Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout10/24/1996 W H E A T R I.D G E B OAR D 0 F A D J U S T M E N T MINIITES OF MEETING October 24, 1996 • MEMBERS ABSENT: Karen Thiessen STAFF PRESENT: Glen Gidley, Director of Planning and Development Sean McCartney, Planner Susan Ellis, Code Enforcement Mary Lou Chapla, Secretary PIIBLIC HEARING 1. CALL THE MEETING TO ORDER: The meeting was called to order by Chairman WALKER at 7:04 P.M. on October 24, 1996, in the Council Chambers of the Municipal Building, 7500 West 29th Avenue, Wheat Ridge, Colorado. 2. ROLL CALL: MEMBERS PRESENT: Tom Abbott Bill Echelmeyer Paul Hovland Bob Howard Susan Junker Linda Mauro Robert Walker The following is the official set of Board of Adjustment minutes for the Public Hearing of October 24, 1996. A set of these minutes is retained both in the office o~ the City Clerk and in the Department of Planning and Development of the City of Wheat Ridge. • WHEAT RIDGE 80ARD OF ADJUSTMENT MINUTES OF MEETING: October 24, 1996 Page 2 2. APPROVE THE ORDER OF THE AGENDA Motion was made by Board Member ECHELMEYER, seconded by Board Member HOWARD, to approve the order of the agenda as printed. Motion carried 7-0. 3. PUBLIC FORUM (This is the time for anyone to speak on any subject not appearing on the agenda.) No one came forward to speak. 4. PUBLIC HEARING A. Case No. WA-96-35: _An application by Richard and Kimberly Eggleston for the approval of a 1'-6" side yard setback variance to the 5' side yard setback requirement to allow a carport on a property zoned Residential-Three and located at approximately 4354 Hoyt Street. Sean McCartney presented the staff report. All pertinent documents were entered into record-, which Chairman WALKER • accepted. Board Member HOVLAND for open structures policy allows a shed placed within 1/3 of setback, and that ru also. asked if-the setbacks were different and Mr. McCartney replied department that is opened on all sides to be the distance of the required sideyard Le applies to porches, decks and patios It was noted there were no fornlal complaints. Board Member ABBOTT questioned if the applicant was misinformed by a city employee, and Mr. McCartney answered no, his neighbor was the one that misinformed him. Board Member JUNKER wanted to know how this was brought to the staff's attention and Mr. McCartney replied it was through ,a 'stop work order' by the building department. Chairman WALKER asked if staff knew the distance from the edge of the roof to the edge of the building next door, and Mr. McCartney answered he did not measure that, so maybe ask the applicant. Mr. McCartney added there could be placed as a condition for approval the downspouts be aligned to flow from the adjacent property so the runoff will not affect the adjacent property. • • WBEAT RIDGE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MINUTES OF MEfiTING: October 24, 2996 Page 3 The applicant, Richard Eggleston, 4354 Hoyt Street, was sworn in. He said a friend helped him put the carport in and they went off of a mark they thought was the property line, when it actually was not. Board Member HOWARD asked if the survey was completed before or after construction started, and Mr. Eggleston answered after. Once the stop work order was issued he obtained all the information from the city that they would need. Mr. Eggleston said the roof is at least 8 feet from the edge to the edge of the building, however he did not measure. Board Member MAURO asked if the structure was completed as far as building, and Mr. Eggleston answered yes. Board Member ABBOTT asked the applicant if he had considered setting the posts in the 1'6" that is needed, and Mr. Eggleston replied yes, but he poured his driveway also and the posts are setting on 2' caissons. He would have to tear it all out in order to move it over. • No further questions were asked at this time. Motion was made by Board Member ABBOTT, that Case No. WA-96- 35, be APPROVED for the following reasons: 1. The intent of the ordinance which is to provide an aesthetically pleasing space between structures cannot be affected to due the proximity of the dwelling to the north. Relocating the posts would serve no visible or practical purpose. 2. The carport is 225 square feet smaller than what is allowable.