Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1/9/1995MINUTES OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION JANUARY 9, 1995 CALL TO ORDER Chairman Meyer called the meeting to order at 7:12 p.m. at the South Coast Air Quality Management District Board Room, 21865 East Copley Drive, Diamond Bar, California. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE The audience was led in the Pledge of Allegiance by Vice Chairman Flamenbaum. ROLL CALL Present: Commissioners: Chairman Meyer, Vice Chairman Flamenbaum, Schad, Fong, Huff Also Present: Associate Planner Robert Searcy; Assistant Planner Ann Lungu; Interim City Attorney Michael Montgomery, Consultant . Engineer Michael Myers; Recording Secretary Carol i Dennis MATTERS FROM THE AUDIENCE/PUBLIC COMMENTS None CONSENT CALENDAR 1. Minutes of November 14, 1994 and December 12, 1994. The following corrections/amendments were offered: 1. C/Huff, November 14 minutes, Page 7, New Business, Item 1., change "indicative" to "indigenous". 2. Chair/Meyer, November 14 and December 12 minutes should reflect that C/Huff abstained from the minutes approval process. 3. C/Fong, November 14, Page 5, middle of third paragraph, correct "topal" to "topo". 4. Chair/Meyer, December 12, Page 4, motion by C/Huff regarding Variance 94=-2, spell out the -� conditions. Copy from the Resolution into the I minutes. Kill January 9, 1995 Page 2 Planning Commission 5. Chair/Meyer asked that the minutes be more active by abbreviating the staff report and adding more comments. 6. VC/Flamenbaum, November 14, Items 1 and 2, outline of proposed Development Ordinance, should include the request for staff to present the outline at the January, 1995 meeting. AP/Searcy stated his notes reflected "expeditiously" and that no date had been stated in the request during the November 14 meeting. A motion was made by VC/Flamenbaum and seconded by C/Schad to accept the minutes as amended. The motion was carried unanimously. PUBLIC HEARING: 1. VARIANCE No. 94-3. A request to install a total of si;x;�1�, ; monument signs: Three monument signs - a maximum height of i feet with a maximum sign face area of 36.75 square feet utilized for tenant identification; and three monument signs, - a maximum height of six feet with a maximum sign face area of 11.38 square feet utilized for center identification. Property Location: Diamond Bar Village Shopping and Professional Center, 325-379 South Diamond Bar Boulevard and 23341-23499 East Golden Springs Drive, Diamond Bar, CA 9176. Property Owner/Applicant: Steve Poretta, Poretta Family Trust, 601 South Glenoaks #301, Burbank, CA 91502. AstP/Lungu presented the staff report and indicated that staff feels the proposed project is an opportunity to correct the sign deficiencies, reduce the sign pollution on the site, and improve sign visibility for tenants. If the Planning Commission approves the proposed project, installation for all monument signs is proposed to occur within four months of the approval. Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve Negative Declaration No. 92-7 and Variance 94-3, Findings of Fact, and conditions as listed within the resolution. VC/Flamenbaum asked if staff would approve. the center identification signs to which Ast/P Lungu replied, "yes". a„., 1[ '.! 'F����,,, >,p �.�;.... ��1�: 1,11',I�:, J� t... ,ol, Y, January 9, 1995 Page 3 Planning Commission In response to C/Huff, AstP/Lungu responded the existing signs are approximately 18 feet high, several feet in excess of the proposed 10 foot high signs. chair/Meyer declared the public hearing open. Constance Nicholson, owner BCN Lighting. & Signs, 2887 Buckhaven Road, Chino Hills stated her company has worked closely with staff and is available for questions from the Planning Commission. In response to Chair/Meyer, AstP/Lungu stated it is a requirement of the Sign Code that all free-standing monument signs have addresses. In addition, DKS has proposed a minimum setback of 15 feet from the edge of the travelled way and this will not create a site distance problem for entering vehicles. Chair/Meyer stated he believed the stipulated setback measurement should be from property line, not from curbface. Responding to Chair/Meyer, Mrs. Nicholson stated she does not know where the property lines are at the corner of Golden Springs Road and Diamond Bar Boulevard. Chair/Meyer stated usually, the 15 foot triangle is measured from property line rather than curbside. CE/Meyers referred Chair/Meyer to Condition (g) on Page 5 which allows for review and approval of the location. Chair/Meyer stated he would like the parameters spelled out in the resolution. In response to Chair/Meyer, AstP/Lungu indicated the applicant stated he would have the project completed within four months, even though he is allowed one year. Chair/Meyer declared the public hearing closed. Chair/Meyer suggested the following wording be added to Condition (g): "All freestanding monument signs shall maintain a minimum 15 feet setback from the travelled roadway edge, provided that such signs shall not project over the public right-of-way, nor shall they impair vehicular site distances, to the satisfaction of the City Engineer." A motion was made by the resolution as unanimously. C/Schad and seconded by C/Fong to adopt amended. The motion was carried January 9, 1995 Page 4 Planning Commission06, 2. