Loading...
591, Remodel existing garage into a, Correspondence• C1iy ofieo lliny J✓'�� January 26, 2000 Dr. and Mrs. Les Hromas 2 Quail Ridge Road South Rolling Hills, CA 90274 INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957 NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274 (310) 377-1521 FAX: (310) 377-7288 E-mail: cityofrh@aol.com SUBJECT: EXPIRATION OF APPROVALS FOR ZONING CASE NO. 591 CONVERSION OF EXISTING GARAGE TO RESIDENTIAL USES AND CONSTRUCTION OF ADDITIONS THAT REQUIRE GRADING 2 QUAIL RIDGE ROAD SOUTH (LOT 1-A-CH) Dear Dr. and Mrs. Hromas: This letter is to inform you that it has been almost one year since the approval of Zoning Case No. 591. Approvals will expire on March 16. 2000. You can extend approvals for one year only if you apply to the Planning Commission in writing to request an extension prior to the expiration date. The filing fee for the time extension is $200 to be paid to the City of Rolling Hills. Feel free to call me at (310) 377-1521 if you have any questions. Sincerely, Z/6 Lola Ungar Planning Director cc: Mr. Frank Politeo, Architect *w, Printed on Recycled Paper 3 PIONEER SOILS ENGINEERING, Consulting Geolechnigil E•ngineer3 3454 W, 1ST STREET, 1„,0 ANGELES, CA 90004 July 2, 1999 Project Na.: 1289-FG Mr. and Mrs. ,Les Hroma 2 Quail Ridge Road South Rolling Hills California Subject: e;r li•KLYtiP s!ioNiGt lbl:.l,. i) 381.7730 ZZ,r� Approved PLANNING DEPART vri Date ADDENDUM. Proposed Room Addition and Retaining Wall 2 Quail Ridge Road South, Rolling Hills Reference: Pioneer Soils Engineering Report dated August 6, 1998 14PrniI NT atiii/fUt 'if &4er Dear Mr. and Mrs. Hromas: At the request of your representatives the architect / engineer, Mr. Frank Politeo and the contactor, Mr. Veli Bilan, we herein present this addendum report regarding the suitability of'the on -site excavated soils and rock within the proposed addition area for compaction. In order to evaluate the excavated materials (soils and rock), a site visit was made on June 29, 1999. Based on our observation at the job site, the excavated• materials contain numerous rock fragments that are large enough to render most of the excavated materials unsuitable for: compaction. It is estimated that approximately 90 percent of the estimated 250 cu, yard to be excavated are unsuitable for compaction and therefore should be hauled away. The remaining approximately 10 percent is suitable for compaction under the observation and testing by a representative of this office. 'd 140dd JV J I ' S S66 l—Sc'.—c. i • The ekcavation has already started at the subject site. The contractor, Mr. Biloxi has reported to us that he has up to date hauled away 110 en. yards. In cc npliance with Sections 7015.4 and 7016.9 of the Building Code, we intended to 'alance the cut and fill materials. However, due to unforeseen conditions prior to the p °posed construction that include the unsuitability of most of the excavated materials for compaction combined with that the construction has already started and the need for the Inisuitable materials (soils and rock) to be exported in order to complete the room additidtt, we gleefully ask the city manager to allow for the export of 90% of the estimated 250 cu. yard of excavations. If any {uestions arise concerning the interpretation of this report, please feel free to call. Very truly y urs, PIONEER S ILS ENGINEERING, INC. Paul SungkyO Kim Geotechnical!Engineer PSK/S13/nm 4. '�S GKy0 4' 4 cni wry : ▪ No. 2088 pa Exp. Date 6/a0vo • Op 000-v Simon Bittar Project Engineer E ' d hOdS NVO I. ' S 566 1-5Z-7: • CU, ./ _With CER'1 II 1ED MAIL March 23, 1999 INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957 NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274 (310) 377-1521 FAX: (310) 377-7288 E-maik cityofrh@aol.com Dr. and Mrs. Les Hromas 2 Quail Ridge Road South Rolling Hills, CA 90274 SUBJECT: APPEAL PERIOD AND AFFIDAVIT OF ACCEPTANCE FORM ZONING CASE NO. 591, 2 QUAIL RIDGE ROAD SOUTH (LOT 1-A-CH) RESOLUTION NO. 99-8 Dear Dr. and Mrs. Hromas: This letter shall serve to notify you that the Planning Commission adopted a resolution on March 16, 1999 to grant Site Plan Review approval to convert an existing garage to residential uses, to construct additions and to construct a new attached garage that requires grading for an existing single family residence at 2 Quail Ridge Road South (Lot 1-A-CH),Rolling Hills, CA in Zoning Case No. 591. That action, accompanied by the record of the proceedings before the Commission was reported to the City Council on March 22, 1999. The Planning Commission's decision in this matter shall become effective thirty days after the