- 3. The carport is completed to a state where it would seem unreasonable to require relocation, in particular, there were no protests registered against it. WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: 1. The carport shall not be closed on any side. - Board Member ECHELMSYER talked on precedence and found it difficult not to grant the motion, and Board Member ABBOTT agreed. Board Member HOWARD was curious to know if the other similar • carports in the area are legal or not. Mr. McCartney said there has been no. record of building permits in that area. . WHEAT RIDGE SOARID OF ADJUSTMENT MINUTES OF MEETING: October 24, 1996 Page 4 Motion was seconded by Board Member ECHELMEYER. Motion carried 6-1, with Board Member HOWARD voting no. Resolution attached. B. Case No. WA-96-36: An application by Davis Sowa for the approval of a 1'-6" side yard setback variance to the 5' side yard setback requirement to allow the enclosure of an existing carport. The property is zoned Residential-Two and located at 5110 Simms Street. Sean McCartney presented the staff report. .All pertinent documents were entered into record, which Chairman WALKER accepted. Board Member HOWARD asked when the garage was converted intc living space was there a building permit pulled', and Mr. McCartney said he assumes there was, but he is not positive. Board Member get a permit replied yes, • is asking to front side i. MAURO asked then if the applicant came into to enclose this structure, and Mr. McCartney and thus resulted in a variance. The applicant enclose the south and east sides only, as the s already closed. Chairman WALKER was concerned with the feelings from the neighbor to the south, and Mr. McCartney assured him the neighbor called in with questions about the easement and not for any opposition. The applicant, David Sowa, Board Member MAURO asked t enclosure started, and Mr. the structure was started. Board Member ABBOTT wanted to the. south, and Mr. Sowa Discussion followed. 5110 Simms Street, was sworn in. ze applicant when was the Sowa replied about the same time to know the distance to the house answered 150-200 feet. Board Member ABBOTT said since this is a non-complying structure why was the Board not asked to approve the whole structure instead of just the enclosure. Mr. McCartney explained that the actual approval is to allow the carport 3'6" from the property. The applicant says it is an application for a carport to be enclosed, but as far as the regulations read that carport becomes an enclosed, attached single-car garage. • Mr. Sowa asked why this was not approved when he received his building permit. He had started construction and had several inspections done and signed off for an open carport, • WIiEAT RIDGE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MINIITES OF MEETYNG: October 24, 1996 Page S and was given the idea by the inspectors that all was going along fine. Upon application to enclose it, Mr. Sowa found out he was illegal from the start, but he was not aware he was doing anything wrong. Mr. McCartney said the original application was for a shed open on all sides. Mr. Sowa felt he should have been tald what the definition of a shed was, and Mr. McCartney replied staff assumed, that the applicant knew what a shed was when applying for a permit. What is being approved now is to allow a single car garage to _- encroach 1'611 into the side yard setback. 'Discussion followed. Board Member ECHELMEYER wanted to know if this was a shed would it have required the inspections that the applicant had, and Mr. McCartney answered yes, all structures require final inspections fora Certificate of Occupancy. Board Member ECHELMEYER asked wouldn't the inspector have caught the fact that this is a carport and not a shed, and Mr. McCartney replied that is something hard to assume. Board Member HOVLAND asked if there will be a floor • installed in this structure, and Mr. Sowa answered probably not as he feels it is not cost effective Ther i . e s no concrete in the front, h is just compacted dirt/rock. Motion was made by Board Member ABBOTT, that Case No. WA-96- 36, an application by David Sowa, be APPROVED, for the following reasons: 1. The primary intent of the ordinance to provide an aesthetically pleasing open space between structures is achieved by the approximate 150` separation from the adjacent dwelling to the south. 2. The 1.6" variance request is a 30a variance. 3. The approximate 150' separation from the dwelling to the south precludes any danger of a fire spreading to the structure, which is the second primary intent of the ordinance. 4. Approval will enhance the essential character of the -- locality because the applicant has been told by his neighbors that the structure will look better enclosed. A statement was submitted by seven adjacent property owners in 'support of the structure as constructed and modified by enclosure. WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITION: • 1. The garage shall incorporate a concrete floor. • WHEAT RIDGE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MINUTES OF MEETING: October 24, 1996 Page 6 Board Member ECHELMEYER said if a concrete floor is not a requirement for a garage why was it being added in, and Board Member ABBOTT feels if this is an attached permanent part of the structure, it should have a concrete floor. Discussion followed. Motion was seconded by Board Member HOVLAND. Motion carried 6-0, with Board Member HOWARD voting no. Resolution attached-. C. Case