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT No. 94-6. A request to modify and continue operation of an unmanned public utility substation for a cellular communication facility. The modification will incorporate digital in addition 'to the existing analog facilities which are now in place. The existing facility 3,1s 'located at Diamond Bar High School. The equipment is located on the roof and also in an enclosed interior unit. Currently, the visible equipment consists of roof mounted whip antennae and a microwave antenna with the majority of the equipment obscured behind the schools mascot banner. The proposed project will: add additional whip antennae and microwave antennae. Applicant: AirTouch Cellular, 3 Park Plaza, Irvine, CA 92714. Property Owner: Walnut Valley Unified School District, 880 S. Lemon Avenue, Diamond Bar. AP/Searcy reported the project is a request by the applicant to continue operation and expand the available technology at 4s. the site. The site has been in operation at this location for i'�,, seven years and located on the roof of the gymnasium_ and within an adjacent equipment room. The current equipment features an array of antennae placed at various locations on the roof of the gymnasium. The proposed project would place additional equipment on existing structures and add new antennae in perimeter locations around the roof. The staff recommends that the Planning Commission open the public hearing and receive testimony and approve the Negative Declaration and the draft PC Resolution 95 -XX with the Findings of Fact and conditions listed. In response to VC/Flamenbaum, AP/Searcy indicated he had spoken with both AirTouch and L.A. Cellular about combining efforts and erecting a monopole. He further indicated that because they are two separate companies providing the same service, combining the service may create conflict and cross- talk,within the two systems. Chair/Meyer declared the public hearing open. Dennis Lowry, Site Development Consultant, Air Touch Cellular, stated that this project will be a digital upgrade to provide better service to the community surrounding the site and involves minor hardware changes. d .„ i�'4,, qi. "?l.° ^.���'"4 i'. ,i a'1, u. "l. d"t "�6� r `"P 1�-�. ii i,4f �;�p�^, „r�,�e„ pr-.��-�, �a, i,. �l,i":IYJ".: W"n.,n��iu iti mar<,wi .��i�r. ism sw4.. ,^e.,, ..woo ,, ea »,.r,,�°v.•a�•�.«z. :�a�. r.�'h I a January 9, 1995 Page 5 Planning Commission VC/Flamenbaum stated his concerns that Diamond Bar is starting to look like an "antenna farm" and asked the applicant if there is a way to combine the applicant and competitor, systems in a single monopole. Mr. Lowry responded that in some cases it is possible. However, in general, there needs to be some distance between systems. C/Schad stated he concurs with VC/Flamenbaum. Craig Clute, 21217 Fountain Springs Road, objects to the lack of information contained in the flyer distributed to the residents. He is very concerned that Diamond Bar is becoming an "antenna farm" and feels the Planning Commission needs to place a limit on the number of antennae allowed. Chair/Meyer declared the public hearing closed. VC/Flamenbaum announced he will be recusing himself from the next agenda item since he has a leasehold interest in the affected land, and proposed the Planning Commission table this agenda item until the next agenda item is heard. He suggested the Commission arrive at a solution by which the two parties can combine their efforts. Chair/Meyer asked if this would preclude VC/Flamenbaum from entering into the debate on this application. VC/Flamenbaum responded his concern is that somehow the antennae should be combined. Chair/Meyer asked if the question of proliferation of the antennae should be a part of the Development Code. VC/Flamenbaum responded that it clearly should be. C/Schad asked if it is possible for the cellular companies to combine several systems on one antenna. Responding to Chair/Meyer, AP/Searcy stated there will be one whip antenna approximately 22 feet high. The remainder will be hidden by the parapet and by the enclosure and the aesthetic impact will be approximately the same as currently exists. A motion was made by C/Schad and seconded by VC/Flamenbaum to approve Conditional Use Permit No. 94-6. The motion was carried unanimously. I � I�IiPI'IIIIIPIII I -�� ' � -� I bl JII I'� II�6 11 1 January 9, 1995 Page 6 Planning commission lA In response to Chair/Meyer, AP/Searcy stated he would have used a categorical exemption had he been able to determine that a.Negative Declaration had been prepared on the previous Conditional Use Permit. In the absence of that, and Los Angeles County's inability to provide staff with the information, the Negative Declaration was utilized to cover all bases. 3. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT No. 94-7. A request to operate an unmanned public utility substation for cellular telecommunication facility with a 90 foot monopole with antennae and microwave dish. The radio equipment, will be housed within an enclosed modular unit. Property Location: 3333 S. Brea Canyon Road Applicant: L.A. Cellular, Box 6028, Cerritos, CA 90702 Property Owner: Metro Diamond Bar Properties, Inc., 2030 Main #1020, Irvine, CA 92714 0111" VC/Flamenbaum reminded the Planning Commission that he had recused himself from deliberation of this project and asked the record to reflect that he neither favors or opposes the project. AP/Searcy reported the applicant requests approval to locate a cell site, including a 90 foot monopole and radio equipment enclosure, in the parking area of an existing two'story office building. The steel monopole is proposed with three antennae arrays with four antennae each and a future 4 foot microwave dish. The proposed 90 foot height is approximately 25 to 3b feet over the height of any other approved monopole within the City. Because one of the primary service recipients is mobile cellular users, the monopole must reach this service area. Because of the grade differential between the freeway and the area adjacent to the freeway and the area available for the project to be developed, this height is desired by the applicant to d'el'iver the required level of service. The staff recommends that the Planning Commission open the_ public hearing, receive testimony, and continue the project for additional information. Responding to C/Schad, AP/Searcy stated the parking m1�� requirement for the office building is 127 spaces. With the fr'! removal of four spaces for this project, there will be 134 ,. h �, 1i i M, � � ' T' I'� �'.1 I.I �'�'� _�14� _ 4 ., i i '�i,t l�2 f . '11 -- _ -1_1___—_ _—. __.L__� _- 11—w­-,..uela:NAUWWI J =.w.+.­i—..._,­_...­ ...... January 9, 1995 Page 7 Planning Commission spaces remaining. In addition, there will be a backup generator at the site. Since the enclosure is soundproof, it is not expected to generate additional noise. Chair/Meyer declared the public hearing open. Dr. Gerald 'Bushberg, L.A. Cellular representative, stated there are facilities which have multiple cellular telephone companies' equipment on a single pole. He further stated this is technically impossible since the systems were developed independently and because they are subscription based at this location. Dan Hare, AirTouch Cellular, 3 Park Plaza, Irvine, stated the temporary site has always been a marginal location and, in order to service the area, there are three sites proposed. At this time, only six antennae will be installed. C/Fong requested the applicant consider another-�ocation. Mr. Hare responded several alternative sites had been considered. C/Fong reiterated he is not convinced this is the optimum location for the antenna. He has a problem with the proposed facility location because of the visual impact. C/Huff asked why L.A. Cellular has three sitesijas opposed to AirTouch's one site. Mr. Hare responded he does not know. C/Huff stated he agrees with C/Fong that an alternative site should be considered. Craig Clute, Diamond Bar resident, 'reiterated the Planning Commission needs to set limitations immediately. Chair/Meyer declared the public hearing closed. Chair/Meyer stated the service station, which is a major sales tax contributor to the City, cannot have a sign exceeding six feet. In addition, Diamond Bar does not permit freeway signs. During the General Plan hearings the Planning Commission received testimony and recommendations that the City provide certain advertising upon entering the City. In his opinion, the various providers, in addition to combining on a pole, might do so on a pole which would have benefit to the business aspects of the community. He further stated that a two foot wide landscape planter is not adequate. Additionally, off- street parking for the business may become an _ssue. A motion was made by C/Huff and seconded by C/Schad to January 9, 1995 Page 8 Planning Commission postpone the item to February 13, 1995 and have the applicant consider alternative sites, particularly to the south of the current site. The motion was carried 4-1 with the following roll call: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Huff, Schad, Fong, Chair/Meyer NOES:- COMMISSIONERS: None ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: VC/Flamenbaum ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: None RECESS: Chair/Meyer recessed,the meeting at 9:10 p.m. RECONVENE: Chair/Meyer reconvened the meeting at 9:20 p.m. 4. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT No. -94-4. 