'k �A.t ,. 'M'. � i a � �G. i:''�'1 r � s� qfi. . �. 'r i � _�� :. � .. .k�.:-•"' � ��'� ' I ��- 1;r .� �. ' .. .��. x '. .. . � �. "; .,. _ � 1 i�" �_ I ' �fi °1Y-0� �� s �:'��+E' i .'*, � 4 `P Ik� I` {� .;I � it a�#,}NI�. . i 6 Ii I; i. k i � ,i; " 3Y lig: u ii i 1 I �. i°i I.�. ��,,� r r u` �i.e7�i� � � i : �'t`�'°�� i i ��':� .... , y � .4 .,�' �� z .. � � ,r ��,I t�� x �=o� n .°k, r � ,• : � rt I y.��. � �Wt'�i�..t'L° 4 '� t. ,�� . �� >y�. ` � �� Y y I L�. ;�7 _ , ' ., ,.. i � Y,' . �,. �p. ,.r. �: � . - ..' �' ..' 1. kt ,' . M1` , �}p [ ��.►m:h� S s ��+ � � � . •. � . ; �'i. . ... � "�'F �` �IIIIIIIIIII��l��11lI��II�I�� ,. . � �', ,�.,. . —_. _ � ' �A . - . ,... . �,,, � s r ... — —=`— � . , ��..��, r .E,i I�� Ip ��' ��Gdi�1��5 . k� �, ,�� IY� � P@� b,�-s rn � ' " fks.€ .. ._;�. � . ,. . . . ;. . .. ,.... u ._... . r..... . -.«_.. � .. . . . . � _ . _ ""� Y�� — �s`9i�::� i � �� :; � � � i k' i � > I � {, s � . u, �� 1 + i . .—� � : N�, �, .� , � ? �t .��,�. . ��; < � ,� ".:`, ��"•s` 'S�I�IY► ' `� �E . , �;_ � � 4 Fy �� , �' . . i � � ' :. yly b p�]y .� .aa+ '... •i� ?Ye . � �$' �j[Y : ... � yl" � 6 -- '•Y. � ,•_ - �Lb, fl�� i � 1 ) � .. � . i. _. Ff i , { �� ♦ �. . ,� �`_ �ii�1�11111��1 4muii� , 'IIIIIfIU"nmC�qdiiiil�iVi�li��l� .: � " ,� �?�. �..._.- -•, .�:� �. � ,q ��,..- , . :� -,,. � ,: � _ ._.. -A+.. �A . : v t ,... ....: s. . ., �y. . . .s'..-� '9� . ... .. tt 9R w .,��.r'Yt 3 ,'� ..: � �� . ... ''!.�- Yu� .. . . . .. . i .� I. Ye.... _ . < . ^ �Mt.. ..�w ,�, ` . ,.. .:.rr �.,,�� .ti. i �� . ,'�' �+ �y � �, '� . F' .. � �• ��eJ,4 � � � �'�+' ��.� ' , s J , 1, `yr _ 4� u•4� a +. - e. ��4'� � �'d; 6-� ��`7w t�a-' �7�. ' �4. �' r 2� ' �- y� � . �i :� f '� ,� , , � � ;a _ �., � .. � . ,. _ A ;�,: '��(� �G� . � 1"+� 4 J^S_ f �� aiYh� a'E _ - Y' n � �1SA;.� ,� .��_� _ .. . . . ,, .. :..i i"i ,; �^: — } �.��>a �eT_; � v,+v� ' � . ..-T . 4 ,� � ap+ r �:...F�1�. {, .� �Y�.I �j�.", ' `... � i mi� TNR Au� I ♦ 3'u �� r ' +�� . t a;� y .. , a ,t ep:�t. ��°s k �I �A j ' i. . . ,I°� " ..Y;... ' . • ,_.. . ..- .,�. !w � . a .�-.. � � ��%4MM'{�1 �.,..• ...� ��.:a n' ... . �' �.:. �,q .� ,.,, .. .b:W� 41�� d 9p�is+�� n t� � i .w.�'. wn ' ._._ t� " �i'.�'�.��y�'. n u ; iwW rt d ` i i a�uww ' '�'"�w' '� M1�u3,�.� �. ' ., rR�r ita s,-+ ""�. �`�'.'i+'aJi A ��i 4 �.�i., �� . . �_'.�. i€� L �� '� �� . .. . � h4.�1' ` I I��%1 _ � � ls. �.'•.•� � �� . I �t �+iG '