adoption of the resolution by the Commission, unless an appeal has been filed or the City Council takes jurisdiction of the casewithin that thirty (30) day appeal period. (Section 17.54.010(B) of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code). Should there be an appeal, the Commission's decision will be stayed until the Council completes its proceedings in accordance with the provisions of the Municipal Code. If no appeals are filed within the thirty (30) day period after adoption of the Planning Commission's resolution, the Planning Commission's action will become final and you will be required to cause to be recorded an Affidavit of Acceptance Form together with the subject resolution in the Office of the County Recorder before the Commission's action takes effect. We have enclosed a copy of RESOLUTION NO. 99-8, specifying the conditions of approval set forth by the Planning Commission and the approved Exhibit A Development Plan to keep for your files. Once you have reviewed the Resolution, please complete the enclosed AFFIDAVIT OF ACCEPTANCE FORM, have the signature(s) notarized, and forward the completed form and a copy of the Resolution to: Los Angeles County Registrar -Recorder Real Estate Records Section 12400 East Imperial Highway Norwalk, CA 90650 Include a check in the amount of $9.00 for the first page and $3.00 for each additional page. .. s Printed on Recycled Paper. • • The City will notify the Los Angeles County Building & Safety Division to issue permits only when the Affidavit of Acceptance is received by us and any conditions of the Resolution required prior to issuance of building permits are met. Please feel free to call me at (310) 377-1521 if you have any questions. Sincerely, Lola Ungar Planning Director cc: Mr. Frank Politeo, AIA Enclosures: AFFIDAVIT OF ACCEPTANCE FORM RESOLUTION NO. 99-8 EXHIBIT A DEVELOPMENT PLAN APPEAL SECTION OF THE ROLLING HILLS MUNICIPAL CODE. • • RESOLUTION NO. 99-8 tX/.//8/T :4 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS GRANTING SITE PLAN REVIEW APPROVAL TO CONVERT AN EXISTING GARAGE TO RESIDENTIAL USES, TO CONSTRUCT ADDITIONS AND TO CONSTRUCT A NEW ATTACHED GARAGE THAT REQUIRES GRADING FOR AN EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE IN ZONING CASE NO. 591. THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS DOES HEREBY FIND, RESOLVE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. An application was duly filed by Dr. and Mrs. Les Hromas with respect to real property located 2 Quail Ridge Road South (Lot 1-A-CH), Rolling Hills, requesting Site Plan Review to permit the construction of a proposed room addition, a 3-car garage, an expanded driveway turnaround area and retaining walls that will require grading at an existing single family residence. Section 2. The Planning Commission conducted a duly noticed public hearing to consider the application on January 19, 1999 and February 16, 1999, and at a field trip visit on February 6, 1999. The applicants were notified of the public hearing in writing by first class mail and through the City's newsletter. Evidence was heard and presented from all persons interested in affecting said proposal and from members of the City staff and the Planning Commission having reviewed, analyzed and studied said proposal. The applicants were in attendance at the hearing. Section 3. On January 19, 1993, the Planning Commission approved a Variance to encroach into the front yard setback and Site Plan Review for substantial additions to the existing residence at the front and rear of the residence in Zoning Case No. 488. The request included a similar addition to the one proposed but, the applicants did not construct the entire project. The work was completed in 1995. Section 4. The Planning Commission finds that the project qualifies as a Class 1 Exemption (State CA Guidelines, Section 15301(e)) and is therefore categorically exempt from environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act. Section 5. Section 17.46.030 requires a development plan to be submitted for site plan review and approval before any grading requiring a grading permit or any building or structure may be constructed or any expansion, addition, alteration or repair to existing buildings may be made which involve changes to grading or an increase to the size of the building or structure by at least 1,000 square feet and has the effect of increasing the size of the building by more than twenty-five percent (25%) in any thirty-six (36) month period. With respect to the Site Plan Review application, the Planning Commission makes the following findings of fact: RESOLUTION NO. 99-8 Page 1 of 5 • • A. The proposed development is compatible with the General Plan, the Zoning Ordinance and surrounding uses because the proposed structure complies with the General Plan requirement of low profile, low density . residential development with sufficient open space between surrounding structures. The project conforms to Zoning Code setback and lot coverage requirements. The lot has a net square foot area of 45,430 square feet. The proposed residence (4,890 sq.ft.), garage (717 sq.ft.), swimming pool (700 sq.ft.), recreation court (312 sq.ft.), future stable (450 sq.ft.), and porch (177 sq.ft.) will have 4,776 square feet which constitutes 12.05% of the lot which is within the maximum 20% structural lot coverage requirement. The total lot coverage including paved areas and driveway will be 10,618 square feet which equals 26.79% of the lot, which is within the 35% maximum overall lot coverage requirement. The proposed project is screened from the road so as to reduce the visual impact of the development. B. The proposed development preserves and integrates into the site design, to the maximum extent feasible, existing natural topographic features of the lot including surrounding native vegetation, mature trees, drainage courses, and land forms (such as hillsides and knolls). The lot slopes downward and most of the mature trees will not be removed. Grading will be done to provide approved drainage that will flow away from the proposed residence and existing neighboring residences. C. The proposed development, as conditioned, is harmonious in scale and mass with the site, the natural terrain and surrounding residences. As indicated in Paragraph A, the lot coverage maximum will not be exceeded and the proposed project is consistent with the scale of the neighborhood when compared. to this irregular -shaped lot. The ratio of the proposed structure to lot coverage is similar . to . . the ratio found on several properties in the vicinity. D. Thedevelopment plan follows natural contours of the site to minimize grading and the natural drainage courses will continue to the canyons at the west side (front) of this lot. E. The development plan incorporates existing large trees and native vegetation to the maximum extent feasible. Specifically, the development plan preserves several mature trees and shrubs and supplements it with landscaping that is compatible with and enhances the rural character of the community. F. The development plan incorporates grading that will not modify existing drainage channels nor redirect drainage flow, unless such flow is redirected into an existing drainage course. G. The development plan substantially preserves the natural and undeveloped state of the lot by minimizing building coverage because the new structures will not cause the structural and total lot coverage to be exceeded. The development plans as proposed will minimize impact on Quail Ridge Road South. Most of the additions proposed will not be visible from Quail Ridge Road South. RESOLUTION NO. 99-8 Page 2 of 5 • • Significant portions of the lot will be left undeveloped so as to maintain scenic vistas across portions of the property. H. The proposed development is sensitive and not detrimental to the convenience and safety of circulation for pedestrians and vehicles because the proposed project will utilize an existing driveway at the northern portion of the property off Quail Ridge Road South for access. I. The project conforms with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act and is categorically exempt from environmental review. Section 9. Based upon the foregoing findings, the Planning Commission hereby approves the Site Plan Review application for Zoning Case No. 591 for proposed residential additions as indicated on the development plan incorporated herein as Exhibit A and is subject to the following conditions: A. The Site Plan Review approval shall expire within one year from the effective date of approval as defined in Section 17.38.070(A) unless otherwise extended pursuant to the requirements of that section. B. It is declared and made a condition of the Site Plan Review approval, that if any conditions thereof are violated, this approval shall be suspended and the privileges granted thereunder shall lapse; provided that the applicant has been given written notice to cease such violation, the opportunity for a hearing has been provided, and if requested, has been held, and thereafter the applicant fails to correct the violation within a period of thirty (30) days from the date of the City's determination. C. All requirements of the Buildings and Construction Ordinance, the Zoning Ordinance, and