HomeMy WebLinkAboutRES NO 187-05
RESOLUTION NO.
'1'87-05
RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BAKERSFIELD
CERTIFYING IT HAS RECEIVED, REVIEWED, EVALUATED AND
CONSIDERED THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THE FINAL
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR THE RIO BRAVO #3
ANNEXATION, GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT AND CONCURRENT ZONE
CHANGE NO. 04-0853 AND CERTIFYING THAT THE FINAL
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT HAS BEEN COMPLETED IN
COMPLIANCE WITH THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT,
THE STATE CEQA GUIDELINES, AND THE CITY OF BAKERSFIELD CEQA
IMPLEMENTATION PROCEDURES, AND MAKING FINDINGS AND
ADOPTING A MITIGATION MONITORING PLAN.
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Bakersfield in accordance with the
provisions of Section 65353 of the Government Code, held a public hearing on Tuesday, July 5,
2005, and on Thursday, July 7,2005, on the certification of the Final Environmental Impact Report
(EIR) for General Plan Amendment/Zone Change No. 04-0853 for the proposed amendment to the
Land Use Element and Circulation Element of the Metropolitan Bakersfield General Plan and the
proposed zone change, notice of the time and place of hearing having been given at least ten (10)
calendar days before said hearing by publication in The Bakersfield Californian, a local newspaper
of general circulation; and
WHEREAS, GFC Properties, Inc., made application for a concurrent general plan
amendment and zone change for property generally bounded by the Rio Bravo Country Club
property on the north, with Comanche Drive located to the west, and Breckenridge Road to the
south, as shown in attached Exhibit "A," to allow development of a single family and limited multiple
family developments on approximately 617 acres, more specifically stated as follows:
General Plan Amendment No. 04-0853:
A request to amend the General Plan from R-EA (Resource Extensive
Agriculture) to LR (Low Density Residential) on 600± acres and LMR (Low
Medium Density) on 17± acres.
A request to amend the Circulation Element of the General Plan to eliminate one
unnamed collector street segment extending from Chase Avenue within the
project site and reclassify a separate unnamed collector street extending from
Miramonte Drive connecting to the Rio Bravo Country Club to a local street
designation.
Zone Chanae No. 04-0853:
A request for a concurrent zone change from A (Agriculture) to R-1 (One
Family Dwelling) and R-1-HD (One Family Dwelling - Hillside
Development) on 600-acres and R-2 (Limited Multiple Family Dwelling)
and R-2 -HD (Limited Multiple Family Dwelling - Hillside Development)
on 17 -acres.
WHEREAS, for the above-described project, it was determined that the proposed project
may have a significant effect on the environment and, therefore, an EIR was required for the project.
in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA); and '"Aì\
;..
>- r
(;' (
-'!R!rl~,!{!;,,1 .
WHEREAS, the City of Bakersfield retained the professional consulting services of RBF
Consulting to prepare the Initial Study, EIR and related documents; and
WHEREAS, by Resolution No. 96-05 on July 7, 2005, the Planning Commission
recommended certification ofthe Final EIR for General Plan Amendment/Zone Change No. 04-0853
and this Council has fully considered the findings made by the Planning Commission as set forth in
that Resolution and as restated herein; and
WHEREAS, a Notice of Preparation was filed with the State Clearinghouse on September
13, 2004, for a 30-day review period in accordance with CEQA; and
WHEREAS, a Public Scoping hearing was held on October 7,2004, to receive input from the
public and agencies on the Initial Study and scope of the Draft EIR; and
WHEREAS, a Draft EIR was prepared and circulated to interested parties and agencies and
a notice of availability was sent to property owners within 300 feet of the project site and all those
who requested notification at the Planning Commission public hearing(s) or requested special notice
to the Development Services Department on April 12, 2005, in accordance with CEQA for a 45-day
review period which ended on May 30, 2005, in accordance with Section 15087 of the State CEQA
Guidelines; and
WHEREAS, the Notice of Completion was filed with the State Clearinghouse and the Draft
EIR was submitted to the State Clearinghouse (SCH #2004091048) on April 12, 2005, to start the
45-day review period to end on May 30, 2005, in accordance with CEQA; and
WHEREAS, the public hearing on the Draft EIR was held during the latter half of the public
review period as is required by the City of Bakersfield CEQA Implementation Procedures; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Bakersfield in accordance with the
provisions of the City of Bakersfield CEQA Implementation Procedures, held a public hearing on
Thursday, May 5, 2005, on the adequacy of the Draft EIR; and
WHEREAS, on June 21, 2005, the Final EIR was completed and notice of its availability was
made to interested parities and agencies; and
WHEREAS, on July 7, 2005, the Planning Commission considered the Final EIR; and
WHEREAS, based on comments received prior to and at the July 7, 2005, Planning
Commission Hearing, the Planning Commission recommended certification of the Final EIR; and
WHEREAS, the environmental record prepared in conjunction with the project includes the
following:
1. The Notice of Preparation, Draft Environmental Impact Report, and Final
Environmental Impact Report;
2. All staff reports, memoranda, maps, letters. minutes of meetings relating to the
project;
3. All testimony, documents and evidence presented to the City by consultants working
with the City relating to the project;
\).1\ f(,'_
2
·-'rW"t\I{:
4. The proceedings before the Planning Commission relating to the project, the Draft
EIR and the Final EIR, including testimony and documenting evidence introduced at
the public hearings; and
5. Matters of common knowledge to the Planning Commission which it considered
including but not limited to the following:
a) The Metropolitan Bakersfield General Plan;
b) The City of Bakersfield Zoning Ordinance;
c) The City of Bakersfield Municipal Code;
d) Other formally adopted policies and ordinances of the City of Bakersfield;
and
WHEREAS, the Council has considered and concurs with the following findings made by the
Planning Commission as set forth in Resolution No. 96-05, adopted on July 7, 2005:
1. The laws and regulations relating to the preparation and adoption of Environmental
Impact Reports as set forth in CEQA, the State CEQA Guidelines, and the City of
Bakersfield CEQA Implementation Procedures, have been duly followed by city staff
and the Planning Commission; and
2. In accordance with State CEQA Guidelines Section 15151, the Planning
Commission considered the following direction regarding "standards for adequacy"
of an EIR:
An EIR should be prepared with a sufficient degree of analysis to provide decision-
makers with information, which enables them to make a decision which intelligently
takes account of environmental consequences. An evaluation of the environmental
effects of a proposed project need not be exhaustive, but the sufficiency of an EIR is
to be reviewed in the light of what is reasonably feasible. Disagreement among
experts does not make an EIR inadequate, but the EIR should summarize the main
points of disagreement among the experts. The courts have looked not for
perfection but for adequacy, completeness, and a good faith effort at full disclosure;
and
3. In accordance with CEQA Guidelines Sections 15151 and 15090, the Final EIR was
considered for adequacy, completeness and good faith effort at full disclosure and
has been completed in compliance with CEOA; and
4. Attached Exhibit "8" containing the "Statement of Facts and Findings" INCLUDING
Statement of Overriding Considerations are appropriate and incorporated into the
project; and
5. Attached Exhibit "C" containing the "Mitigation Monitoring Plan" is incorporated into
the project; and
WHEREAS, in accordance with State CEQA Guidelines Section 15132, the Final EIR
consists of the following:
1. The Draft EIR;
3
.-
o
2. Comments and recommendations received on the Draft EIR either verbatim or in
summary;
3. A list of persons, organizations and public agencies commenting on the Draft EIR;
4. The responses of the Lead Agency to significant environmental points raised in the
review and consultation process; and
WHEREAS, the Final EIR for General Plan Amendment/Zone Change No. 04-0853 was
prepared in accordance with State CEQA Guidelines Section 15132; and
WHEREAS, in accordance with State CEQA Guidelines Section 15151 the Planning
Commission considered the following direction regarding "standards for adequacy" of an EIR:
State CEQA Guidelines Section 15151:
An EIR should be prepared with a sufficient degree of analysis to provide decision-makers
with information which enables them to make a decision which intelligently takes account of
environmental consequences. An evaluation of the environmental effects of a proposed
project need not be exhaustive, but the sufficiency of an EIR is to be reviewed in the light of
what is reasonably feasible. Disagreement among experts does not make an EIR
inadequate, but the EIR should summarize the main points of disagreement among the
experts. The courts have looked not for perfection but for adequacy, completeness, and a
good faith effort at full disclosure; and
WHEREAS, in accordance with State CEQA Guidelines Section 15090 the lead agency (City
of Bakersfield) shall certify that: .
(a) The Final EIR has been completed in compliance with CEQA; and
(b) The Final EIR was presented to the decision-making body ofthe Lead Agency and
that the decision-making body reviewed and considered the information contained in
the Final EIR prior to approving the project.
WHEREAS, in accordance with State CEQA Guidelines Sections 15151 and 15090, the
Final EIR was considered for adequacy, completeness and good faith effort at full disclosure and
has been completed in compliance with CEQA; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED AND FOUND BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF BAKERSFIELD as follows:
1. The City Council hereby certifies that it has received, reviewed, evaluated and
considered the information contained in the Final EIR for General Plan
Amendment/Zone Change No. 04-0853.
2. The City Council hereby certifies the Final EIR for General Plan Amendment/Zone
Change No. 04-0853.
3. The above recitals and findings incorporated herein by reference are true and
correct and constitute the Findings of the City Council in this matter.
,
,
4
'n
,-
4. That all required notices have been given.
5. The provisions of CEQA have been followed.
6. The City Council hereby finds the mitigation incorporated into the project avoids
impacts or mitigates impacts to a less than significant level.
7. Certain environmental impacts regarding aesthetics are considered unavoidable and
cannot feasibly be mitigated to a less than significant level. Moreover, the project
alternatives analyzed in the Final EIR would not feasibly mitigate the impacts. A
Statement of Overriding Considerations is being adopted for aesthetic impacts.
8. Based on the absence of evidence in the record as required by Section 21082.2 of
the State of California Public Resources Code (CEQA) for the purposes of
documenting significant effects, it is the conclusion of the Lead Agency that this
project will result in impacts that fall below the threshold of significance with regard
to wildlife resources and, therefore must be granted a "de minimus" exemption in
accordance with Section 711 of the State Resources Code. Additionally the
assumption of adverse effect is rebutted by the above-referenced absence of
evidence in the record and the lead agency's decision to prepare an Environmental
Impact Report.
9. The Planning Division of the Development Services Department is hereby directed to
file a Notice of Determination with the County Clerk of Kern County, pursuant to the
provision of Section 21152 of the Public Resources Code and Section 15094 of the
State CEQA Guidelines adopted pursuant thereto and a Certificate of Fee
Exemption pursuant to Section 711.4 (c)(2)(B) ofthe State of California Department
of Fish and Game Code.
---------000--------
5
~
.1. '" K "
\ -0:'-)
o <J
-."
!!.:'
) ",...,_"" tJ
'~"'" . ¡~\I!''!
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution was passed and adopted by the
Council of the City of Bakersfield at a regular meeting thereof held on AIJG 1 ., 20DS
~~~~~~~ .
CAYES~
NOES:
v'''''''''-' (... t--~
COUNCILMEMBER COUCH, CARSON, BENHAM. MAGGARD, HANSON, SULLIVAN, SCRIVNER
COUNCILMEMBER
ABSTAIN:
COUNCILMEMBER
COUNCILMEMBER
ABSENT:
APPROVED
Þ.\)G 1 7 20re
~
PAMELA A. McCARTHY, CMC
CITY CLERK and Ex Officio Cle
Council of the City of Bakersfield
HARVEY L. HALL
MAYOR of the City of Bakersfield
APPROVED as to form:
VIRGINIA GENNARO
City Attorney
By fA,J; ~ 1l~
EXHIBIT A
B
C
Location Map
Statement of Facts and Findings
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Checklist
LP - S:\Current Planning EIRsIRio Bravo #3lstaff repts\CC\CC FEIR.doc
6
fl.kr
'<
()'
"¿
',)
iJ;ll.
I'"
,
fj
·"'t'
EXHIBIT A
LOCATION MAP
. (',,\!(,:'::'
'< \. ~,/'
()
--
,--
:¡P!"·,!~,¡þ)'
-
I-
Z
W
~
o
z
W
~
«
z
OM
,....~LO
CO-.JCO
~::>'?
OO~
zo::w
ZO(9
OJ:::Z
-Z«
I-WI
~~U
WOW
ZZZ
ZWO
«~N
« I
Z
:5
a..
---I ~.
~ -.
W
Z
W
<..9
,
I
I
~
z iiIl!8
w
§ 0'>
~
.!![
en
o 0'>
N
I-
§I
g
~
.; '\j:,~
>
,
f
';~)Ir' !~:'l',;'
---.---
EXHIBIT B
STATEMENT OF FACTS AND FINDINGS
i
,
't)<
FINAL
FINDINGS REGARDING THE ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS
FOR THE
RIO BRAVO ANNEXATION NO. 467 PROJECT EIR
GPAlZC NO. 04-0853
SCH # 2004091048
Lead Agency:
CITY OF BAKERSFIELD
1715 Chester Avenue
Bakersfield, California 93301
Contact: Ms. Louise Palmer
(661) 326-3733
Consultant:
RBF CONSULTING
14725 Alton Parkway
Irvine. California 92618
June 2005
IN 10-103781
,~; \-",
c
,'~"
Ç."'-'I'-
TABLE OF CONTENTS
EXHIBIT A - STATEMENT OF FACTS AND FINDINGS............................................................ 1
I. Introduction ... ...... .................. .....__... .............. ..... ............. ............... ...... ............... 1
II. Project Desaiption......................... .__.. ............ .................................... --..... ..........2
III. Findings with Respect to Significant Effects ..............................__.__. .....____..........2
IV.
Findings with Respect to the Environmental Review Process..__
__.__.........3
V. Findings Regarding Impacts Determined to be Insignificant in
the Initial StudylNotice of Preparation.......__...................__.......__.____..____.____.........4
VI. Findings Regarding Effects Determined to be Insignificant
Or Less Than Significanl.........____...........................................·...·..--··................ 11
VII. Rndings Regarding Effects Determined To Be Mitigated
To Less Than Significant Levels .__.....................................................................22
VIII. Findings Regarding Infeasibility of Mitigation Measures
For Significant Impacts ......... ................................................ ................. ............ 64
IX. Finding Regarding Alternatives.. .........................................--....--......................66
EXHIBIT B - STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS..........--.
__............... 70
'i). ,\ i(
« '.
('\
,
C",
['^'R!,'""·,.·!f!
, -.-...,-,..-.--- _.,..._._...---_.__._'"--,._~._._..~---_.,_._._.
RIo Rnovo Annexation No. 467 Project
GPAlZC No. 04-4853
EXHIBIT A
STATEMENT OF FACTS AND FINDINGS
I. INTRODUCTION
The following statement of facts and findings have been prepared in accordance with the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and Public Resources Code Section 21081.
CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 provides that:
"No public agency shall approve or carry out a project for which an environmental
impact report has been certified which identifies one or more significant effects
on the environment that would occur if the project is approved or carried out
unless the public agency makes one or more of the following findings:
The following potential significant impacts of the proposed Project have been separated into
three categories:
(1) Those potential impacts that have been dete011ined to be less than significant,
based on review of available info011ation in the Project record, and in
consideration of existing standard development review requirements and existing
codes and regulations;
(2) Those potential impacts that could be mitigated to a level that is considered less
than significant with the implementation of the recommended mitigation
measures; and
(3) Those potential impacts that could not be reduced to a less than significant level
with the implementation of the existing policies and standards and the
recommended mitigation measures.
For potentially significant impacts (categories (2) and (3) above), the City of Bakersfield ("City")
has made one of the following three findings for each potentially significant impact and provides
facts in support of each finding in accordance with CECA Guidelines Section 15091:
a. Cha~s or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project
which mitigate or avoid the signifICant effects on the environment.
b. Those changes or alterations required in the Project to mitigate or avoid
significant environmental effects are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of
another public agency and have been, or can and should be. adopted by that
other agency.
c. Specific economic. social. or other considerations make infeasible the mitigation
measures or Project alternatives identified in the final environmental impact
report. .
The Final EIR for the Rio Bravo Annexation identifies certain significant enVIronmental effects
which may occur as a result of the Project Therefore,findings are set forth herein pursuant to
Section 15091 of the CEQA Guidelines. The Summary of Mitigation Measures is based in part
on the requirements contained in Section 21081.6 of the Public Resources Code (see Exhibit
B). A Mitigation Monitoring Program will be adopted as part of the Resolution.
IN 10-103781
1
'1>Mf;y
June 2OOsŠ"'~
>-
\--- g:1
Õ t;
ORIGINAL
.- .~-_._---_.~~--
--~.__..
- _____.___"._._..__._._.__n
Rio Br8vo Annexation No. 467 Project
GPÞlZ.C No. 04-4853
II. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The proposed Project involves actions necessary for a General Plan Amendment (GPA) No. 04-
0853, zone change, and annexation of approximately 617 acres within unincorporated Kern
County (County) into the corporate limits of the City of Bakersfield (City). The proposed Project
is situated within the current Sphere of Influence (SOl) boundary identified in the Metropolitan
Bakersfield General Plan (General Plan).
The annexation, GPA. and zone change would permit development of 1,300 single-family
residential units. The Project area is proposed to be developed in several phases, however, unit
layout for individual phases are unknown at this time. The future development and future
infrastructure improvements including pipelines, wells, and other utility improvements will be
subject to separate environmental review pursuant to the requirements of CEOA.
An amendment to the General Plan's Circulation Element is also proposed as part of the
Project. The amendment would result in the elimination of one unnamed collector street
segment extending from Chase Avenue within the Project site and the reclassification of a
separate unnamed collector street extending from Miramonte Drive connecting to the Rio Bravo
Country Club to a local street designation
Although not a part of this proposed annexation Project, secondary collector streets, are
planned. These planned secondary collector streets indude Chase Avenue which will
accommodate future fire and emergency access to the annexation area and will run southerly
through the Project site ultimately connecting Comanche Drive with Breckenridge Road. A
segment from Chase Avenue connecting to Miramonte Drive, and a segment of roadway
connecting to the Rio Bravo Country Club are also planned.
III. FINDINGS WITH RESPECT TO SIGNIFICANT EFFECTS
The City of Bakersfield, as Lead Agency and decision-maker for the Project, has reviewed and
considered the infonnation contained in both the Draft and Rnal EIRs prepared for the Rio
Bravo Annexation Project and the public record. The Lead Agency makes the following finding
pursuant to CEOA and the CEOA Guidelines:
1. The City of Bakersfield. as Lead Agency and decision-makers, having reviewed
and considered the information contained in the Draft and Final EIRs prepared
for the Rio Bravo Annexation Project and public records, finds that changes or
alterations to the Project will avoid or substantially lessen potentially significant
environmental impacts. These changes or alterations are related to the
implementation of the mitigation measures detailed in this document.
2 The City of Bakersfield. as Lead Agency and decision-makers, having reviewed
and considered the information contained in the Draft and Final EIRs prepared
for the Rio Bravo Annexation Project and the public record, finds that there are
specific economic, social. or other considerations which make the mitigation
measures for Aesthetics. Light. and Glare in the Draft and Final EIR's infeasible.
3 The City of Bakersfield. as Lead Agency and decision-makers, finds that
significant and unmitigable impacts on Aesthetics, Light, and Glare may occur
with future development In conjunction with implementation of the Rio Bravo
Annexation Project. This finding requires that the Lead Agency issue a
'Statement of Oveniding Considerations' under Section 15093 and 15126(b) of
IN 10-103781
2
June ~~~.~''',~
:;-.. ~
I- m
-" ~
ù <:::>
ORIGINAL
.._.'__m__.____.,' __,__..___._.__.____~._._.___..___,_"_.
Rio Bravo Annexation No. 487 Project
GPÞlZC No. 04-0853
the State CEQA Guidelines if the Lead Agency wishes to proceed with approval
of the Project.
IV. FINDINGS WITH RESPECT TO THE ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW PROCESS
The City of Bakersfield, acting as Lead Agency for the environmental review of the Project,
makes the following findings with regard to the environmental review process undertaken to
analyze the potential environmental impacts of the Project:
1. In accordance with Section 10563(a) of the CEQA Guidelines. as amended, the
City of Bakersfield undertook the preparation of an Initial Study. The Initial Study
detennined that a number of environmental issue areas may be impacted by the
construction and implementation of the Project. As a result, the Initial Study
detennined that the Draft EIR should address the Project's significant impacts.
2. Pursuant to the provisions of Section 15082 of the State CEQA Guidelines, as
amended, the City of Bakersfield, as Lead Agency, circulated a Notice of
Preparation (NOP) to public agencies, special districts, and members of the
public requesting such notice for a ~y period commencing on September 14.
2004, and concluding on October 14. 2004.
3. During the circulation period for the Notice of Preparation, the City of Bakersfield.
as Lead Agency, advertised and conducted a public scöping meeting on October
7, 2004 at the City of Bakersfield Development Services Building in the City of
Bakersfield.
4. A Draft EIR was prepared which analyzed project-related impacts related to the
followin9 environmental issue areas: agriculture, public health and safety,
aesthetics/light and glare, traffic and circulation, noise. air quality. biological
resources, cultural resources, and public services and utilities. Growth-inducing
impacts, project alternatives and cumulative effects were also analyzed in the
Draft EIR
5. During the Draft EIR's public review period. which began on April 12, 2004 and
concluded on May 30, 2004. the City of Bakersfield held a noticed public hearing
on May 5, 2005 regarding the Draft EIR The public was afforded the opportunity
to orally comment on the Draft EIR at the public hearing. and the testimony was
considered by the decision-makers. Upon the close of the public review period,
the Lead Agency proceeded to evaluate and prepare responses to aU written
comments received from both citizens and the public agency during the public
review period.
6. The aforementioned comments and responses and other ¡nfonnation consistent
with the requirements of Section 15132 of the State CEOA Guidelines. as
amended, comprise the Final EIR Following completion of the Responses to
Comments document, the Lead Agency's responses to the comments received
from the public agencies were transmitted to those public agencies for
consideration at least 10 days prior to the Final EIR's certification.
IN 10-103781
3
"Ai{ ~
XV I::,-y
June 200S:> ~,
>-
t-.::..
m
,-
(.) ~,
nrW::INAL
...~,,_~_.m_'_...·__·_~·_·__·____·'·
Rio Baovo Annexation No. 467 Project
GPNZC No. 044853
V. FINDINGS REGARDING IMPACTS DETERMINED TO BE INSIGNIFICANT IN THE
INITIAL STUDY/NOTICE OF PREPARATION
The City of Bakersfield conducted an Initial Study in September 2004, to determine significant
effects of the project. In the course of this evaluation, certain impacts of the project were found
to be less than significant due to the inabmty of a project of this scope to create such impacts or
the absence of project characteristics producing effects of this type. The effects determined not
to be significant are not induded in primary analysis sections of the Draft EIR.
AESTHETICS. Would the proposal:
Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista?
The proposed Project site topography consists of relatively level to steep terrain.
Elevation on the Project site ranges from 925 feet above mean sea level (msl) to 1,203
feet above msl. The site is not designated as a scenic vista or located along a
designated scenic highway, as defined by the Metropolitan Bakersfield General Plan.
Therefore, Project implementation would not have a substantial adverse effect on a
scenic vista.
AGRICULTURE RESOURCES. Would the project:
Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance
(Farmland), as shown on Ihe maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and
MonitDring Program of the California Resources Agency. to non-agricultural use?
The majority of the Project site soils are considered "non-prime' for agricultural purposes
by the Metropolitan Bakersfield General Plan Update EIR The annexation itself would
not result in the loss of agricultural land. Currently, the site is vacant and no agricultural
use is present on-site. No impacts would occur in this regard.
Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract?
Refer to response above.
Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature,
could result in conversion of Farmland, 10 non-agricultural use?
The proposed Project would result in a GPA from R-EA to LR and LMR and zone
change from A to R-1 and R-2. No agricultural practices have historically occurred on-
site. nor do any agriculturally related activities exist today. The proposed annexation,
GPA and zone change would not promote the conversion of existing farmland to non-
agricultural uses. Refer to responses above
AIR QUALITY. Would the project:
Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people?
Construction activities associated with future development of the Project site may
generate detectable odors from heavy-duty equipment exhaust Odors associated with
diesel and gasoline fumes are transitory in nature and would not create objectionable
odors affecting a substantial number of people. The impacts from these odors would be
è;'~Î\¡:·
o '."
Q '[J'
IN 10-103781 4 June 200S ~
f-'- (I;
- r-
!j _ f)
()RiGINM:-
Rio Bravo AnneøUon No. 467 Project
GPIJZC No. 04-0853
short-term, would cease upon construction completion and are not anticipated to be
significant.
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the project:
Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section
404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal,
etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means?
No federally protected wetlands occur on-site. Therefore, impacts are less than
significant.
Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a
tree preservation policy or ordinance?
The Metropolitan Bakersfield Habitat ConservaÜOfl Plan (MBHCP) is the regional
conservation plan that addresses the effect of urban growth on Federally and State
protected plant and animal species within the Metropolitan Bakersfield General Plan
area. The MBHCP is a joint program of the City of Bakersfield and Kern County that was
undertaken to assist urban development applicants in complying with State and Federal
endangered species laws. The MBHCP utilizes avoidance measures and a mitigation
fee paid by applicants for grading or building pennits to fund the purchase and
maintenance of habitat land to compensate for the effects of urban development on
endangered species habitat. If a Project is developed on land within the Metropolitan
Bakersfield area, one-time MBHCP habitat mitigation fee payment of $1,240 per gross
acre is required. This Project must comply with the provisions of the MBHCP.
GEOLOGY AND SOILS. Would the project:
Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative
waste water disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste
water?
The Metropolitan Bakersfield General Plan indicates that the Rio Bravo area of the City
is developed using on-site septic tanks. Some of the developed Rio Bravo area is
sewered to community-level septic systems. Refer to response 4.6 (aX1), in the Initial
Study. The proposed development is required to connect to sewers.
HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS. Would the project:
Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine
transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials?
The proposed Project would also involve the developrnent of residential uses which
typically involve limited amounts of hazardous materials that would be used, stored, or
transported in the vIcinity of the Project area. Use of these materials would be subject to
local, State and Federal regulations. Future development of the Project site does not
have the capacity to create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through
the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials.
Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials.
substances, or waste within OnfHluarter mile of an existing or proposed school?
IN 10-103781
5
X 'ò~KE>j
June 20050 <1.;.,
:>. -
>--- m
__ r-
Ü (:)
ORiGINAL
-..--...-.------..---
- -------
---_..~----~---
Rio e..."o Annexøtlon No. 467 Project
GPAlZC No. 04-0853
The proposed Project involves the annexation of land into the City of Bakersfield. Future
development of the Project site WQuld not result in hazardous emissions or handle
hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within o~uarter mile
of an existing or proposed school.
Be located on a site which is included on a /ist of hazardous materials sites compiled
pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a
significant hazard to the public or the environment?
A Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) will be prepared for the proposed
Project. The Project site is vacant except for a water tank, therefore, the presence of
lead-based paints (LBPs) and asbestos containing materials (ACMs) is considered
unlikely. The Project site is not anticipated to result in the creation of health hazards
with compliance with pertinent health and safety regulations.
For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been
adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result
in a safety hazard for people residing or worlång in the project area?
The proposed Project is not located within the vicinity of any airport. Due to the scope
and nature of the proposed Project, an annexation into the. City for future residential
development. would not result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the
Project area.
For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project result in a safety
hazard for people residing or working in the project area?
Refer to Response above.
Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response
plan or emergency evacuation plan?
A Traffic Management Plan (TMP) would be implemented to ensure that future
construction on the Project site does not interfere with any emergency response or
evacuation plans. The TMP and, if necessary. other traffic control measures, will be
described in the EIR
HYDROLOGY AND WATER aUAUlY. Would the project:
Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements?
Implementation of the proposed Project could result in short-term and long-term impacts
to surface water quality. Short-term surface water quality impacts may occur from water
erosion of soils during construction. with long-term impacts on surface water quality
occurring primarily from the addition of project related automobile trips which generate
urban type pollutants (i.e. oil. tire particles, etc) However, surface water quality is not
expected to be significanlly affected because the proposed Project would be required to
implement best management practices (BMPs) to comply with the National pollutant
Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) stormwater quality requirements.
Development of the site would involve the construction of impervious surfaces, which
would lead to a decrease in ground absorption on-site and a increase in the quantity of
JN 10-103781
8
June 2005 ,:
\J.,::\l\{:
~¡.
""',
fT'
r·
,.< (:)
'~lr¡:G!NAt
".~'-...--.~-'--...-~'..-.--.'._..._-----.--..-."
.-------.--.
Rio B,..vo AnneXIItJon No. 487 Project
GPAlZC No. ~53
surface water. As noted above, urban type pollutants would be introduced into the
surface waters as a result of the increase in impervious surfaces throughout the Project
site. However, runoff would be conveyed to nearby sumps which would detain the runoff
and allow it to flow off-site at reduced levels. A second function of the sumps would be
the trapping of urban type pollutants, thus reducing potential water quality impacts to
down stream drainages. Drainage facilities would be provided on-site as a part of the
Project design and would be subject to review and approval by the City of Bakersfield. In
addition, as noted above, the proposed Project would be required to implement BMPs to
comply with the NPDES stonnwater quality requirements.
Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater
recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the
local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would
drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which
permits have been granted)?
Construction activities associated with development of the proposed Project. which are
short-tenn, are not expected to affect the Quantity or Quality of the groundwater. The
Project would be served by the northwest Bakersfield water treatment plant which uses
water from the Kern River. An analysis regarding water consumption will be inctuded in
the EIR. In addition, cuts and excavation into aquifers on the Project site are not
anticipated.
Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, induding through the
alteration of the course of stream or river, in a manner which would result in substantial
erosion or siltation on- or off-site?
Implementation of future development on the Project site may result in minor changes in
the amount of runoff due to an increase in the amount of impenneable surface area at
the Project site. Development on-site would be subject to City codes and requirements
for erosion control. Due to several factors, including the characteristics of the on-site
soils, the rolling topography, the implementation of erosion control measures pursuant to
City codes, and the construction of drainage facilities (Le. curb and gutter, retention
basins), the proposed Project would not result in significant erosion or displacement of
soils off-site.
Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, induding through the
alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount
of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off-site?
The rate and volume of on-site surface runoff would increase due to the implementation
of the proposed Project which would introduce impervious surfaces on the Project site.
The proposed Project would include the expansion of all stann drain facilities that would
be required to serve the Project. No significant impact on drainage facilities is expected
to occur. Drainage facilities and flood protection would be provided on-site as a part of
the Project design and would be subject to review and approval by the City of
Bakersfield
Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned
stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted
runoff?
IN 10-103781
7
0.1·'.\1':,
ÖV '-S'
.r
"':f\
June 2105 m
I:: t-
() ()
C\~!n "JAL
Rio A_'-, Anneutlon No. 467 project
GPAJZC No. 04-0853
Refer to response above.
Otherwise substantially degrade water quality?
Refer to response above.
Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood
Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map?
The elevation of the site ranges from 925 feet above msl to 1,203 feet above msl. The
Project site is not located within a 1 OO-year flood hazard area.
Place within a 1OO-year flood hazard area structures which would impede or redirect
flood flows?
Refer to response above.
Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding,
including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam?
Isabella Dam. which is located approximately forty (40) miles northeast of Bakersfield,
has a capacity to hold 570,000 acre-feet of water. If an earthquake were to occur in the
vicinity, it could potentially result in a break in the dam. This could, under certain worst
case conditions. cause the entire lake storage to be released, which would result in
flooding of 60 square miles of the Metropolitan Bakersfield area.
As a result of the possible dangers associated with Isabella Dam, the City of Bakersfield
entered the Regular Phase of the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) as
administered by the Federal Emergençy Management Agency (FEMA) on May 1, 1985.
The existing Flood Evacuation Plan for the City of Bakersfield provides for the protection
of life and property through evacuation of areas that would be inundated.
However, due to the proposed Projects elevation on-site, the area is not anticipated to
be flooded in a dam failure event.
Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow?
There are no large bodies of open water located on or adjacent to the proposed Project
site which may result in seiche or tsunami hazards. Hazards involving tsunamis. seiche,
or mudflows are not expected to affect the development
LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the project:
Physically divide an established community?
The proposed Project would not divide the physical arrangement of a community. The
Project site is surrounding by vacant land. except for the Rio Bravo Country Club located
immediately north of the Prolect site
.IN 10-103781
8
",Þ-K[¡;
d( 'Ttp
_S:> .<'
June 200:!l ñí
1-- r-
-C) <:1
ORlr,iNAL
Rio Bravo An...xatIon No. 467 Project
GPPJZC No. 04-0853
Connict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with
jurisdiction aver the project {including, but not limited to the general plan, specifIC plan,
local coastal program, or zoning ordinance} adopted for the purpose of avoiding or
mitigating an environmental effect?
The proposed Project would result in an amendment to the Land Use Element and a
change in zoning in order to insure consistency with the proposed GPA. The annexation
would result in the Metropolitan Bakersfield General Plan designation change from R-EA
to LR and LMR. Concurrent zoning would be from A zone to R-1 zone on 600-acres and
R-2 zone on 17-acres. If applicable, a Circulation Element Amendment to modify the
circulation map of the General Plan may be required. The EIR will address the required
discretionary actions, approvals, and amendments to City policy criteria to detennine the
level of significance of impacts and required mitigation as detennined necessary.
MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the project:
Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral rewurœ that would be of value to the
region and the residents of the state?
As indicated in the Metropolitan Bakersfield General Plan, there are no mineral
resources that would be of value located within the proposed Project site. No impacts
are anticipated in this regard.
Result in the loss of availability of a locally-important mineral resource recovery site
delineated on a local general plan, specifIC plan or other land use plan?