'The City is requesting to develop a 23.8 acre site located east of Pantera Drive and south of Bowcreek Drive. The master plan for the park includes development of two ball fields, multi -use hard courts, tennis courts, picnic areas, a tot lot, and a multipurpose community center approximately 7,500 square feet in size. 1 Property Location: 700-800 Pantera Drive Applicant: City of Diamond Bar, 21660 E. Copley Drive, Suite 0100, Diamond Bar AP/Searcy commented that the role of the Planning Department„ is to present the City's technical review of the project. He stated that the project has undergone numerous scoping sessions with the public. The master plan project as it is presented has been approved as a "consensus" project by the Parks and Recreation Department and forwarded to the Planning Commission for review. CSD/Rose will serve as proponent for the Parks and Recreation Department's "consensus" project. AP/Searcy reported that the 23 acre park site was reviewed as a part of the EIR and established as part of the subdivision of Tract No. 31479 approved circa 1978. -The 23 acre park site was designated as an element of the residential development that entailed the area north of Grand Avenue, east of Golden Springs Drive and Diamond Bar Boulevard, and south of the SR 60 Freeway. In 1988 the County Parks and Recreation Department initiated a project with similar elements to the present project and received approval in 1989 but the project was never constructed. The City Community Services Department then set out to create a new master plan for the Pantera Park ., "* �� VI '9 1 ". r , � ', i� 'r.�,,� r ?.1'N° _.t0" Pj4i January 9, 1995 Page 9 Planning Commission site and using staff, a professional consultant, and community input from residents in the immediate vicinity of the park site. The General Plan has identified the inadequacy of park facilities within the City. "By any measure, the City is inadequately served by active and passive facilities." (Resource Management Element Page III -2). The primary active recreational facilities are located at Diamond Bar High School and the County Golf Course. As the City continues to grow in population, the disparity in the available active recreational facilities will increase. Currently:, there is a total of 23 acres of developed park land to serve Diamond Bar north of Grand Avenue. There are no lighted baseball fields and no lighted basketball, or tennis courts to serve north Diamond Bar. The General Plan directs the City to provide adequate active and passive recreation facilities. The present project has a the opportunity to satisfy this directive. The incorporation of an extensive passive area for picnics, open play and future interpretive area (hiking trail) and the provision of the hard court area and ball fields. go a long way.- However, staff feels that the current plan does fall short in maximizing the park's features. In particular, the omission of lights on the ball fields reduces the opportunity for the utilization of the facility to its highest and best use. The potential negative impacts of ball field lighting can be mitigated as previously stated and should strongly be considered for this site. The staff has reviewed the needs of the general community as it relates the provision of recreation activities and found that the City lacks adequate facilities. The development of this park represents the opportunity for the greatest amount of active park space in the City. This project has undergone the scrutiny of the neighborhood in the immediate vicinity of this project and yielded the basis for a truly beneficial facility. The primary issues related to the master plan are traffic and circulation, light spillage, and intensity of use. The master plan and environmental mitigations have been incorporated to maximize the use and minimize the impacts. The project design, limits on hours of operation, deliveries, and lighting is def ined in a manner that reduces impact to the existing residential development. January 9, 1995 Page 10 Planning Commission`;t, The purpose of this public hearing is to review the Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program as this initiates the public review period. AP/Searcy stated the proponent for the project is Bob Rose, Director of Community Services for the City of Diamond Bar., Staff recommends that the Planning Commission open the public hearing, receive testimony and consider the Negative Declaration and direct staff as appropriate. Responding to VC/Flamenbaum, AP/Searcy stated the City is bound by the'Conditional Use Permit requirements. Responding to VC/Flamenbaum, BCS/Rose indicated there, is security lighting around the building at Summit Ridge. Responding to C/Schad, AP/Searcy reiterated that 15.5 acres would be active and the remaining 7.5 acres would be natural or passive. C/Schad voiced his concern that ,there would be loss of the facility for night games without night lighting. AP/Searcy responded that the master plan excludes the use of