No. WA-96-37: An application by Barbara and Walter Bendever for approval of a 2' height variance to the 6' -- maximum fence height requirement to allow for an S' fence. The property is zoned Residential-One A and located at 394 Simms Street. Sean McCartney presented the staff report. All pertinent documents were entered into record, which Chairman WALKER accepted. Board Member HOWARD asked if there is any difference in elevation from the group home site up to the house, and Mr. McCartney replied yes, and it looks to be about 5 feet. Board Member HOWARD asked if the 6 foot fence is on the- _ group home property, and Mr. McCartney answered he is not sure,-so perhaps refer that to the applicant. The applicantso Walt and Barbara Bendever, 3940 Simms Street, were sworn in. Mr: Bendever said their house is a 2-story and they look directly down onto the group home property. The lights in that house are on all night long, there are people coming and going from the patio all night long, and the lights shine directly into their upper floor. Mr. Bendever feels the 2 foot fence extension would block the light considerably, as looking down would be the top of their windows. The noise from the patio filters in through their windows, and it is very disturbing. The fence would not be noticed from the front because there is a 3 foot drop from the front to the back. • Board Member ABBOTT asked staff is there a problem with the Group Home ordinance, and Mr. Gidley replied in a single-._ family home one has a right to keep their lights on all night or to set out on their patio all night. These folks have the same rights as well, however, not everybody does that. In itself, it is unusual and could support this particular variance, but it is not an actual item from a zoning or nuisance perspective. WSEAT RIDGE BOARD OF ADJIISTMENT MINIITES OF MEETING; October 24, 1996 Page 7 Mr. Bendever feels the neighborhood was not properly notified. He feels the group home is more of a'business that is owned and operated by a company out of Minnesota. Ms. Bendever spoke saying she has talked to them twice to try and alleviate the problem, but nothing has happened. The back of this house is solid windows and the large screen T.V. and lights shine right into their daughter's bedroom. Chairman WALKER questioned the plot plan showing the fence being back from the property line to allow for the 10' ' utility easement, and Mr. Bendever replied the plot plan is correct,- the fence is not on the property line. Board Member HOWARD feels even'if the fence were 2 feet higher-it would not alleviate the lights shining into the second floor, and Mr. Bendever said yes it would because their house sets down 4 foot from the group home's patio. The current fence is 'slats on rails° and the applicants will put up another-rail with all new slats. Board Member HOWARD asked if building code required replacement of posts for wind load, and Mr. Gidley answered he is not familiar with the code for 8 feet. However, that will be worked out with the building department. Discussion regarding the south side of the property followed. Board Member ABBOTT asked if they had given any thought to vegetation instead of the fence, and Mr. Bendever said they have hired a landscape architect to have the backyard completely re-done. The bushes and shrubs being put in will take a long time to get up to that point however, and planting trees at the 8 foot level is not cost effective. Board Member ECHELMEYER added that the people of Wheat Ridge have been denied the right to oppose group homes because of action taken by the city attorney and council. The applicants have been denied tYie privacy they thought they were getting when purchasing this home. The board needs to do something to help people regain the privacy they reasonably expect for their homes. He would recommend very strongly that this be approved. Motion was made by Board Member ABBOTT, that Case No. WA-96- 37, an application by Barbara and Walter Bendever, be APPROVED for the following reasons: 1. The applicants are experiencing problems related to noise and light from the adjacent group home to the east. WHEAT RIDGE BOARD OF ADJIISTMENT MINUTES OF MEETING: October 24, 1996 Page 8 2•. The applicant°s house is particularly affected by the multiple tenant usage of the adjacent group home due to its construction of substantially all glass on the west wall. 3. The appellant`s yard is approximately 4-5 feet higher in elevation. 4. The cost of planting 8 foot Evergreen or-deciduous trees sufficient in height would be prohibitive. 