of the zone in which the subject property is located must be complied with unless otherwise set forth in the Permit, or shown otherwise on an approved plan. D. The lot shall be developed and maintained in substantial conformance with the site plan on file marked Exhibit A and dated January 13, 1999, except as otherwise provided in these conditions. E. The working drawings submitted to the County Department of Building and Safety for plan check review must conform to the development .plan approved with this application. F. Any retaining walls incorporated into the project shall not exceed 5 feet in height, averaging no more than 2-1/2 feet. G. The residential building pad coverage shall not exceed 41.3%, the stable and recreation court pad shall not exceed 19.2%, and total building pad coverage shall not exceed 36.8%. RESOLUTION NO. 99-8 Page 3 of 5 • • H. Maximum disturbed area shall not exceed 33.3% of the net lot area. • I. Grading shall not exceed 260 cubic yards of cut soil and 267 cubic yards of fill soil and shall be balanced on site. J. Any grading shall preserve the existing topography, flora, and natural features to the greatest extent possible. K. Landscaping shall incorporate and preserve, to the maximum extent feasible, the existing mature trees and shrubs and the natural landscape screening surrounding the proposed building pad. L. Landscaping shall include water efficient irrigation, to the maximum extent feasible, that incorporates a low gallonage irrigation system, utilizes automatic controllers, incorporates an irrigation design using "hydrozones," considers slope factors and climate conditions in design, and utilizes means to reduce water waste resulting from runoff and overspray in accordance with Section 17.27.020 (Water efficient landscaping requirements) of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code. M. An Erosion Control Plan containing the elements set forth in Section 7010 of the 1996 County of Los Angeles Uniform Building Code shall be prepared to minimize erosion and to protect slopes and channels to control stormwater pollution as required by the County of Los Angeles. N. Prior to the submittal of an applicable final grading planto the County of Los Angeles for plan check, a detailed grading and drainage plan with related geology, soils and hydrology reports that conform to the development plan as approved by the Planning Commission must be submitted to the Rolling Hills Planning Department staff for their review. Cut and fill slopes must conform to the City of Rolling Hills standard of 2 to 1 slope ratio. O. The project must be reviewed and approved by the Rolling Hills Community Association Architectural Review Committee prior to the issuance of any building or grading permit. P. Notwithstanding Sections 17.46.020 and 17.46.070 of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code, any modifications to the project which would constitute additional structural development shall require the filing of a new application for approval by the Planning Commission. Q. The applicants shall execute an Affidavit of Acceptance of all conditions of this Site Plan Review or the approval shall not be effective. R. All conditions of this Site Plan Review approval must be complied with prior to the issuance of a building or grading permit from the County of Los Angeles. RESOLUTION NO. 99-8 Page 4 of 5 PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 16TH DA ATTEST: ft MARILYN KERN, DEPUTY CITY CLERK STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) §§ CITY OF ROLLING HILLS ) I3, 1999: ALLAN ROBERTS, CHAIRMAN I certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 99-8 entitled: A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS GRANTING SITE PLAN REVIEW APPROVAL TO CONVERT AN EXISTING GARAGE TO RESIDENTIAL USES, TO CONSTRUCT ADDITIONS AND TO CONSTRUCT A NEW ATTACHED GARAGE THAT REQUIRES GRADING FOR AN EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE IN ZONING CASE NO. 591. was approved and adopted at an adjourned regular meeting of the Planning Commission on March 16, 1999 by the following roll call vote: Commissioners Hankins, Margeta, Sommer and Chairman Roberts.. AYES: NOES: None. ABSENT None. ABSTAIN: Commissioner Witte. and in compliance with the laws of California was posted at the following: Administrative Offices. RESOLUTION NO. 99-8 Page 5 of 5 hr,„„ DEPUTY CITY CLERK • • 17.54.010 17.54 APPEALS 17.54.010 Time for Filing Appeals A. All actions of the Planning Commission authorized by this Title may be appealed to the City Council. All appeals shall be filed in writing with the City Clerk. B. All appeals must be