ball field lighting. Staff is recommending that the Planning Commission strongly consider including lighting to maximize usage of the park. C/Schad commented that he wishes review of the botanical features of the park for preservation during the development process and expansion for certain -areas be addressed. Responding to C/Schad, AP/Searcy stated that Pomona School District has no definitive plans or schedule for building the, school. Responding to C/Huff, AP/Searcy stated the park was conceptualized as a part of the original approval of the tract map about 1978 and lighting was included in the original plan. Again responding to C/Huff, AP/Searcy indicated Planning staff was not present at the community workshops. C/Huff asked AP/Searcy to address the liability factor of the water element and the costs involved. m AP/Searcy stated he did not have that information available. i January 9, 1995 Page 11 Planning commission Responding to C/Huff, AP/Searcy indicated the mitigation measures for the lighting system would limit the height of the standards on which the lights are placed and incorporate light shields, directing and focusing the light in certain areas. The Negative Declaration refers to incorporating very tall trees along the parameter of the site for diffusion. Pat Mann, Cotton%Beland\Associates, Inc. stated the Negative Declaration was prepared under his direction. The lighting was removed from the park plan and the firm does not have information on the type of lighting and intensity which might be used. He further stated that closing the park at 10:00 p.m. and turning off all lights would be the most effective measure in limiting the lighting impact. In response to C/Huff, DCS/Rose indicated the percentage of increase of use of the park on a year-round basis as a result of incorporating lighting for the ball field would be 46%. Inclusion of youth programs use during the winter months would increase the use percentage by about 102%. C/Fong asked how deep the water will be in the pond. AP/Searcy responded there is no specific design for the water element at this time. DCS/Rose introduced members of the project team. Joe Ruzicka, Vice Chairman, Parks and Recreation Commission, stated Pantera Park -represents a great opportunity for the City of Diamond Bar. According to state and national recreation standards, Diamond Bar should have a minimum of 110 acres of developed active park land. Diamond Bar currently has about 50 acres and the development of Pantera Park would bring the total to approximately 65 acres which is still below the standard. The design provides facilities for many of the park uses which have been demanded by the community. These include active ball fields, tennis, basketball and roller blade/hockey courts, formal picnic structures, and a jogging path around the park. Of the 55,000 residents of Diamond Bar, a full 30% or 16,000 are children. This park will allow us to further serve the children's needs with wholesome activities. The process for design incorporated the need to balance the desires of the local neighborhood with the needs of the entire community. In order to achieve this goal, the Parks and Recreation Commission conducted an extensive series of public workshops to reach consensus on the elements to be January 9, i9s5 Page 12Planning commission��' s incorporated into -the park's design. Bob Mueting, Landscape Architect, referred the Planning Commission to the artist's conceptual drawing of the proposed site project master plan and pointed out the location of each of the components. Responding to C/Huff, Mr. Mueting stated the development is not yet phased. It is an overall master plan which needs to be approved before moving on to the subsequent design development with the staff. Responding to VC/Flamenbaum, Mr. Mueting stated that it would be his intent to make the retention basin attractive, whether or not it contained water. In addition, the bench drain's would be designed to conform to the General Plan. Mr. Mueting indicated that whether or not the community center gets built in the future will not significantly impact the project. The plan before the Planning Commission represents a consensus -of the community participation, not specifically documented by needs for each one of the elements. VC/Flamenbaum stated he feels there are too many elements for this size park and is concerned that the parking may not be adequate. Responding to VC/Flamenbaum, DCS/Rose stated the response from Pomona Unified School District is that the school site is available for overflow parking from the park, should it become necessary. When the school is built a joint use agreement would be acceptable. VC/Flamenbaum suggested that if the school comes with ball fields, would it not be expedient to enter into a reciprocal agreement to use some of its facilities and minimize the elements of Pantera Park. He feels the City is trying to solve all of its park problems with one facility, thereby