5. The 8 foot section of fence would essentially be invisible from the street. Motion was seconded.by Board Member HOWARD. Motion carried 7-0. Resolution attached. Chairman WALKER called for a five minute recess. D. Case No, WA-96-32: An application by M. Carolyn Ritz, Et A1, for a request for interpretation to an administrative decision by the Planning and Development Director that a construction equipment storage and service facility is a use by right in the Light Industrial (I) Zone District. This interpretation involves a Light Industrial zoned property located at 5040 Tabor Street. Glen Gidley presented the staff report. All pertinent documents were entered into record, which Chairman WALKER accepted. Entered into record Section 26-23(B)(8-22) labeled EY~+~rit 'C° . Board Member ECHELMEYER asked which was here first, the- industrial zoning of this land, or the R-1 and R-2 north of it, and Mr. Gidley answered he does not know when the R-1 and R-2 was established, the industrial zoning of this property was during the early 60°s and before the City was incorporated. Board Member HOWARD wanted to know when the latest change was made on the Comprehensive Plan, and Mr. Gidley replied there have been no changes in this particular area in terms of land use since 1976. There have been some changes in terms of the street Master Plan for this area. The applicant, Carolyn Ritz, 5115 Swadley Street, was sworn in. Ms. Rite read into record Exhibit 'D° (see attached) explaining her position regarding this case. Chairman WALKER commented it would seem if a Special Use Permit were granted it would not change a thing in that • area, the activity would still be taking place in that area near the houses, and wondered why a Special Use Permit WHEAT RIDGE 80ARD OF ADJUSTMENT MINUTES OF MEETING: October 24, 1996 Page 9 would make it okay: Ms. Ritz said she hopes that is not granted. She commented when she moved there in 1961, the land around was all farms. Board Member ECHELMEYER asked the applicant if she was involved in any activity with the City at that time, and Ms. Ritz said they hired a lawyer to try and fight when the aforementioned farm went Industrial, but was overruled. This was all before the City was incorporated. Board Member ABBOTT said what is being looked at tonight is if this type of-business can occur in this zone.district, so Mr. Munchiando's licenses are really not germane to the question here .tonight, and Mr. Gidley answered yes. Chairman WALKER asked just what action can this Board take, and Mr. Gidley replied the action you have the authority to do is to overturn the zoning administrator's decision in terms of this being an allowed use. If the Board overturns this decision, then Code Enforcement action will be taken against Mr. Munchiando if he does not cooperate and remove the use from the property. Different uses were-discussed further. Board Member ECHELMEYER asked staff if Mr. Munchiando has to declare himself in a certain business and apply for permits or licenses to operate, and Mr. Gidley answered any business doing business in the City should have a sales tax license. Mr. Munchiando has a business license now,-but to his knowledge he did not have one before Ms. Ritz pointed it out. Board Member ECHELMEYER asked. if Mr. Munchiando is a licensed trucking company in the City, and Mr. Gidley said he knows he is licensed to operate his business in the City. Board Member ECHELMEYER wanted to know if there are any restrictions anywhere in the City in the hauling of hazardous wastes, and Mr. Gidley replied there are federal and state requirements but none from the City. Board Member ECHELMEYER asked if there has been any compliance or non-compliance in this area, and Mr. Gidley said there have been no complaints of any specific violations on this site relating to solid waste because it occurs elsewhere. There is absolutely no hazardous waste brought back to this site. The trucks are used to haul hazardous waste and Mr. Munchiando can address that issue. WHEAT fl2YDGE BOARD OF ADJIISTMENT M%NUTES OF MEETINGS Octokres 24, 1996 Page 10' Mr. Gidley said Mr. Munchiando claims to be approved by the federal government, however the City is not a licensing authority relating to that. Board Member HOWARD asked Mr. Gidley if he could explain how he differentiate between an 'allowable similar use° and one that is °not objectionable to nearby property by reason of odor, dust, fumes, gas,-noise, radiation, heat, glare, vibration, traffic generation, parking needs, outdoor storage or use, or is not hazardous'to health', and Mr. Gidley said those are the characteristics of uses that are- looked at as it relates to a use that isn't specific. There are alot of uses that aren't specifically enumerated and Mr. Gidley gave examples. It doesn't matter what is in the vehicles, what matters is the use of the land. Board Member HOWARD asked in his consideration did he include what might be objectionable to the neighborhood, and Mr. Gidley replied yes, based upon-the above items, and not just objectionable because it looks ugly, or because people don't like trucks/trailers, or because there is outside -- storage, because those issues don't