filed on or before the 30th calendar day after adoption of the Planning Commission's resolution on the project or application. Application fees shall be paid as required by Section 17.30.030 of this Title. C. Within 30 days after the Planning Commission adopts a resolution which approves or denies a development application, the City Clerk shall place the resolution as a report item on the City Council's agenda. The City Council may, by an affirmative vote of three members, take jurisdiction over the application. In the event the City Council takes jurisdiction over the application, the Planning Commission's decision will be stayed until the City Council completes its proceedings in accordance with the provisions of this Chapter. 17.54.020 Persons Authorized to File an Appeal Any person,including the City Manager, may appeal a decision of the Planning Commission to the City Council, in accordance with the terms of this Chapter. 17.54.030 Form, Content, and Deficiencies in an Appeal Application A. All appeals shall be filed in writing with the City Clerk on a form or forms provided by the City Clerk. No appeal shall be considered filed until the required appeal fee has been received by the City Clerk. B. The appeal application shall state, at a minimum, the name and address of the appellant, the project and action being appealed, and the reasons why the appellant believes that the Planning Commission erred or abused its discretion, or why the Planning Commission's decision is not support by evidence in the record. 76 ROLLING HILLS ZONING MAY 24, 1993 • • 17.54.030 C. If the appeal application is found to be deficient, the City Clerk shall deliver or mail (by certified mail), to the appellant a notice specifying the reasons why the appeal is deficient. The appellant shall correct the deficiency with an amendment to the appeal form within seven calendar days of receiving the deficiency notice. Otherwise, the appeal application will be deemed withdrawn, and the appeal fee will be returned to the applicant. 17.54.040 Request for Information Upon receipt of a written and complete appeal application and fee, the City Clerk shall direct the Planning Commission Secretary to transmit to the City Council the complete record of the entire proceeding before the Planning Commission. 17.54.050 Scheduling of Appeal Hearing Upon receiving an appeal, the City Clerk shall set the appeal for a hearing before the City Council to occur within 20 days of the filing of the appeal. In the event that more than one appeal is filed for the same project, the Clerk shall schedule all appeals to be heard at the same time. 17.54.060 Proceedings A. Noticing The hearing shall be noticed as required by Section 17.30.030 of this Title. In addition, the following parties shall be noticed: 1, The applicant of the proposal being appealed; 2. The appellant; and 3. Any person who provided oral testimony or written comments to the Planning Commission during or as part of the public hearing on the project. B. Hearing The City Council shall conduct a public hearing pursuant to the provisions of Chapter 17.34 of this Title. The Council shall consider all information in the record, as well as additional information presented at the appeal hearing, before taking action on the appeal. ROLLING HILLS ZONING 77 MAY 24, 1993 • • 17.54.060 C. Action The Council may act to uphold, overturn, or otherwise modify the Planning Commission's original action on the proposal, or the Council may remand the application back to the Planning Commission for further review and direction. The Council shall make findings to support its decision. D. Finality of Decision The action of the City Council to approve, conditionally approve, or deny an application shall be final and conclusive. E. Record of Proceedings The decision of the City Council shall be set forth in full in a resolution or ordinance. A copy of the decision shall be sent to the applicant or the appellant. 17.54.070 Statute of Limitations Any action challenging a final administrative order or decision by the City made as a result of a proceeding in which by law a hearing is required to be given, evidence is required to be taken, and discretion regarding a final and non -appealable determination of facts is vested in the City of Rolling Hills, the City Council, or= in any of its Commissions, officers, or employees, must be filed within the time limits set forth in the California Code of Civil Procedure, Section 1094.6 78 ROLLING HILLS ZONING MAY 24, 1993 • • Ciiy ol � f!