Refer to response above.
NOISE. Would the project result in:
For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been
adopted, within two miles of a public airporl or public use airport, would the project
expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels?
The proposed Project site is not located near any airport.
For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expose people
residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels?
Refer to response above.
POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the project:
Induce substantial population growth in an area. either directly (for example, by
proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of
roads or other infrastructure) ?
IN 10-103781
e
. 'òi'KE0'
<:l. <I'
Ju... >tUU5 :'.':
I- ~
Ô C)
OPlG1NAL
Rio e....vo Annexation No. 467 Project
GPAlZC No. 04-0853
Approximately 1,300 units are anticipated to be constructed within the project area at
buildout. Although the proposed Project is not anticipated to result in any signifICant
growth inducing impacts, the EIR will inetude a review of direct and indirect growth
inducing impacts pursuant to CEQA Section 15126 (g). The review will discuss ways in
which the proposal could foster economic. housing or population growth in the
surrounding area.
Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of
replacement housing elsewhere?
The proposed Project would not involve the displacement of housing. The Project site
would ultimately result in future housing.
Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement
housing elsewhere?
Refer to Response above.
PUBUC SERVICES.
Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the
provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically
altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant
environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable selVice ratios, response times or
other performance objectives for any of the public selVices:
Other pUblic facilities?
Due to the size and scope of the proposed Project, implementation would not
significantly affect other governmental agencies. Less than significant impacts are
anticipated in this regard.
TRANSPORTATlONfTRAFFIC. Would the project:
Result in a change in air traffic patterns, induding either an increase in traffic levels or a
change in location that results in substantial safety risks?
The proposed Project would not affect air traffic patterns and would not result in safety
risks to air traffic.
Result in inadequate parking capacity?
Proposed development must meet City parking standards.
Conflict with adopted pof¡cles, plans, or programs supporting alternative transportation
(e.g.. bus turnouts. bicycle racks)?
The proposed Project would not conflict with adopted polIcies. plans, or programs
supporting attemative transportation
~ I'"'
"'.,I" !\t:'0-~
()x '0
...,-"
IN 10-103781
10
Rl
¡-.
June 200v \:'
ORiGINAl
~
.....
Rio A~vo Annexation No. ~ Pro ec:t
GPAlZC No. 04-4853
UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would the project:
Be served by 8 landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project's
solid waste disposal needs?
Existing solid waste collection services for residential uses are provided within the City of
Bakersfield by the City Sanitation Division. All solid waste generated in the City is
disposed of in County operated landfills. Future development anticipated in the Project
site is not expected to significantly affect existing facilities.
Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste?
Refer to response above.
VI. FINDINGS REGARDING EFFECTS DETERMINED TO BE INSIGNIFICANT OR LESS
THAN SIGNIFICANT
The City of Bakersfield finds that based on substantial evidence appearing in the FIf18I EIR.
Technical Appendices and in the administrative record, that the proposed Project would have
insignificant or less than signiftcant impacts in the following areas.
LAND USE AND RELEVANT PLANNING
Land Use Compatibility On-site
5.1-2 Implementation of the proposed Project would result in the phased elimination of
open space as land uses are developed, thus resulting in potential land use
conflicts between urban uses and open space. This is considered a less than
significant impact because the proposed Project would be compatible with
existing residential uses to the north and would provide for an orderly outward
expansion of new "urban" development on-site.
Facts SupDQrtil1Q Rndinq
The 617-acre Project site is currently undeveloped except for a water tank owned and
maintained by the OtNSC. The entire Project site is located within an area designated by
the Metropolitan Bakersfield General Plan as R-EA and zoned A. Although the entire
site is designated and zoned for agricultural uses, no agricultural activities occur within
or immediately adjacent to the Project site boundaries. Therefore, no compatibility
impacts for Mure on-site residential uses related to agricultural uses would occur.
Future development of on-site uses will also indude two non-residential uses, a park site
with an adjacent fire station. These uses are anticipated to be located on Chase Avenue
in the northwest quadrant of the site. Although the ultimate size, location, and
orientation of these uses are undefined at this time, the proposed park site and fire
station will be developed according to applicable Metropolitan Bakersfield General Plan
guidelines, existing ordinances. and development standards. Final siting will be subject
to approval by the City to ensure that long-tenn on-site land use compatibility impacts
between residential and park uses are minimized to the fullest extent possible. As such,
the development review process, combined with adherence to applicable General Plan
and Bakersfield Municipal Code requirements would reduce potential compatibility
impacts to lesS than significant levels.
IN 10-103781
11
'òr.K (;;
'<.cJ'
o ...,',
>- m
'- I;
June 2OOg.) OR\G\NilL
Rio Bravo Annexation No. 467 Project
GPÞJZC No. 04-0853
Relevant Planning Policies
Consistencv with General Plan Policies
5.1-2 The proposed Project would require an amendment to the Metropolitan
Bakersfield General Plan and a concurrent change to the Bakersfield Municipal
Code zoning designation for the site that would allow the conversion of the 617-
acre undeveloped Project site to residential uses. The Project has been
reviewed for consistency with goals and policies as set forth in the Metropolitan
Bakersfield General Plan and the analysis has concluded that impacts are less
than significant and no mitigation is required.
Facts SUDDOrtinQ Findil1Q
The Project site is located within the City's SOl, however it is situated immediately
outside the current City corporate limits within unincorporated Kern County. The Kern
County LAFCo must consider how proposals for boundary changes in Bakersfield
conform to the City's General Plan. Therefore, properties proposed for annexation into
the City must be pre-zoned in order to indicate the intended zoning for the site and
establish consistency with applicable zoning and Generat Plan provisions.
Future on-site development will accommodate a park site and an adjacent fire station to
serve local residents. The park site and fire station sizes will be sited, dedicated, and
constructed based on the Bakersfield Municipal Code. In addition, individual
development proposals will also require City review and approval to ensure adequate
pedestrian facilities are provided to encourage safe pedestrian movement throughout the
Project area.
The analysis contained above and in Appendix 15.9, GOALS AND POLICIES
ANALYSIS, concludes that there are no significant consistency impacts from the
proposed Project. It should be noted that the Project's consistency with the SJVAPCD
AQAP is addressed in Section 5.8 AIR QUALITY. Overall, Project implementation would
not conflict with the land use plan, goals, and strategies of the Metropolitan Bakersfield
General Plan. Less than significant impacts are anticipated in this regard.
Consistency with LAFCo Policies
5.1-5 Implementation of the proposed Project would require annexation of the entire
Project site into the City; thus requiring a project consistency analysis against
policies enforced by the Kern County LAFCo. This is considered a less than
significant impact because the proposed Project would be considered consistent
with applicable Kern County LAFCo policies and guidelines.
Facts SUDDortinQ FindinQs
In that the City seeks to annex the proposed site from the County of Kern and modify the
Metropolitan Bakersfield General Plan through an amendment to the Land Use Element,
Circulation Element, and zoning designation. particular focus is given to the goals and
policies of the Kern County LAFCo (refer to Appendix 15.9, GOALS AND POLICY
ANALYSIS). It is noted that LAFCo goals andlor policies not included in the assessment
were omitted due to their having either a negligible or no relationship to the proposed
Project or surrounding area. Pursuant to Section 1.2 of the Kern County LAFCo
JN 10-103781
12
(èA1(P
«r? _
June 2ð05"';,
>--
~: m
.'-) ()
'!F;:!~INA!
Rio Bravo Annexation No. 467 project
GPfoJZC No. 04-0853
Procedures, Standards, and Policies for the Evaluation of Proposals. the City shall
submit a plan for providing services within the annexation area and demonstrate that
services can be provided within a timely and financially feasible manner.
The analysis contained in Appendix 15.9, GOAlS AND POLICY ANAlYSIS. concludes
that there are no significant consistency impacts from the proposed Project associated
with relevant Kem County LAFCo goals and policies. No additional mitigation would be
required.
Consistencv with the Circ1Jlation Element
5.1-6 A Circulation Elemenl Amendment to the Metropolitan Bakersfield General Plan
will result in the elimination of one collector street segment extending from Chase
A venue within the Projecl site and the reclassification of a separate collector
street extending from Miramonte Drive coonecting to the Rio Bravo Country Club'
to a local street designation. This is coosidered a less than significant impact
because the proposed roadway reclassification is required to achieve City design
standards and applicable Circulation Bement goals and policies.
Facts SuDPOrtiIlQ Finding
Future developments on the Project site plan for roadway extensions on Miramonte
Drive and Chase Avenue. The proposed circulation amendments include the elimination
of a collector street segment. and the functional classification change of a second
roadway to a local street designation consistent with the City design standards. The City
would be responsible for all improvements, maintenance and services to the roadways
upon completion. As all City 90als and policies would be achieved with the proposed
Project Circulation Element Amendment, no additional mitigation measures would be
required (refer to Section 5.6. TRAFFIC AND CIRCULATION).
Cumulative Impacts
5.1-8 The proposed Project, combined with other future development, may increase
the intensity of land uses in the area. Analysis has conctuded that impacts are
anticipated to be less than significant and no mitigation is required. Projects will
be evaluated in accordance with the Metropolitan Bakersfield General Plan and
on a project-by-project basis.
Facts SupportillQ FindinQ
The anticipated Project impacts in conjunction with cumulative development in the site
vicinity would increase urbanization and result in the loss of open space in the local
vicinity. Potential land use impacts are. site-specific, and require evaluation on a case-
by-case basis. This is true with regard to land use compatibility impacts that are
generally a function of the relationship between the interactive effects between a specific
development site and its immediate environment. In that development within the
northeast planning area is anticipated to occur in accordance with the Metropolitan
Bakersfield General Plan and attendant zoning classifications. potential cumulative
effects upon land use and planning are not anticipated to be significant.
IN 10-103781
13
"Mf"
..d. \"
June ~5 ~.
\- rn
'(:J ¡;
oprrYNAI
Rio BrJovo Annexation No. 4e7 Project
GPAlZC No. CH.e8S3
GEOLOGY AND SOILS
Liquefaction
5.2-4 Based on available data, the potential for liquefaction is not anticipated due to the
lack of near-surface groundwater. Less than significant impacts are anticipated.
Facts SUPDOrtillQ FindinQ
Generally. when liquefaction occurs as a result of earthquakes. the conditions of
cohesion less surface material accompanied with relatively shallow water tables
underlying the area were the factor. In such cases, ground vibration increases the pore
pressure resulting in water moving upward whereby turning the sand or silt into a
quicksand like condition. The surface characteristics include the development of sand
boils, surface cracks, ground setttement, and differential compaction.
The groundwater depth at the Project site is at least 200 feet bgs. Furthermore, the
Geologjçal Hazards Investigation indicates, shallow groundwater less than 25 feet bgs is
not known to occur beneath the site or in the immediate vicinity. The lack of near-
surface groundwater beneath the site make impacts related to liquefaction unlikely.
Therefore, no significant impacts are anticipated.
Dam Inundation
5.2-6 Due to the elevation and location of the Project site, inundation of the Project site
due to a catastrophic release at Isabella Dam is not considered to be significant.
Less than significant impacts are anticipated.
Facts SUPDOrtillQ FindinQ
If an earthquake were to occur in the vicinity of Lake Isabella, the potential exists for a
failure of Isabella Dam. Such a failure could cause the entire lake storage to be
released, which would result in the flooding of 60 SQuare miles of Bakersfield. The
Metropolitan Bakersfield General Plan indicates the chances of the dam failing entirely,
with the lake at capacity, was judged as one day in 10,000 years. Due to the elevation
and location of the Project site, impacts related to dam inundation are not anticipated to
be significant
HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
Groundwater
5.3-2 The proposed Project would not result in adverse impacts to the amount of
available groundwater available or degrade groundwater quality. Less than
significant impacts are anticipated.
Facts SUpportl1lQ Findinq
Based on the Water Supply Assessment prepared by Gal Water, the proposed Project is
included within the plans to accommodate future growth in the City of Bakersfield. Gal
Water concludes the supply of water to be more than adequate to meet the projected
demands associated with the proposed Project. The Project would not alter the direction\?i'>kg
~ ../)
CJ ú~\
>-
June ~
t,) ()
i)P!r:::1NAJ.
14
r"
IN 11)..103781
Rio B/'IIvo Annexation No. ~ project
GPAlZC No. ~53
of groundwater flow, nor result in the need to withdraw, change the rate of groundwater
flow, or affect its supply. Refer to Section 5.11, PUBLIC SERVICES AND UTILITIES, for
additional details.
Water Quality
5.3-3 Implementation of grading, excavation and construction activities associated with
future developments could result in an increase in urban pollutant discharge
resulting in impacts to water quality. Impacts would be reduced to less than
significant levels with the incorporation of NPDES requirements.
Facts SUPDOrtinq Findinq
With the future urban development of the site, the proposed Project would result in an
increase in urban pollutant discharge, especially during short-term construction phases.
The discharge of materials other than storm water from a particular site is prohibited.
With urban development projects, the pollutants of concern ¡ndude silt and sediment, oil
and grease, floatable trash. nutrients (including fertilizers), heavy metals, pathogens
(such as coliform bacteria) and other substances. Referred to as "controlled pollutants",
discharge of these substances into waters of the United States, are prohibited.
Future proposed developments that involve grading and construction would contribute to
an increase in pollution discharge. Individual development projects would be required to
mitigate short-tenn construction impacts pursuant to the NPDES criteria and standards
on a project-by-project basis. The purpose of the NPDES permit is to ensure the Project
area will eliminate or reduce construction related sediments and pollutants during storm
water runoff. Construction sediment erosion can be adequately controlled through the
application of standard construction BMPs. The goal of BMPs is to capture and treat
"first flush" storm water run-off generated by surrounding and on-site watersheds. Water
quality management BMPs for grading and construction scenarios may indude the use
of sand bags and straw bales for run-off diversion and velocity reduction, mulch topping,
hydro-seeding and siltation fencing to prevent soil loss and measures to minimize
vehicular leaking and spilling. Implementation and compliance with the NPDES
requirements would reduce construction-related impacts to water quality to a less than
significant level.
PUBLIC HEALTH AND SAfETY
Long-Term Maintenance and Operation
5.4-5 Project implementation would not create a significant hazard to the public or
the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous
materials. Less than significant impact.
Facts SUPDortinq Findinq
The Kern County and Incorporated Cities Hazardous Waste Management Plan
(HWMP) lists goals and policies regarding the transport of hazardous wastes. The
HWMP recognizes that the transportation of hazardous waste on roads poses a
short-term threat to public health; of prime concern is the safety of the transportation
system for hazardous waste, especially extremely hazardous waste, in and
throughout Kern County. The HWMP seeks to establish State and Federally
ð \)Þ.,F (j/
- ,-!;.
IN 10-103781 15 Juhe 2005 '"
\-- r-'
Ô û
On\C:NAL
RIo Bnlvo Annexation No. ~ Project
GPAlZC No. 04-0853
maintained roads as candidate Commercial Hazardous Waste Shipping Routes in
and through the County (except those to collect locally generated hazardous
wastes). Given the location of the proposed Project within a newly developing
residential area surrounded by open space, Project implementation would not
promote the transport of hazardous materials within the Project area.
Delivery trucks often times haul -household" chemicals commonly found in grocery
stores andlor commercial uses. Nthough no roadways within the vicinity of the
Project site are specifically identified as Truck Routes within the Circulation Element
of the Metropolitan Bakersfield General Plan, the potential exists for the incidental
transport of materials/chemicals along surrounding roadways that meet the definition
of "hazardous". While the risk of exposure to hazardous materials cannot be fully
eliminated, measures can be implemented to maintain risks to acceptable levels. As
described above, there are several Federal, State. and local regulatory agencies that
oversee hazardous materials transportation. Oversight by the appropriate agencies
and compliance with applicable regulations are considered adequate to offset the
negative effects related to the incidental transport of hazardous materials within the
Project area.
5.4-6 Project implementation would not create a significant hazard to the public or
the environment through the long-term use of hazardous substances for the
purpose of long-term maintenance. Less than significant impact. Compliance
with State and applicable local regulations would reduce potential impacts to
less than significant levels,
Facts SUPDOrtinq Findinq
The proposed annexation, General Plan Amendment (GPA), and zone change does
not involve construction activities within the Project site at this time. Future on-site
uses indude 1.300 residential units, a pari< site, and fire station. Therefore, in the
future, the on-site storage and use of hazardous materials may indude fire
suppression substances, fuel, deaning solvents, fertilizers, pesticides, and other
materials used in the regular maintenance of residential structures. With proper use
and disposal. these chemicals are not expected to result in hazardous or unhealthful
conditions for nearby residents or maintenance worl<ers. However, this future
development would be subject to environmental and design review on a site-specific.
project by project basis. Additionally, future development would be required to
comply with all applicable local, State, and Federal regulations and policies regarding
hazardous materials.
NOISE
Off-Site Mobile Source Impacts
5.7-2 ProJecl implementation would generate additional vehicular travel on the
surrounding roadway network, thereby resulting in permanent noise level
increases. Analysis has concluded that long-term noise impacts would be
less than slgni/ìcant for the analyzed adjacent roadway segments in the
Year 2024 traffic scenarÎ<J. Analysis has concluded that long-term vehicular-
related noise would not exceed the City's threshotd of significance and
would result in a less than significant impact.
IN 10-103781
16
"-M.-
, \). 'f::/),
c< t~,
,
I [11
June 2QÐ5 co!
OP~r:;1~~Al '
Rio 8nIvo Annexation No. ~7 Project
GPAlZC No. 04-0853
Facts SuPoortino FindillQ
Future development within the area would result in additional traffic on adjacent
roadways, thereby increasing vehicular noise in the vicinity of existing and proposed
land uses. As discussed in Section 5.6 (Traffic and Circulation), traffIC volumes were
analyzed under Existing (Year 2(03) and Future (Year 2024) traffic scenarios. The
-2003 Without Project" and "2003 With Project" conditions were compared to analyze
interim conditions, while the "2024 Without Project" and "2024 With Project" were
compared for long-term conditions. As previously discussed, an increase of five dBA
or greater in noise levels occurring from project-related activities would be significant
when the -No Project" noise level is below 60 dBA CNEL. An increase of three dBA
or greater in noise levels occurring from projèct-related activities would be significant
when the -No Project" noise level is between 60 to 65 dBA CNEL. Finally, an
increase of one dBA or greater would be significant if the "No Project" noise level is
above 65 dBA CNEL.
Table 5.7-9 also compares the -2024 With Project" scenario to the "2024 Without
Project" scenario. As indicated in Table 5.7-9, the highest noise level increase would
occur along Breckenridge Road; a 5.4 dBA increase east of Comanå1e Drive.
Based on the significance criteria in Table 5.7-3, Project-related traffic would result in
a significant change in ambient noise levels along Breckenridge Road under 2024
conditions. However, noise levels would remain along the roadways would be below
the 65 dBA CNEULdn City noise standards. In addition, the proposed Project would
be more than 1,000 feet away from the Breèkenridge Road. Thus, as the change in
ambient noise levels would not affect the Project site and remain below the City's
noise limit, a less than significant impact would result.
Cumulative Impacts
5.7-5 Implementation of the Project, combined with cumulative projects, would
increase the ambient noise levels in the site vicinity. Analysis has concluded
that cumulative traffic noise impacts are less than significant.
Facts SuppOrtino Findino
Noise by definition is a localized phenomenon, and drastically reduces as distance
from the source increases. Consequentty, only projects and growth due to occur in
the general area of the Project site would contribute to cumulative noise impacts.
Table 5.7-9 lists the cumulative traffic noise levels along roadway segments in the
Project vicinity under Year 2024 (General Plan buildout) for the "No Project" and
-Plus Project" conditions. The "Plus project- traffic noise levels would increase by a
maximum of 11.5 dBA along Breckenridge Road for Year 2003 and 5.4 dBA for Year
2024, east of Comanche Dnve However, noise impacts would still be considered
less than significant since noise levels would be below the 65 dBA CNEULdn noise
standard of the City. Thus. it is concluded that cumulative mobile source noise
impacts along these roadway 5egments are less than significant.
Long-term (stationary) noise would be subject to requirements of the Bakersfield
Municipal Code. Therefore, individual projects would be required to comply with the
City's noise level standard of 65 dBA for residential uses and include mitigation
measures if this standard is exceeded. As such. it is not anticipated that a significant
cumulative increase in permanent ambient noise levels would occur and the imJ>ltq
. 'ò k,,,'i
r~ d'_
"
IN 10-103781
17
>-
Ju."..2005 {'.'
õ t:J
ORS!NAL
Rio Bravo Annexation No. 467 Project
GPÞlZC No. 0+0853
would be less than significant. Consequently. the project contribution to cumulative
stationary noise impacts is not considered cumulatively considerable.
AIR QUALITY
OdOfS
5.7-2 Long-term odor impacts would not occur as a result of Project implementation.
Analysis has concluded that impacts would be less than significant.
Facts Supporting Finding
The proposed Project involves the annexation of approximately 617-acres that will allow
for future residential uses, which are generally not considered odor generators. Odor is
strongest at its source and dissipates with increasing distance. The offensiveness and
degree of odor is ultimately dependent on the sensitivity of the receptors exposed to the
odor. According to the SJVAPCO's Guide for Assessing and Mitigating Air Quality
Impacts, facilities located one mile or less from a sensitive receptor may create a
significant odor impact The SJVAPCO's guidance indicates that a detailed analysis
would ¡ndude evaluating whether complaints have been filed with the SJVAPCO for
similar existing operations.
According to SJVAPCO records search between July 2001 and November 2004, there
were no odor or nuisance complaints received or investigated. Complaints on file had
been issued to these operations relative to pennitting questions that were resolved.
Based on standard operating regulations imposed on the operators of the wells by the
Division of Oil, Gas, and Geothermal Resources (DOGGR) and SJVAPCD, the operating
wells and associated equipment are not expected to be a significant source of
objectionable odors that would likely impact potential sensitive receptors located within
the Project area.
Visibility Impacts
5.7-4 Long-term visibility impacts would not occur as a result of Project
implementation. Analysis has ronduded that impacts would be less than
significant.
Facts SupportinQ FindinQ
The analysis of the potential for effects to visibility is within the guidelines of the "Level I"
analysis given in the USEPA publication entitled Workbook for Estimating Visibility
Impainnent (EPA 450/480-031). The calculations used to evaluate the potential for
adverse effects uses data on the emissions of PM1O. N02, 502, and the distance
between the source and the area evaluated for visibility impainnent. Data concerning
meteorological conditions and atmospheric dispersion are incorporated into the
equations. The calculation of ·contrast parameters" are used to evaluate the potential
for adverse effects with the emissions of PM1O. NO" SO, and the distance between the
source and the area evaluated for visibility Impairment.
The absolute values of all three of the contrast parameters for both the mid point (five-
year) and build out (ten-year), are less than 0.1. therefore, a visibility impact at the Class
I areas is not expected to have a significant effect.
IN 10·103781
18
,.i'.K~ ì
;'" '.,~
q@('f!
."
June 2 5 iñ
I- ,.-~
Õ C;:.ì
np:r.tNJ~L
Rio Bravo Annexøtlon No. ~7 Project
GPAlZC No. 04-G853
Air Quality Conformity Analysis
5.8-5 With the implementation of proposed mitigation measures, long-term emissions
would be offset by Project buildout. Significance: Less than significant
impact..
Facts SUDDOrti!1Q Findinq
Assuming 460 households in year 2005 and 1,990 households in year 2030, then growth
from 2005 to 2030 would be 1,530 households, approximately 190 more households
than proposed by the Project. However, this rate of growth would accelerate the
buildout of the TAZ. and could potentially result in basin emission increases that are in
excess of those forecast by the AQAP or SIP. Therefore, implementation of the
proposed Project may not be consistent with the growth assumptions of the AOAP. The
proposed mitigation measures below, would offset Iong-tenn ROO and NOx emissions
associated with accelerated growth posed by the Project. Assuming these Iong-tenn
emissions are offset by Project buildout. the Project should be considered to be
consistent with the adopted growth forecast and in confonnance with the AQM>.
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
Special Status Plants
5.9-2 Project construction would permanently impact a total of approximately 617
acres, however since the original native habitat of the site has been changed by
ranching, off-road vehicfe use and illegal dumping, no special status plants were
identified or would be expected to ocçur on the site. Less than significant impacts
are anticipated in this regard.
Facts SUDDOrtinq Findinq
The Biota Report condudes that no wetlands, or riparian habitats exist on the Project
site and that the on-site vegetation is greatly disturbed and has regrown with native and
non-native species. Thus, no evidence of any sensitive plants was found on the Project
site. Because no evidence of any Federal and State Threatened or Endangered plant
species were identified on the Project site, development of this Project is not expected to
result in any adverse impacts to any Threatened or Endangered species. As previously
stated, the Biota Report did not identify any loss to wetland or riparian habitats as a
result of the proposed Project. Furthennore, the proposed Project would not result in
si9nificant impacts to riparian or wetlands habitat.
CULTURAL RESOURCES
Cumulative Impacts
5.10-3 Cumulative development may adversely affect cultural resources. Resources are
evaluated and mitigated on a project-by-project basis. Less than significant.
Facts SUDDortinq Findinq
Potential impacts would be site specific and an evaluation of potential impacts would be
conducted on a project-by-project basis. Each incremental development would be
IN 10-103781
10
~þ..~-~,:,
June ~ '~~~'\
>- ¡q
'::: "
C (I
Op~(';i~\i\t
Rio p.~ Annexation No. ~7 Project
GPAlZC No. 04-4853
required to comply with all applicable State, Federal and City regulations concerning
preservation, salvage, or handling of cultural resources. In consideration of these
regulations, potential cumulative impacts upon cultural resources would not be
considered significant.
PUBLIC SERVICES AND UTILITIES
Sewer Services
5.11-6 Implementation of the proposed Project would not result in the increase in
demand or expansion of sewer services. Less than significant impact.
Facts SUPDOrtinq Findinq
According to the City of Bakersfield Public Works Wastewater Division, 1,300 square
foot dwelling units have the capacity to produce approximately 350,000 gallons of
wastewater per day. The Wastewater Division indicated that this would create a
signiftcant demand on the collection and treatment facilities within the Project area. The
City is currently preparing a Sewer Master Plan for the northeast area. The Master Plan
will address the future wastewater infras1ructure needs as development occurs within the
northeast area. The Project site will be induded in this Master Plan. Upon construction,
the Project site will be serviced by Wastewater Treatment Plant Number 2. Plant 2 has
an excess capacity of 8.5 mgd. Since the Project site has the capacity to produce
approximately 350,000 gallons of wastewater per day, Plant 2 has more than adequate
capacity to service the Project site.
The City of Bakersfield Public Works Sewer Services Department has four types of
sewer fees, collection fees, trunk line fees, user fees, and commercial and industrial user
surcharges. The user fees are annual fees paid on the property takes. The user
surcharges are billed and are annual fees paid on the property taxes. The user
surcharges are billed and are due and payable monthly. The user surcharges are based
upon a fonnula of total Biochemcial Oxygen Demand, Total Suspended Solids
concentration, and flow. The connection fees are based upon a -cost to recover" for
plant expansion, while the trunk line fees are similarty based upon a 'cost to recover" for
the construction of the trunk line serving the Project area. The sewer connection fee for
single-family residential homes is currently $2,500 per unit, but will increase significantly
to pay for future plant expansion. The current user fee for single-family residential units
is $120 per unit, and will soon increase to $125 per unit. The sewer rates are calculated
and adopted by the City Council annually. Less than si9nificant impacts are anticipated
in this regard.
Electrical Services
5.11-8 Implemental/on of the proposed Project would require temporary use of electricity
during conslruction and long-term electric consumption. Electricity use would not
result in excessive power consumption that would result in significant impacts on
exisJing faci/lI¡es. Less than significant impacts are anticipated in this regard.
Facts SUPDOrtinq Findinq
The Project site is currently being served from the Magunden Substation, which is
located at the west end of Mills Street. north of Highway 58 and west of Morning Driv£\oM.¿:./.-
<.-. . '~n
() .",.
,_ m
JN 10-103781 20 June 2C!95 [;
OP:G!t\AL
Rio Bravo Annexation No. 467 Project
GPAlZC No. 04-0853
Electricity distribution facilities are currently present within the Project site. This facility is
a 12 Kv distribution line maintained by PG&E.
According to PG&E, the Project site is anticipated to have an approximate load of 2OMw.
PG&E indicated that the existing facifrties do not have the capacity to supply the
proposed Project at buikklut Therefore. withoUt upgrades to existing facilities.
implementation of the proposed Project may result in excessive demands in electrical
services. Therefore. the construction of additional facilities andlor upgrades would be
necessary.
According to PG&E. impacts can be minimized if main lines adjacent to roadways are
brought to ultimate widths with the initiation of the proposed Project Additionally.
mainline distribution tie lines will be required throughout the Project site.
During construction. the Project would require temporary electrical power supply for
certain equipment and lighting. The proposed Project would also require electricity for
street lighting along the roadway. The connections would be constructed in accordance
with the requirements of the City of Bakersfield. The Project contractor shall coordinate
with PG&E staff prior to construction for potential issues that may occur. Less than
significant impacts are anticipated in this regard.
Natural Gas
5.11-9 Implementation of the proposed Project would not result in increased demand for
natural gas services. Less than significant impacts are anticipated in this regard.
Facts SUDDOrtinQ FindinQs
According to PG&E, no natural gas facilities are present within the boundaries of the
Project site. The closest gas line is located along Highway 178. north of the Project site.
PG&E indicated the existing gas facilities can be extended to furnish gas services to the
proposed Project. On average. 0.04 million cubic feet per hour (MCFH) is consumed per
household. PG&E indicated that this eight-inch diameter pipeline has the capacity to
supply gas to the proposed 1.300 lots. Currently, mitigation measures were not
identified. however PG&E identified that a Mure back fee applied to the development
may be required. The Project contractor shall coordinate with PG&E staff ear1y in the
planning stages to ensure that any necessary upgrades to on-site gas distribution
facilities are implemented in such a manner as not to disrupt services off-site and be of
adequate capacity to serve ultimate site development.
The PG&E pipelines are under high pressure and like others. have the potential to
rupture, resulting in uncontrolled releases of natural gas. A pipeline rupture could result
in environment contamination and human health effects in the residential areas, once
they are developed. For safety reasons. State regulations prohibit the construction of
any structures directly over the pipeline and a right-of-way (ROW) is usually established.
The width of the ROW IS negotiated between the property owner and the pipeline
operator and usually ranges between 20 to 50 feet Shared ROWs may span 60 to 70
feet Types of shrubs may be restricted; specifically, structures and large trees cannot
be over pipelines. Compliance with State and applicable local regulations would reduce
future potential impacts health and safety related to pipelines to less than significant
levels.
IN 10-103781
21
Ú¡1f\'t/,
June 20^'" . ·:r
~ '"'1""\
nl
._ r~
,.j c:'
(\n:t~:NAL
---..........-.--...-.. --,_...._..~'
Rio 8.....0 Annex.uon No. 467 project
GPAlZC No. 04-0853
VII. FINDINGS REGARDING EFFECTS DETERMINED TO BE MITIGATED TO LESS
THAN SIGNFICANT LEVELS
The City of Bakersfield, having reviewed and considered the information contained in the Final
EIR, Technical Appendices and the administrative record, finds, pursuant to California Public
Resources Code 21081 (a)(1) and CEQA Guidelines 15091 (a)(1), that changes or alterations
have been required in, or incorporated into, the proposed project which would mitigate, avoid, or
substantially lessen to below a level of significance the following potentially significant
environmental effects identified in the Final EIR in the following categories: Land Use, Public
Health and Safety, AestheticslLight and Glare, Traffic and Circulation. Noise, Air Quality,
Biological Resources, Cultural Resources. and Public Services and Utilities.
The potentially significant adverse environmental impacts that can be mitigated are listed below.
The City of Bakersfield finds that these potentially significant adverse impacts can be mitigated
to a level that is considered less than significant after implementation of mitigation measures
identified of the Final EIR.
LAND USE AND RELEVANT PLANNING
Short-Term Construction
5.1-1 Construction of the proposed Project in future phases may temporarily result in
increased amounts of local airborne and particulate matter, as well as an
increase in traffic congestion. noise levels, adverse visual impacts and related
effects. thereby causing short-term construction-related impacts to surrounding
uses. Construction-related impacts are temporary and would cease upon project
completion. This is considered a less than significant impact with implementation
of mitigation measures provided in the appropriate sections of this document.
Facts Suppartinq FindinQ
Project construction-related activities would primarily affect adjacent residential uses to
the north.
Oust generation due to typical construction and grading activities can be anticipated to
temporarily increase local airborne and particulate matter. However, construction-related
dust is more of a nuisance than a serious health threat. and would be offset through
standard construction practices. Construction equipment and staging areas may be
unsightly for adjacent residents and motorists, although vehicle staging and materials
stockpiling will be removed as far as practicable from adjacent residences. Construction
activities will also temporarily increase noise due to on-site construction activities.
However. these impacts would be short-term in nature and are not expecled to continue
after build-out of the proposed Project. In addition. prior to construction, the Project
applicant or contractor will be required to submit a construction Traffic Management Plan
(TMP), which will include restrictions on the hours and routes for construclion traffic. as
well as construction traffic safety measures. Short-term Impacts are further reduced
through proper Implementation of mitigation measures and construction requirements
identified throughout the EIR.
Mitigation Measure 5.1-1 of the Final EIR reduces impacts below a level of significance.
The measure is as follows:
I:~":Ô!~ :\ ,~~_
._ F
~,
JN 10-103781
22
June 200~
en
r-
U c)
n0!:(~ N.AL
Rio Bravo Annexation No. 467 project
GPIJZC No. 04-0853
5.1-1 Refer to mitigation measures in Sections 5.5, AESTHETICS. LIGHT AND
GLARE. Section 5.6, TRAFFIC AND CIRCULATION, Section 5.7, NOISE. and
Section 5.8, AIR QUALITY.