burdening the neighborhood. Chair/Meyer declared the public hearing open. Donovan Martinez, 635 Pantera Drive, stated that he was one Of the residents in attendance at all" of the Pantera Park community planning meetings. In the beginning there was complete division. One group was in favor of an active paipk � J11, and the other group was in favor of a passive park. By the end of the deliberation there was consensus for what is before R Y■ V,- :,l'Sl�aF'IA141 LAMN January 9, 1995 Page 13 Planning commission the Planning Commission. There was never consensus to include lighting for the park and it was never part of the presentation. The only lighting considered was low lighting for the tennis courts. The majority of the residents were against field lighting. He asked that the Planning Commission respect the time and energy of the citizens to arrive at the current concept. Ardeshir Malganji, 265 Bowcreek, requested the Planning Commission reconsider the walkway to Bowcreek since it will create major parking problems. Dan Buffington, 2605 Indian Creek Road, stated although he was not a part of the meeting process, he strongly urges the use of lights in the park for the sake of the youth of Diamond Bar. Chair/Meyer declared the public hearing closed. Chair/Meyer stated that since this is a neighborhood park and the residents actively participated in the concept. He would urge cooperation, as part of this master plan, with the Pomona Unified School District and to address whether there is duplication of facilities. In addition, off-site signing needs to be provided for the park. He further stated that he is concerned with the feasibility of the water element. Chair/Meyer further stated he has two major concerns regarding the project. One is the timing of the Conditional Use Permit and the ability to exercise the permit in the one year time period. secondly, regarding the environmental report concerning traffic. He adamantly disagrees with the report and believes that a park of this magnitude will generate significantly more traffic and wants it adequately addressed in the environmental review. In addition, the report should include the cumulative effect of the school traffic. C/Fong suggested lighting only one of the fields and also consider lighting ball fields in other parks in the City. Chair/Meyer reminded staff that the issue of parking on Bowcreek needs to be addressed. C/Huff asked for feedba k on the proposed lighting and the impact on the neighborhood. He is concerned that other sites were not planned with lights as part of the project. Pantera Park was from the beginning and as distressing as it may be tc January 9, 1995 Page 14 Planning Commission;" the residents, when they moved into the area, it was part of the plan. Responding to Chair/Meyer, AP/Searcy asked for clarification of the traffic study concerns. Chair/Meyer indicated that he would vote "no" when the environmental study comes before the Commission. He feels the traffic study is inadequately addressed. A motion was made by C/Schad and seconded by C/Huff to continue the public hearing to February 27, 1995. The motion was carried unanimously. OLD BUSINESS - None NEW BUSINESS - None PLANNING COMMISSION ITEMS C/Schad stated he would like to begin working on a Tree ordinance. Chair/Meyer referred to a letter from the Mayor of Chino Hills indicating he found it extremely disappointing that the Traffic Element of the Draft General Plan did not assume Diamond Bar's responsibility of solving the -traffic problem created by the City of Chino Hills by placing a four lane road through the environmentally sensitive Tonner Canyon. Chair/Meyer indicated he would, with the blessing of the Commission, work with staff to draft a letter to the mayor indicating why it was not in the Draft General Plan prepared by the Planning Commission. Chair/Meyer stated the Planning Commission would like to take a pro -active stance on the Development Code. He asked staff to place the item on the February 13, 1995 agenda. VC/Flamenbaum requested the Traffic Development Study for Calvary Chapel and Inter -Community Hospital also be placed on the February 13, 1995 agenda. AP/Searcy responded he was h contacted Friday, January 6, 1995 by the traffic engineer advising staff there are three identified alternative locations and a cost evaluation associated with each alternative site. Tentatively, meetings will be held the week of January 9, 1995 with the two adjacent property owners to discuss what they wish to do and what future plans Calvary 4� I y� I k JJ � OW J f Ai:,",I �'.k- ! � � P�- January 9, 1995 Page 15 Planning Commission Chapel may have for their site. Staff hopes to bring this information to the Planning Commission within the next 60 days. Chair/Meyer asked staff to include the updates in the February meeting agenda. ANNOUNCEMENTS - None Chair/Meyer declared the meeting adjourned at 10:52 p.m. Respectfu ly Submitted, it mes DeStefazo Secretary Attest: Da j Peyer