•..s JIt/id FIELD TRIP NOTIFICATION January 21, 1999 Dr. and Mrs. Les Hromas 2 Quail Ridge Road South Rolling Hills, CA 90274 INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957 NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274 (310) 377-1521 FAX: (310) 377-7288 E-mail: cityofrh@aol.com SUBJECT: ZONING CASE NO. 591, a request for Site Plan Review to permit the construction of a proposed room addition, a 3-car garage, an expanded driveway turnaround area and retaining walls that will require grading at an existing single family residence at 2 Quail Ridge Road South (Lot 1-A-CH), Rolling Hills, CA. Dear Dr. and Mrs. Hromas: We have arranged for the Planning Commission to conduct a field inspection of your property to view a silhouette of the proposed project on Saturday. February 6. 1999. The Planning Commission's timetable is to meet at 7:30 AM at 28 Portuguese Bend Road and then proceed to 10 Eastfield Drive, 3 Crest Road West, 16 Crest Road West, and then to your property at 2 Quail Ridge Road South. Do not expect the Commission at 7:30 AM but, be assured that the field trip will take place before 10 AM. The site must be prepared according to the enclosed Silhouette Construction Guidelines and the following requirements: • A full-size silhouette must be prepared for ALL STRUCTURES of the project showing the footprints, roof ridges, bearing walls and any retaining walls; • Stake or flag the limits of the building pad at the rear, the side yard setback at the north, and the limits of grading. • Delineate areas to be graded showing finished floor or grade elevations. The owner and/or representative should be present to answer any questions regarding the proposal. Please call me at (310) 377-1521 if you have any questions. Sincer. LOLA M. UNGAR PLANNING DIRECTOR cc: Mr. Frank Politeo, AIA Printed on Recycled Paper. • ./ Ailing JUL INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957 NO.2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CALIF, 90274 (213) 377-1521 FAX (213) 377-7288 SILHOUETTE CONSTRUCTION GUIDELINES 1. When required by the Planning Commission or City Council, a silhouette of proposed construction should be erected for the week preceding the designated Planning Commission. or City Council meeting. 2. Silhouettes should be constructed with 2" x 4" lumber. Printed boards are not acceptable. 3. Bracing should be provided where possible. 4. Wire, twine or other suitable material should be used to delineate roof ridges and eaves. 5. Small pieces of cloth or flags should be attached to the wire or twine to aid in the visualization of the proposed construction. 6. The application may be delayed if inaccurate or incomplete silhouettes are constructed. 7. If you have any futher questions contact the Planning Department Staff at (213) 377-1521. Ir • 1 lit 1 1` i ` ' i 1 i I at 1 ! /N �\ PLAN SECTION City ol�o��hy INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957 NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274 (310) 377-1521 EC STATUS OF APPLICATION & NOTIFICATION OF MEETIL' (310) 377-7288 cityofrh@aol.com January 7, 1999 Mr. and Mrs. Les Hromas 2 Quail Ridge Road South Rolling Hills, CA 90274 SUBJECT: ZONING CASE NO. 591; a request for Site Plan ' Review to permit the construction of a proposed room addition, a 3-car garage, an expanded driveway turnaround area and retaining walls that will require, grading at an existing single family residence at 2 Quail Ridge Road South (Lot 1-A-CH), Rolling Hills, CA. Dear Mr. and Mrs. Hromas: Pursuant to state law the City's staff has completed a preliminary review of the application noted above and finds that the information submitted is: X Sufficiently complete as of the date indicated above to allow the application to be processed. Please note that the City may require further information in order to clarify, amplify, correct, or otherwise supplement the application. If the City requires such additional information, it is strongly suggested that you supply that information promptly to avoid any delay in the processing of the application. Your application for Zoning Case No. 591 has been set for public hearing consideration by the Planning Commission at their meeting on Tuesday, January 19,1999. The meeting will begin at 7:30 PM in the Council Chambers, Rolling Hills City Hall Administration Building, 2 Portuguese Bend Road, Rolling Hills. You or your designated representative must attend to present your project and to answer questions. The staff report for this project will be available at the City Hall after 3:00 PM on Friday, January 15, 1999. We will forward a copy to you. Please call me at (310) 377-1521 if you have any questions. Sincerely, LOLA UNGAR PLANNING DIRECTOR . cc: Mr. Frank Politeo, AIA r. Printed on Recycled Paper.