Land Use Compatibility On-site
5.1-2 Implementation of the proposed Project would result in the phased elimination of
open space as land uses are developed, thus resulting in potential land use
conflicts between urban uses and open space. Development of the Project site in
accordance with the design and policy standards as set forth by the City of
Bakersfield and County of Kern would reduce impacts to a less than signifICant
level.
Facts SUPDOrtinq FindinQ
The 617 acre Project site is currently undeveloped except for a water tank owned and
maintained by the OIVSC. The entire Project site is located within an area designated by
the Meúopolitan Bakersfield General Plan as R-EA and zoned A. Although the entire
site is designated and zoned for agricultural uses, no agricultural activities occur within
or immediately adjacent to the Project site boundaries. Therefore, no compatibility
impacts for Mure on-site residential uses related to agricultural uses would occur.
As discussed in Section 3.0. PROJECT DESCRIPTION, fu1ure development of on-site
uses will also indude two non-residential uses, a pari< site with an adjacent fire station.
These uses are anticipated to be located on Chase Avenue in the northwest quadrant of
the site. Although the ultimate size, location, and orientation of these uses are
undefined at this time, the proposed pari< site and fire station will be developed
according to applicable Metropolitan Bakersfield General Plan guidelines, existing
ordinances, and development standards. Final siting will be subject to approval by the
City to ensure that long-term on-site land use compatibility impacts between residential
and pari< uses are minimized to the fullest extent possible. As such, the development
review process, combined with adherence to applicable General Plan and Bakersfield
Municipal Code requirements would reduce potential compatibility impacts to less than
significant levels.
Mitigation Measure 5.1-2 of the Final EIR reduces impacts below a level of significance.
The measure is as follows:
5.1-2 Proposed Project development shall be in accordance with the design and policy
standards as set forth by the City of Bakersfield and County of Kern.
Land Use Compatibility Off-site
5.1-3 Implementation of the proposed Project may result in land use compatibility
impacts to surrounding uses. Impacts are reduced to less than significant levels
with implementation of required mitigation for noise, traffic and air quality (refer to
appropriate sections of this EIR).
IN 10-103781
23
June 2O~\\ÄK(-:y
() {f
;>. -0
\- ¡:;1
õ ö"'
OPIr,'NN
Rio Bravo Annexation No. ~7 ProJeá
GPAlZC No. 04-0853
Facts SuooortinQ RndinQ
The Project indudes a Land Use Element Amendment to modify the land use
designation of the Metropolitan Bakersfield General Plan. The proposal is to change the
current land use designation from R-EA to lR and LMR.
The proposed Project would permanently alter the site from its current condition. This
conversion would have long-term land use impacts that would indude increased local
traffic, as well as increases in noise, and air pollutants. The impacts associated with
these issues are discussed in detail in the respective sections of this EIR document:
Section 5.6, TRAFFIC AND CIRCULATION, Section 5.7, NOISE, and Section 5.8, AIR
QUALITY. Concerns associated with viewshed and noise impacts for nearby residents
are addressed in Section 5.5, AESTHETICS, LIGHT AND GLARE and Section 5.7,
NOISE.
As the Project site is currently undeveloped, the existing residential areas to the north
have the benefit of being located adjacent to undeveloped open space. Although the
proposed Project would alter current conditions on the site, the development would be
compatible in density and character with existing residential uses to the north.
Compatibility impacts would be mitigated with applicable design standards pursuant to
requirements set forth by the City of Bakersfield. Therefore, off-site land use impacts to
neighboring residential areas are considered less than significant. due to the consistency
of uses with the surrounding area, and with implementation of the recommended
mitigation measures identified throughout this EIR document.
Mitigation Measure 5.1-3 of the Final EIR reduces impacts below a level of significance.
The measure is as follows:
5.1-3 Refer to mitigation measures in Sections 5.5, AESTHETICS, LIGHT AND
GLARE, Section 5.6, TRAFFIC AND CIRCULATION, Section 5.7, NOISE, and
Section 5.8, AIR QUALITY.
Consistency with LAFCo Policies
5.1-4 Implementation of the proposed Project would require annexation of the entire
Project site into the City; thus requiring a project ronsistency analysis against
policies enforced by the Kern County LAFCo. This is oonsidered a less than
significant impact because the proposed Project would be considered consistent
with applicable Kern County LAFCo policies and guidelines.
Facts SUPDOrtinQ FindinQ
The entire 617-acre site lies within the existing City'S SOl boundary as depicted in the
General Plan. The proposed Project includes the expansion of the City's corporate limits
to indude the proposed Project site.
In that the City seeks to annex the proposed site from the County of Kern and modify the
Metropolitan Bakersfield General Plan through an amendment to the land Use Element,
Circulation Element, and zoning designation, particular focus is given to the goals and
policies of the Kern County LAFCo (refer to Appendix 15.9, GOALS AND POLICY
ANALYSIS). It is noted that LAFCo goals and/or policies not induded in the assessment
were omitted due to their having either a negligibte or no relationship to the proposed
.IN 10-103781
24
'~.... A. r; :~. ,
'( --";
Junfž005 '-'b
i-. [':
~:) o;~!'r;T\'A¡~
Rio BI1IVO Annexation No. 467 Project
GPAlZC No. 04-0853
Project or surrounding area. Pursuant to Section 1.2 of the Kem County LAFCo
Procedures, Standards, and Policies for the Evaluation of Proposals, the City shall
submit a plan for providing services within the annexation area and demonstrate that
services can be provided within a timely and financially feasible manner. The effects of
the proposed Project upon the City's public services are described in Section 5.11,
PUBLIC SERVICES AND UTILITIES.
The analysis contained in Appendix 15.9, GOALS AND POLICY ANALYSIS, concludes
that there are no significant consistency impacts from the proposed Project associated
with relevant Kern County LAFCo goals and policies. No additional mitigation would be
required.
Mitigation Measure 5.1-5 of the Final EIR reduces impacts below a level of significance.
The measure is as follows:
5.1-5 Refer to mitigation measures described in Section 5.11, PUBLIC SERVICES
AND UTILITIES.
Consistency with Regional Plans
5.1-7 Implementation of the proposed Project may be inconsistent with area wide
environmental plans. Less than significant impact with implementation of
mitigation measures. As discussed in Section 5.8, AIR QUALITY, the Project has
been determined to be consistent with the San Joaquin Valley Unified APeD Air
Quality Attainment Plan.
Facts SUPDOrtinq Findinq
The proposed Project was reviewed to determine consistency with the following plans:
Metropolitan Bakersfield Habitat ConseNation Plan, Air Quality Attainment Plan,
Bikeways Plan, Emergency Response Plan, Regional Transportation Plan, County Solid
Waste Management Plan, and the County Hazardous Waste Management Plan.
Air Quality Attainment Plan
As the Project proposes to amend the Metropolitan Bakersfield General Plan Land Use
designation to allow residential uses as opposed to agricultural uses (the current
General Plan Land Use designation and Zoning designation), the AQAP anticipated
growth of the population and economy within the Basin. The adopted growth forecast for
the Project site is within the Transportation Analysis Zone (TAZ) 384. Kern COG has
determined that TAZ 384 is not at capacity under their projections, even in the year
2030. Assuming 460 households in year 2005 and 1,990 households in year 2030, then
growth from 2005 to 2030 would be 1,530 households, approximately 190 more
households than proposed by Project. However, this rate of growth would accelerate the
buildout of the T AZ and could potentially result in basin emission increases that are in
excess of those forecast by the AQAP or State Implementation Plan (SIP). Therefore,
Implementation of the proposed Project may not be consistent with the growth
assumptions of the AQAP. The proposed mitigation measures would offset long-term
Reactive Organic Gas (ROG) and Nitrogen Oxides (NOx) emissions associated with
accelerated growth posed by the Project. Assuming these long-term emissions are
offset by Project buildout, with implementation of mitigation measures, the project should
be considered to be consistent with the adopted growth forecast and in conformance
JN 10-103781
25
\:,!\i<.(:/,
c::' ~y
June 2~tní ."
¡~1
,::. Î
c;. l',
(ì!iiG:Nl\L
Rio Bravo Annex_ No. 467 Project
GPAlZC No. ~53
with the AOAP (refer to discussion and mitigation measures in Section 5.8. AIR
QUALITY. for further discussion).
Bikeways Plan
The proposed Project would not affect the City's Bikeway's Plan. Bike lanes would be
implemented as appropriate along roadways when full improvements are completed.
Regional Transportation Plan
The Project would involve the implementation of roadway improvements, such as the
installation of traffic signals and the widening of roadway segments and/or intersections
on a fair-share basis. These improvements are not inconsistent with the policies or
planned Projects of the RTP (refer to Section 5.6, TRAFFIC AND CIRCULATION, for
further information).
Solid Waste Management Plan
Solid waste disposal shall be in accordance with the County's Solid Waste Management
Plan. Refer to Section 5.11, PUBLIC SERVICES AND UTILITIES.
Metropolitan Habitat Conversation Plan
The Project site is located within the permitted area of the MBHCP. The MBHCP
addresses mitigation and compensation for the loss of endangered species habitat and
impacts to endangered species within the Bakersfield Planning Area. The development
of the site would require the payment of mitigation fees for the preservation of natural
habitat areas in the area (refer to Section 5.9, BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES).
Hazardous Waste Management Plan
The proposed Project would not handle or dispose of hazardous wastes on-site other
than common household chemicals used for cleaning. The Project site is not located in
an area that has been designated as a candidate site or facility for hazardous materials
disposal. and thus, is not subject to the policies in the Hazardous Waste Management
Plan (refer to Section 5.4, PUBLIC HEALTH AND SAFETY).
Mitigation Measure 5.1-7 of the Final EIR reduces impacts below a level of significance.
The measure is as follows:
Refer to mitigation measures in Sections 5.5, AESTHETICS, LIGHT AND GLARE,
Section 5.6, TRAFFIC AND CIRCULATION. Section 5.7, NOISE, Section 5.8, AIR
QUALITY, Section 5.9, BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES, and Section 5.11, PUBLIC
SERVICES AND UTILITIES.
GEOLOGIC AND SEISMIC HAZARDS
Soil Erosion
5.2-1 Future development of the proposed Project site could result in substantial soil
erosion. Implementation of and compliance with the Bakersfield Municipal Code
JN 10-103781
26
ö~,Kt.0
June 200t' - ~p
",
>- -'
. m
... r·
~ t.?
ORiC!N.Al.
Rio Bravo Annexation No. 467 project
GPÞlZC No. 04-0853
and recommended mitigation measures would reduce impacts to a tess than
significant level.
Facts Supoortioo Fmdil1Q
According to the Geological Hazards Investigation. the Project area contains soils that
are moderately fine textured and well drained. Grading operations associated with
future development of the Project site and the resultant manufactured embankments
could increase the potential for erosion and siltation both during and after the
construction phase. Increases in impervious surfaces would also result in the
construction of curb and gutters and storm drain systems to collect the runoff. In order
to mitigate the potential effects of erosion on-site, temporary and permanent erosion
control measures would be required, such as the use of sandbags, hydroseeding,
landscaping, andlor soil stabilizers. The Contractor will be required to submit a Storm
Water Pollution Control Plan (SWPPP), which indudes erosion control measures in
order to comply with the NPDES requirements of the Federal Clean Water Act (ONA).
All earthwork is required to be peñormed in accordance with applicable City
requirements as stipulated in the Bakersfield Municipal Code. Earthwork would also be
performed in confonnance with approved grading plans and any appticable geotechnical
reports prepared for Mure developments on-site. Implementation of appropriate grading
measures would serve to reduce the potential impacts related to erosion to less than
significant levels.
Mitigation Measures 5.2-1a through 5.2-1c of the Final EIR reduce impacts below a level
of significance. The measures are as follows:
5.2-1a On-site grading shall occur in conformance with established City engineering
guidelines and shall be balanced on-site. Grading and slope contouring shall
adhere to provisions as set forth in the Bakersfield Municipal Code regarding
hillside development (Chapter 17.66 HD. Hillside Development Combining Zone).
Compliance with this measure is subject to review and approval by the City
Engineer.
5.2-1b Prior to issuance of grading permits for each development, a site specific soils
report shall be completed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. that further
characterizes and analyzes on-site soil conditions, and identifies appropriate
measures to be implemented to control erosion and dust. The results of the study
shall be used as the basis to complete the required Storm Water Pollution
Prevention Plan (SWPPP), which indudes erosion control measures in order to
comply with the National Pollution Discharge Bimination System (NPDES)
requirements of the Federal Clean Water Act. Temporary, construction-related,
and permanent erosion control measures may indude but not be limited to the
use of sandbags, hydroseeding, landscaping, and/or soil stabilizers.
5.2-1c The overall shape, height and grade of any cut and fill slope contour shall be
developed in concert with the existing natural contours and scale of the natural
terrain, as prescribed in Chapter 17.66 of the Bakerslleld Municipal Code. The
graded form shall reflect the natural, rounded terrain. wherever possible. The
grading plan shall also reflect a contouring and landscaping program intended to
control erosion. Compliance with this measure is subject to review and approval
by the City Engineer.
.IN 10-103781
27
\; p, ì\ ,,~
('r -,~ '··A
,,' -.y
June 200!j:' '"
rn
r-
,"
,..~n{":!i\;r\t~ .
Rio B....vo Annexation No.4til Project
GPAlZC No. 04-0853
Fault Rupture
5.2-2 Future development associated with the Project site could potentially expose
people or structures to effects associated with the rupture of a known earthquake
fault. CompIianœ with the BakersflØld Municipal Code, the Uniform Building
Code, and recommended mitigation would reduœ impacts to less than significant
levels.
Facts Supporting FindinQ
Several faults are located within the vicinity of the Project site. Maximum probable
ground motion on the Project site would likely be the result of movement along the White
Wolf, San Andreas, Gar1ock, or Pleito faults. A maximum probable magnitude
earthquake along the White Wolf, located 13 miles southeast of the Project site or the
San Andreas fault. located 39 miles south of the site, could produce intensities as high
as VIII on the ModifJed-Mercalli intensity scale resulting in severe danger to life and
property. Two separate Earthquake Fault Zone as defined by the Alquist-Priolo
Earthquake Fault Zoning Act transect portions of the property to the north and south.
Future structures built for human occupancy, as defined by the Alquist-Priok> Earthquake
Fault Zoning Act, should not be built within the Earthquake Fault Zone boundaries
without additional subsurface geotechnical investigation. Implementation of
recommended mitigation measures at the end of this section would serve to reduce fault
rupture related impacts to less than significant levels.
Mitigation Measure 5.2-2 of the Final EIR reduces impacts below a level of significance.
The measure is as follows:
5.2-2 Prior to approval of tract maps, a subsurface investigation that indudes
exploratory trenching shall be conducted to analyze existing and potential fault
hazards associated within the two Alquist Priolo Fault Zone boundaries identified
to the north and south as indicated in the Geological Hazards Investigation. The
subsurface investigation(s) within the Aliquist Priolo Fault Zones shall be
perfooned to provide the adequate level of infoonation to adequately establish
appropriate setbacks and siting of future structures. Future development shall not
occur in these areas until further investigations condude otherwise to the
satisfaction of the City Planning Director.
S~ismic Ground Shaking
5.2-3 Future development on-site would increase the number of people and stru<;tures
exposed to effects associated with seismically induced ground shaking.
Implementation of the recommended mitigation measures and compliance with
the Bakersfield MunicIpal Code would reduce this potential impact to a less than
significant level.
Facts SUPDOrtinq Findinq
The intensity of future seismic activity at the proposed Project site is expected to be no
greater than for other sites in the vicinity. The site is expected to experience ground
shaking as a result of regional seismic activity. Due to the site's proximity to several
faults located in the area, ground shaking could be substantial. These impacts
associated with seismically induced ground shaking are considered to be potentially
IN 10-103761
28
, 'Of:""KF;;
JUM 20~'~
>- -
1- rn
__ r--
'.) Ö
ìé~!(~,INAl
Rio Bravo Annexation No. ~7 Project
GPA/lC No. 04-0853
significant. To ensure the safety of life and property, future development on the Project
site will be designed in strict accordance with the minimum earthquake regulations of the
UBC. and the Bakersfield Municipal Code including Chapter 17, Hillside Development
relating to grading, slope contours, and hillside development guidelines. To provide the
adequate level of information to properly design and engineer Mure development, an
engineering geologist would perform additional design-level geotechnical studies on a
project-by-project basis and submitted to the City for approval. The compliance of future
development with recommended mitigation measures and UBC standards would reduce
potential impacts with seismic ground shaking to a less than significant level.
Mitigation Measure 5.2-3 of the Final EIR reduces impacts below a level of significance.
The measure is as follows:
5.2-3 Engineering design for all future structures shall be based on the probability that
the Project area will be subjected to strong ground motion during the lifetime of
development. Future project development plans shall be subject to the
Bakersfield Municipal Code (including Chapter 17.66 Hillside Development) and
shall include standards that address seismic design parameters. Seismic ground
shaking shall be incorporated into design and construction in accordance with the
UBC requirements and site specific design.
Landslides
5.2-5 Implementation of the proposed Projec1 has a low potential of exposing people
to seismically induœd lands/ides. However, due to the existing terrain,
adherence to mitigation measures would be required. Implementation of the
recommended mitigation measures and compliance with the Bakersfield
Municipal Code and the Uniform Building Code would reduce this potential
impact to a less than signifICant level.
Facts SupoortinQ FindinQ
As previously mentioned, the Project site is located on level to steep terrain with rolling
hills. Although no landslides have been mapped on the Project site, they have been
mapped a few miles east of the property. Future development of the Project site could
potentially be significantly impacted by landslides resulting from strong ground motion
from nearby earthquakes. erosion, or adverse conditions created during grading
activities. The northeast and southeast portion of the site are not considered suitable for
development due to the existing steep terrain. As such. Mure development of the site
would require strict adherence to the USC, and the Bakersfield Municipal Code including
Chapter 17.66, Hillside Development. Specific slope stability calculations, analysis and
design of slopes are required during future geotechnical studies on a project-by-project
basis. Potential impacts associated with seismically induced landsides would be less
than significant following compliance with recommended mitigation measures, the
Bakersfield Municipal Code, earthquake regulations of the USC, and standards
engineering practices and design criteria.
Mitigation Measures 5.2-5a and 5.2-5b of the Final EIR reduce impacts below a level of
significance. The measures are as follows:
5.2-5a Refer to Mitigation Measure 5.2-3, above.
IN 10-103781
:zg
June 2005
'ú~KfQ
d '.~
.~
en
._ c-
.:) G
'\n:G1~AL
Rio Bnlvo Anneøtlon No. 467 Project
GPAlZC No. 04-0853
natural flows. The amount of runoff detained would be the difference between the 100-
year natural runoff and the 100 year developed runoff.
Although the proposed Project site is not within the Kern River Designated FIoodway or
within the FEMA flood hazard zones, it cannot be assumed that no additional flood
hazards exist within these locations. 1ñe future increase in development would increase
surface water runoff, contributing to additional storm water flows. Undevelopable areas
have been identified in the Preliminary Drainage Report as being the northeastern and
southeastem portion of the Project site. If determined necessary through additional site
specific hydrological analysis. developable areas could potentially require mitigation on a
project-by-project basis to accommodate the increased surface flows. Based on
available information. impacts are anticipated to be less than significant with the
mitigation measures discussed below. The mitigation measures are recommended to
confirm the adequacy of drainage facilities.
Impacts of Proposed Roadways
Although not currently a part of the annexation and GPA, the site includes plans for
Mure construction of three secondary collector street segments to accommodate the
area. These proposed secondary collector streets are Chase Avenue connecting
Comanche Drive and Breckenridge Road, a segment from Chase Avenue connecting to
Miramonte Drive, and a segment of roadway connecting to the Rio Bravo Country Oub.
The planned street segments would alter the natural flow conditions, thereby resulting in
impacts to the existing hydrologic and drainage patterns. These potential impacts would
be mitigated to a less than significant level with the installation of drainage facilities
along the proposed roadway to provide adequate hydraulic capacity.
Drainage Right-of-Way Dedications
Right-of-way dedications would be required for future private property occupied by
drainage infrastructure. The nature of these the dedications would be dependent upon
final designs for tracts.
Mitigation Measures 5.3-1a through 5.3-1c of the Final EIR reduce impacts below a level
of significance. The measures are as follows:
5.3-1a Prior to the approval of final project plans and specifications, the City Engineer,
or his designee. shall confirm that recommended design elements have been
incorporated so that the Project site will be adequately protected from the 100-
year storm. will not adversely impact downstream properties. and is designed in
conformance with applicable City and County requirements.
5.3-1b Drainage system design requirements for the future developments and all future
roadways shall include. but not limited to:
· Future on-site roadways shall be designed to accommodate adequate
flow capacity.
· Appropriate minimum stormdrain pipe size diameter as specified by the
City Engineer
· Stormdrain flow velocity limitations as specified by the City Engineer.
5.3-1c Adherence to the City of Bakersfield Subdivision Ordinance and Breckenridge
Planned Drainage Area Plan is achieved with the payment of fees used for the
IN 10-103781
31
0.. þ. 81:
~ u '/...:.
June 2005> /'{"
;~
\__ rn
,.- r--
,~) V
on:(','NÞ<!.
Rio Bravo Annexation No. 487 Project
GPÞlZC _ 04-0853
purposes of defraying the costs of constructing planned drainage facilities and
sewers. Projects within the Breckenridge Planned Drainage Area are subject to a
fee per acre for the Project site. Adherence to hillside development codes and
regulations shall also be required for future development Proof of payment shall
be provided to the Planning Director prior to the recordation of Final Tract maps.
Water Quality
5.3-3 Implementation of grading, excavation and construction activities associated with
future developments could result in an increase in urban pollutant discharge
resulting in impacts to water quality. Impacts would be reduced to less than
significant levels with the incorporation of NPDES requirements.
Facts SUPDOrtil1Q Findinq
With the future urban development of the site, the proposed Project would result in an
increase in urban pollutant discharge, especially during short-toon construction phases.
The discharge of materials other than storm water from a particular site is prohibited.
With urban development projects, the pollutants of concern include silt and sediment. oil
and grease, floatable trash. nutrients (including fertilizers), heavy metals. pathogens
(such as coliform bacteria) and other substances. Referred to as 'controlled pollutants",
discharge of these substances into waters of the United States, are prohibited.
Future proposed developments that involve grading and construction would contribute to
an increase in pollution discharge. Individual development projects would be required to
mitigate short-term construction impacts pursuant to the NPDES criteria and standards
on a project-by-project basis. The purpose of the NPDES permit is to ensure the Project
area will eliminate or reduce construction related sediments and pollutants during storm
water runoff. Construction sediment erosion can be adequately controlled through the
application of standard construction BMPs. The goal of BMPs is to capture and treat
"first flush" storm water run-off generated by surrounding and on-site watersheds. Water
quality management BMPs for grading and construction scenarios may include the use
of sand bags and straw bales for run-off diversion and velocity reduction, mulch topping,
hydro-seeding and siltation fencing to prevent soil loss and measures to minimize
vehicular leaking and spilling. Implementation and compliance with the NPDES
requirements would reduce construction-related impacts to water quality to a less than
significant level.
Mitigation Measures 5.3-3a and 5.3-3b of the Final EIR reduce impacts below a level of
significance. The measures are as follows:
5.3-3a Prior to approval of individual development projects. the Director of Public Wor1<.s
or his/her designee. shall confirm that the plans stipulate that prior to issuance of
any grading permits. the project applicant shall be responsible for filing a Notice
of Intent (NOI) and for filing the appropriate fees pursuant to the NPDES
program. The project contactors shall incorporate stormwater pollution control
measures into a SWPPP. BMPs shall be implemented to the maximum extent
possible. Evidence that proper clearances have been obtained through the
SWRCB, including coverage under the NPDES statewide General Stormwater
Permit for Construction Activities. must be demonstrated. A Standard Urban
Storm Water Mitigation Plan (SUSMP) shall be required as required in the
NPDES permit for the area of the Project site draining to the Kern River.
IN 10-103781
32
<,", -\1< ."
June 2005'< Y)' I:
() ;j~\
>-
I::: 11,1_';
o C'
OP/~"~~i\L
Rio Bnovo Annexation No. 467 Project
GPÞlZC No. 04-0853
5.3-3b Future projects shall exercise special care during the construction phase to
prevent any off-site impacts. Erosion control measures and temporary
desiltationldetention basins shall be in place. as approved by the Director of
Public Woó<s. The basins and erosion control measures shall be shown and
speciflBd on the grading plans and shall be constructed to the satisfaction of the
Director of PubflC Wor1<s prior to the start of any other grading operations.
Cumulative Impacts
5.3-4 The proposed Project, in combination with other cumulative projects, would result
in increased degradation of surface water quality and ffooding impacts in the
area. Compliance with Federal, State, and local requirements on a project-by-
project basis would reduce cumulative impacts to a less than significant level.
Facts SupoortillQ RndinQ
Cumulative effects related to hydrology resulting from implementation of the proposed
project and development in the vicinity and surrounding areas may expose more
persons and property to potential water hazards. Cumulative development may also
adversely affect downstream water quality, resulting in impacts to surface and ground
water suppfies. The potential cumulative impact is mitigated through required drainage
studies to identify potential impacts, relationship to City and County drainage master
plans, and implementation of appropriate on-site and off-site drainage improvements.
Projects are also required to implement NPDES and BMP measures on a project basis
to reduce potential water quality impacts. In addition, projects may require drainage
improvements in order to be in compliance with the Metropolitan Bakersfield General
Plan and Bakersfield Municipal Gode standards in addition to local and regional agency
requirements, as part of the discretionary review process. There are no cumulative
impacts associated with 1he proposed Project
Mitigation Measure 5.3-4 of the Final EIR reduces impacts below a level of significance.
The measure is as follows:
5.3-4 A SUSMP shall be required for the proposed Project as required in the
NPDES permit for the area of the Project site draining to the Kem River.
PUBLIC HEALTH AND SAFETY
Short-Term (Construction) Impacts
5.4-1 Project construction activities have the potential to encounter known hazardous
materials or wastes. Analysis has concluded that no evidence exists of an
existing or previously remediated recognized environmental conditions in
connection with the proposed Project. Less than significant impact with
incorporation of mitigation measures
Facts SupportillQ Findinq
Several agencies have published documents that list businesses or properties that have
handled hazardous materials or waste or may have experienced site contamination. The
governmental sources provided by EDR reported that no aboveground or underground
storage tanks have ever been located on the Project site, and no leaking underground
IN 10-103781
33
<ç,AK(-Ñ
June ~ "J>
,....I ....ç\
m
r-
(')
'\;::G'!\!AI..
~-"--'-"~'-'----'-" ---~---,_..._--~-"-----_._'--.__..,-'_..-
Kia urava AIlnOAilUU'lI .'U...vl rlUJO\.r'"1.
GPAlZC No. 04-0853
storage tank sites are located within at least one-half mile of the proposed Project site.
Interviews conducted with the KCEHSD indicated that no records of environmental
problems are on file for properties affecting the Project site, nor the surrounding
adjoining properties. No potential for existing or previously remediated REGs were
found. A review of local regulatory agency records was conducted to help detennine if
hazardous materials have been handled, stored, or generated on the subject site and/or
the adjacent properties and businesses. No hazardous materials records were found.
The Phase I ESA and Phase /I Limited Soils Investigation revealed the potential for
historical drilling mud deposits associated with former oil well locations may contain
elevated concentrations of barium, or oil-based drilling muds. The actual presence of
elevated concentration soil deposits at the well locations were not confirmed during the
course the investigations. In addition to the historical oil well facilities, the Phase /I
Limited Soils Investigation identified concentrations of soluble lead in the soil of the
south and central parts of the target berm in the former shooting range. lead
concentrations in these soils were reported nearty .35 and 2.6 times the STLC for lead,
which is five milligrams per liter. These elevated concentrations are therefore considered
hazardous according to Title 22 of the California Code of Regulations.
Based on the conclusions rendered in the Phase I ESA and Phase /I Limited Soils
Investigation, con<frtions exist on-site that may potentially compromise Project
construction or acquisition of construction easements. Implementation of mitigation
measures identified at the end of this section would serve to reduce these potential
hazardous material impacts to less than significant levels.
Mitigation Measure 5.4-1 of the Final EIR reduces impacts below a level of significance.
The measure is as follows:
5.4-1 Soil within the Project site is reported to contain elevated concentrations of
hazardous materials above regulatory deanup levels. Prior to recordation of a
final map, all lead and potential barium contaminated soil locations identified in
the Phase I ESA and Phase /I Limited Soils Investigation shall be remediated
below hazardous levels established by Title 22 of the Califomia Code of
Regulations and to the satisfaction of the City Fire Prevention Services. General
remediation measures may include, but not be limited to the following:
· Excavation and disposal at a permitted, off-site facility;
· Qn-site treatment; or
· Other procedures deemed appropriate by the identified agency with
closure responsibilities.
5.4-2 Project construction activities do not have the potential to create a significant
hazard to the public through foreseeable upset and accidental conditions. Less
than significant impact with incorporation of mitigation measures.
Facts SupportillQ Findinq
As indicated in the Phase I ESA and Phase /I Limited Soils Investigation report, lead
contamination is present within the historic firing range area and the potential for
increased concentrations of barium eXist in areas of the historic exploratory wells.
Due to the presence of lead contamination and potential barium contamination. future
construction àctivities have the potential to result in a release of hazardous materials into
IN 10-103781
34
Ju'2&ðt/,>
~ 'í)
-' f...-(\
- .-
\__ m
r-
',~) CJ
I;r~, ':'~-<;¡,1,.
R'o tiravo AnnexatIOn NO. 4a1 ....rOJec1
GPAlZC No. ~853
the environment and the accidental release of hazardous substances such as
petroleum-based fuels used for construction equipment. The level of risk associated with
the accidental release of hazardous substances is considered significant due to the
volumes and concentrations of hazardous materials present within the on-site soils and
utilized during construction. The project contractor will be required to use standard
construction controls and safety procedures which would avoid and minimize the
potential for accidental release of such substances (petroleum based fuels) into the
environment. Additionally, the contaminated soil will be required to be remediated to a
level considered non-hazardous. Standard construction practices would be observed
such that any materials released are appropriately contained and remediated as
required by local, State, and Federal law. Implementation of mitigation measures would
reduce these impacts to less than significant.
Mitigation Measures 5.4-2 and 5.4-3 of the Final EIR reduce impacts below a level of
significance. The measures are as follows:
5.4-2 Refer to Mitigation Measure 5.4-1, above.
Facts SUDDOrtillQ RndillQ
If Valley Fever spores occur within the boundaries of the proposed Project. with the
absence of mitigation, there is potential for the infection of construction workers and
surrounding residents. as well as within the Project area. Any future development would
be required to implement mitigation measures designed to reduce the amount of fugitive
dust during grading activities would reduce the likelihood of Valley Fever to a less than
significant level (refer to Section 5.8, AIR QUALITY). The long-tenn covering of portions
of the Project alignment with landscaping material, and/or impervious roadway surfaces
would reduce the long-term potential release of Valley Fever spores to a less than
significant level.
Mitigation Measures 5.4-3a and 5.4-3b of the Final EIR reduce impacts below a level of
significance. The measures are as follows:
5.4-3a Refer to Section 5.8 AIR QUALITY, regarding fugitive dust mitigation measures.
5.4-3b All areas with bare soil exposed as a result of Project earthwork activities shall be
landscaped at the earliest time possible or stabilized by watering when winds
exceed 20 miles per hour (mph) in order to rèduce the potential inhatation of
spores causing Valley Fever.
Oil Production Facilities
5.4-3 Several abandoned welfs (five) are located within the Project site's boundary.
therefore, health and safety risks are present. Less than significant impact with
incorporation of mitigation measures.
Facts SUDDOrtlnq Findinq
According to the Phase I ESA and Phase " Limited Soils Investigation. several
previously abandoned wells are present within the Project site. Future development and
grading activities on the Project site would require that the wells be exposed and the
abandoned status reexamined. Public Resources Code Section 3208.1 authorizes the
IN 10-103781
35
Q..~d{'·
June 200~ v' .~.,'
() 'c~\
iTj
j-' r-
,) c)
nG:(::t<,t,i,
Rio Bravo Annexation No. 467 Project
GPÞlZC No. 04-0853
State Oil and Gas Supervisor to order the reabandonment of a previously abandoned
well when construction of any structure over or in the proximity of the well could result in
a hazard. The Division of Oil, Gas. and Geothermal Resources must be notified to
investigate the condition of the wellheads and check for leakage. If any abandonment or
reabandonment is required, the Division of Oil, Gas, and Geothermal Resources would
furnish the necessary closure specifications. Adherence to closure provisions would
serve to reduce impacts to less than significant levels.
Additionally, Valley Waste Disposal maintains evaporation ponds located approximately
1,000 feet to the east of the subject site. These ponds are used for oilfield waste water.
The ponds are under the jurisdiction of the Central Valley Regional Water Quality
Control Board (RWQCB). No specific setback standards exist with regards to oilfield
waste water facilities. Additionally. the RWaCB has not received complaints regarding
odors emanating from the ponds. Therefore, given the distance from the Project site,
the topographic features between the Project site and the waste water ponds, and the
lack of setback regulations and complaints, impacts of this facility on future on-site uses
are considered to be less than significant.
Mitigation Measure 5.4-4 of the Final EIR reduces impacts below a level of significance.