apply. This issue has • to do with how the property is zoned. There was further discussion regarding hazardous materials and other undesirable uses. Board Member ABBOTT said the City will not permit the use for storage or handling of hazardous materials without a Special Use Permit, but in this case they are not asking for that, so there is no need for a Special Use. They are storing and servicing their construction equipment and trucks relating to the business. Sandra Winsett, 11601 Ridge Road, was sworn in. Ms. Winsett had general questions regarding light and heavy industrial districts, the semi trucks that have not been moved in 6 months, off-street parking, and spoke on other industrial areas that are screened from view. Board Member ECHELMEYER asked if she had any concerns when- the applicant was at his previous site, and Ms. Winsett said no because it was obstructed from view and not near neighbor areas. She did-not see semis, trailers, buckets, fencing, shelving units and boards everywhere. The site was fenced and it looked to her to be a storage business. There was no traffic problem because she said there was very little movement from that lot. There is truck traffic from this development occasionally now. WHEAT RIDGE $OARD OF ADJUSTMENT MINUTES OF MEETYNG: October 24, 1996 Eage 11 Board Member ABBOTT questioned since upgrading the property is purely voluntary, how will it be enforced. Mr. Gidley replied there is a specific requirement on 'the building permit regarding outside storage being screened from view with a 6 foot high wall or fence. The voluntary part is the 25 foot berm and the landscaping with trees and shrubs. Board Member MAURO wanted to know how this will affect other industrial parcels, and Mr. Gidley said any determination regarding not permitting semi trucks/trailers or storage of construction equipment will equally apply to the rest of the Industrial zoned districts. Greg Munchiando, 5440 Tabor Street, was sworn in. Mr. Munchiando stated he does not store or bring hazardous waste back to this site. He does this for a living and he hauls all over the United States. The only thing he does in-this yard is bring his trucks in for service and send them back out. They are a clean outfit and do a lot of work for the EPA. Mr. Munchiando was evicted from his other site and had to move everything in a hurry to this property, but that was not his intention. They would have liked to have gotten. the shop done and everything moved in. As it is now, he has no shop and everything he owns is in trailers. He cannot maintain his trucks so this is costing him a lot of money. Board Member ECHELMEYER asked if he was a trucking comgany, and Mr. Munchiando replied yes. The hazardous waste consists of any kind of waste permitted by the state and federal government. They are a licensed hazardous waste transporter in the lower 48 states. The makeup of the waste is contaminated dirt (with gas, diesel, lead, arsenic, etc). The trucks are cleaned and checked at the. facility where they are dumped and are free of any debris. Everything is logged and tracked and they are audited by the EPA every year. Mr. Munchiando has offered anyone in the neighborhood or audience to inspect his site and come in the office at any time. He is not ashamed or afraid to show anybody what he has or what he does. The site is ugly he agrees, but he will get things put away and feels then this issue will die. Chairman WALKER stated the equipment is of specialty type and depending on the contract, this might be why some pieces of equipment are not moved. Mr. Munchiando agreed„ and said there is a wrecked truck that will be moved into the bays. Board Member ABBOTT asked Mr. Munchiando to state for the record that he is not an approved EPA waste controlled • WHEAT RIDGE BOARD OF ADJIISTMENT MIN[JTES OF MEETING: Octobes 24, 1996 Page 12 substance storage facility, and Mr. Munchiando said he does not and never will store hazardous waste on Tabor Street. There is'only one other facility in Colorado that can store hazardous waste and that is Highway 36 at Last Chance. Board Member ABBOTT questioned the berming and screening in excess of the requirements,-and Mr. Munchiando said he has agreed to and submitted a landscaping plan that will be attached to his permanent C/O. He elaborated on the plan. Board Member HOVLAND asked if he brought any material on the site at a11, and Mr. Munchiando replied no. His concern is the trucks even entering the site with hazardous material. Mr. Munchiando said he also has trucks with gravel going in and out of the site. Trucks are not allowed to set more than 3 1/2 hours with hazardous waste off of a designated highway and they are tracked on their daily logs and have to submit the logs to EPA for audit. The trucks may come in .to get fuel and then leave. Board Member ECHELMEYER asked as they grow do they anticipate 7 