The measure is as follows:
5.4--4 Prior to the recordation of any final map affected. the Project contractor shall
coordinate with the Division of Oil, Gas, and Geothermic Resources to verify that
the existing abandoned wells meet current closure requirements. Should
abandonment or reabandonment be required, appropriate closure activities shall
be completed under consultation with the Division of Oil, Gas, and Geothermal
Resources. Verification of adequate abandonment or reabandonment shall be
provided to the Planning Director prior to the recordation of any final map
affected.
5.4-6 Project implementation would not create a signíficant hazard to the public or thé
environment through the long-term use of hazardous substances for the purpose
of long-term maintenance. Compliance with State and applicable local
regulations would reduce potential impacts to less than significant levels.
Facts SuPDOrtinQ FindinQ
The proposed annexation, General Plan Amendment (GPA), and zone change does not
involve construction activities within the Project site at this time. Future on-site uses
include 1,300 residential units, a parK site, and fire station. Therefore, in the future, the
on-site storage and use of hazardous materials may include fire suppression
substances, fuel, cleaning solvents. fertilizers. pestiddes, and other materials used in
the regular maintenance of residential structures. With proper use and disposal, these
chemicals are not expected to result in hazardous or unhealthful conditions for nearby
residents or maintenance worKers. However. this future development would be subject
to envlfonmental and design reV1ew on a site-specific, project by project basis.
Additionally, future development would be required to comply with all applicable local,
State. and Federal regulations and policies regarding hazardous matenals.
Mitigation Measure 5.4-6 of the Final EIR reduces impacts below a level of significance.
The measure is as follows:
IN 10-103781
36
«. ~ÞK(9
June 200SJ ,!;,
.~ -
m
- r-
) C)
JR:r:iNÞJ
Rio Bravo Annexation No. 467 Project
GPAlZC No. 04-0853
5.4-6 No mitigation measures beyond compliance with State and local regulations are
required.
Cumulative Impacts
5.4-7 The proposed Project, in combination with other cumulative projects, could
increase exposure to the public of hazardous substances. Compliance with
Federal, State, and local requirements on a project-by-project basis would
reduce cumulative impacts to a less than significant level.
Facts SupportinQ Findinq
Compliance with Federal, State, and local regulations would ensure that contamination
or exposure to hazardous substances is avoided or controlled to minimize the risk to the
pUblic on a case-by-case basis as the cumulative projects are constructed.
Mitigation Measure 5.4-7 of the Final EIR reduces impacts below a level of significance.
The measure is as follows:
5.4-7 No mitigation measures beyond those identified on a project-by-project basis are
required.
AESTHETICSILlGHT AND GLARE
Short-Term (Construction) Aesthetic Impacts
5.5-1 Grading and construction of individual phases would temporarily alter the visual
appearance of the Project area. Impacts are considered to be short-term, would
cease upon completion of construction activities, and would be reduced to less
than significant levels with implementation of the recommended mitigation
measures.
Facts SUPDOrtinQ Findinq
Project construction activities would temporarily disrupt views across the site from
surrounding areas. Graded surfaces, construction debris, construction equipment and
heavy truck traffic would be visible. Soil would be stockpiled and equipment for grading
activities would be staged at various locations throughout the Project site. The use of
metal storage containers in conjunction with construction activities would be subject to
Section 17.57.050 of the Bakersfield Municipal Code, which allows the use of metal
storage containers for construction. subject to approval by the Building Director. These
impacts would be short-term and would cease upon Project completion. With the
implementation of the recommended mitigation pertaining to location of screening area
and with compliance with Bakersfield Municipal Code requirements. short-term impacts
would be reduced to less than significant levels.
Mitigation Measure 5.5-1 of the Final EIR reduces impacts below a level of significance.
The measure is as follows:
IN 10-103781
37
'òM,c.
-"''':)
June 200 <!;-,
>-
'""
C.1
m
r-
C)
¡;P:r.!~'·!fI,L
Rio Bravo AnMXauon l'1li0. ~l rroJect
GPAlZC No. 04-0853
5.5-1 Temporary construction equipment staging areas shall be located within the
Project site through the duration of construction. Appropriate screening (e.g.,
temporary opaque fencing [six feet in height)) will be used to buffer views of
construction equipment material. when feasible. All construction activities shall
also be consistent with the Bakersfield Municipal Code requirements and
conditions of approval. Staging locations shall be indicated on final grading plans.
Long-Term Aesthetic Impacts - Off-Site
5.5-3 Future development allowed under the proposed General Plan Amendment and
zone change may alter views to Analysis has concluded that less than significant
visual impacts would occur with incorporation of recommended mitigation
measures the sUffounding area.
Facts SUDDOrtino Findinq
The open space and hillside areas surrounding the Project site are classified as scenic
resources within the Metropolitan Bakersfield General Plan. The foothill area. which is
visible through much of the City, creates a backdrop and provides visual open space
within the eastern portion of the City. Development, particularly if it is dense. win result
in a significant loss of the aesthetic value of the Project area to the community. The
Metropolitan Bakersfield General Plan states that land use intensification has the
potential to alter landforms, scenic vantage points, overall character, and potentially
affect scenic resources. In addition, because of the steepness of the foothills. even
development of individual single family dwellings on large lots can, along with the
needed access roads, result in substantial degradation of the area's aesthetic values.
Views of the foothills are currently available for motorists, pedestrians, and residents
located throughout the City and within the immediate vicinity of the Project site. In the
immediate Project area, views to the foothills are currently unobstructed, thus the
change in visual character from open space to developed conditions would be a distinct
visual alteration compared to existing conditions.
As stated in the previous Impact Statement and analysis, the ultimate conversion of the
617-acre undeveloped Project site to urban uses represents a significant and
unavoidable on-site aesthetic impact. Notwithstanding that conclusion, potential view
impairments to the foothills are not considered to be significant. as Mure site
development would be guided by applicable General Plan policies and implementation
actions set forth in the Land Use Element and Open Space Element. Grading techniques
such as limiting the overall shape, height and grade of any cut and fill slope contour to
match the existing natural contours and scale of the natural terrain, as prescribed in
Chapter 17.66 of the Bakersfield Municipal Code would serve to minimize obstruction of
off-site views. This would be enforced through subsequent environmental and design
reviews conducted on a site-specific. project by project basis to ensure visual aesthetic
affects are limited to the greatest extent possible. View impairment impacts are
therefore considered less than significant wIth implementation of mitigation measures
referenced at the end of this section.
Mitigation Measures 5.5-3a through 5.5·3c of the Final EIR reduce impacts below a level
of significance. The measures are as follows:
IN 10-103781
38
June 2005
~)f\l\t '\
(-.',~ ">:p
,-,-('
>-
P'
r
(')
:"1rW~~NÞ.L
Rio Bnovo Annexetlon NO. <167 Project
GPNZC No. ~853
5.5-2 Future on-site development shall be completed in compliance with the goals and
policies of the Metropolitan Bakersfield General Plan, Chapter 17.66, Hillside
Development Combining Zone of the Bakersr/Ð/d Municipal Code, and the goals
and policies of the Metropolitan Bakersrreld General Plan.
5.5-38 Future on-site development shall be completed in compliance with the goals and
policies of the Metropolitan Bakersfield General Plan, Chapter 17 .66, Hillside
Development Combining Zone of the Bakersfield Municipal Code.
5.5-3b Grading for future development phases shall be designed in accordance with
acceptable grading criteria as defined in Chapter 17.66, Hillside Development
Combining Zone of the Bakersfield Municipal Code. Grading plans shall consider
the following: 1) manufactured cut and fill slopes exceeding ten feet in height
which are exposed to any public view shall be landform graded so that their
ultimate appearance will resemble a natural slope and 2) slopes along streets
and highways, slopes adjacent to par1<s, schools. open spaces, and other public
facilities shall be engineered to retain as much natural slope as possible.
Compliance with this measure is subject to grading plan review and approval by
the City Engineer prior to issuance of grading permits.
5.5-3c Maximum grade of streets, public or private, and other access easements shall
be determined in accordance with a Policy on Geometric Design of Highways
and Streets, American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials
(AASHTO) 1990, for design of maximum grades for arterials, collectors, and local
streets.
Light and Glare Impacts
5.5-4 The Project would generate additional light/glare beyond existing conditions due
to street lighting and project~elated vehicular traffic. Less than significant impact
with incorporation of mitigation measures.
Facts Supoortinq Findinq
Implementation of the proposed Project would convert portions of the Project area to an
urban, built environment, thus resulting in the introduction of light into the area. The
introduced light would consist of lighting for residences and streets. If this lighting is not
adequately focused or screened, it may cause spill-over lighting and glare that may
present a nuisance to residential uses or act as a deterrent to wildlife in sensitive habitat
areas during evening hours and may present a nuisance or potential safety hazard by
distracting motorists during daylight hours.
Light and glare impacts can be substantially reduced through siting development in
areas that utilize existing topographic features as a barrier. With the implementation of
the recommended mitigation measures, light sources from individual future on-site
residential development would not have a significant impact on surrounding areas.
Street lighting illumination would be comparable to exisllng nearby residential
developments. Proper lighting techniques to direct light on-site away from adjacent
properties would reduce potential light and glare impacts to a less than significant level.
According to the Metropolitan Bakersfield General Plan EIR. development that would
convert vacant land to urbanized uses would create additional sources of light and glare.
IN 10-103781
39
"
"
June 2005
1<(.:"/.
,
..()
'-;:..,;.,
m
¡--
'0
~·":"':!\AL
1'(10 tiravo Annexation 1110. ~I nqect
Gf'AlZC No. 04-œ53
The Metropolitan Bakersfield General Plan provides goals and policies that would serve
to reduce aesthetic impacts associated with light and glare and it provides programs that
serve to implement the goals and policies that address light and glare in MeIropofitan
Bakersfield. Therefore, Mure development would be required to comply with the goals
and policies of the General Plan as well as undergo project specific environmental and
design review by the City and/or County. Implementation of the recommended mitigation
measures and proper lighting techniques, compliance with the General Plan, and
environmental and design review would reduce future project impacts to Iéss than
significant levels.
Mitigation Measures 5.5-4a and 5.5-4b of the Final EIR reduce impacts below a level of
significance. The measures are as follows:
5.5-4a Lighting for all future on-site development proposals shall be designed in
accordance with the goals and policies of the Metropolitan Bakersfteki General
Plan. This measure is subject to the requirements of the Bakersfield Municipal
Code.
5.5-4b Exterior lighting shall be implemented pursuant standards and specifications
contained in Bakersfield Municipal Code Section 13.12.030 (B), Subdivision
Design Manual, and other applicable standard manuals referenced under Section
13.12.030 (B) which include minimization measures for outside lighting to utilize
low pressure sodium lighting andlor the provision for lighting to be shielded and
filtered according to wattage and lamp type.
TRAFFIC AND CIRCULATION
Short-Term (Construction) Impacts
5.6-1 Project-l'elated construction activities would result in temporary circulation
impacts on nearby residents, pedestrians, bicyclists, and potential traffIC
congestion. However, these impacts are considered a temporary nuisance and
would cease upon Project completion. Implementation of recommended
mitigation measures would reduce impacts to less than significant levels.
Facts Supoortil1Q RndinQ
Anticipated construction-related traffic and circulation impacts would be considered a
temporary nuisance that would cease upon completion of Project construction.
Preparation of a detailed Traffic Management Plan (TMP) would be required pñor to
construction of the proposed Project. The TMP would delineate all road closures,
provisions to maintain access to nearby residential properties at all times, adequate
sign-postings. detours. provisions for pedestrian, bicycle transportation, and permitted
hours of construction activity. Proper detours and warning signs will be established along
the Project perimeter to ensure public safety. The TMP shall be devised so that
construction would not interfere with emergency response or evacuation plans. Due to
the relatively rural nature of the Project and surrounding vicinity. implementation of the
TMP and recommended mitigation would result in less than signtficant impacts.
Mitigation Measures 5.6-1 a and 5.6-1 b of the Final EIR reduce impacts below a level of
significance. The measures are as follows:
IN 10-103781
40
June 2005
?oi'Kt'^
f{' "/Y
,,-, 'IS!
'-- ,"'n
.,
m
,-.
C:'
·'Þ'<"NþJ
Rio Bravo Annexation No. ~1 Project
GPAlZC No. 004-0853
5.6-1a With submittal of a grading plan, a Traffic Management Plan (TMP) shall be
submitted for review and approval to the City of Bakersfield Public WorKs
Department. Such plan shall consist of prior notices, adequate sign posting, and
detours (including for pedestrians and bicyclists). The TMP shan specify
implementation timing of each plan element (prior notices, sign-posting, detours.
etc.) as determined appropriate by the City Engineer. The TMP shall be
reviewed and approved by the City Police and Fire Departments so that
construction does not interfere with any emergency response or evacuation
plans. Construction activities shall proceed in a timely manner to minimize
impacts.
5.6-1b Proper detours and warning signs shall be established to ensure public safety.
This includes the use of proper lighting (where appropriate): fencing and
shielding: proper storage of equipment and construction supplies: and covering
loose piles of soil, silt. clay, sand debris, or other earthen material.
Traffic Generation
5.6-2 Project implementation may cause a significant if1Ç(ease in traffic when
compared to the traffIC capacity of the street system and may exceed an
established LOS standard. Less Than Significant With Mitigation.
Facts SUPDOrtinq Findinq
The annexation and corresponding General Plan Amendment (GPA) and zone change
would allow the development of up to 1.300 residential units at buildout. The traffic
related to the proposed Project was calculated in accordance with the following accepted
procedural steps: (1) Ttíp Generation; (2) Ttíp Distribution; and (3) Traffic Assignment.
Overall, to lessen Project impacts, mitigation is recommended. which requires payment
of traffic impact fees and Project fair share contribution towards implementation of
improvements.
Mitigation Measure 5.6-2 of the Final EIR reduces impacts below a level of significance.
The measure is as follows:
5.6-2 Refer to Mitigation Measures 5.6-48 and 5.6-4b, below.
Access
5.6-3 Future development of the site would require secondary access to provide
adequate site circulation and emergency access. Analysis has concluded that
with incorporation of recommended mitigation measures. impacts are reduced to
less than significant.
Facts SUPDOrtinq Findinq
In accordance with the 2010 General Plan update, it was assumed for the purposes of
the Traffic Study that a northeasteriy extension of Chase Avenue to Comanche Drive
would be completed by the year 2024. 11 is anticipated \llat this extension will be
constructed in conjunction with adjacent development. 11 was also assumed that the
segment of Chase Avenue extending easteny and southeasteny from Comanche Drive
IN 10-103781
41
June 2005
'~'P."t(/-
".ý
([:-
~
>-
r,o
~. t·,
',) ~I
"">,~1',0'!\:;'\L
Rio Bravo Annexation No. 4411 Project
GP/lJZC No. ~53
to Breckenridge Road would be constructed for Mure anticipated traffic generated by
the Project From a transportation viewpoint, the proposed Project could develop up to
390 residences before construction of ())ase Avenue to Comanche Drive or
Breckenridge Road would be required. Access on Miramonte Drive to State Route 178
would allow up to 390 residences while maintaining an acceptable level of service in
both the existing and future conditions, provided that the proposed traffic signal is
installed at the intersection of Miramonte Drive and State Route 178. However, City of
Bakersfield policy requires secondary access points be provided on developments over
200 residences. Therefore, the construction of Chase Avenue to Comanche Drive or
Breckenridge Road would be required prior to the recordation of the 200'" residential unit
on-site. As stated in Section 5.11, Public Services and Utilities, the City's Fire
Department requires secondary access connection along Chase Avenue between
Miramonte and Comanche Drive prior to recordation of future subdivisions on-site.
Completion of ())ase Avenue consistent with Mitigation Measure 5.11-1d in Section 5.11
would serve to meet adequate circulation and emergency access needs on-site.
Mitigation Measure 5.6-3 of the Rnal EIR reduces impacts below a level of significance.
The measure is as follows:
5.6-3 Refer to Mitigation Measure 5.11-1 d in Section 5.11.
Cumulative Traffic (2024 Conditions)
5.6-4 Implementation of the proposed Project, combined with cumulative project
development, may cause a significant increase in traffic when compared to the
traffic capacity of the street system and may exceed an established LOS
standard. Less Than Significant With Mitigation.
Facts Supportinq Findinq
Many agricultural areas within the Project vicinity are transitioning to residential and
commercial land uses. Average annual growth rates of 0.2 to 18 percent were applied to
existing traffic volumes to estimate future traffic volumes for the year 2024. The rates were
developed based on a review of historical growth rates in the Project vicinity and
KemCOG's TPPLUS traffic model for the year 2030.
Overall, with adherence to the Metropolitan Bakersfield RTIF, applicable goals and
policies of the Metropolitan Bakersfield General Plan, implementation of the Project's
pro-rata share of the recommended improvements, and consideration of future
circulation improvements on a project-by-project basis, cumulative traffic impacts would
be mitigated to less than significant levels.
Mitigation Measures 5.6-43 and 5.6-4b of the Final EIR reduce impacts below a level of
significance. The measures are as follows:
5.6-4a Prior to issuance of building permits, the Project Applicant shall comply with the
City'S Regional Transportation Impact Fee Program (RTIF) in accordance with
the standard residential. commerCIal. and industrial per-lot rate
IN 10-103781
42
'< '(JAK;.-
June 2005 CJ . ')'<1',
>- 4
\_ n1
__ r-
OJ Ç)
;P;~:NN
GPAlZC No. ~853
5.6-4b For impacted intersections subject to fair-share improvements (refer to Tables
5.6-11 and 5.6-13), the Project Applicant shall participate in the improvements
required on a pro-rata fair-share basis, as indicated in Table 5.6-16, (Future
Intersection Improvements and Local Mitigation).
NOISE
Short-Term (Construction) Impacts
5.7-1 Grading and construction within the Project area would result in temporary
noise impacts on nearby noise sensitive receptors. Analysis has concluded
that temporary construction noise woutd result in a less than significant impact
with implementation of mitigation measures_
Facts SUDpOrtillQ Findinq
Construction activities would include demolition, grading, construction of buildings, and
paving. Construction activities generally have a short and temporary duration, lasting
from a few days to a period of several months. Groundbome noise and other types of
construction-related noise impacts would typically occur during the initial site
preparation, which can create the highest levels of noise; but is also generally the
shortest of all construction phases. High groundbome noise levels and other
miscellaneous noise levels can be created by the operation of heavy-<luty trucks,
backhoes, bulldozers, excavators, front-end loaders, compactors, scrapers and other
heavy-<luty construction equipment. Operating cycles for these types of construction
equipment may involve one or two minutes of full power operation followed by three to
four minutes at lower power settings. Other primary sources of acoustical disturbance
would be random incidents, which would last less than one minute (such as dropping
large pieces of equipment or the hydraulic movement of machinery lifts).
Standard residential construction in California provides a 20 dBA reduction of interior
noise levels with windows closed and a 12 dBA reduction with windows open. Per the
Bakersfield Municipal Code, construction would be limited to the hours of 6:00 AM to
9:00 PM on weekdays and 8:00 AM and 9:00 PM on weekends. Implementation of the
mitigation (Le., muffling/ placement of construction equipment and stockpilinglstaging of
construction vehicles) would serve to reduce the noise levels to sensitive receptors and
thus would result in a less than significant impact.
Mitigation Measures 5.7-1a through 5.7-1d of the Final EIR reduce impacts below a level
of significance. The measures are as follows:
5.7-1a Prior to issuance of grading permits, the contractor shall provide evidence
acceptable to the City Planning Department that (1) all construction equipment.
fixed or mobile, operated within 1,000 feet of a dwelling unit shall be equipped
with properly operating and maintained mufflers; (2) construction activities shall
be limited to the designated daytime hours as specified by the City of Bakersfield
(currently 6 AM to 9 PM on weekdays and 8 AM and 9 PM on weekends)- No
construction is allowed on Federal holidays_ These restrictions apply to all trucks,
vehicles, and equipment that are making or involved with material deliveries,
loading or transfer of materials. equipment service, and maintenance of any
devices for or within the Project construction slte_
IN 10-103781
43
June 2005" 'ò ~ K
c,;'
--
\-_-.
',.)
- --'-~- ~ ---- - -----~
Rio Bravo Annexation No. 467 Pn> ect
GPAlZC No. 04-0853
5.7-1b During construction, stationary construction equipment shall be placed such that
emitted noise is directed away from noise-sensitive receptors, to the satisfaction
of the Building Official.
5.7-1c Prior to approval of the project plans and specifications by the City Planning
Department, the construction contractor shall incorporate feasible muffling
features into all construction vehicles and equipment and into construction
methods, and shall maintain all construction vehicles and equipment in efficient
operating condition.
5.7-1d The Project plans and specifications prior to approval by the City Planning and
Building Departments, shall stipulate that stockpiling and construction vehicle
staging areas shall be located as far away as practical from noise-sensitive
receptors during construction activities.
On-Site Mobile Source Impacts
5.7-3 Project implementation would generate additional vehicular travel on the roadway
networl<, thereby resulting in permanent noise level increases. Analysis has
concluded that with the incorporation of recommended noise attenuating design
features, long-term vehicular- related noise would not exceed the City's 65 dB
CNEL compatibility standard for future on-site residences.
Facts SUDDortinq Findinq
As indicated in the Acouslical Analysis, prepared by Gordon Bricken and Associates, the
Year 2024 65 dBA CNEL contour would extend approximately 107 feet from the
centerline along Breckenridge Road. The potential extent to which the traffic noise levels
could affect the project lies along Breckenridge Road since it comes near the southeast
comer of the Project site. The 65 dBA CNEL contours from the other roadways do not
affect the project site. Some residential locations could potentially be exposed to traffic
noise levels in excess of 65 dBA CNEL. Based on the conceptual nature of the site plan.
the mitigation components cannot be adequately determined at this time. It is
recommended that additional noise analysis be conducted prior to Tentative Tract Map
approval to ensure that adequate noise mitigation is provided to meet the City of
Bakersfield noise standards. The report would evaluate the interior and exterior noise
impacts based upon the actual roadways, pad elevations and building design. With
implementation of the recommended mitigation, which requires additional noise analysis,
a less than significant impact would occur in this regard.
Mitigation Measure 5.7-3 of the Final EIR reduces impacts below a level of significance.
The measure is as follows:
5.7-3 Prior to residential development, an acoustical noise analysis shall be prepared
to ensure that exterior and interior noise levels are met Residential buildings or
structures shall prepare an acoustical analysis showing that the building has
been designed to limit intruding noise to the level prescribed (interior of 45 dBA
CNEL and exterior 65 dBA CNEL). To the extent feasible, the following site-
planning techniques shall be implemented:
K
IN 10-103781
44
-~:..:
June 2005 ~j
iT
") f;"
"P:;~'NA!
KIO ÞraVO AOnexauon no. ~I rrqOct
GPAlZC No. ~853
Increasing the distance between the noise source and the receiver.
Using non-noise sensitive structures such as garages to shield noise-sensitive
areas.
Orienting buildings to shield outdoor spaces from a noise source.
Incorporating architectural design strategies, which reduce the exposure of
noise-sensitive spaces to stationary noise sources (i.e., placing bedrooms or
balconies on the side of the house facing away from noise sources). These
design strategies shall be implemented based on recommendations of an
acoustical analysis for individual developments, as required by the City to comply
with City noise standards.
Incorporating noise barriers, walls, or other sound attenuation techniques, based
on recommendations of acoustical analysis for individual developments, as
required by the City to comply with City noise standards.
Modifying elements of building construction (i.e., walls, roof, ceiling, windows,
and other penetrations), as necessary to provide sound attenuation. This may
include sealing windows, installing thicker or double-glazed windows, locating
doors on the opposite side of a building from the noise source, or installing solid-
core doors equipped with appropriate acoustical gaskets.
Stationary Source Impacts
57-4 Implementation of the proposed Project would result in the generation of on-site
noise associated with future residential units. Analysis has concluded that
impacts woutd be less than significant with the implementation of recommended
. mitigation measures.
Facts SupoortillQ FindinQ
Future development of residential lots would create stationary noise typical of any new
residential development. Noise that is typical of residential areas includes such things
as children playing, pet noise, amplified music, car repair, pooVspa equipment,
woodwor1<.ing and home repair. Noise from residential stationary sources would primarily
occur during the "daytime" activity hours of 7:00 AM to 10:00 PM. Furthermore, the
residences would be required to comply with the noise standards set forth within the
Metropolftan Bakersfield General Plan. The General Plan states that exterior noise
levels in residential property shall not exceed the basic noise standard of 45 dBA for
interior noise and 65 dBA exterior residential property line. Thus, noise impacts from the
residential uses are anticipated to be less than significant in this regard.
Mitigation Measures 57-4a and 57-4b of the Final EIR reduce impacts below a level of
significance. The measures are as follows:
57-4a As a condition of approval, when a site plan with sufficient detail is available, a
final acoustical analysis shall be conducted to the satisfaction of the City
Planning Department to confirm that electrical and mechanical equipment (i.e.,
ventilation and air conditioning units and pool equipment) is specified in a
manner that complies with the Noise Level Performance Standard (NLPS) limit of
IN 10-103781
45
\\ r> 1'('2,"
June 200Sc~ ,'v~,
rn
r
.> (',
'-'2;r;"NM~
"-IV oravu I-\llOCAClUVII AU. ~f rlUjGQ
GPÞJZC No. 04-G8S3
50 dBA. The NLPS shall be applicable on any residential lot other than the lot in
which it sited. In multifamily projects, the individual units shall be considered as
individual residential uses and private areas such as patios and decks would be
subject to the requirement.
5.7 -4b Buyers, renters or lessees within the project whom are located within the
proximity of Mesa Marin Raceway shall be notified of the raceway operations and
that noise from this facility may be audible on a periodic basis.
AIR QUALITY
Short-Term (Construction) Emissions
5.8-1 Temporary construction-related dust and vehicle emissions would cxx;ur during
construction within the Project area. Analysis has concluded that impacts
would be mitigated to a less than signifICant level.
Facts SuPoortillQ RndinQ
Short-term construction related emISSions are primarily related to the grading and
construction phases of a project and are seen as temporary in nature. Compliance with
SJVAPCD Rules and Regulations. the local zoning code. and additional mitigation
measures will reduce PMIO fugitive dust emissions to ensure that emissions remain at a
less than significant level. Actual emissions wíll depend on the level of activity and the
type of control being used.
In addition, the GAMAQI. recommends that projects with buildout periods in excess of
five years to model the project's emissions at the midpoint of the duration of construction
activities. As the proposed Project is expected to have a buildout of approximately ten
years, an additional URBEMIS run was completed for the five-year mid-way point. The
mid-way point emissions associated with the Project would be less than SJVAPCD
significance threshold levels for ROG and NOx. As calculated by URBEMIS, short-term
emissions with all listed equipment would result in less than significant levels.
Annualized emissions are expected to remain below significance threshold levels even
with overlapping phases and variations in equipment usage.
Mitigation Measures 5.8-1a through 5.8-1d of the Rnal EIR reduce impacts below a level
of significance. The measures are as follows:
5.8-1a To minimize engine exhaust emissions during Project construction, the Applicant
shall implement the following measures:
· Properly and routinely maintain all constructton equipment, as
recommended by manufacturer's manuals. to control exhaust emissions.
· Shut down equipment when not in use for extended periods of time, to
reduce exhaust emIssions associated with idlIng engines,
· Encourage ride-sharing and use of transit transportatton for construction
employees commuting to the Project site.
JN 10-103781
46
ç;"P.)( (,
June 2005 '< ,. . '0',
C) 'u;,;
>- "
\__ Pl
._ r-
;j 0
O~!iC!~\!Þd
~.-~_. "-'---'--">~'.'_._-"." .--------
-------
Rio Bravo AnnexaUon No. 0467 Project
GPAlZC No. 04-œ53
·
Use electric equipment for construction whenever possible in lieu of fossil
fuel-fired equipment.
·
Curtail construction during periods of high ambient pollutant concentrations.
·
Construction equipment shall operate no longer than eight cumulative hours
per day.
·
All construction vehicles shall be equipped with proper emission control
equipment and kept in good and proper running order to reduce NOx
emissions.
·
On-Road and Off-Road diesel equipment shall use aqueous diesel fuel if
permitted under manufacturer's guidelines.
·
On-Road and Off-Road diesel equipment shall use diesel particulate filters
if permitted under manufacturer's guidelines.
·
On-Road and Off-Road diesel equipment shall use cooled exhaust gas
recirculation (EGR) if permitted under manufacturer's guidelines.
·
Use of Caterpillar pre-chamber diesel engines or equivalent shall be utilized
if economic and available to reduce NO, emissions.
·
All construction activities within the project area shall be discontinued
during the first stage smog alerts.
·
Construction and grading activities shall not be allowed during first stage
ozone alerts. First stage ozone alerts are declared when the ozone level
exceeds 0.20 ppm (1-hour average).
5.8-1b Construction of the Project requires the implementation of control measures set
forth under Regulation VIII of the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control
District (SJAPCD) Fugitive PM,o Prohibition. The following mitigation measures,
in addition to those required under Regulation VIII of the SJVAPCD. shall be
implemented to reduce fugitive dust emissions:
· Water previously disturbed exposed ~urfaces (soil) a minimum of three-
times/day or whenever visible dust is capable of drifting from the site or
approaches 20% opacity_
· Water all haul roads (unpaved) a minimum of three-times/day or whenever
visible dust from such roads is capable of drifting from the site or
approaches 20% opacity.
· All access roads and parking areas shall be covered with asphalt-concrete
paving or water sprayed regularly_
· Dust from all on-site and off-site unpaved access roads shall be effectively
stabilized by applying water or using a chemical slabilizer or suppressant.
· Reduce speed on unpaved roads to less than 15 miles per hour.
IN 10-103781
47
o.þ K ¡.
June 2005 '< v· "-9
() ú'
""
>~
m
r---
o t)
OH;C~;NÞ\L
,--
Rio Bravo Annexation No. 0407 Project
GPAlZC No. _53
·
Install and maintain a trackout control device that meets the specifICations
of SJV APCD Rule 8041 it the site exceeds 150 vehicle trips pel' day or
more than 20 vehicle trips per day by vehicle with three or more axles
·
Stabilize all disturbed areas, including storage piles, which are not being
actively utilized for construction purposes using water, chemical stabilizers
or by covering with a tarp. other suitable cover or vegetative ground oover.
·
Control fugitive dust emissions during land clearing, grubbing, scraping,
excavation, leveling, grading, or cut and fill operations with application of
water or by presoaking.
·
When transporting materials offsite, maintain a freeboard limit of at least six
inches and cover or effectively wet to limit visible dust emissions.
·
Limit and remove the accumulation of mud and/or dirt from adjacent public
roadways at the end of each workday. (Use of dry rotary brushes is
prohibited except when preceded or accompanied by sufficient wetting to
limit visible dust emissions and use of blowers is expressly forbidden).
·
Stabilize the surface of storage piles following the addition or removal of
materials using water or chemical stabilizerlsuppressants.
·
Remove visible track-out from the site at the end of each workday.
·
Cease grading activities during periods of high winds (greater than 20 mph
over a one-hour period).
·
Asphalt-concrete paving shall oomply with SJV APCD Rule 4641 and restrict
use of cutback. slow-cure and emulsified asphalt paving materials.
·
Grading should be conducted in phases.
·
Project site shall not be cleared of existing vegetation cover until required
by construction.
·
The project developer shall revegetate graded areas as soon as it is
feasible after construction is completed.
5.8-1c Prior to issuance of any building permits, Contractors andlor Developer shall
submit a written statement to the City of Bakersfield Planning Department stating
that they shall maintain records documenting compliance with all mitigation
measures as required and shall make such records available to the SJVAPCD
upon request
58-1d Prior to the issuance of any building permits, Contractors andlor Developer shall
submit a written statement that they will allow an authorized representative of the
SJVAPCD to review construction equipment activity and mitigation measure
records for the purpose of assuring oompliance with the applicable requirements
of these mitigation measures and all tract development requirements.
IN 10-103781
48
June 2005 x '01<1,2,0
(""' \P
J .~
>- .-
m
r-
c) C)
r¡r~G'NAL
,-
."'.... ........... ""n.......ou..... .~....... "TV"' . ....J""...,
GPAlZC No. ~853
Long-Term (Operational) Impacts
5.8-3 The Project would result in an overall increase in the local and regional
pollutant load due to direct impacts from vehicle emissions and indirect impacts
from electricity and natural gas consumption. With implementation of
recommended mitigation, combined mobile and area source emissions would
not exceed SJVAPCD thresholds for NO. and ROG. Analysis has concluded
that impacts would be mitigated to a less than significant level.
Facts SUPDOrtinQ Findinq
As a result or normal day to day activities occurring on the Project site after occupation,
operational emissions would be generated by both stationary and mobile sources.
Stationary source emissions would be generated by the consumption of natural gas for
space and water heaters, and landscape maintenance equipment Mobile emissions
would be generated by the motor vehicles traveling to and from the Project site.
Mitigation Measures 5.8-3a and 5.8-3b of the Final EIR reduce impacts below a level of
significance. The measures are as follows:
To reduce emissions from mobile sources, incorporate transportation control measures
and design features into the Project. The below-listed control measures provide a
strategy to reduce vehicle trips, vehicle use, vehicle-miles traveled. vehicle engine idling,
and traffic congestion for the purpose of reducing motor vehicle emissions and are
therefore required in order to achieve the necessary emission reduction.
· The project design shall comply with standards set forth in Title 24 of the Uniform
Building Code to minimize total consumption of energy.
· The developer shall position as many home sites as possible with a north/south
exposure.
· The developer shall ensure that all residential units are designed in compliance
with SJVAPCD Rule 4901 regarding wood burning fireplaces and wood burning
heaters.
· Applicants shall be required to comply with applicable mitigation measures in the
Air Quality Attainment Plan, District Rules, Traffic Control Measures, Regulation
VIII and Indirect Source Rules for the SJVUAPCD.
· The developer shall petition the Golden Empire Transit District (GET) to conduct
a service study to determine if the project site warrants being annexed into the
GET operational system.
· Specific bus turnouts and shelters shall be located at appropriate locations to
serve residential sites within the project area in consultation with the Golden
Empire Transit District The bus turnouts and shelters shall be planned by
developers in the project area and local transportation coordinating entities to
encourage the efficient and practical use of public transit entities servicing the
project area.
JN 10-103781
49
June 2005 \J.P" F
'-( --./,;
" .~~~"
m
.J CJ
OP::--'~:Al
"'V D....",V ,.....",'IIII"'...II.IV'I. '''.....-. .--.""J....,..,
GPAlZC No. 04-0853
5.8-3b To achieve the emissions reductions as described above, mitigation programs
such as, but not limited to the following, shall be considered by the subdivider:
SJVAPCD MitiQation Fund:
Should the SJVAPCD implement an air quality mitigation program, the subdivider, could
elect to participate as set forth below.
·
The Developer may provide emissions offsets through participation in a voluntary
emission reduction program (VERP) through the San Joaquin Valley APCD. The
VERP will require the developer to enter into a binding agreement with the
SJVAPCD that will require the SJVAPCD to:
Review the air emission impact assessment protocol and quantification of
emission estimates attributable to the project.
Acceptance of the estimated monetary value of the emission reductions to
equal the emissions from the project.
locate and implement the emissions reductions.
Certify that the emission reductions have been made to the lead agency and
the developer in the form ola certificate.
· During the life of the project, if the City of Bakersfield adopts an emissions
mitigation program that provides equal or more effective mitigation than
measures listed in this analysis, the developer may choose to participate in the
City's program to mitigate air quality impacts.
· The purchase of Banked Emission Reduction Credits (ERCs) will fully offset the
project. ERCs, which have been approved by the SJVAPCD, are retained in the
emission inventory for the air basin. Purchase and surrender of ERCs removes
them from this inventory, thus fully offsetting the incremental increase to the
emissions inventory from this project. Therefore, the emissions inventory
contained in the SIP and used for the AQAP will not increase as a result of this
project and the AOAP remains valid.
· Should ERCs not be available or deemed cost effective, the developer may
provide offsets through other means acceptable to the City Planning Department
and approved by the SJVAPCD.
· Fees paid to the SJVAPCD through an approved indirect source emissions fee
program may be utilized to provide applicable offsets for the proposed project.
Cumulative Impacts
5.8-6 Impacts on regional air quality resulting from the proposed Project and
cumulative projects may impact existing regional air quality levels on a
cumulative basis. Analysis has concluded that less than significant cumulative
impacts Witt, incorporation of mitigation measures would occur.
IN 10-103781
50
June 2005 <?>id\l'i)
« !.p
() '..-n
0>-
1---
-ó (')
OP'(~!~<A:'
P1
KIO tu"avo Annexation No. 461 Project
GPAJZC No. 04-0853
Facts SupoortillQ FindinQ
The SJVAPCD Guide for Assessing and Mitigating Air Quality Impacts defines
cumulative impacts as two or more individual effects which, when considered together,
are considerable or which compound or increase other environmental impacts. The
document also states -any proposed project that would individually have a significant air
quality impact... would also be considered to have a significant cumulative air quality
impact". Therefore, NO, and ROG are considered cumulatively significant.
The cumulative analysis is based, in part, on a quantitative analysis of projects in the
vicinity of the proposed Project, and is supplemented with an analysis of data utilized by
the Kern COG adopted regional growth forecast used for the regional air quality
conformity analysis required by the 1990 Federal CAAA The nearby project analysis
quantifies operational project impacts along with all identified projects in the vicinity of
the proposed site for comparison with the Basin totals for NO, and ROG. The Kern COG
analysis confirms whether the proposed Project. when added to existing and proposed
development and compared with local and regional growth forecasts, are in line with
those forecasts. The analysis then determines conformance with SIP emission budgets
or baseline emissions for NO" ROG. CO and PM10. Along with the CO "Hot Spot"
analysis and TACs. the combined analyses provide a detailed description of the Project's
overall cumulative impact on air quality.
The proposed Project, can be considered part of the anticipated growth within the
Planning Area Limits set forth by the Metropolitan Bakersfield General Plan. The
Project, along with past present and reasonably foreseeable future projects will result in
cumulative short-term impacts to air quality.
The proposed Project. along with other past, present and reasonably foreseeable future
projects will result in cumulative long-term impacts to air quality. The proposed Project's
incremental contribution to these impacts will be mitigated to a level of insignificance.
Mitigation Measure 5.8-6 of the Final EIR reduces impacts below a level of significance.
The measure is as follows:
5.8~ Refer to Mitigation Measure 5.8-3a and 5.8-3b.
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
Short-Term (Construction) Impacts
5.9-1 Construction of the proposed Project would result in temporary Impacts to
biological resources in the Project area. Project adherence to all applicable
construction minimization measures outlined throughout this EIR, would reduce
impacts to less than significant levels.
Facts SupportinQ FindinQ
Grading activities would disturb soils and result in the accumulation of dust on the
surface of leaves, trees, shrubs. and herbs. The respiratory function of the plants in the
area would be impaired when dust accumulation is excessive. However, most of the
vegetation on the Project site is non-native. Implementation of standard dust
suppression measures identified in Section 5.9, AIR OUALITY, would serve to reduce
IN 10-103781
51
·'6~KF
~ -/¡
June 200S C) ú'"
>~ m
r'
) C:>
()~Trd!\!A.L
Rio Bravo Annexation No. 4ð7 Project
GPAlZC No. ~53
constructiorHelated dust generation. Therefore, the indirect effect of impaired respiration
by existing plant species on the Project site is considered less than significant.
Noise levels on the Project site during construction of the proposed Project would likely
increase above existing noise levels !hen return to a lower level following the completion
of the construction period. However, temporary increases in noise levels are unlikely to
impact wildlife because animals in the vicinity are limited. The Project is not expected to
result in wildlife displacement adjacent to the site due to increased disturbance.
Therefore, Project-related construction noise impacts would be considered less than
significant
Mitigation Measures 5.9-1a and 5.9-1b of the Final EIR reduce impacts below a level of
significance. The measures are as follows:
5.9-1a Refer to mitigation measures provided in Section 5.9, AIR QUALITY.
5.9-1b Construction vehide speed limits shall not exceed 15 mph and shall be posted
throughout the site for the duration of construction activities. Open road culverts
shall be provided during construction to prevent vehicular mortality of fox
crossing roads.
Special Status Wildlife
5.9-3 Due to the existing on-site and surrounding conditions, potential impacts to
special status wildlife species are not expected to occur. However due to the
potential range of such species, conformance to the MBHCP would be required
to reduce impacts to less than significant levels. Less than significant impacts
with incorporation of mitigation measures are anticipated in this regard.
Facts SUDDortil1Q Findinq
During the surveys conducted for the proposed Project. no listed wildlife species or their
signs were observed. The Federally and State-listed Threatened San Joaquin kit fox is
known to exist within the Project region, however, no signs or evidence of the kit fox
such as scat or prey bones were identified on the site. No other species of concern
were observed or expected to inhabit the Project site induding, the Federal and State
Endangered blunt-nosed leopard lizard, tricolored blackbird. Species of Concern
burrowing owl. southwestern pond turtle, Federal Threatened valley elderberry longhorn
beetle, and Federal Endangered and State Threatened San Joaquin kit fox.
All sensitive species listed above were not identified as part of the MBHCP except for
the San Joaquin kit fox and the blunt-nosed leopard lizard. Compliance with the MBHCP
is intended to conserve entire communities and ecosystems and prevent the loss of
species and habitats. Although not known to occur in the immediate vicinity of the
proposed Project site, impacts on habitat for special status species, including the San
Joaquin kit fox. would be mitigated through the payment of a one-time mitigation fee due
and payable to the City of Bakersfield at the time grading plans are approved or building
permits are issued. The mitigation fee. as previously mentioned above, is currently
$1,240 per acre, although it may be increased in the future to keep pace with inflation.
The mitigation fee will apply to the acres of all vegetation types directly impacted by the
proposed Project
JN 10-103781
52
\..)i\i<{~..~
·c,; leS"
June 20&5 ."
''1
r-.
C..,
r;1:\~AL
___"____..._o__._._<·_._____~____"
Rio Bravo AnnexaUon NO. ~( prOject
GPAlZC No. 0~853
Also. the MBHCP requires certain take avoidance measures for San Joaquin kit fox
dens. Although no fox dens were observed during the site survey. some potential,
favorable areas were located on the Project site. such as surface pipes. It is also
possible that new dens could be excavated or potential burrows could be occupied prior
to construction. Agency guidelines regarding tracking and excavation will be followed to
prevent entrapment of animals in potential dens.
Mitigation Measures 5.9-3a and 5.9-3f of the Final EIR reduce impacts below a level of
significance. The measures are as follows:
5.9-3a During construction, all pipes. culverts or similar structures with a diameter of
four inches or 9reater shall be kept capped to prevent entry of kit fox. If not
capped or otherwise covered. the openings shall be inspected twice daily in the
morning and evening and prior to burial or dosure, to ensure no kit foxes or other
wildlife become entrapped or buried in pipes.
5.9-3b Excavations shall be provided with escape ramps or otherwise be covered to
prevent entrapment, or the site shall otherwise be protected during construction
through deployment of a wildlife exdusion fence. which would eliminate the
possibility of ranging animals from being harmed during construction. Open
excavations shall be checked twice daily, in the morning and evening. to
preclude loss of wildlife from entrapment.
5.9-3c Prior to commencement of construction activities. preconstruction clearance
surveys shall be conducted by a qualified biologist within 60 days of initial ground
disturbance in accordance with the provisions of the MBHCP. Any identified kit
fox dens shall be monitored, excavated, and backfilled in accordance with the
MBHCP. the CDFG. and the USFWS. Survey windows for the San Joaquin kit
fox can occur at anytime throughout the year.
5.9-3d Preconstruction clearance surveys shall be conducted on no more than 50-foot
intervals during the immediately preceding blunt-nosed leopard lizard survey
window, which is occurs in two seasons: 1) between April 15"' and July 15th; and
2) extending between August 1st and September 15"'. Surveys shall occur
accordingly to the USFWS recommendations for survey days for both survey
seasons.
5.9-3e The Project Applicant shall conduct pre-construction surveys prior to ground
disturbance to ensure that no burrowing owls are present on-site and to ensure
avoidance of direct take or accidental entrapment of burrowing owls. If nests are
encountered, use agency-approved buffer zones and avoid nests until the young
have fledged. Additionally, the following mitigation which meets CEQA
requirements, will reduce impacts to this sensitive species to less than
significant:
Occupied burrows shall not be disturbed during the nesting season
(Frebruary 1 through August 31) unless a qualified biologist approved by the
CDFG verifies through noninvasive methods that either: (1) the birds have
not begun egg-laying and Incubation: or (2) that juveniles from the occupied
burrows are foraging independently and are capable of independent
survival.
IN 10-103781
53
'"ilK ..
<~ ~ c-- /.)
.dr lJ'
June 2uv:;) ..f,
:;...
r- 01
Õ {:~.
o"::m\i\l.
_.,--_._-'--'~
GPAlZC No. ~853
5.9-3f The presence of any previously unidentified protected spedes, which are not
addressed in the MBHCP shall be avoided and evaluated by a qualified biologist.
The USFWS and COFG .shall be notified of previously unreported protected
species. My take of protected wildlife shall be reported immediately to the COFG
and USFWS.
Long-Term Impacts
5.9-4 The proposed Project would result in permanent long-tenn impacts to biological
resources compared to existing conditions. Analysis has concluded that no
significant changes in composition or distribution of wildlife woutd occur.
However, implementation of mitigation measures would reduce impacts to less
than significant impacts.
Facts Supoorting Finding
The following impact analysis evaluates long-term implications of the proposed Project
on biological resources.
Future development of the 617 acre Project site would result in the loss of native and
non-native vegetation associations and the wildlife habitat they provide. Both native and
non-native habitats within the Project site may provide nesting, foraging, and denning
opportunities for a wide variety of wildlife spedes. However. non-native habitats
generally provide low quality wildlife habitat. The future removal of native and non-native
habitats within the Project site would result in the loss of small mammals. reptiles.
amphibians, and other animals of slow mobility that are present within the Project area.
More mobile wildlife species now using the Project site would be forced to move into
remaining areas of open space, consequently increasing competition for available
resources in those areas. This situation would result in the loss of individuals within the
wildlife population that cannot successfully compete. The loss of native and non-native
habitats from future on-site development would not result in any substantial reduction of
general wildlife population in the region because a substantial amount of open space is
available adjacent to the Project site. Therefore. these impacts are considered to be less
than significant.
As previously described under the Existing Conditions subsection. no wildlife migration
corridors or wildlife nursery sites were identified during the field reconnaissance for the
Biota Report. Thus, impacts would occur in this regard.
As traffic and occupancy increases with future on-site development of the Project site,
the incremental increase in traffic volumes and associated noise levels on-site and
surrounding areas would increase beyond present levels. However, the northern portion
of the Project site and adjacent open space to the east are currently influenced by
stationary and vehicular noise sources associated with the Rio Bravo Country Club as
well as existing construction activities occurring in the immediate area Because of the
large areas of open space available to the east. south. and west, the introduction of
future residential land uses on-site would result In less than significant noise impacts to
wildlife.
Night lighting would increase due to car headlights and Project-related parking and night
lighting during and after completion of the proposed Project. Lighting associated with car
IN 10-103781
54
Jun.200~'i)Mfÿ
o ú~
~
._ m
A~ r-
'.) <::>
OP::'~,'NPd
KIO tnavo AnneXatlOO NO. ~I t"roJect
GPAlZC No. 04-0853
headlights would not be present throughout the night and most of the light would not
stray onto adjacent properties since night lighting would be designed to reduce spillover
into adjacent areas. Therefore. with implementation of mitigation measures, project-
related night lighting would be considered less than significant.
Mitigation Measure 5.9-4 of the Final EIR reduces impacts below a level of significance.
The measure is as follows:
5.9-4 Lighting shall be shaded or shielded and directed down and away from adjacent
agricultural areas to minimize increased predation of species that may be using
the adjacent agricultural fields. Refer to Section 5.5, AESTHETICS. LIGHT AND
GLARE. regarding light spill over and glare mitigation measures
Cumulative Impacts
5.9-5 The proposed Project would result in the cumulative loss of open space
resources within the City. Cumulative projects are mitigated on a project-by-
project basis and in acrordance with applicable local, State, and Federal
requirements including the MBHCP.
Facts SuppartiOQ Findinq
The City of Bakersfield is expanding rapidly in the northwest and northeast with new
residential and associated commercial development being constructed. Cumulative
development within the northeastern portion of Bakersfield would have the potential to
adversely affect area biological resources. Regional loss of native areas is a significant
issue. The Metropolitan Bakersfield area is subject to the provisions of the MBHCP,
thus cumulative impacts have been addressed and are considered mitigable to less than
significant levels.
Mitigation Measure 5.9-5 of the Final EIR reduces impacts below a level of significance.
The measure is as follows:
5.9-5 No mitigation measures beyond compliance with the MBHCP and project specific
mitigation measures are recommended.
CULTURAL RESOURCES
Archaeological Resources
5.10-1 Implementation of Ihe proposed Project may cause a significant impact to
unknown archaeological or historical resources on-site. Implementation of the
recommended mitigation measures would reduce impacts to unknown
archaeological resources to a less than significant level.
Facts SUDpartinq Findinq
No potentially significant cultural resources were identified on-site. Adjacent to the
proposed Project three recorded cultural resources and one reported cultural resource
exists within a half-mile radius and four recorded cultural resources exist within a one-
mile radius. Additionally. no previous studies that involved the Project area were
conducted.
IN 10-103181
55
'" ~ "{'
June 200~ ,,' " ',.9
C: '(j!
>~ <".
t::.:.
'::
KIO tnaVo AnneXaUun nu. -.vI r,uJ4;K.""1,
GPMC No. 04-0853
As indicated above. the Project site is included in an area that was historically inhabited
and important to people during the prehistoric era. It is possible that erosional or
depositional processes have obscured cultural remains that may be present. While it is
unlikely that signifIcant village or habitation sites exist within the area, there is always the
potential, regardless of how remote, that cultural resources may yet be unearthed during
construction.
Ground-<:Jisturbing activities for the Project may involve grading for construction and
excavation. Implementation of the proposed Project therefore has the potential to disturb
or destroy undocumented archaeological or historical resources. Measures such as
proper monitoring of Project grading activities and testing of any resources found as a
result of Project development would reduce potential impacts to undocumented
archaeological resources to less than significant levels (refer to Mitigation Measures
5.10-1a and 5.10-1b).
Mitigation Measures 5.10-1 and 5-10b of the Final EIR reduce impacts below a level of
significance. The measures are as follows:
5.10-1 a If archaeo1ogical resources are discovered during excavation and grading
activities on-site, the contractor shall stop all work and the City shall retain a
qualified archaeologist to evaluate the significance of the finding and
appropriate course of action. Salvage operation requirements pursuant to
Section 15064.5 of the CEQA Guidelines shall be followed and the treatment of
discovered Native American remains shall comply with State codes and
regulations of the Native American Heritage Commission.
5.10-1 b If human remains are discovered as a result of the Project during any earth
removal or disturbance activities, all activity shall cease immediately and the
Kern County Coroner's Office must be notified immediately under state law and
a qualified archaeologist and Native American monitor shall be contacted.
Should the Coroner determine the human remains to be Native American, the
Native American Heritage Commission shall be contacted pursuant to Public
Resources Code Section 5097.98.
Paleontological Resources
5.10-2 Implementation of the proposed Project may cause a significant impact to buried
paleontological resources on-site. Implementation of the recommended
mitigation measures would reduce impacts to unknown paleontological resources
to a less than significant level.
Facts Supportinq Findinq
As previously discussed above, the Project vicinity is immediately underlain by
Quaternary (Holocene and Pleistocene) alluvium and compact sandy loom with small
concentrations of sedimentary. meta-sedimentary and granitic rocks. No vertebrate
fossil localities are known to eXist within the proposed project boundaries. However.
localities nearby from the same sedimentary deposits that occur in the proposed Project
area have found vertebrate fossil remains. Current records at the NHMLAC do not
indicate any recorded fossil localities in the project area. However. based on known
vertebrate fossil occurrences in the contiguous deposits of the Kern River Formation,
excavations in the proposed Project area have a good chance of encountering
. ~K"
June ~~ '. ->:~'"
>-
56
r;,
IN 10-103781
,-.
'J (:)
Ci·,C;¡V/\:,.
........ .....-.- .-...----.-
GPAlZC No. 0+-0853
significant, and perhaps rare, fossil vertebrate remains. Ground-<:Jisturbing activities for
the Project may involve deep grading or excavation. As a precautionary measure, a
qualified paleontologist would be retained to inspect the excavations and resultant spill
soils for the presence of fossil remains. If potentially significant fossil remains are
identified, appropriate paleontological measures would be implemented to salvage the
materials for study at a local institution such as the Buena Vista Museum of Natural
History. Implementation of the recommended mitigation measure would reduce impacts
to a less than significant level.
Mitigation Measure 5.10-2 of the Final EIR reduces impacts below a level of significance.
The measure is as follows:
5.10-2 A qualified paleontologist shall be retained to examine earthwork spoils
generated during construction activities. If paleontological resources are
discovered the contractor shall stop all work and the paleontologist shall evaluate
the significance of the finding and the appropriate course of action.
PUBLIC SERVICES AND UTILITIES
fire Protection
5.11-1 Implementation of the proposed Project will result in the need for additional fire
facilities or personnel. Future development would contribute to the new
development or relocation of an existing fire station to serve the Project site.
Compliance with fire safety standards and requirements would reduce potential
impacts to less than significant levels.
Facts Supportlnq Findinq
Due to the potential increase in urban development beyond existing conditions,
additional demand for fire services may occur with implementàtion of the proposed
Project. The City of Bakersfield Fire Department has not established a ratio of staff to
resident population; however, current fire personnel are at a ratio of 0.79 per 1,000
persons. The Kem County Fire Department operates a ratio of 1.05 fire personnel per
1,000 persons. According to the service ratios of the City Fire Department and the
potential population increase on the Project site, approximately 3.2 additional fire
personnel would be necessary to maintain the current service ratio. The County Fire
Department would need an increase of approximately 4.23 fire personnel. The City of
Bakersfield Fire Department indicated that a future fire station, Number 12, is proposed
to be constructed within the next five years. Therefore, the conditions for approval of
future development on-site may include an increase in both City and County Fire
Department personnel. Additionally, the City Fire Department indicated that they
anticipate the proposed development will contribute to a new station or relocation of an
existing station As a result, the City Fire Department Indicated that they may request a
land dedication (two net acre standard) or a contribution to costs for fire protection in the
Project site ¿rea.
The proposed Project has the potential of having short-term construction-related
impacts. If during construction there is a need to redirect traffic or block access routes
or residential streets, this could result in potential delays to emergency response times
This impact would be temporary and implementation of the provided mitigation
measures pertaining to coordination during construction would reduce impacts to less
IN 10-103781
57
June 200S.::<
v
.~
,.-
Rio Bravo Annexation No. ~7 Project
GPAlZC No. 04-0853
than significant levels (refer to Section 5.5, TRAFFIC AND CIRCULATION). Additionally,
compliance with fire safety standards and requirements such as sprinkler systems, fire
alanns, emergency access and adequate fire flow at public and on-site hydrants would
be required during the plan check process and would reduce impacts to less than
significant levels.
Any development on-site shall be subject to the provisions of the Uniform Fire Code and
local amendments, Trt1e 19, 22, and 27 of the California Safety Code Regulations, the
Bakersfield Municipal Code, and the National Fire Prevention Association Standards.
Mitigation Measures 5.11-1a through 5.11-1e of the Final EIR reduce impacts below a
level of significance. The measures are as follows:
5.11-1 a Future development projects shall be reviewed by the City of Bakersfield Fire
Department Specific Department requirements for access, fire flow, hydrants,
or other fire and life safety requirements shall be addressed at the subsequent
property entitlement phase. .
5.11-1 b Residential projects shall meet fire-flow requirements in accordance with
relevant City building codes and City fire codes.
5.11-1 c Refer to Section 5.6, TRAFFIC AND CIRCULATION, for short-tenn
construction mitigation measures.
5.11-1d Prior to recordation of any subdivision to allow residential development, a
secondary access connection along the Chase Avenue alignment, from
Miramonte to Comanche Drive shall be provided to the satisfaction of the Fire
and Public Works Departments.
5.11-1 e Within the Project site, a minimum of two net acre site for development of a fire
station shall be dedicated to the City. This fire station shall be in the vicinity of
the Chase Avenue/Miramonte Drive intersection. Final site location and timing
will be determined by the Fire Department.
Police Protection
5.11-2 Implementation of the proposed Project will not result in the need for additional
police facilities or personnel. Impacts are reduced to less than significant levels
with compliance with City standards and recommended mitigation measures.
Facts Supportinq Findinq
Construction of the proposed Project would create an increased demand for police
services on the Bakersfield Police Department and the Kern County Sheriffs
Department At build-Dul. the proposed Project may generate a population of 3.875.3
persons. The City of Bakersfield Police Department has a current staffing level of
approximately 1.3 officers per 1,000 residents According to the City of Bakersfield
Police Department. based on the current staff. population of Bakersfield, number of
proposed residential units, and using 3.2 persons per household: the Police Department
would need to be increased by at least one sergeant, five officers, and two non-sworn
personnel to adequately service the development The Bakersfield Police Department
provided several mitigation measures which are safety components fundamental to any
IN 10-103781
58
, i~ ¡..;,z
, ...-9
June 200$ ,~\e."1
-..------.
Rio Bravo Annexation No. 4til Project
GPAlZC No. 0~853
new development. These measures are included in Secüon 5.11.4, MITIGATION
MEASURES, below.
The Kern County Sheriffs Department uses a target-staffing standard of one officer per
1,000 persons (excluding officers assigned to the Civil Division, Detentions Division, and
administrative staff), however the current staffing level is 0.83 persons per 1,000
persons. Therefore, implementation of the proposed Project would result in the need of
3.22 additional officers. The Sheriffs Department indicated that as new housing
devE\lopments are completed, the number of officers required to provide adequate patrol
service will increase accordingly.
The addition of officers, clerical staff, and law enforcement equipment pursuant to
conditions of approval as set forth by the City of Bakersfield would decrease the demand
on existing police services and reduce the significance of impacts to less than significant
levels.
Similar to the fire protection services, the proposed Project has the potential of having
short-term construction related impacts. If during construction, there is a need to
redirect traffic or block access routes or residential streets, this could result in potential
delays to police response times. Furthermore, construction areas may require additional
police monitoring throughout the duraüon of Project construction both during day and
nighttime periods. These impacts would be temporary and implementation of the
provided mitigation measures pertaining to coordination during construction would
reduce impacts to less than significant levels.
Mitigation Measures 5.11-2a and 5.11-2b of the Final EIR reduce impacts below a level
of significance. The measures are as follows:
5.11-2a Several project safety components are fundamental in the development of any
new project. These include, but are not limited to:
· The prevention of visual hindrances in regards to public gathering
locations.
· Planning considerations and elimination of traffic hazards at the Project's
conceptual level.
· Preventing the manufacturing of unintentional isolation locations for
individuals while engaged in recreational andlor conveyance in or around
the project site.
5.11-2b Refer to Section 5.6, TRAFFIC AND CIRCULATION. for short-term
construction mitigation measures.
Schools
5 11-3 Development of the Project site would generate additional students beyond
existing conditions. Impacts are reduced to less than significant with
Implementation of required mitigation measures.
Facts SupportinQ Findinq
According to the Kern County Superintendent of Schools, the proposed Project will not
have any environmental impacts on school facilities. however the proposed residential
s"Kt·.
-" ./.
o "~jJ
.f'
IN 10-103761 59 June 2006 m
~.--: r-
:J <::,
~ OR1¡G1N¡\L'
Rio Bravo Annexation No. 467 Project
GPAlZC No. 0~853
development will have a significant impact on the Bakersfield City and Kern High School
District's facilities.
Current student generation factors for the elementary schools within the Bakersfield City
School District are based on a generation rate of 0.721 students per dwelling unit. The
current student generation factors for the high schools within the Kern High School
District are based on a ratio of 0.2293 students per single-family unit. Table 5.11-1,
GENERATION OF STUDENTS, demonstrates the potential number of students
generated by the proposed Project.
TABLE 5.11-1
Generation of Students
Generation Factors Dwelling Units Total Number of Students
E\ementarylMiddle School 1.300 937.3
0.721 sludentslUnit
High School 1,300 298.09
0.2293 sludentslsinnIA familY Source: letter from the School Dis1ricI Fadlilv ServiceS Office. dated Januarv 31. 2005.
The development of the proposed Project would generate additional students beyond
existing conditions and would require the construction of additional school facilities,
including the construction of new schools to serve the increased population. Both
elementary school and high school facilities would be required. No elementary schools
are currently planned for construction. The Kern County Superintendent of Schools
indicated that the Bakersfield City School District would need to buy land and obtain
funds for new school construction. Additionally, the proposed Project would be required
to contribute development impacts fees to the school districts in accordance with the
below-mentioned standards and policies.
Pursuant to Government Code Sections 65995. 65996, and 65997, mitigation of the
proposed Project's impacts on public school facilities will be limited to the collection of
statutory fees authorized under Education Code Section 17620 and Government Code
Sections 65995, 65995.6, and 65995.7 at the time that building permits are issued.
Currently these fees are set a $2.24 per square foot, and amount subject to adjustment
every two years. However, if either or both districts adopt the alternative fees authorized
by Government Code Sections 65995.6 andlor 6995.7, fees required for this project may
be significantly higher than the current amount.
Mitigation Measure 5.11-3 of the Final EIR reduces impacts below a level of significance.
The measure is as follows:
5.11-3 Pursuant to Government Code Sections 65995, 65996, and 65997. mitigation of
the proposed Project's impacts on public school facilities will be limited to the
collection of statutory fees authorized under Education Code Section 17620 and
Government Code Sections 65995. 65995.6, and 65995 7 at the time that
building permits are issued. Currently these fees are set a $2.14 per square foot.
and amount subject to adjustment every two years. However. If either or both
districts adopt the altemative fees authorized by Government Code Sections
65995.6 and/or 6995.7, fees reqUIred for this project may be significantly higher
than the current amount.
IN 10-103781
60
Ç1, t k "
" F'('.».
c, d·'
June 2005- --1'
I-" r-
'(:J [;-
on:C!~;/-\i
Klo tJravo Annexation NO. 4til t'roJect
GPAlZC No. ~853
Parks and Recreation
5.11-4 Development of the Project site would create additional demand on Parks and
Recreation facilities. Analysis has concluded that although impacts are less
than significant, the Project shall be subject to Bakersfield Municipal Code
requirements for Parks and Recreation facilities.
Facts Supportinq FindinQ
According to the City of Bakersfield Recreation and Parks Department no existing city
maintained parks or recreational facilities are located within Y:,-mile of the Project site.
The applicant shall be required to either dedicate land, or pay in lieu fees pursuant to
Bakersfield Municipal Code 15.80. Additionally, the applicant shall be required to pay a
park improvement fee of $1,275 per dwelling unit. According to the Department of
Recreation and Parks. it is likely that dedication of land for a neighborhood park will be
recommended for the subject site. A final decision to dedicate land or pay ¡n-lieu fees
will be made by the Bakersfield Planning Commission with approval of the tentative tract
map. The proposed Project shall be required to be annexed into the Specific Parks and
Trails Plan for Northeast Bakersfield to guide park and trail provision and development.
Mitigation Measure 5.11-4 of the Final EIR reduces impacts below a level of significance.
The measure is as follows:
5.11-4 In accordance with an ordinance of the City of Bakersfield, land must be
dedicated for park uses by the developer of new residential subdivision projects
at a standard of 2.5 acres per 1,000 persons. and the developer must pay park
development fees. Location and timing of park facilities to be detennined by the
City of Bakersfield.
Water Resources
5.11-5 Implementation of the proposed Project would not require the expansion of
existing water distribution or supply facilities within the project area. Incorporation
of mitigation measures would reduce impacts to less than significant.
Facts SupoortiOQ Findinq
The Water Supply Assessment Report for Development Project in Section 23, T29S,
R29S in Northeast Bakersfield, California concluded that the proposed Project would
result in the demand of approximately 943,910 gallons per day or 655 gpm. The
following Table, 5.11-2 PROJECTED URBAN WATER DEMAND, illustrates the
anticipated water use within the Project site upon buildout. The domestic water demand
is calculated based upon an average daily use of 205 gallons per capita per day (gpcd),
an average of 3.5 persons per single family residential unit, and a total of 1,300 units.
For the proposed park/open space area is based on an area of five acres a usage of 2.5
ft/yr, and a total of 235,851 gallons per acre-foot.
Cal Water's per capita water usage In the Bakersfield District is 352 gallons/personlday
for the year 2002. However. for the purposes of Water Supply Assessment for the
proposed Project. it was assumed that water conservation measures will be incorporated
into the residential units, therefore the average per capita consumption rate will be closer
IN 10-103781
81
,,(V.
~ \,~'¡'-'\'>?p
June 2495 -:0'
1--_ r11
.._ r'··
Ù (:)
(;r1:CI~;ÞJ.
1'\10 DlèIIVU I"UUn:IIAdU""I'.V........' ..-.....J-.n..\
GPAlZC No. Q4.0853
to the City of Bakersfield's demand, which in 2002 was 205 gallons per day.
Similar to the residential usage rates. the parklopen space demand estimate utilized
1.70 gallons per day rather than the 1.84 gallons/day typical of Gal Water's Bakersfield
District, assuming the usages will be metered and conservation measures will be
incorporated into the design of the project.
In its Water Supply Assessment, Gal Water estimated that water service to residents in
the initially completed residential phase will occur in June 2006. Complete buildout is
estimated to take place over 10 years. For the purposes of the Water Supply
Assessment, it is assumed that the enlore development will be completed and occupied
in June 2016. Gal Water projects an average daily demand of 70.7 million gallons/day
for 2006. Cal Water's estimated average daily demand for 2016 is 80.8 million
gallonslday, so the estimated increase in demand for the 1o-year period is 10.1 million
gallons/day. If the proposed development were fully occupied by June 2016, it would
represent approximately 9.8 percent of the projected increase in forecasted water
demand over the next 10 years leaving 90.2 percent for other projected and general
growth within the Bakersfield District
Gal Water schedules preparation of plans, designs. and construction of new surface
water treatment plants. wells. and related distribution and storage facilities so as to
increase supply capacity ahead of projected demand growth. This planning process
provides the means to maintain excess supply capacity to accommodate more rapid
growth than anticipated and dry weather periods that might result in temporary declines
in the groundwater table level and surface water sources. Typically the goal for supply
capacity in Bakersfield is to accommodate the maximum day demand (1.84 times the
average) with additional capacity reserve to cover the loss of the single largest source
supplying water.
Gal Water will provide the Applicant with a will serve letter indicating its intention to
provide water services to future residents of the Project site. The infrastructure required
for a complete water system will include transmission lines, a distribution system. and
meters and meter reading system. Cal Water will be responsible for compliance with
state and city standards with respect to pipe sizes, fire flows. equipment, materials.
valves. appurtenances, and interties with Gal Water's Bakersfield system. Gal Water's
Bakersfield District supported by its engineering. water quality, and customer's service
staff in San Jose. will be responsible for providing ongoing operations and maintenance
services for the constructed water facilities.