days a week with night operations, and Mr. • Munchiando said his trucks leave all hours of the day but actually they have downsized. Any trucks going down Tabor Street do not belong to him, their trucks go south out of Tabor and turn and go down the frontage road to Ward Road. J.R. Moyer, 5000 Tabor Street, was sworn in. Mr. Moyer is a neighbor on the south side and is in support of tYiis request. Paula Vessa, 5170 Swadley Street, was sworn in. She spoke saying granting this will allow huge trucking companies into the C-2 and Light Industrial districts. She also feels this will hurt their tax base and homes. She is against this request because Mr. Munchiando°s property is an eyesore and has depreciated her property. -She said a vote for Mr. Gidley's interpretation will have a great impact on the- community and asked the board to deny the application. Michael P. Ritz Jr., 5011 Swadley Street, was sworn in. He-feels the presentation was factual and honest. All was said that was needed to hear and the board has enough information to make a good decision. They wanted to be incorporated so they could be properly represented by the City. Their homes are important to them and they would like for them to maintain their value. He said the area is not C-2, it is Industrial and they would consider PID. He . thanked the board for listening to them. WHEAT RIDGE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MbavvsnS OF MEETING: October 24, 1996 Page 13 Chairman WALKER asked staff how long has this property been Industrial, and Mr. Gidley answered since 1964. -- Board Member HOVLAND said on the list of non-permitted uses, there is the °contractor's plant/storage yard°, and what is the definition of that. Mr. Gidley said there is no definition in the code, however, a contractor`s plant is where there is cement and concrete; large mixers and equipment where they are processing something. A large construction company where there are outside racks of forms. and such. Mr. Gidley said the ordinance is not very clear and that is why somebody has to make a decision. He realizes this decision becomes much harder when the use is already there. -The burden falls on the administrator and they have to make a call from time to time. Taking a look at the kinds of equipment that was on the site and having discussions regarding screening andfor moving some of the stuff in side, they made the call. Based on that they made the determination that it is not a plant or contractor`s storage yard. ` Board Member ECHELMEYER asked staff what the gentleman meant • when he said they would consider a PID, and Mr. Gidley replied there has been some discussion with council to completely do away with Industrial zoning and re-zone all 'I° properties to PID. All that does is say what is there is there, but any major changes to buildings .or uses would require that the PID regulations be followed. Board Member ECHELMEYER asked if anyone could buy Industrial land and haul in-trucks, equipment and buildings before the City asked what they are doing, and Mr. Gidley said yes they can but it would not be very wise. It would be much smarter for them to come and talk to the City. Discussion followed. No further questions were asked. Motion was made by Board Member ABBOTT, that interpretation for Case No. WA-96-32, an application by Carolyn Ritz et al, be as follows: "It is found that the use requested of the City by Mr. Greg Munchiando and as described by the City within the packet provided and during the hearing by Mr. Gidley, Director of Planning and Development and Mr. Munchiando is permitted. - It is found that the interpretation of the question as provided by Mr. Gidley is to be accurate as to the basic • . WHEAT RIDGE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MINUTES OF MEETING: October 24, 1996 Page 14 intent and purpose of words, phrases, and paragraphs as related to Section 26-6(D)(4), Section 26-23, and Section 26-24 of the Wheat Ridge Code of Laws." Motion was seconded by Board Member 5-2,-with Board Members ECHELMEYER against. Resolution attached. 5. CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING HOVLAND. Motion carried and JUNKER voting 6. OLD SUSINESS 7. NEW BUSINESS A. Chairman WALKER reminded the Board of Election of - Officers be on next month°s agenda. B. Scheduling a review of the By-laws. C. Mr. Gidley explained interpreting voting. D. Board Member HOWARD talked about industrial zoning and the fence limitations. 8. ADJOURNMENT Motion was made by Board Member MAURO, seconded by Board Member HOWARD, that the meeting be adjourned. Meeting adjourned at 1Oc47 P.M. ~C~~bt5`~~~0. Mary L~u ~hapla, S cretary B OAR D O F A D J U S T M E N T . PUBLIC FORUM ROSTER - Octo&er 24, 1996 - THIS IS THE TIME FOR ANYONE TO SPEAK ON ANY SUBJECT NOT APPEARING UNDER ITEM 3 OF THE PUBLIC HEARING SECTION OF THE AGENDA. Name and Address Please Print _ • •