The Water Suppty Assessment concluded that for a 20 year future planning period, the
Bakersfield District has more than adequate water supplies to meet the project demands
associated with the proposed Project in addition to those of its existing customers and
other anticipated future uses under normal, single dry year, and multiple dry year
conditions. Therefore, a less than significant impact would occur in this regard with
implementation of mitigation measures
Mltigallon Measure 5.11-5 of the Final EIR reduces impacts below a level of significance
The measure IS as follows:
5.11-5 Prior to filing a final tract or parcel map. the developerlowner shall record a
covenant for each lot in the subdivision that prohibits the export of groundwater
from the subdivision except by the water purveyor that is serving the
IN 10-103781
82
,~,k!'í ~.
June ~5· '¡-'~;J'
-<'
III
,.,
_" 1:::1
.; 'N:~L
Rio Bravo Annexauon ....0. <1M)1 t''r0JeC1.
GPAJZC No. 04-0853
subdivision. Additionally, the developerlowner shall pay fees for inspection of
installation of water facilities and Water Availability Fees. Payment of fees
shall be made to California Water Service on a pro-rata basis prior to final
acceptance and recordation of each phase of the Project, based on the
percentage of the gross acreage contained in the particular phase to be
accepted and recorded, as compared with the local gross acreage within the
entire Project. All water main, service connections, and fire hydrants shall be
installed by the developer and dedicated to the California Water Service. Plans
and specifications for such water mains and appurtenances shall be prepared
by andlor approval of plans for installation shall be by the California Water
Service. All improvements must be installed or bonded for prior to the
California Water Service issuing a letter guaranteeing a water supply.
Solid Waste/Landfills
5.11-7 Implementation 01 the proposed Project would not result in increased demand
for solid waste services. Short-term construction impacts resulting from
construction debris would increase solid waste on a temporary duration. With
implementation of applicable recyding programs, impacts would be reduced to
less than significant levels.
Facts SupportillQ Findinq
Implementation of the proposed Project would not result in the increased demand for
solid waste services. The Project will generate construction debris on a short-term
temporary basis during construction. The Project also proposes a limited amount of
deconstruction to accommodate the proposed improvements and the anticipated
deconstruction materials and raw construction debris are not anticipated to be
significant. The County charges up to $36 per ton fee at landfills for disposal of
construction waste. Recycling of construction debris would reduce potential waste to
landfills in the County and contribute to the recycling goals set forth by the City of
Bakersfield and AB 939. Upon completion of the annexation, the Project site will be
automatically induded in the Bakersfield UniverSal Collection Area. Project
implementation would not adversely impact existing landfill capacities.
Mitigation Measure 5.11-7 of the Final EIR reduces impacts below a level of significance.
The measure is as follows:
5.11-7 All construction debris and construction-related debris shall be separated into
recydable and non-recyclable items to the greatest extent possible. All
recydable debris shall be transported to appropriate recycling facilities so as to
reduce waste disposed of at County landfills. To the maximum extent possible,
recyclable materials and malerials consistent with the waste-reducing goals of
the City shall be used for all aspects of construction.
VIII. FINDING REGARDING INFEASIBILITY OF MITIGATION MEASURES FOR
SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS
The City of Bakersfield, having reviewed and considered the information contained in the Final
EIR. appendices to .the Final EIR and the administrative record. finds. pursuant to Public
Resources Code 21081 (a)(3) and CEOA Guidelines 15091 (a)(3) thaI (i), that specific
economic, legal, social. technological, or other considerations, make infeasible the mitigation
IN 10-103781
63
June~5K(y
() (p
. -"(\
:-,.
rï
,..
') 0
'îr. "-"'0:ÞJ,
Rio Bravo Annexation No. 461 Project
GP AJZC No. 04-0853
measures identified in the Final EIR and, therefore, the Project will cause significant
unavoidable impacts in the category of Aesthetics, Light and Glare.
AESTHETICS, LIGHT, AND GLARE
Long-Term Aesthetic Impacts
On-Site
5.2-2 Project implementation would permanently alter views of and across the Project
site. The permanent alteration of the site would result in a significant and
unavoidable long-term aesthetic impact.
Facts Supportinq Findinq
The visual analysis of any project must consider the actual visual quality of the area,
which, in the Project area, is defined by the open space value and the area's rural
characteristic. Another factor is visual sensitivity, which is defined by the public views of
the Project. the number of viewers and the duration of the view. Therefore. a project
located on a site that has both high visual quality and high visual sensitivity would have
the most significant visual impact.
According to the Metropolitan Bakersfield General Plan, the Project site is located in an
area of scenic resources due to the scenic view sheds, vantage points, and scenic views
from surrounding highways. The Project site consists of hilly terrain with topographic
relief features, including foothills and bluffs. The area to the north and east of the
proposed Project site is developed recreational and residential, and industrial uses,
respectively. These uses have visual access to the surrounding scenic areas.
The future potential development of the Project site would permanently alter the
topography and nature of the project area. Grading would be required to provide a
circulation system and buildable areas would alter the current landforms. These
potential future alterations are permanent and would continue throughout the life of any
future projects.
Several policies have been set forth in the Bakersfield Municipal Code, Chapter 17,
Hillside Development that provide guidelines to development to be sensitive to the
topography of the hillside areas of Bakersfield. The purpose of Chapter 17 is to define
and implement goals and policies of the Metropolitan Bakersfield General Plan as they
relate to the preservation and maintenance of hillsides as a scenic resource and to
protect the general public from the threat of wildfires. The regulations apply to all
projects related to grading, building permits, parcel maps, tentative tract maps,
conditional use permits, zone changes, and general plan amendments. Section
17.66.030 indicates that the maximum grade of streets, public or private, and other
access easements shall be determined In accordance with a Policy on Geometric
Design of Highways and Streets, American Association of State Highway and
Transportalton Officials 1990, for design of maximum grades for ar1erials, collectors. and
local streets. Seclton 17.66.040 requires that any cut or fill slopes exceeding ten feet in
height which are exposed to public views shall be landform graded. This creates an
ultimate appearance that will resemble the naturat slope. Additionally. Section
17.66.180 requires that all grading be contoured to conform to the natural slopes to the
greatest degree possible.
IN 10-103781
84
~r·_;I:,c",
June200~ '^.'"
_J '~,
)...
Pl
-~ r-
".).... t.::J
( )P::~'f'.:þ,L
f\.IU OldYU ""II'''''''.II.IUII "'V......,. rluJ.,....'
GP AIZC No. 04-0853
It is important to note that no site development is proposed at this time. However, it is
anticipated that the annexation will ultimately result in the development of 1,300
residential units. Future on-site residential developments would be required to undergo
environmental and design review on a site-specific, project basis to ensure compliance
with code requirements in areas of topographical relief and to ensure visual compatibility
and enhancement with the surrounding environment. Applicable requirements indude
the Hillside Management Ordinance that regulates development in areas of excessive
slopes and applicable goals and policies of the Metropolitan Bakersfield General Plan.
On-site grading would be necessary for primary access roads into the Project area,
remedial grading, and construction of residential uses. The landform alteration impacts
resulting from on-site grading for roads and residences are considered significant even
with the imposition of mitigation measures and adherence to the implementing policies
and actions in the Hillside Management Ordinance,
Cumulative Impacts
5.5-5
Project development, together with cumulative projects, may result in greater
urbanization and the loss of views in undeveloped areas of the northeast
portion of the City of Bakersfield. Analysis has concluded that cumulative
development within northeast Bakersfield ronstitutes a significant and
unavoidable aesthetic impact
Facts SUPDOrtinQ FindinQ
Construction of currently approved and pending projects in the Project vicinity would
permanently alter the nature and appearance of the area through loss of hillsides and
open space areas. As development occurs throughout the Project area, residents and
visitors in the area would notice the visual effects of urbanization. The significance of
these visuaVaesthetic changes is difficult to detennine since aesthetic value is
subjectively detennined and potential impacts are site specific. Security and street
lighting would introduce light and glare potential to the area. Impacts are typically
mitigated separately for each project. Cumulative impacts can be mitigated to less than
significant levels with the use of building materials that are consistent with the general
character of the area, landscaping design, and proper lighting techniques to direct light
on-site and away from adjacent properties,
Page 4.2-14 of the Metropolitan Bakersfield General Plan EIR states that development in
accordance with the General Plan would ronvert existing open space to urban uses,
resulting in the incremental loss of open space within Bakersfield. This conversion was
considered an unavoidable adverse impact, for which a statement of overriding
considerations was adopted, The R-EA (Resource-Extensive Agriculture) designation in
effect at the time the General Plan EIR was certified, The Project proposes an
amendment to the General Plan to allow development of urban uses on the site. As
such, the Project, together with cumulative development in northeastern Bakersfield,
would exceed the General Plan EIR assumptions and conclusions and would contribute
additional impacts not previously anticipated in the General Plan EIR. This exceedance
constitutes a significant and unavoidable cumulative impact related to aesthetics.i
IN 10-103781
65
. 'oOAKr",
June 2005 Ç) ~r
"
Rio Bravo Annexation No. 4ti7 Project
GP AJZC No. 04-0853
IX. FINDING REGARDING ALTERNATIVES
The City of Bakersfield, having reviewed and considered the information contained in the Final
EIR, appendices to the Final EIR and the administrative record, finds, pursuant to Public
Resources Code 21081 (a)(3) and CEOA Guidelines 15091 (a)(3) that (i) the Final EIR
considers a reasonable range of project alternatives and mitigation measures and (ii) specific
economic, location and/or other considerations make infeasible the alternatives as follows:
No Project Alternative
The No Project Alternative undertakes no residential. commercial, or industrial
improvements within the Project site This Alternative serves as the baseline against
which to evaluate the effects of the proposed Project and other project Alternatives. The
No Project Alternative would produce no immediate environmental impacts;
consequently. no mitigation would be required.
The No Project Alternative would not result in any of the environmental impacts
associated with the construction and development of the proposed Project. This
Alternative would avoid potential impacts resulting from alteration of the Project site's
physical characteristics and construction of residential, commercial, and industrial
structures and impervious surfaces. Maintaining the Project site in its existing condition
would also eliminate potential impacts to agriculture, public health and safety, aesthetics,
traffic and. circulation, noise. air quality, biological resources, any unknown cultural
resources, and public services and utilities.
Implementation of the No Project Alternative would avoid the environmental impacts
identified for the proposed Project. however, this Alternative would not preclude the
potential for development of the Project site at some future date. The development of
this site and the surrounding areas has been envisioned in local and regional planning
documents. Given the level of existing and planned development in southwest
Bakersfield. it may be anticipated that the development of the Project site would be
proposed for construction at a future date.
The No Project Alternative was rejected as not being environmentally superior to the
proposed Project. The No Project Alternative does not meet the Project objectives. This
Alternative would also be inconsistent with the General Plans for the City of Bakersfield
and County of Kern.
"No Project/Existing General Plan and Zoning Designations" Alternative
The "No ProjecUExisting General Plan and Zoning Designations" Alternative assumes
that the proposed annexation. GPA and zone change would not be implemented and the
existing on-site land use designation would remain. Although this alternative would allow
for the development of approximately 29 single-family dwelling units (maximum 1.0
dwelling unit per 20 acres) (approximately 28.66 acres are deemed undevelopable due
to topographic constraints), pursuant to §15126(dX4) of the State CEOA Guidelines, this
alternative scenario is focused on the existing conditions. as well as what would be
"reasonably" expected to occur in the foreseeable future if the Project were not
approved. based on current plans and consistent with available infrastructure.
This Alternative. when compared to the proposed Project. would not require a General
Plan Amendment or zone change. This Alternative would be consistent with land uses
IN 10-103781
88
I 'ò/'<h¿~ý
June 20ò5 '(~,
>-- .._e'
\---- p.:'
õ (OJ
OP/"'N/\L
KIO uravo Annexation ....0. ~I t"roJect
GPNZC No. 04-0853
identified in the General Plan and Zoning Ordinance. and would not modify the existing
City corporate boundaries. Implementation of this Alternative would substantially reduce
the number of dwelling units; therefore. the development intensity and subsequent land
use impacts would be less when compared to the proposed Project.
Although implementation of the "No ProjectlExisting General Plan and Zoning
Designations" Alternative would be consistent with the existing General Plan designation
for the Project site and would result in a decrease in impacts related to all environmental
issue areas. the significant reduction in residential units would only partially meet the
stated Project objectives. Therefore, this alternative has been rejected from further
consideration.
"Estate/Residential Densities" Alternative
Under the "EstatelResidential Densities" Alternative, the Project site would be developed
to the maximum intensity allowed under the General Plan Estate/Residential land use
designation (maximum 1.0 dwelling unit per net acre). Approximately 28.66 acres are
deemed undevelopable due to topographic constraints. Development in accordance
with this land use designation would result in the construction of 588 single-family
dwelling units.
The "Estate/Residential Densities" Alternative would decrease impacts, except on
geologic and seismic hazards; public health and safety; aesthetics, light. and glare; and
cultural resources. However, because of the significant reduction in residential units, the
"Estate/Residential Densities" Alternative would only partially meel the Project
objectives. Thus, this Alternative was rejected.
"Alternative Site" Alternative
To respond to the criteria for lessening the effects in comparison to those of the Project,
three nearby sites have been identified. The sites would be consistent with the Project
objectives and with the Metropolitan Bakersfield General Plan goals and policies for
efficient and orderly development. As shown on Figure 7-1 ALTERNATIVE PROJECT
SITE LOCATIONS. these sites are:
. Alternative Site Location 1: Section 21, located west of the proposed Project
site and Comanche Drive, near the SR-1781SR-184 junction.
Alternative Site Location 2: Section 29, located southwest of the proposed
Project, south of SR-184.
. Alternative Site Location 3: Section 19, located west of the proposed Project
site, south of SR-178 and north of SR-184.
Based on the above criteria. there are no contiguous parcels within the site vicinity of
equal or greater size suitable for the proposed Project. The three alternative sites do not
offer the topographical variations present on the proposed Project Site 1 has
significantly lowers elevations compared with the proposed Project location and does not
provide the rolling hills and terrains uniquely characterized by the proposed Project site
Additionally the OS land use designation indicates a floodplain and Resource
Management Area and the R-MP designation indicates areas that contain producing. or
potentially productive petroleum fields and mineral deposits areas.
IN 10-103781
67
June 2005", M, .
:;" '.1,1
C)
'·f\
-'.
1- '-)j
<..) ()
(\;·~:(',;,p.;\i.·
Rio Bravo Annexation NO. 4ö7 PrOject
GP AlZC No. 04-0853
Site 2 does not offer favorable topographical variations present on the proposed Project.
Additionally, two extensive drainages dissect this alternative site from the north and
cornbine into ¡j single drainage towards the southern portion of the site. Residential
developrnent of the magnitude proposed by the Project would not be feasible within or
near the OS designation. This alternative site also includes land use designation P
which indicates publicly owned facilities such as government buildings, hospitals. public
utilities, cemeteries, sewage treatment plants, and waste disposal sites.
Site 3 is lower in elevation than the Project site and does not provide similar
development patterns consistent with those intended by the proposed Project site. The
entire southern portion of this alternative site consists of numerous small drainages that
slope gradually towards the south. Furthermore, a small knoll is located to the north
central portion of the site, unevenly distributing the balance of developable land.
Environmentally Superior Alternative
The purpose of the Alternatives evaluation is to develop Project Alternatives that reduce
or eliminate signifICant impacts. CEQA Section 15126(d){2) indicates that. if the "No
ProjectlNo Development" Alternative is the -Environmentally Superior" Alternative, then
the EIR shall also identify an Environmentally Superior Alternative among the other
Alternatives in this case. The "No projectlNo Development- Alternative (Existing
Conditions) is the environmentally superior Alternative, as it would not result in
environmental impacts associated with construction. However, the "No ProjecllNo
Development" Alternative would not satisfy the Project's objectives.
The "No ProjecllExisting General Plan and Zoning Designations" Alternative would allow
buildout of the Project area under the existing general plan and zoning designations.
Although this alternative results in reduced environmental impacts while allowing partial
development of the site, this alternative does not entirely fulfill the Project's stated
objectives and is therefore rejected as an environmentally superior alternative.
The "Alternative Site" Alternative would create impacts similar to those of the proposed
Project. Although most of the City's objectives would be achieved, the three Alternative
sites lack the topographic and elevation needed to fulfill the intent and purpose of the
proposed Project and, in some cases, the existing land use designations do not reflect a
favorable site for residential development of the magnitude proposed by the Project.
The " EstatelResidential Densitý Alternative would have similar adverse impacts on
public health and safety: aesthetics, light and glare; and cultural resources. However,
this Alternative would have lesser impacts on land use. geology and soils, hydrology and
water Quality, traffic and circulation, noise, air Quality. biological resources, and public
services and utilities would be reduced, while meeting the proposed Project's objectives
to some degree.
Based on the reasons stated above. the proposed Project is the environmentally
superior Alternative because no other Alternative feasibly achieves the objectives of the
Project and avoids the potentially siglllficant Impacts of the Project.
IN 10-103781
68
6~Kf,ý
X. ·,C
June 200:10 ."".
~
r1
r
I-ZJc,r""
\:t;-'
Rio Bravo Annexation No_ 467 Project
GP/IIZC No. 04-0853
STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
Pursuant to Section 15093 of the CEQA Guidelines, decision-makers are required to balance the
benefits of a project against its unavoidable environmental risks in determining whether to
approve a project. In the event the benefits of a project outweigh the unavoidable adverse
effects, the adverse environmental effects may be considered "acceptable-. The CEQA
Guidelines require that, when a public agency allows for the occurrence of significant effects
which are identified in the Final EIR but are not at least substantially mitigated, the agency shall
state in writing the specific reasons the action was supported. Any statement of overriding
considerattons should be included in the record of project approval and should be mentioned in
the Notice of Determination.
To the extent the significant effects of the project are not avoided or substantially lessened to a
level of insignificance, the City of Bakersfield, having reviewed and considered the information
contained in the Final Environmental Impact Report for the project, and having reviewed and
considered the information contained in the public record, and having balanced the benefits of the
project against the unavoidable effects which remain. finds that such unmitigated effects to be
acceptable in consideration of the following overriding considerations discussion.
The City finds that all feasible mitigation measures have been imposed to lessen project impacts
to less than significant, and furthermore, that alternatives to the project are infeasible because
they have greater environmental impacts, do not provide the benefits of the project, or are
otherwise socially or economically infeasible as fully described in the project findings.
The environmental analysis undertaken for the Rio Bravo Annexation Project indicated the Project
would result in contributions to aesthetic (long-term and cumulative) impacts that would represent
a significant adverse environmental effect on a project basis.
The City of Bakersfield, as Lead Agency and decision-maker for the Project, has reviewed and
considered the information contained in both the Draft and Final EIRs prepared for Rio Bravo
Annexation Project and the public record. The project benefits include the following:
Accommodate anticipated housing demand within the City of Bakersfield's SOl
through the orderly expansion of its boundaries.
Create a variety of housing opportunities In an area of
varied terrain. views and open space.
Provide a residential community that is compatible with existing and planned land
uses in the area.
Provide a local street network that contributes to the quality and safety of
residential neighbomoods.
The Lead Agency makes the following finding, pursuant to Section 15093 of the CEQA
Guidelines, with regard to the Statement of Overriding Considerations for the Rio Bravo
Annexation Project:
California Administrative Code. 7//1e 14, Section 15093(a) states· "If /lIe benefits of a
proposed project outweigh the unavoidable adverse environmental effects, the adverse
environmental effects may be considered ·acceptable'." Based on the above discussion
and on the evidence presented, Ihe City of Bakersfield therefore finds that the benefits of
the proposed project outweigh the adverse aesthetic, light. and glare (long-term and
cumulative) impacts associated with Rio Bravo Annexation Project, which cannot be
eliminated or reduced to a level less than significant.
JN 10-103781
69
,,-!
"-
June 2005 r- en
_" r·'
c) C:-,
0n::~YAL .
EXHIBIT C
MITIGATION MONITORING AND
REPORTING CHECKLIST
<t L]/ ..
«'D' \Ç/,)
() .,~,
ò-
,___ P1
r-
t,) l"')
nr:'("¡-.;.\:
3
CO') c
It) l- .!
00 I/) ii
0 ::¡ E
, ~ 0
~
0 (.) (.)
(.)~ w 'õ
J: c
~O (.) 0
C) :¡::¡
c..c.. z J
cd~ ¡:: ~
.¡:
.....1- 0:: ~
<Ø(.) 0
"":< c..
w
oc.. 0::
z::E Q
z
z~ <
0< C)
-I-
~ffi z
æ
0
w::E !::
Zz z
zO 0
<0::: :E
0> z
~ffi 0
¡::
<
ŒI C)
0 I-
ï:2 :E
I!!
:I
I/)
III
CD
:E
c
0
:¡::¡
III
CI
:2
:E
-
.!!
:¡¡
u
..
.c
U
Q
c:
1:
o
a.
..
II::
..,
c:
<II
Q
c:
'C
S
C
o
:I!
c:
o
;:I
<II
Q
;:I
i
>. ~ >. ¡,:,
L>
'C .c .c
~ 'C 'C 'C
~ ~ ~
e e e e
0. 0. 0. 0.
0. " 0. " 0. c: 0.
<C 0 <C 0 <C 0 <C
£i!~£!š§~Ø~EÕ~ ~~~liisS i~~e~s ëœB~
SLit:(U-c=a:lëi5.Qwoecø __~¿:ë:S-gãi"2t5 >-Um.at'Uö Q)E~5_
Q.~ .., co> ð_ C S U) ....,._.- - ..... CD CD ø,2·- 0'''-
,,¡;;; u)':::.J:: > C; CU Q. Q.:J C:"o;:: ~ c: ::s = "'0 "_ .)¡¡f! Q)'- fA - o._:J (t
~E Cft) CDZZ ~ m~C~e(Ur::~ =0 _0. Oø~~
.e8ro.~Q)>-E~ -~r::C1)ª -t:$~ ~i5.sæ !_-æg'~(ij "'i~._UJ C»
VJ £:=E"C.9"CCD I-O=C: °S-::tJë .EeI) =OC-c > œ....,g- T'""
:=~ ~.~Ø2=E '~Om CDr::e~:Jr::E- ('Q <U:J)2 ~œ~r:: -
c: 'So.", U Õn- 'CO:J.__m IV .r:.c:~"C c.. ~o~ 0
~~~ ~CD~£=~<~"C eUro!~~e~ ø.2~ w~ ~~"C= -
o..r:. CD _ .J::. .S "3 U,I... CD Ó C) c: r:: CD 0) t/) ~ õ o"C t: :J.r:. a. Q)
rtJ r:: .- CD - :J 15 >. CD :t::' r:: - CD.:ac CD 0> e ro ...: Q.~:= CD Q. '- "C... - ca C)
O>t:"ë>i..cõ ~O'j- >.rJ)1iS'E e"ã. -g'C~..c:~=~ Q.EQ) 92 o1ij.!2õ >.2 "5 o~ C'C
"8.c - :> --«I -...... "" .......+:;:J:::J.Q....-;;;;I- a..
=ë WeD (I) 0. >Q)-o m - üctlC>U)c:.....cuu'C I 0 "C~ U Iii
~e~¡s~~~~~~~!~ ¡1~Z~~.~~~~:~§Ji Bgl~ g
0~-t0ø ~u~ø~ c -øro_øØ~~wro~b ~- _>~ N
-o~(]o~I,;..æ~oc:uQ)Õ~ ~'C~O~~0~ e-=ø~CI °og. W
II) :JøQ):¡:-'- ~c co- "'O:o-uo..c.o en =øQ) Z
flQ)u~~~'=Õ.EVJ~~li? 'S P c»~-g~~a)~~~>.-J9 ('Q_5c6~-§tIJ:5 ::>
¡Þg!E_~Q). -"'t:]Wø"'O..cg> g.=(U,...,CI):Õ-c~="'O{/)=c:~~ea..c. .,
" ro ~ ~ 16 E ø 8 f6 5 ~ f6 Q):e; oS ~ ~ yo- E ëii -g.~ -:ë ~ 8.~ 0 ~ E ~ õ ~~ C")
~~Oc ~ ~ ~ 'CQ) _ø:;)1,;. øroõ...cJ9~O{/) ~Q)~ ~ ~
~ø coS'C.9 c~ .:;)0) =1,;.,S,æ.eo E_Ø~1ii {/)~ moø~ ~
,'- 0) c: ttI 'C c: - 0) "'0 Õ ë e 5 c ~"'O a. en 0 ro Q) E J:? en ~ - õ:5 Q) ~
.9i~~~f6~i~~£,æs'C ~~8~~~~ü~~8~~~o~.9~~ 00
I,;.ro.eml,;.o.°c~5S:;)&3õ!>-~ o8mue~5¿ ~ Q),2ØS£!! ëS=c Q
O P{/)CI) 0 >(1)-0 ¡:;m CC_I,;.-O Q)'Cc.ø I,;. .- _0::
~~=Q)a.~Q)eco ~~E Q)ø~_~øc~m CVJ ~o ~øêi
~~~.~coe:5a..~ ~Rø~~~î~i~iBe~~m .õ~-~Æ:5~~ ~
~ 0) ID Q) en c c: E ts e: 0) Q) {/) C)..c t- co Q) co "'0 ~ ..c: 1iæ B ~' "s k
.c£!~F~"~-eieß~~~U~FE~~õ~~.c!~C:~~C:<II "vW
yo- CD _ c :P .þ "2:::J :;) -- ø (I) 'C .- yo- :ø (þ - ~ Q) _ Q) U) CJ - en_ E CO ('I) - m -.". .-J
~> m5Sc:¡=~~~c:ic:~~"'O~e~~~c:~~c~~2..ca~~~ 0<
~~££~B:::JfB~~8Emu~f6~~ð,æe8e~!w~eni~~~~~ ~
_ u.
o
(¡'--
-
.!!
:¡¡¡
u
..
.c
C (.)
0 ...
üi c
'S; i!
0
Õ ...
01 ~
C 'C
'6 c
co
":¡ ...
c
III 'I:
£
ë
0
:Ii
c
0
CI> i
u ...
c .,
.!!! 01 :¡¡
ã. c
'C
E :
0
0 c
'õ "51
c
c w
0 u
~ ~
¡¡:: I-
-¡:
CI>
>
en
c
ë
c
as
ii: k ~ i
"C "C "C
" ~ ~
>
e e
c. c. c.
c: c. c c. c: c.
0 « 0 « 0 «
CI>
..
::I
I/)
as
CI>
:æ
c
o
:¡:¡
as
en
E
:E
"'''C''''''''üí~c... ...·~"Cc"-o~,, c""'=~~"'õ~C-~"
c~o~o~~ œ-~ ~~~œo~ ~>c ø~ c u~
=~~ c~~~~~~ ~~~>~~cS ~i~ ~Oœ~OOoo_
- '__".c~E~,,~ "&g,eecoo 8,,1!!"C1~"CR~~0
.eEcï(ij~C):¡gui "5'-= "OEe8:CÞot5>. aCÞ...JlSo_wQc
e 0.-5 w ='e 1ij ~ 0""0 e·- CD CU "0"0 ~ æ c rn 16::::: tV (,) C,) -.....
"C~~ -E~" ~"-,,,c..~_ -~õ£".c"E~~ß
~~5ø~5æ~Srn~ _~ cucu~æo ~¡(þE~~~ª-C~"
_c.~a.~"Cc«w"tí ", ""'.. 'I: 'I:-U~~Óð 0"
-ows:i....a.c ,,~~_!'!£c...ca O"Ec~Cl~~.c..~O~
zwêm~£zoc~w & ~~~rn£~ i ~8"O~cu-€(þ~
_ca.i o.~ ·tí-~~a.~ "'~ccuO'~"OO(þ ~rnrn C,,-c0_cuuc
..... w. ~Q) ~J c-~ ~0E CD O~C-
cZ ~~052~0"(þ æcu £CÞcu"O- ~o-~~-Q) CÞcu>
.(þS~Q)c~~ e£ .~~ (þ~ ~B (þ~s~~~£§cucu
_E£~o~~æ~§~!~ (þx~~~ '~i~ ~~~~~E(þ~~b~E
o > ~cü" m~-ØO ·c cuo_ cuCÞOOrn
o_~ooE ~~"O=cu (þc~CU~~ 0. ~~~CUQ)eN-~ e
(þ~8 ~(þ(þsc~e =o.~~ornc8rn ~_~~~ N~ooB~
gcucCUE~C)~~ØCU ~oEQ)Ø~(þ ~ eo .(þ~!(þ~"O~ø
0::1'- ·XJ::.eS::C/)_Q) en- c .0(1)0 a.. !!lõ....... cl-ro
z~=oro",øc ~£ oo~ ~~_~> ,,"'c">~~=~Øro_ØE
~ro-E >ø ~ - ro~--> ~m ~ 0
roa...c:.E ø8~«,.ç.o c.J~ ~~.!ëõc.J =.o~"O-..c:>-".c. Ö>
oøø œc.J ~ OO~~..c: ~ø..c:= ~ ccø~o~-cc
cœ~ø.c.~~ø .~_ ea.~§ ø~~cea.ro;c _m~~~
æ~£e~rosJ$~ê~a.cc~õë~æã~~ê~~~~~~E~g
~~~~-~lêgj&~~fi8~~i:õ~~gjj!~~~~!IS
~1§~lk~~~~ffiE~i ~j!II§~8;~!lj~~~e~
~~~_~e~~~~~~~c8c~~_oea ~i~~sØ~c~~;
oro~g~a.~œ"O&zøM i~£e.Eð~_~-ê~~~3e-~ø
~~·~§a.m~æøEø£Mœe1>-ëeø!~~~ø~~~~·~~~~
e£~c.J~£øø~~=£~=w"O~8~£5~ø~~~~~~wroø=
<D C c:: Q)-
£; -J!!'C'"
i~~:~
>- . â) ~:i: c::
.c ¡ 'ã.Jõ ~
.si= E.t! -~
0~:Q 8<~Q)
c. fÞ CD 0 I;::
e§.8£;~~
0.;;=_ ~
o.mmO~('O
ca "'i "'.sa¡
"Oe_~a.~
CD~5~.cca.c
EU)-- -
15 Q)OE&.0õ
~ G) Õ c."
0. ~ "0 -= .2 c c::~ ~
fI) 0 Oil;: CD to co 0
=a +.r~~~~~a:N
"0 c ~ "C co C)
c: G).s c CD 0 .~
'" .5 R !!! 'is "'1!! .£
Co m~(6 CI)Q).c
,g gC.i§£;~5
g!.2>~~g~~(!)O
r¡:=tpCDC.a~ ë
x(Jcõ.c"""~Q)
w.!!!o :glLgõ;E
ca "" c.
=~.2
NO. Q) ~
.bE"'>
..-;8Æ8
.s
,¡;
II!:
o
-ë
Æ
ï~
"
c.
ca
-
"
.
. .
'"
~
-
o
N
"
...
"
a.
.n-
o
o
N
W
Z
:::>
....,
""
..
o
>
'"
m
o
ir
I
~
wí' i\~i'
~ ;Jr" '~<~e,
'u::
":"
'.:-"
rr
~
.!!
:;;¡
u
..
.c
C 0
0 '"
,ii c
'> t:
0
Õ CL
..
CI a:
c "
'6 c
It
'S '"
c
ID ;:
0
~
ë
0
::Ii
c
0
II> =
It
() '"
c =
.!!! CI ~
ii c
.¡:
E II>
0 CI>
() c
'51
'õ c
c w
0 u >.
~ IE .c
I! ~
I;: I-
.¡: e
II> a.
> a. c
<{ 0
CI
c
ë
c
ca
ã: >. >.
.c .c
"0 "0
( ) Q)
> >
e e
a. a.
c a. c: a. c
0 <{ 0 <{ 0
~
:J
II)
ca
II>
::¡;
C
o
i
CI
E
:E
~ øW~Ø=O=NOØØOO O~øø~~ø~~œ~= ø~~~~~Õ~Cj-jØC
co .Qœc:cC¡::-Q) -CD"'-. EC:~CD~.-Q)..cC.r.<JCtI ~_CC:CD~ _0 .-
. ~CtI ~~~_~ c: (tIftlOO ~O ft ~C~ -OCD~~ - ~~
Ijl~I~;~~~li; ~J~~~0~~~i~; ~~!r~:5;1 i~~
¡ ",'58~'B ~£ ~~~~ ij¡.~ '" eg ~~~.~ ~.U t~ '§.9 g] ~~~ :~~~ E.~
<. 310>-«1 i-coJ5f:! c: _,-..c·co.s:;Cc..5CD õ·Q) "C E~>- OC:_CD
CD co:g m è5 e e ~ en s.. =' .!a w æ .e æ c..~ en ~ g. e .e >- CO ~ c.. ~ 6 co -g = >-~ ~ - .~ O"'C
;; -ã.f![q)~~i~g.....~e~ õ.~ õ Q.~"'CQ)~æ6~O)j1:SÕ~~.c1is~o....~
~ i:i~~~~~~!£~~ ~EE~~~~~I:~£~2§ti~1i~~¡~2~:I;
E..c>o~~O) o~(t ~ - ~cnB -êco '§ Q)c~c:~f!~-c: ~~
~ ~1~~~~~rot"'CE~~ ~iCD8~!~Si'u.ê ~.~O)m8g~cnl:~~~-~
:§ _~ Q,.EC)t:Q)ctlc(þ .c 0) .:.::0 .....r:t Q) CDO'-_~ 00CD((I0III::8= c:.
~ ~ð~~_~~~Elctlm$~ ~Æ="C õ."'CQ."'C~o~Eoc:~~>-~ Q. ~mcê~
~ Ø~~e~~c æ~ce> .ro_ roc ~ø~~~' ø_c~2øœc~ sø
"O.cæ~"croæEø~ 2~_~_~",ro~uro~Bs~_oQ)"B~Eœ~rooz~~cæc:oc
"0 :I:c:æ·-- u~~~·- ~o øm c >--o.m - ¡¡::; .-
c~:e c_Q) 1!!"O"'o.e;l-'~Eoø c ~1;)ø"Jø._·-JEo.ø5.Q)-=:·¡e ~~.-:.. ==CEmts
ro '~~~b~ ~_c §roø - œ=__~~ c- - o.c~<øQ)_m 2
"'~.a-Q)~-CDO~ ~roøo "Oõ~~Þ~o.£~oQ)~~õcc~S~~~~.c°~~ØCDc( )~~_
_ <.> '10:::- -;:Þ - c.....~..:::·- 1;)(.) OCOI/).... -"0 _c cø
~~~~~~~~~~¡i~~ro~~~O~o~r~ .~ci~-~¡m~2Q)~~~K~roc8
æ~ ~~~Q)-l/)cQ)~ero~~D ØO~ Eg~oØ~~Oo.E~~1;)Ec~ 3~~
œ ~ .~ §!Æ = ~ ~ ~ ~ q) ~ ~E'~ ~ ~ £:5 ~ c -g ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ - :¡ æ <: 8. C8 ~ ~ i ~ i'~·~ ~
£~~ m ~~.-œ -._......... œtOo œ- Q);::I~ a.øo. ~~C~ ·-ø·ë
~~e~B~~$>~~g~8c~~¡S~~ø~~~~c~tO~i~~1~ &o~~~ø~
c_ø-c"ø~£roR~Ø §o~E ~ c~~ .2 c~.... EQ)-iB~~m E
to! i-_cQ)~ mooQ)~~C Q)~Es~i~b~~$~ °œ ._-Q)~_~_ø~
_ 'j¡¡ '" c j 0 8 '" 5. '* '" -.c;ë g> ~ '" ¡¡ »e -E ~ ij E ?Õ >e S :5 $ '" ~ .~ ~ Æ j :g f! '" I!! ~.:g É. ~
tl~~i~:¡§~il~~~~J~ia.li~!~Q)a.~i~~~~i~~~~~i!~3~
(.) CX).o ~ ~ N ij ü5 ~ '5 ü5 !. ij 8. 5.9 u?:E g-Q ~ 8..5 ëñ:; ª' 8 e 0. u? 8 ä: ~ ij E ~ to æ u. ~ E g'§
._--_.._-",,-~---~._._"-- -.-.--.--.".....- --_..~.-..._._--^--_._,~-,_._------._--.,
'"
~
-
o
M
( )
æ
'"
Il.
.;;
o
o
N
UJ
Z
::J
...,
M
g
'"
à5
o
ã:
I
0::
W
-"
~~I'k,
()'Ü:
>-
,--
()
r··'-···~'~
ï""
-
í .!!!
:¡;¡
"
.,
.c
C 0
0 CD
¡ii C
.:; 'f
c 0
c.
.,
CI II::
C ...
'1:1 C
'"
'S CD
C
III ;:
0
-
c
0
::E
C
0
CII 1ii
(,) CD
C ;:
.!!! CI :Ii
ë. c
·C
E :
0
0 c
'õ '61
c
c w
0 CJ
i IE
(,) I!
¡¡:: ....
"¡:
CII
>
2!
:¡
I/)
'"
CII
:¡;
C
o
i
CI
~
:¡;
CI
c
ï:
c
'"
i5: ;,:, ~ ~ ~ ;,:,
.&> .&>
-g 'C 'C 'C 'C
'" '" " '"
> > > > e
e e e e
a. a. a. a. a.
a. C a. c a. c a. c ~ c
« 0 « 0 « 0 « 0 0
= "'1ij3i!:ï;-'-'C
-.;.Q.s=.cn_CÐI::
:io_cn~g.ãtU
9!]!"'~c3N~
Ctl)C~- "S
ê'C glX)1d'e
.eC1::C1)CD.5:0
c'"8=g,.&>-
8~ .9511
c:c( ).5~()·-.
.-=0. CD -§
...Q).Q:.J::-c_ø
=' "2 en t: c
s.¿'~ 0 Q) CD tn
Õ 0I"C"":g e--
c:... U) Q. In
= "'''' "'= 0 c:
«Ie (Ì)J:ã)::::)r.,..;:
.c. -c en > fI) Q)
U)Q)C(/)g>( )m~
C)~:s a:J._O e--
.S oed'!:! en "E c:
eCC!)C:~Q)'~w
C)G> .'~~~=__
",,¡;-$'5 =~ü
"". 'ill e~:¡:·. '"
cpuêo.o £
c-c0 ucia>
0", .s_~o.&>
.c ~ co...... c:_
(I) Q. a:I (0
",= eõ = >
";'.&> æ "''i::$ ~e
N~-..c:3 . 0
LriG).!-g~~ot'U
õ~~~
_-c-
ijjõí'~ 8
e c"
'C '" '2 .
cu8.j~~
=~C).s.~
",c ~
"C"'C"C; as. >-
mæ$'Es
0- ~ 01ii
a." >
~.c~.s C»
c
= to "C :2"0
oJ:: :a a.:::I
'" "'= E 8
e CI):ë - en
",,,,.s~'"
..c:pU):J'::
._ 00
.J::·~"'o.ca.
-- '"
"0;;: U <D "'"_
~ ctI::c ~o
en i:"¡þ (I) 5
~ »'" ",.-
c::!,o-õí
tV.c.o."Ëëõ
_1:: CD oJ:
4: m.5~·s
.ct5~"'C;j
(t)Q)Q)Q)C
~ 'õ''E 8 $
aria:m~8.
~JB.J:::2 g>~,g
Eüi g>".-
l!!",e~.81ijói
8.::=.s::Eii
",0 5.2,g",>
g'¿'!ji 5'"
Q)CD2 $;:<'0
J::Eü) -(O~c
'\:a.c8E",'"
,. I!! C't:" .
"'C 'E 8.æ ro ~ ~ë
~CDC)cC) '-E"E
.-... c: 0 c: c:
> c"c,_o- CD 0 c..
e",,"''''a.EI!!
0.>"0:::11::0 -
e 13 I!! c
Q)o."O>< .~Q;
..c CD Q)- c_ E
-0ts 00
-_,," '!j 0
~"'C-~~2·501=
'" e e32=_ .J!¡
ø Q) a.">;;: .c rn >=
5>Q):t>~C:16;2
",8'&>"'8.8'C~
g!.:g mõ ",,,õ
'" '" c" '"
~ æ'!...:;·§! ctJ
w'i!"c 'C .Q
.&>"ß~¡ij~
M=-.9·-" "-~
. o1ijo.Et:m
~,-.cm=«I.c
100ctJ~m.cCJo.
cti«l-gen'2'cLæ
~iJ"= ~Ü(l) .
'> 2_.9J: æ
~~c»o·_ŒlCDQ)
(.) CD t:: "'== J:: >-
(l iÕ_ ctJ 0..:;: en
,..:::::JcocEeno.c
...~.- 0 ..r.-'"
.2 c'1§o¡¡; "'" 11>-
ts o.-.>.&>.c:!'''
20 ",_-0°
... CDÕ a.~1ij·3"O"6>
~.Q i·c :;,
8 ~ ~Š ~ ~ ~~
õctJ~ .æ12,:>Q)
r/J .c.....oL..E
c>- :t:::)( CJ ::J._
,,!!¡ 0,. '" 0(1) >.
E,-<D .¡;co t::
Q):;' œ::::cu>ttI
(,)ctJc{.)':'::·_~-
CQ)'-C ~ co
Q)(,)J::«I~CD '-
EC~"Eœ=cnB
EI!!"'o!5~:Jo
8'" "co °
~~~~~£ic
0" 0) - co
"'cOc ~~(,)
'- 0 0'- ~c c:)(
013"- ««IttlJ2
..:: ..c CD __...
a..2g."OC>~
û)"Ocoa...æI..Lc:
(.) c:~-eu ~o·3
'?8~.2:¡:"'()c-
Ø)mC01i)ŒlQQ)ttI
. ~ :3__ "'== )(.c 0
U'> o..C"'~~ Q)..."""')
.! Q) ~=E ~ CD iG'
=c:~æ=c:
"''' ;¡ n"
1ijc:r.øc......¡:::;r.ø
'5 ~ "E jQ) ~ ~~
~ "'_'&>
cø~= ~'E'-
~~'E~c 08.£1
c:: G) «I..... CD cø
:J 'E Q. ëñ CD (Q l;'
",.-gcl~'C
~1¡1~~f
eì25oo:a-ææ
'" c"c.c
Q)c~~Q)r.ø.š:
õ~~.5¡~r.ø
§e~eN~~
:g ~.5 ~-gæ~
2 'C Õ ca c:
û) S2 ~ r.ø5~ . CDE
c'" è-U')£i
8cQ..c.....It)E
Q) 0 >-.~~..... 8
è:'C'i)i~~e
~E~~~(/)~
~-6~.gæ$~¡¡¡
~ C8 E c:"an ftcn m
'" ._ 'i~(I):J (l
'"
~
-
°
...
'"
'"
'"
11.
on
o
o
N
W
Z
:J
...,
"
~.
'-.,)
.;..
M
..
°
>
co
as
°
iŸ
I
IX:
¡¡¡
'.;.if,"
'«
z
ü:
-
.!!
:¡¡
¥
c .<:
0
0 '"
'; c
.:;: t:
õ &.
tII &!
c ."
'õ c
..
"S '"
c
ED 't:
0
-
ë
0
::E
c
0
.. ~
u '"
c ;¡
.!!! œ 21
Q. c
.¡:
E QI
0 QI
(,) c
'õ '61
c
c W
0 u
~ ~
¡¡:: I-
.¡:
~
..
...
:I
tJ
OS
..
:¡;
c
o
~
œ
:¡:¡
~
œ
c
'2
c
OS
õ:
>-
.c
'0
CD
>
e
0-
0-
-0:
c
o
5 g e õ >. ~~ ~
Õ æ_g::l+:-
·~-16C:C:Q)g.~o
.r.: CD CD 0) .....
..... ECC(1)C
C Q) 0 Q.Q).c·ºõ'"
º...._tU(þ--
Y::I '::;:J- ~tO
m r/) "0 c: :¡:;:;.- a.
I:.CcQ) þc::t::e
0.. CD ro "'C:J E·-
..... 0 «i e CI) CJ)Q)
g-CDC.sû)C<.J.o.;
"CQ):'::'Q)cQ)":i:-5c
c:o<f:9:JcoCDB
gcCQ8-c=....q::
roouc,_o .-
=€ <'tIQ)g--=-:=á,
(t :::J"'" ro CD §.-
.c-c....tI) .r.: Cf.I
ø·!Gmoæ-c""'u)c
..... "C ~ CD c >.ë ctI
C-o a.':':: (I) «1= CDS
~c SØU)êEU)
.- :J CD Q) 0 CD U)
ë..e~-cc:;:::::..~.s?
o.CJ)(t ~ 0'-::10
« .... ~ N:g 2'"_
.....OCl):e; .....«~<I)
~ - 3' '" CD .91
'eg o'õ~Ë-gð ~
D... a.. en Q) C) .gw rn
COC"'Cø()Q)
CD ~.~ æ"§ ~ 11= ~
M~ê:QgeQ)~'ø
ch:J::J~:JR~Q)E ¡¡
LÓcn.o<V.QCO.c en
~û)1ãj ~Q)-g
'c:~-:5>=(t
-5..¥~~.!¥ E~
~.c¡~~,gæ
€~>Q,)Q)C/)-g
:JeeE§~8.
:i2:5RQ) C)cCD CD-æ
-o~ ro.==~ >-g.~
CD _ "'.. ::1'- ~
.0":»0.(1) """-0>1::..
L,-Oõ ~ 0 ..... c: æ
õ co 0'- c: ro·-
£: 2õ g CD-.5 g>ë
=.g:ëC~_~~
.êLL"'C.c.cN~C
C/)-cm~ø-=-e~
m§:::o'EOro(þ
~ U) (t ~.- {p"O
o(t :J_.c·~~·!:
t: CD c:r (I) CD 5 0_
::¡fI.I(t CD"C:.=t:O
..0 C) q::"'" (t ::J CD
C UJ 'C _..o.c::c
-0.- CIJ Q)..... ::J"'C (t
.gæêi)~ >-0 Q) 0-
Q.Q) CC) i..:.!:"ã.ctI
::¡C::Iu.Q) :JO
gQ)-Cl~"C()Q)
O£;MÜ:æ~g(ij
.
>- ~ >-
.c .c
'0 '0 '0
CD ~ CD
> >
e e
0- c 0- c: 0- C
0- 0- ~
-0: 0 -0: 0 0
"g0-~~ª 2'õ5-g-g iš-O:'õ€ æ ~ "'CD'ÞC'$~ æ:!! ~
q::U -CD_ .C:: a:::m=O :to - ()-=
:;:;~ ~~u> ~e= eW- "t: _:eg 'c::em
~~~.~~~ "C'E ~.~~u 5i~~ ~~ü æ ~sz
iE Q) 0 Q.Q)õUJ e 8 C"-g 05S Ê<C æ ro E-g<c-8~
::1;;:2 Q)=> Q) mr¡;: me eQ)Q)~Q)""-
c: .c Õ 1=:"C 8 ~ .E ~ ~ õ J:; () .~ m g ::r::: ~.~ ! è
~.-"C t:::~ .,,-.S;::m.... =æ16 CD~iQ)16emo
CD'OQ) Q. .=Q)eo2:...~Q).£:z co-¡;:=iíZO.t:
6: m~"i-(!)"C:!: Q) coV£; I/} "C.a'O:C Ü Q)
'>~~~~~ e<f=()UJ~ Q) ~.~c:Q)'OøE
[!!'OC:CTCO~" COC:~1 ¡:: U">'Oê-s Q)"Cmeæ~<c
Co m- 0 CD ~ ¡::.- >.... E -
"C m .µ Q) tI) q:: ctI ctI _ e 0 ~.- 1;) '0 Q)
>-~ ~ Q) ~= ~.~ ~'2 c.§ ~ 0 .~ ëõ ~ i'~ g ~
c:o .c«o :J:!:u.QI.Qê)jL..CD 'O>'_q:::0.cCO
"C"g .- ¡j!.~ "'ÕCD~c:C: CD°-g.,ÕcnZ
_e~~~~e~~!COUJ~roi ~~Eg~.Q)
Om~.£:'-.æ <u__ oo.g<u UJ....e .c:"C~
.r:.-æ( )8..~ "ãiO)'OS!õ--ã5"S .s.£:·_~~Q)õo
¡'¡o> -g .!lcc.. - E:fi' "t:CD .. -
æ~~æi~~~co~Q)~~~....g~m~~i~(I)
:ß .;æßr,·- g C>~ ij; ~ e!_ !!;'O'~ c: ~¡'¡ E!E 8'~
o.'~"i ! ~ ~ -g S g g 5.~ ~ æ'ë ~ ro 16 8 ~ B E
( ) 8. :go -g ~ 1:8. I:!.. ro =æ ûS UJ CD Z CD E ~ g>-5 fEo C" = e
~" -CD- Q)O.£:~ mc:
--tI» 'O~~C:Q.~_æ( )'O"CÜ~::I>-CDm.c:m
-em Q)¡:; 00_mECD"8 "'''' "'E
CD ( )U)t: CD m~ûS o·t: :æ Q) ~.c .>~-g.... ~
_~.c~[.c~> ~~eQ» g~õ~c:roi.£:
'1Še'ãjCL [!!'ãj ¿, 1 'ãj£ 5.'~:!2 S!'Ë¿'·e!!!.<6 e ~ co CÞ
0) .£:(I)c:.c: ~)(~¡:;Q.....~I/}~Q)~ _0>
~~( )::>~CI)~Q)CDmme~U(l)~~~ëõü~E=
0>
~
-
°
'"
CD
0>
"
0-
.¡;
o
o
N
W
Z
::J
...,
'"
'13
>
..
~
CO
o
ä:
I
ex:
¡¡j
~
"ii:
';~
-
.!!!
:¡¡:
(,)
..
.r:
C (.)
0 '"
¡¡¡ c
'S: :e
0
i5 a.
..
CI II<:
C "
~ c
..
'"
:J c
ŒI 'i:
.s
ï:
0
~
c
0
G) ~
U '"
C ;:
.!!! CI :i
ë. c
0;:
E G)
0 G)
() c
Õ '61
c
c W
0 U
o:¡ ~
III
U
I;:: ....
.;:
~
CI
c
i:
c
III
ii: ;.:, ;.:, ~ ;.:,
.c .c .c
'0 '0 '0 '0
~ ~ OJ ~
>
e e e
c. c. c. c.
a. c c. c c. C c. C
« 0 « 0 « 0 « 0
e
:J
I/)
III
G)
::E
c
o
¡
CI
:e
::E
'0
~
g
C .
0'"
(,)'"
,..:
OJ'"
.cg
C
=0
m~
.r: u
'" OJ
CI)
C OJ
0'0
.- 0
:Zu
'Ë 8
E ~
0:0
uo
'"
CD CD
",a:
",u
:ë::B
CD :0
ra.
.9
c_
5 C
'C '"
OJ :0
E I!!
«5.
.s§~16S
=-~.~
¡0-crnc..
.s.Èeûíi2
s en Q)'- a.
e8 8~~
"'- CD
~ g>'6 §,s
'C Q)~"C
=æ-6æ~æ
.r: '"
en"'C Q) ~ g>
û.is~-:e;
._ ~ :J""C c:
~Q)~C:=
_cmmO)
.9Q)C;~J::
c: 01_ -¡;:;-
äL~.~~õ
o;'õ "'_ OJ
0.. i"~ ëõ g
i!-><ëg.5
!E-¡:;o_q::
. Q OJ ",.-
m ~m= ã¿
:J J:: a. CI:I (:is 0
cræ::=:-mœïj
<{ CD ....:5 CQ
OJ "'CD·.8 ØO
c u-
N .- "''''' '" g¡
'E>.5~~
°co;;cm:J
:;:;~~8~8
Q)Q)(/,IQ)CCD=C-CQ)
u.c'E: C'- (.) CO 0 0- t/)
-I!1ij 13~i!-I!ij~ g>5'~
.h~=:fj~ s¡ ~~ H1
:J _:J"C:J6~-o 0
ø g'''5æ..S Cl)N·5 C:Õ Q)
mZS U)Q)~õmc:-g..:
o_om..c::l_CD=(30
cñm:mõ=t-mQ)t5~c:õ
c.....c·c:J u..>m Om
co~ øa. i c: o~B ø 0.5
E':»o..õ OÕ4)Q)"EcnC
.aia.-u"..ö::·C:- UJ CD c:
t5 m 'C .~ æ ~a. ~ Q) E :S .5
fCc:C'" :o:;~C"(ijo.coC:
_.2 co-«J:: fI,IÆ cþ,t:, 0 O)C
0. 1:::Q):J'C -=(0
15)(0) o~crmc..e~CI)ã:
œ,E 0 C:S:-«- Q) a.Q) ~
-U)1i)::iP!:Q) J:: o."C C._
mQ)·-&'J::fI, Q)-m '-0
>-0>< -b..cCD e....
e:JQ)( )O~-"'CJ:::JQ)<D
a.~ ~ ..... 'u .- UJ ..... ..c 1::.
0.'-1 ~+='"'C N.S ~= :J1:::'"
m.s~c~~~ a..gu..aõ
O-m._.- II:;: ûj '-I::
_"'C~-_~O en"..¡: o
,s "'. :¡¡ '" -- CD e c ""
... "O.o~"'C>-~::IO
.gcS ._~cQ)ã)Õ(l).2:!
Cl.~"'C"E8iõ~Eê62ffi~
fa .æ ..... -c CD fa 0 ;;!.1;) .... fa
~v CO fa O>'t:..... (0 en
~-~~'ä1~¡ ~~~ ~S
u;,5 8 (O.c=.ç.oS.a£s
~~õ.8 ~~ é ~~
_ CD_'6:o,eïñ5i
o;;¡¡¡Eo;:OÜCDCDE
.r:s",.r:ü.sE'C'"
en ~enc e ~
enca.-en~= £-5
ee-c:: ![.5CT
:Jfa~~Q)ø -oe
" _c.)! cCDU
.si O>ëõ-g.~ëm
en-~cG) møo=>
OJa.Es Eã;_~ e-CD
:s "'C 8'.o..ë 8:5
..... Q) c--º CD" c:~
.a~oCDC:E·-·-"'"
=.....~à)~a.~~·3
"'-E'C::E,g·- OJ
~ '" ..., OJ CD_ 0
o~ u-o>0'iic
.........."00)- CD ~ ca
c ~ § ï~'~ 0 :z '" 'E
.º'= e c. ~ CD m '" § .
en.c Q) I;.C C
Q)aJO>CD..:c:2-o:;!caC»
"O.cc»~ca.!!l-otO 'æ
C)ec.....l:D=tV~Cctl
c a.e:3 :r: en"--o
'C U-Q) .....-oCO
$CDØ .:5~!c:8!E
c::~ 0..... ......:3" 0
._-_c" e2CD
'" C CD 0..- '^ __ a.
C -cE..... -.....·ww
W0Q)o. ...."EocCD
Ü 01'\,e ""-8'"
",ãJCD-a;a.'CE '"
N cn:ë"~:ë'! ~.~-o-o
~.!~~~U1ñCl)ææ
-o:¡ijC>>-C'?;-
¡¡¡ijm~~-§
en .c:3Q)"OO
c ~Q)C">CDO
.!2 m > (þ"O ~
Q. C tV "0 CO._
OI~ aJ.....I-o
ü"æfl)Q)O-oc
.2.~ 1: .c c CO
E Q)==_~
c..!!1 E "!i'!i ~
"ii~~ "0'-
c...Q)Q)S£co
c¡:: 0 c:æ t: CO
-o..:·~......e~CD
O)cnoenCD-
_ ( ) Q) Q,) CD.c
aJ.ç"0 "õ'æ:.e 5
> 01 ... G) CD·-
e c"OQ.. >,0.0..
o.w~ øò e a.
0. c:~oo.tO
t'O.?:Q,)..........
~Uê1õQ,)E~
-CD8,s,s~~
.9,segE1Ð
.g ¡ic¡;'C,g ~ fj.!'.i
Q.. .0 ~.s .g c á5
~-I!!i! "'E
",,,,~R1'\.,Ee
.-~o;:-a;U.Q'-
;¡;~"E8ë[cð-
IÒ g,8.s c..§ 8 e
'"
~
'õ
CO
CD
'"
'"
a.
,¡;
o
o
N
W
Z
::>
..,
'"
~
>
I!!
m
o
æ
I
a:
,,{,iD<cy
(j ~ 0.
..':>- Z ,-,
I:: u: r'
o {',
or ,-
, -
.!!
:;;¡
:r¡
c '"
u
0 ...
ijj e
.:; ~
õ 0
c.
Q "
a::
c 'C
:¡; e
>. to
.:; .c ...
ID 'C e
~ 't:
e oS
c. ë
c. e 0
« 0 ::I!
e
0
.. ;:¡
U to
...
C ;:¡
.! Q i
Q. c
.¡:
E .
0 .
(.) c
Õ "61
c
c w
0 u k
~ IE
u I! 'C
I;: I- ~
'i: e
~ c. e
c.
« 0
f
:I
I/
IV
.
:E
c
o
¡
Q
E
:E
Q
C
C
C
IV
ii:
>.
.c
'C
Q)
>
e
c.
~
e
o
~Q)
-"
"
~ü
,ge
J!315
e-<=
",,,,
E'"
e?~
"S ~
~-g
e
&~
(is 3
~.2
E'"
"'"
¡¡¡c
>'"
"'",
ë
~Q)..
roEE
.~~~
~Q)~
o ã;.~
,,-
..QQ)õ
_~c
,"-
M-"
ari..2L:1
.s .§ tß -g~~~õ.
"C en":' co c: co ftI e.!IJ
Q) Q) ~ co Q)
§¡ .11>~~ S"E~>o~~
ijj þ.Q-·Õ).o (\' ~ m , Q) '"
Q)·õQ.c~ -è:ts~..c"C-
"C as c:wS c..œ..c~ N
'" C.l~1:'·Ë ~.s.2>J:.E.2
::¡' 'Oë3=';~ãJJ: .-g
]i ~ E Q)1:'æ:ã.5'E~~ '"
cnc;::oS'-c~s= ~cn-
",,,,¡¡¡>g~o.t:c(J)-~
>._ ..c-C IDOl 0
ro § E"O ~ ~ :i ã5'~ Õ Õ~
~ cr::J~ ~ Q)"'OO t-=
ro-8.ê·õ~o2?.! ãJ:g
em.!:Q)óQ)(;)-.g=(/) -
Q) CD E Q.t¡::.r::. _ (ij _ CU <!!1.
....._ en ~o..cQ)õ«ttI
·ëf~.æ r6 c~ Q) ø E 5J-'~
COCCi .- "C( )O~øt:
o E'!:: æ e"'C eë œ«<6 m
Q)Ec._,,-cr!e>œC) ë3....
~ e E'- E 1E0
-5§gj.9~§3!¡¡~O':;;
lL ro«-O(l) ø E m >,'c c:~
.- 0 Q) m
~Ø=E.g~
::<~ØO«tOC)
D- 't'E
.0"
..c ro co So. E
M'- Q)U)
, "",,,ex
U1£~.bem
LOo~Cf.)t-E
.
.
.
. '. ___. .__'._""0__"__'_._' __.___.._....,~
>. >. >.
.c .c .c
" " "
~ ~ '"
>
e e e
c. c. 0.
c. e c. e 0. e
« 0 « 0 « 0
ê:.!2C:~
Q)~.,m-
E Cia..: _
g- CD è 0
~=~.!IJ
ø.J:: Q) c:
"~ø~
Q)Q)~e
~ C) (1)'-
C/) C~:::J
c:ro~g
o"E Q) '-
0-'<
""'"'
e"a¡E
,,'" -
-c"
~.-.!2 0
"'O~- .
= Q) Q. 'tS CD
ra §¡ e.m ~
1;;......5(5
.... en -i :::J_
J2-o<U>(t
( ) ~.~.§-
0).0 _ '-
e:-_ c::
:pëõoe~
..c..c :::J<
.S;!) UJ ~ UJ-o
....I !!l'õ co Q)
",~g,~~
:;J; ¡;'''.21-'<&¡''
. c: e:..c
1.0 a. ml-
.9:2~'C6E-g -gg>S-g=æê: .!l=æ~
~~~~:p~co co~eco..c~ ~..c=
coi!?Q)æ~1('C =Qu>UJe à,U>'(ij
:::J( )O¡;;'-e0CD ~Æ~CD'CG> o'-~55
i!?ic~-æ~ co g~cc ~~eu>
~m~e£:::J~ ~ c~co- ~~co~
'C _~~E~-i __-g;;> _ë a...cC)·õ
S£~mQ)e! ~mcocU>~ øU>£c
t: ..c ê'O 0. ~~ ,3' ~,g '8 0. §' ~ E
Q)'O~Q)~~O Co 05- -~~
E( )OOEÕ~- ~c52( )~ cow00
~~~ .s_~ Q)~tS¡¡¡e", ~I~~ .
~~~~..c~=·~~~~c 'C ~CO~~~
-oo'C£~~co ~ë8§~ &i~£E
~U~~}~~~~ 8:¡¡~~ UJO>ü~
_ cnN1ñ_.9~ e: _be: 20 -g c>.§ [m
ëõ§~Q)mc> com-~Su~ co£~ c
..c :.¡::; C"S :is -.C C¡ S'" >e <..> õ.5 C Q) ø C 2 ~ .2
"'~~~oE~ 0. 2"'8> cæ~ Õ
cn~ c.- ('I') 0)'- a. Q) - e c .!2 - e: >i
£-o~~=>~co~cn 0 a.~8'"
~~~iNQ)[S gi.9~ õ~ ~c
g~Q)~~~Q)S.9> ..52¿~6~~8
~ cn",_'S",-.c" ~.oe ",.!!1_
o "C Q) = 0- c 0 = g>'C c:e a.. Q) );:c
~c'Coc ~~ _c8'C ..cC)ø.
Scoo'C~~gc:æ~~eCO_C8!~~CO§
x ücõ~vR oc"_- ~.cc.,,"
WØëõcoQ)Ø~~ ~Q)Ecco~ ~Q)~
Ea.~OO! co BEQ)Q)Sc ëõg-@o
.oco~co~~C)~o=t:iSE5='C>- ~
~"-""'~~~_u"'-~ee_e"'_~~
"'ccc'C....z:.CP I Q)Q.cn:::J--g? I 0.-
ari ~ ~ ~ § ~ ~æ ~ i~ j g ~ ~ ~ ~:& ~
0>
-
õ
....
Q)
o
Q)
D-
on
<:>
<:>
N
w
Z
=>
...,
~
e
'"
o
æ
I
II::
,i'6'J(
~
(;
or·'
c::
0
jii
.:;
ë
CD
c::
'6
'S
III
GI
0
c::
.!! CD
ëi c::
"t:
E GI
0 GI
(.) c::
- '61
0 c::
c:: w
0 0
;:; ~
ß
r¡: I-
"t:
~
CD
c::
ë:
c::
IV
¡¡: >.
J:J
"
~
e
0. "
0.
« 0
~ c: - CD (.) Q) Q) ~E" Q)£ 'iij~151.'! J::'" ~"'C c: en an- .!Q)c::::=ttlf/JO)
~geüE(j..c: :¡ 0 E" j<S!" Q) :!:LLI ~.- rn CU ( ) CD tÞ
~cnê::Ee:E- ,g"" O~ "~Q) -s «I . "'OõU}e> iec.cæ=:J
. 0. '" - :¡ij e CO ~_
:I~ 8 CD- ( ) ~ ~5 ~ ~- -.- g¡ >-CDo::=C Õ"õ
i :::-g>.~ "''2 ",õ. -£ 5U C)~.~Q) .c col-~õQ)~
0.Q)'" " 0 -5 E ~.c 0. "- Q) 8 ~£ (þ 0 e Q) CD .
-g"'C~cuo-5 8'Ëg' E"õ"« ..... -'eO>
.92m's:e;ciõ(Q E£ " "'" 8·-'C,g5 ~ II> 1j'~]j"-,§i ~
8- 8 E Q) ",- '" ûJ '" =,gøo
:ëUJ~Q).5E.9 0- ~'" 5.5 e>E .el!:!õ3(6 g_£ë ~ã"ë' cna>~
oQ)~õ=ë ... .!9 tJ)-of.5 ~:øa.w-g=~-g
e'- '--e»CI) -"'0 " " Q) i ¡¡¡ g> Q) ·-tü~·- UJgøæm.socu
f :J.,2J::a>c"E 16N_
~1J)~.~(:50 ~G>G> :85 Q)C'f"""C ... ft ¿c:r::..c ¡e>G>"
0>00 .- Q) co .- "-~"~1!!8-
:J E Q).o c»:I c: (I):; N 1;; .~ ._'" ~ ::I E- UJ "- 0.-.5 ~ c: -õ 53
III o E CD c:"'C'- F'Ë 0 16 g"=t C' "-e.e _õEQ) co Q) cC,!) 0 CD C:._
IV -= CD g CD ~"'O 5.S:~ 0. ..c"'CQ)"O e c :J (I) œ:5Q)E $~~Q)E.9g~
GI _-'="0(1) ( ) =G> UJ e"5 fij o-rnQ)
~ cnet-Q)õ-': 1;; E "':ë !:øCtO"S J::Øã)ct1è :J 0.' J:::::I CD ~ CD
~€O ",cr: II> cnõ"C CD o .....- >
c- .....- 0::) ~.- CUCDQ)cr. Ee ~1I>Q)8.Q)
o c: o.c: cr ",II> :;;!!o~ = 0> E::;
c:: _0 _CDmQ)¿ .e- ll> ...._ 0 0)_ :J~~:¡ß-OUJ=
~ 0 "'E" ~ 8.'- - " II>
0 ~o.....:>-> ....0 õêD~ 8.0. Q.·ë ü..! ~'E'-e en .- >- .......... >-c
¡ ._ ~g>-0Q)·- .Q :::J a... 0- m :m-!s o c:~~ en en (O·üS CI).Q e ~
E § "__ ~ e-.E g G> II> 0 !2 ~-«e £3Q)c(§~ 'Q)e:::J m :::J__§~"'C-e
'-øü .
CD Q):¡:¡e~ä;:::JQ)"C e'Eo>è G> II> ~ Q).~>~ >1-(;) 00 C .cœ.m:¡:¡ ê~:;)
> '" ,,-
:e «)(l.1D>a.æ(l) "'C ë'" C) ~'§~~õ G> _ 0 .g"'C'E~..:co8
a."'" G> " "e~"""
8 1:: ctI.c .... "'C=ë~ " '" Q) en " '(3 CD CD:;)¡ «)- C
:E &'Q)ctI-=CD-C: Q) '" 0 " - =='iij!f:~ Q.'- '" e! -"0 ø -
-5tb.cCDtbS~,º Q) i= Q) Q)'ø£ E ~d~8. CDB'-C a.-oCD
~c:""'"OCD ctlø ~ "- ~~ ~ ~ ~'§ß cÎ ~o ~ ~ a. Øg._CDC
m .>=.... ø I- IDO II>G> I-Wø3:o CI).2f c.cœ's
-=.seli=.E-g·E
O(l)Ca.CÞ ctlQ)
I--ro'- UJ£ 5 ø ~ . . . . . .
ðoof-æ:¡:¡sm
œe-eiiJ>~ëñØ
Mo:::Jm .00Ø(l)
cb - $"'-0
. g ~ Q) 0 E (I)
1O.__E:;¡oøc
-
.!!
:¡¡
¡¡
~
o
II>
"
1:
o
...
~
...
c::
'"
II>
"
'ä
-
ë
o
:E
"
o
;;
II>
:¡:¡
:i
'"
~
-
o
co
G>
0>
'"
"-
.;;
o
o
N
W
Z
::>
-,
'"
'\!i
>
e!
ID
o
æ
I
cr:
w
,<~iít'-?
C);¡; 'ó'
'" LL '"
1- m
õ-
op;,,.....,,\iA,l>
._".,." '-
-
.!!
:;;:
u
'"
C .l:
0
0 '"
.¡¡¡ c
':;: t:
Õ 0
Q.
'"
CI a:
c '"
'ë c
..
'5 '"
m c
;:
0
-
'E
0
~
c
0
GO '"
..
u '"
c '"
.!1! CI ~
C
C. '¡:
E .
0 .
(,) c
- '61
0 c
c W
0 u >.
:¡: IE
III .0
U I! '"
I;: I- !!;
.¡: e
~ c. c
~ 0
CI
C
'c
C
III
ii:
~
'ê'
c..
'"
=
C>
c
'13
! .~
"
~ "'
II) "'
III "
. ;e
::e 'ë
'"
c -
0 .¡¡;
i c
~
CI .2
:t:: :¡;
::e => .
c.'"
_e
° '"
>.
.0
'0
~
C.
~
~.gSlO
"O"õøf"O
CD CD...... Q)
~a.c:CIJ
Q) en e ~
.~ .~-t;
i::j9.cu
Q) c: _<'0
..ca>3':cu
E°.o
~t:q:::=cD
1ä ~~ ~ ~
So Ø"oo Q.
~ cnëë
'ê'e§~~
c..¡¡: CQ ~ ~
.... ....--....
53-o.e~E
E-æ!3~Q)
a.~ c >-~
..2 ~ CDE ã) "
Q) CD - 0-
~~ ~ rn e
"'Oa:I:;Q)Q.
e CT~ ë
;:,Õ~-o~
"S ë~O"
LL.?;-""m
<0'- E .....0
.....Ut::t¡:::J
~ ~45 CD
.....Q>Q)..cQ)
arl50õ:5
>.
.0
'0
'"
>
e
c.
c 0.
o «
~C>
0.5
I:;f:g
e"S
"".0
.?;-
ã5ü
"
E'ë
~
-"
(ijä;
.l:~
"'=
rtJ "§
g~
'ë' æ 00
Q.-e Q)
0'0
-88
~«Ie
Cc'"
~.- Þ
ø "".-
CDë()
0::,,'0
.cE~
.....eU)
"'!'·3~
"": :ti8
"'~
c
o
::t C 0 CD
0.2-5
=õCD_
ctlϑO
o c: 0 c
-ceo
c81!!'fl
:~ g¡~~
>91 ,.,
:8öEgJ
=> ",,g "
VJ ~..;:5
>-mc:o
c -0 CD"" .
ccðE"i'Ë
õ ~ 5>:2 ~'"
ø= >
§ co e ca
:;::oroQ)c.c.
co ~::::J Q) Q)
"Eë¡.cQ
o Q) >= (f.)
~ K«~'¡:
° '" °
gã;m!!;;=
... ã;~'C:.~
.g-ouo:g
c..mQ)~a..
'CÊ=g-g
";' -8 t» co ctI
~._cEm
......(1)001::
oril!!¡;;oii:
>.
.0
'0
"
>
e
0.
c.
«
eo Q) CD CD
o-£:t:::·~
co -0 (I) LL
"'-
ã)"S0"'æ<D
c._ .?;-.¡; =
O'tJ-LL
~~.§ . >.
.- c:..c
Õ .8 > .0
"1'0
E = J: CD
:::I co- c:
E..c .-
.- "'.¡; " "
c _ t:
Ë is 25'¡; $
.- '"
ro1O=~-O
ai1i5 ~ 'C cD
:!:::Q)cnO..c
"' ~
_I¡::CQ)_
~C'Ogë=
'-'_ co 0 3:
e°1i.íE
a.. c e g>
Q) CD e·-·-
= E"" ;;¡:.!;;
.5 g..~~-
J::ã).J::c-o
:!:::>I-CDC-:
;='" «><'055
'C. E
~5~Q)St::
,_ü ø:¡::; m
;:SC1}~~ ft
LOëi5£ü.QC
c:
o
I!!'"
109¡
~
S·
cg
"'-
c:e
8.0.
E ~
° "
u c
>-
c:
.?;-'"
,S2õ
»!'ë
"
E Ö
~ §-:;;
ø- a>
"ë'~:!:
o.~ J¡
a>õ
_.l:c:
e-;; Q)
~= œ
~~:;
",.0
mEa;
~co"C
~'C=>
~cg
",.a ._
.9 ~ œ.E~
ø m 5-c-
"E .E :;::¡Q)-o
co _ æ ~c
!2> ° - C> =>
~ c c: e
§ãiêG,)m
.5 :w>:::IQ)~
en ~~_~o
~ "Ë1Ü 0 =:.5:
C ._:::J rn
I!! ãi ë. g>¡;; ~
~ 'C~'E:-6á
.r: . æ õ -B::2: i1D
_CD 0S-o>
~Õ~L(I);:].5C:
.!!a~~t5æ~8
>õf!·~E-'='~
'õ_œE ~.e
c 0):2 (L Q) 0 -g
o.r::. ( J <D== co
=5šc8= ctI_.
f5.c -c:n8~$
~10 c:n:~~ oëñ
c: C).5"Cë o=õ
c...!:? c.... ø= to ( )
",:¡; C ~ ¡¡;.!!11!!.¡;.
.c::::JScoc:~~':;
I- o.a.. .r=. a..._ .... CL
.
.
.
0>
Õ
0>
"
C>
'"
c..
.¡.;
o
o
N
W
Z
=0
...,
'"
15
>
'"
[¡;
°
jÿ
I
0::
<~I';.,Í\,~·,
(~:.<
_~z
\-- ü: ('
,
L) ('
C~:r::I~·;A!
CD
C,)
c
.!!!
Q.
E
o
o
'õ
c
o
¡
C,)
¡¡:
'¡:
~
>-
.c
."
~
e
a.
a.
«
c:
o
~
."
'"
>
e
a.
It
ð
~
."
~
e
a.
It
c:
o
>- i
.c
." ."
~ '"
e
a. a.
a. c: a. c:
« 0 « 0
I!
::J
II)
01
CD
:iE
c
o
;::
01
CI
;e
:iE
ccømœœ~~~ ~~~~œ~ '-œ
omœoo~cc~O œcœ~m~ææ~
~K~m~-mœ -emco~soE-
"> Qc'C~ E .0.r; ¡;:.
~~~'eæ2=~o ~=~OO~65§£
.c::!::a.'C~e"OS!: œ(!)CO o..:;::¡ø'C,-
:J mC).c a. CDcO
ø<œ"O ~~>£ ==COooCO~~CO'C
't:J &= ~ CD '- c ~ 2 .!fO e»ë Þ en 'ß 0-
~~~i",&~e~ l~ti~l§te~
e e"O 0.:5 j g-.a a.. <Ii Q) § 'x e":J '- ( ,) :s i
~C~O)C ~2!coa..~Q)3g~5_-
co'C:Jc-m>'--Ec»~( ,)~~cgcC
CD~ø~?£~2£_~o5e~:J(!)~c».
~c~2i~Q)"O"o~=Q)~ i c£i
m~~ ( ,)"OmQ),-:J~~ --"OOC:Õ
bK_c~E~~~~~~-e~$c"OcQ)
._ °ou:J=:J>--.r:.~:JEo..mcco~
oQ)ëo1ø~ieê~¡i~cE ~æm
!~~õ£~£'-~~gQ»õ~8~coQ)m
-ê>ø :( ,)!~o~œ£ æ~(!)S5E
.e~Q) ~û) f e g o=äJ c U)'!: ~ë.c= -~ oro
'" ",0~«e~~2~~~em~'o=~-~
o .c0~ (1)(0(1)(0(%)0::1'-'-.1:: Q)
éCD~Q)æ~£=ë~58iðo:-i~c
Q)"O~5 ~<~Q)E8£=æQ) _~o_>~
J::C~ 'C- en CD J::~-C·- Oeo
"Om c»ce· >'-oøoQ)Q»C ~
«","'",C:~o.ømQ)~ _Q)E~~cQ.c
o ~ -co...r:. '-~E °000 0
c>~ø"Oøo__a..s~ CCO>:;::¡Q)=
m~~Q)Q)~=Oo uœ oœ·-œ~œ
Qc~øzcuœ_~ e~ ~~ou ~
~_u~-cØS2~~--~c~ ~-~
~~œ ~œ~ ~.Q.cg=ro~œi~
~o~~s~~~~~~8o~i~s>~
õãi~ãi
"'c: 1j
.e-o c:
.- ~
c.. 5!'~-5
~a:8,5
- ~."
q¡_fh C fã
-~'-
'§ u í1:'-æ
Q) -.-
a. ~ ~
"'~ '"
~S-E
.- E E
." ~
3~~8
.c~ª,~
Õ ~~
S2-~æ
a.u. ."
æ E ëñ
"8õ '"
g¡ ~ ~
._ a.~
0=.5 ro
- ~ ."
~-5§c
,§ :+:I.e .
~ ttI fh-S
-1:: ~
Coœ~
œ,~ ~S §
~~c:~ .!..
. a. e 'I: '"
tn«I-:;.Q.
-"'---'--'~--"'--~-'~-"~----
IE ~ J9.5 ëti
~-æ~8
fh.....:.EØ-J
.!..Mœ"tO"'t)
._~ > u c:
J!1doe'õ~
o ~ o.E ,5 ~
- c:
g-g';~~
:ë'roSq¡~
" .- 0
(/J:;:.5 ~ 6-
(/JCD ..oe
§Lri-Se-
._ co c:
~~.~~:2
e:ë:e!~
'" ~ ~.- f!
ël-o.J2Q)
·-O-me:
~-~,¡;:¡-
S....-SeQ)
u,æ.....·....
(OQ)_E.2
Q.....cQ.I.L"
E-
.- '" ~~-
~ê:~c:cô
°œo.o~ .
U.E« do"
Q) ~. 0
.c>õe"'''
"t e .2!.·S.s1 ¡g,
CD o.e C"'.oi:
...;.~ c.. e~::¡:
~-g5"tO.e5cb
.. ~ £; '" '" 'iä
tn....en tþQ)
;;! 0 g> g>õ x '"
ði=e"i c: Q).c
~x= 0 ",'" 31
r::Q).ð~.5æg
caã;_en~--'.e
..=~ëñ W ø
1:Q)C:~_Z=..
Q)....œm 0 ~
E "." c:" - "'. '"
(/J'jj(0 E--'ë
o.cQ)-=ŒI~Q)
£Q)a:~o~'jjE
Q)O :¡::¡_L()coQ)
~:;; ~~..æõ.
~eã58~'õë.§
-~EroC)....Q)",
cuo. '-0-
:+:IQ) cen,cx.o
c....æroQ)Q)Q)=
-8o.rom~ëCÞ~
._ Q) .;;: C:.- ~...
en~CÐro!---
e=ä;a. "'0'"
co>IE Q)I-~
o~.!!o.cn€ 'C'"
_ tn _ co 0 -.-
0') Ri~Q)-'c
~ï/S 5!~ ",UJ~
.g >0.'_ (JJ C) i:. Z ~
a. (ij 0 (JJ .5 0.0 -
cC:C1>~- C)
ro....~=Q»«c:
0"" m--
0:> 5!'c õ.c.s1." ê
~·-S.s"'''' ~
Lrig.Ect)55~õ.
-
.!!
:;¡¡
~
~
o
'"
c:
t:
o
...
.,
II::
."
c:
to
'"
c:
1:
o
-
C
o
::E
c:
o
~
'"
:;:
:i
CI>
~
~
o
~
'"
'"
~
c..
,¡;
o
o
N
UJ
Z
:::>
...,
1
m
o
¡¡:
I
~Kt:.¡,
..)'< --' 0'
,« ...¡\
z -
_ m
u. r-
l) (J
C':~·W~"¡":AL
-
.!
:;<
u
..
.c
c:: U
0 '"
'¡¡ c
'> 1:
0
Õ ...
..
CI II:
c:: ...
:s c
..
':; '"
c
CD -¡:
0
-
'E
0
::E
c
0
G> ;::
..
U '"
c:: ;::
.!!! CI :i
ã. c::
.;::
E G>
0 G>
(,) c::
'õ '61
c::
c:: w
0 u
'5 IE
l!
I;:: t-
.;::
G>
>
G>
...
::I
II>
CO
G>
:e
c::
o
:;;
CO
CI
E
:e
CI
.:
c
c::
CO
ii:
!E
'õ
c
"
5
c
"
ï
'"
.0
"
u "
c '"
J!3>
.~ ëD
"0
e
""
:5£
","
.5 æ
~ ~
e ~
0"
..s~
'"
..
.c
o
"
'"
",,"
~~
,,"
.6 .~
0:t=
'"
~ äS
+=-(fJ
.~ ~
~·Õ
c
""
.!a'Ø
g:ë
, '"
c 0
0-
C",
'"
"''''
.5: E
"''''
::>'"
.
'"
~
'"
c.
'"
(;
o
"
'5
o
"
a;
:ë
'"
.8
'" cD
g>¡:
.- "
"0
:=ø
" '"
.0",
C)"õ
C C
~(t
.~ E
oJ:
.
·Q)cnG)CC~¡;'
~ > c: f/) oos--
0ö,i"ë:5s"ø (/)ü
Q) co~ CÐ"O'- ( )
_ Co. "0 Q) 1I).t:
e 5! . Q) '" ",-,",-
1i)Q,ø=~Z~~
.!¿'Ò.c m'tj
c:gcnQ)"-"'Ctõecñ
.21 0)"0.-:..$ (.)._~
f/J_ e·- (/) c::,¡:¡::J Co
~O::Jt/)~Q)~g~
o Q) ~ E ~ Co
_~( )£::J~8(1)s
~~mc:~a.roCtlCl)
.a o'õ 0 ( ,).~ c$'m
~ ~c: ~.!a ro c'õ
..... CD ~.- 0 ( ) _0 " C
:ë L.Cc.c E
oQ)CD8 UJc..'?;-
æ.c c_ E= c: 0<.)·-
......9 co 0 ro 0-
_.cJ:.c::¡:¡Q)..c
c>~!9o>-CI)m~='E
.5::Jf/J ~ -g'C~
~~.8Ë~:ßQ)ëii~
o ~ II) 0 m._ E::J a.
e-.c'" o "'¡¡'E:!2 ¡s
o (.) ~-c.5êé 0.2: (.J
g~a.Q,)~.Þ~-go
_$UJ.c.....ø.....__
.
.
iD §.e =ª'
5 <.)
o "''''
~ã!ïñ5
o (f.I ~ >-
"''''.0
..0 C
l!l. co"C
15 _ e u.i
;t '" -.- 'E
Q) ~::::I co
-" ~ g"
~.r:Z::l'" c:
·H8~~
jg.$"'š5!
_ C"õ
Q) 0 Q) c:
'" C E
__.0 UJ a.~
o:¡::¡ c: 0'-
Cctlo_U
ê:ø~-c
",,,,,,,,*,
.5~-g"03
ëmQ)<õ~
o E::Ja.
e--g E:!2 ¡s
8::::18=60
£~e.5.9
.
>.
.0
"
"
>
12
c.
c.
«
C
o
,~" - ''''e .c-",,,,,,.c:¡¡õÿ'
~15~~~º~ ~!~~~~ -
-~ooo~y~ ~øC:c: s_-
c: 0"0"0 c:øc:mø(l)O~'~
o c:c:~~::I8 m-~~=Q)-c:
~"C~~~(t ~m a.~~æ§~~~_
2C- "'''' E E--.
«I> C»'tJ Õ C» :!:: c: ~ C» 8 - ø E
~ e~",,,~~ "''''ð,,~ C/)~.
C8 ~- a. m t;1 "'0 = .CfJ CfJ ë5 c: 5 êã ~ >-~
o"'-f~S~ CUøCfJ~~ZC=
_ ø <þ:¡:¡.r:: ._-;¡;;¡ CfJ::J
~~ ø 2£2 .c:oo--~~-cE
~£~~~.~~~ ~gõ~8~~oc
=~~õ6~OCfJ ~~ '~ c~Q)-
~ ~c CfJ- ~~CfJ - .
~ ø-'tJg~ >-5~~Ei~~
_ -0;0, ".c 12'" '" .,"''''
oC»Q)CfJ~Q)c~ a.~~ 'tJcaoo~~
Ø£cE°.c:~~ a.~m_cc ~
-= -~ CfJCfJ~CfJœ-8a.~
~~~~~§Q)'tJ ~~~£c~cca~
~ _ ___~:Q 1?!11 ~ c:ë '" c,g !'=õ ~ .8 ~.!1
-_00 ..c:oO.- oJ!;! ccu","'
Q)Occ-oC~ :¡:¡-Q)== .0=
e»e~~C»"'OQ)i ~~Sc8~~i~£
£ !êãce».r:: ~5CfJo ~ø~ø_
~~-"'c~~£-mQ)U$- ~-C/)~
-.. !11 ~ E "'" ,-"
~=cQ)ø~ 8Øro='tJSQ)c>~Q)
"''''= 0 ~"''''Q) ~"''''~~
~~a.CfJ~g~'tJu~~~_-E~Z-;¡;;¡
'tJ~æc.e-Q)Q)c
-'tJEQ)::JfÞ.r::CfJ
'" .~ C8" g, gõ f- =
"iu ~.__z<Q;
":'§",,g.2~m5
an U)..Q 0 cD ~-;¡;;¡ "'C 0
.
-------.-"--,-..-
0>
~
õ
~
~
'"
'"
'"
Il-
,¡.;
o
o
N
W
Z
::>
-,
'"
""
o
>
e
m
o
ii:
I
!:t:
,~,I\K_0:<)
~ '(;'
>-Z _
~ü: ~
(.) t:J
(!~¡CINAt
, -
.!!
:;¡¡
¡¡
,<=
c u
0 '"
iii '"
.:; t:
0
õ i
CI
c ...
'6 '"
>. ..
'5 .c '"
'C '"
In CD ;:
> .9
e i:
0-
0- " 0
« 0 ::E
"
0
CII ..
..
(J '"
c ..
.!!! CI ~
ë. c
.¡:
E CII
0 CII
U c
'õ "51
c
c W
0 (J
;¡ IE
I'll
(J I'll
..
¡¡:: t-
"¡:
CII
>
CI
c
'ë
c
I'll
õ: >. >. >. >.
.c .c .c .c
'C 'C 'C 'C
Q) Q) Q) Q)
> > > >
e e e e
0- 0- 0- 0-
0- " 0- " 0- " 0-
« 0 « 0 « 0 «
I!!
:I
II)
I'll
CII
:E
c
o
;¡
I'll
CI
;¡
:ë
ëü~
" 0
:2Q)
>'C
'is'C
.S; æ
",,,,
..0
=
'0"
e~
Q)"
:2.c.
"'0
"''' .
8"'ë
'" Q)
~~ê
...-
=CD5-
co êã Q)
,<=>~
rn·c Q)
0-,<=
~"C-o
""'-
"..-
_!R~
mè)):c
"" "
:2_CI)
.~ J2 Q)
-g'E.c
.- -8 32
ïñ "
~d
~ æ ë g>-g 5 J9 æ ~ þ g> ~ c
'p, ¡!!~.. g. '~~1ii~'§~ ~
Q)i€<D"co (þiëro~-g.
0. cuE! 0. Q)_m--
roQ,:3"-() m~c_o~
g>:=c3~t~ '~=EiE~!!~
__EO) > "C ¡;,o.rnC
;g.g.ErnCfJ;n :s.g "scG)
:J(f. C~m .,Ccn'iO"e.E.....
..c c: ~ Q) N Q) ::) Q) C,)
=m8~.c. »=occo.·:e
~~ ë: ~ ~ ~ c ~ 0 0 CD 6--
(0....'0 00_ ctlø;iï3.c.a.>
'-ã)cmQ) -0~"..2:""=
O)q::'- <D_ Q) 0 m
õO-ou.d9E.l:I.. o.c:tií.....~
~c: Bomcø.Q
Q)ã)~1õ§:æ cm>:>8'Eri-o
oð)ø:JE+:õ> tV ;;:0. o:.:::c:
com com ::::s~g3:()§:m
ro _=.Q)cn ~ mÆ~ttI
::J CD 0 ro:!::::"'E .- 0)- >
J3=~-æE8 Q)£~~~Q)~
~() m :5....>000..5"
o·-»:æc. oa>- en
S:CQ)Q).c.c o-£OQ).cm
C:-S£:t:g --g UE~CD
:scuo_:!:ø oa:lêOa..c:;.E,æ
'''f!-''1 Q) '''1!!5«iSQ) "
a...oë5c:~ a..oc2;~gc:Q)
õø roe"'; tSœcn;:¡(UcE
~ g E g''ã._ :ß '0 .. E CD Ë 'ã.1ii.~
."Q)=E-2-.ÞQ)5 E2'''
~()oiií.!9 01! ij¡oI¡8"'¡¡¡- -g 8;" 2'
LO 1i)cnC,)cn,-U') 1ñom EE
is g>ui"=å.
i·_It) '"
",'"
"," -
:c eQ) 5-5
-cttl..CIì3=
" >- CD
m-rocnO)
e E .5
~.a-o"E
-c-m_m
ã;.¡¡ £ ~ <;!>
.- c rn mE
.c. CHþ ~
(I) co Õ Q) ~
~ CDo::UJ
0_ a. a::: u)
"C C (þ ,« Q)
Q)Q)_(þ...J....
"C~o~C)æ
(U,-c Q) co
.J:"Co!¡::CQ)
'" "'.- Z E
ëij-
~E'Oe«"
'"" 0
=0"""1-=
(U ol= a. ::::J:I: co
iš '2 ,g C) ,2>
~ ;- m ~::; ~
:ê«le-cñe
C) OCü«l
::J'O.5 fj¡::õ>
" ..
co ~._W"C
._"C:J: .."
E"I-
"t ¡¡; - CJ) ~
c:b ~.E Q)W ~
u)"CE£<o
~~VlG)G)u-)~~":-"i~~ Õ~(Q
",ti5"'8"'''8!'tN..!!- .-
~,9d..oU~,¡!!"'- Q)'C ~c ~>1õ
..oe-c..o'Ë~~~"':~ ü~
c..-o0 ....rO --..n- -~
VI dJ·;:VldJ~J:~O">.... Q)""~
§~''!:G§o..~.C'O~~ _5~.""
ï:: ~8.~ .g 'ß ~ ;;; ~ ~ ~ .~ '"
Q, u.JQ, .-Q.GJ......O.L: o~o..
(/)oQ)....V'l32_>Q)=t5> Q)ctlc:
'-J:;Jeu ·-"40>c.- 00.0
IV 0.. '1::1 G) =' CO'! ,:?::''::: rO i:: C .....-
'8Q)~§'8::~"E",G ~.g.;!
U5>"u1!..~$ui;¡; 'Ë...:g
___~~_...._~(õ~~ og::l
C 0 'Z 'C C Q.J S; Q.J GJ -..n 'Vi c ~ en
Q.J '-oQ)E ......c"OQ) (U'-_
g§=Ö£E'':::~!U::'''..c 5'OãLm
.....- C'O =' C Q) n:I EO-" -
a;1ij-("I a;.L:"'_o.Q¡;-'1:;: CQ)
> 00_ >.... Q) ","'C ~ E s CD
OE8~o~~.~n:I~ ~~ M
ÜE~_Q",:S;~~~~ ~~ë ~
o ~ II'! ~-o U"'I Q) o·c.,." 'e- co::l >
....~ OCO">£-~o ~E~ co
_g::~::in:lO'l>tí~uo. c; ëD à5
cU"l..c- U"'I_Q) ", 8'0",
n:I.~~SO~~'-L~'-~ C 0
~-_Vl_' -..c_....LC «I -
VI _ ,~"'CQ)~OG)-~CO-- ~
:3""'0 'õt:ect:",.oE,-o ~o I
c..~§c~n:l8ëoESE~~'- ~
o ..D :J G)'"Ç: ru Q) Q) u..
~ VI ,_ c' 0 Q) > ~ - e 0. Wi.
e;o :;; ~ ~ .!2 ~ -g E -= <3 ':; ~ 't Q) ~ y)¡;;'tl)
~ 0'1 0.= tj 0'1 ;j ru._ '- -- ~ > ~ « ,
--: U"\ E 0 ~ U"'I ~ c: GJ >- çr :J "'"": tV Q) 0' :ú'
U"'I ..0 ,_ U <J'¡ ...0 ._ n:I ~ ..0 ~ U It) CO "C i>- U-~ 'II
n1
'0 ~>'
on:r!NA!.
'"
-
-
o
N
-
"
C>
æ
,¡;
o
o
N
W
Z
~
....,
-
.!!
:;¡¡
¡!
.s::
c: 0
0 '"
.¡¡¡ c
":; t:
0
is a.
..
Q a:
c: ."
~ C
co
'"
:J c
m '\:
0
-
c
0
:IE
c
0
B ¡
'"
c: ..,
.!! Q ~
Q. c:
.¡:
E GI
0 GI
0 c:
'õ "¡:;'
c:
c: W
0 u >.
~ IE .c
t! ."
Q)
¡¡: .... >
.¡: e
GI a. c
> c.
« 0
E
:J
'"
IV
G>
:¡;
c::
o
:¡:¡
IV
Q
E
:¡;
Q
c::
ï:
c:
IV
ii:
!¡;-t'::
c.'"
oc.
m_
> °
Q) .
." ",,,,
CD£ã>
=.S~
"'-Q)
C",-",
"''' '"
·",m
"' -
c " °
° °
I!!."Þ
CD ca"-
c.oO
goQ)
--'.c:
0. ;.
.....r.r.i.,C
~Q)'"
Q) Q) Q)
c.- "
"' ~-i"
Q) Q) t:
t§-,æ
"'- Q)
Ll)~"tJ
. Q) Q)
~"'O..c
o >.B
"Ea:lcn
'" c. '"
-gü)g
"'::> 0
1i5E.e
>. >.
.c .c
'" '"
Q) Q)
> >
e e
c. c. "
c. " .2"
« 0 0
c
o
"' c ~~~::; Q) 'õ ëõ
mo ......J:...
e~ e .- U)c&:
",eo Æ1.c:c
:)0. .o;¡;;¡;.Qc:
C)"C E 0'- -';;::t: 0
c: Q)- ~:Þ"C
';;,Q)-", "'-"",
m= Q)ot= t: 0 CD
.w :'øc:Q)O-
rAJ:q>::IG)1i5"C~
-g'ø ~(i5C:'-
~e~~sc"'-g
E "'- ...: 8 J!! .-
a.=.5:¡¡:.ê c: Q)
"::is C::Þ Q) CD G)..c
0"'- Q) -- .c E
Q)Ø!=-CO Q)=
't;o.t:.Eo.!:::tO
Ca;U)C)_U):JJ:
0...... "ã)C:ëefjø
1SES.c:Q) IEcn
;:>(l. '" c E= Q) c
-=ø"c·-o.«I1;: O
f/).t::.o._"SJ::o:þ
,,-e!l1C'"'or¡
8 c: ftJ!! Q) 00_ 0
;S c:( )( c:.0) (t -
~... ¡ñ,g ~.9- '"
e:Þ ......O·-·~ c:
8.'" . '" 2 " t: .-
C1)cc: «I::JO)
E-.2.¡;1D ::;.'!I';
œBtscCc1:l(/)æ
1-.Q2s82ã>-:15.
<D 115 - (,) Iõ:: to
..oc:Q)°2ø>C)
8::>~ ~ 0"
.....= C'" û$~~:e
trim m c:-o.m
. .r:. _ Q.-r 8 ~ 0. c
II) en 0 0.... ...., cu C)
.".----"-~.. _._...,_._--_..,-_._--,._._._~_.,.__._._-_.._--_.__.~'...-------
I~E~~_gZëõ~~~le¡~'õ~Æ
..- 0", c.", "Q)", -"'-.-- ..
c:.t::c: _C:''''''Q) _C (Oa:lm '0
~-~Q)~=ëõ ec:"CQ)"C~EðB-
a:lõQ)øJ::~~£~·m~œæ~Q)~~c.Q)~
E--~",",'- "'''.c: Q) 'EO
~ - 7e_~œc::o_ ~~roo.~·¡::
- -Q)....."o..&:80 cn~':;oo(t Q)a.
~~ (t ~sm~- œc::c::c>~~~
~œ§S ~~o.~œ~·,-~ro~~ros-
(t ~c~ s_ ~~ U~Q~~
a..e 6> ~ 1:: (t 0 Æ ~ ~ c:: œ 8. ~ æ õ ~ ã1
~_ œ~~_~mc(t œC::o~ ~~
°æõ~£õæ~~~u~5œ.e~~5S
uC::~~~cEro~~~eO~W~UD~
g~i~~ili~~r~~~~i¡~m
-mœ~œ~ o_Q)~cn~£~e~~c::
ê~ Q) Q)£~ ø 5.0£.." ~ Œ ~~ a...cQ):¡O·S
~~..&: ~CQ) c_~ ..cOO) ~Q)
O-£-~Q)t'\300..c~ ~ <D ..cw-
"'~ -_ p c::~o...c_c::C
~~mo~ mQ)o~~~ø=~·-e
..c..c § c"'t':] ~_.¡;J E - ro ~ <D (t
~=___§~o~m 0 S~~ø..c~
._<u~a.~'§= 01:$- U)mW
~~e~~ ~~~~roQ)æ£'AU)§ø~
-o.x_ (t -c~..&:~- -Q)~~<D
o ~ CD....... 0.= () CD a. - g:I Q) C () ro E =
-Q)œc¿~~ ~a. ~~..c~æ= ~
~§SR~~<~roQ)~'=~~c::l!m
~ðc::cnÆ.e~-œ£3 <~ ·~c::CD
~l~~~cniogc~~ :~~~E~
Æ..c..cm~-Somm~·~()R2~ø
~R~~~~>Q)a.~o.o. mQ)mU)o~
~CD~enø ~œQ) E~~~ c~
~>~CDCD~~maøQ) eu-~roa.
~~ã1==uoE~~£8~~Bæ~~b
õ '"
.~ C t-
i ~ ~~~
~B ~õ
CD 0)'_ ~
~:6:28:0
=enØ:1cñ
to Q)"C en'c
~-gcc..c
en_moQ)
ø 0 C)~"C
§,.E.c (J2-g
._ en Õ
ø'- c: ~ m
or=- .æ ~ ~
" ... 8,.,
'ËÞ-ø '"
ro.æœ"Cõ
:: m·¡:: æ~
~.2 eë u:
mj5 0. CD =
~ ~g-[~
ðme'SÕ
- " Q) C'",
Q)::>",CDQ)
-c~~_= .
Q) G)_o a.(ij
8"13 g>8,Z¡'5j
~ ."eg-¡¡¡
a. ðJ £'13 - E
"i=cnCDc:
..c.- ~ ~ c CD
;¡;I ~~'~8c~
I.OCÞa.a. CD
0>
~
-
°
M
~
Q)
'"
'"
a.
Ii;
o
o
N
I!J
Z
::::>
--,
M
15
>
~
m
°
æ
'< fJ¿\KC
() jjj {p
~.
>- --' .
~. < i11
·õ ~ (c,.
()~IN!-'l
~
.!!
:;t
u
..
c: ,c
0 0
jii ...
c
> t:
Õ 0
Q.
aI ~
c: ...
'g >. c
..
:J D ...
ID 'C C
" "C
> 0
e ~
0. "ë
0. e: 0
« 0 :I!
c
0
Q :¡¡¡
u
c: ...
.!!! aI ;¡
ã. c: ~
1:
E :B
0
0 .:
'õ g'
c: w
0 u ~
~ Ii
.. 'C
I;: I- ~
.¡;:
~ 0.
0. e:
« 0
aI
c:
'ë
c:
CO!
¡¡:
Q
..
::::I
III
CO!
Q
:¡¡
c:
o
i
aI
;e
:¡¡
:t:£~E'õ
~ 8.g .ª
.~ co...;õ
'E ~æ$
~(QE~
.- -0 C ct
en c 0> ø
~ 11="
<I)"'.s::
ISo rn .......
o co ~ 0 .
NÕ c::-.$
.s::" 2 ~ ~ 55
__«"CE
_ en Ot
o § æ Q) co
c:oro-5at
:8=ü.s::e:o
co co CtI CfJ
-e-æøg~
o......cOo
()c:- 3:
e~ .90
.s:s..g>Q)Z¡
.... 0...2 -E: :J
o<moc..
'e: 'C
a. î.§ ~ fij
et50e
("')a..~EiL
cbQ)C:~Q)
u$£8~£
e: <II"
~.;=
.5 'õ .s
<lie:
e: -
0'C e
0"0
=~
.- c.
~E~
'" 0> ~
e:~
g1¥ø
s.""'" .~
(/),e:t::
0<11 .
_:J 55]!
c ø UJ 0
B'C:k~
~ ~õ 0>
_roc:c
~ã. :s
o E=
0" 0:>
Do/=!Q
- .,
C)(ij >.=
"2.c to-
:::J ø ~ 0
o_me
~ .2
'Cõ
DE.,, !!
~ c.õ <II
~'3e:ø
LÒ áš=s 51
>.
D
'C
~
e
c.
~
E >- $
j I'g
l~ï.~
eC't:Jrn
Q, "t: c: <tI
....D
.,::;; 0
~ <11'-
"" .. e: 'C
.= (Þ.2·g
=0)-0)
.'" :I! E 0.
'"'_ [ro
en 0 0 c:
If~~
~x 0)'-
....00"0
o ~ co :;:¡
o.~'"
~ Q) Q) Q)
S..c..cD
c_->.
ec::õro
.- E
~;5~z.
~'3 ~ ==
:>'Coo
m,æc.s
Dg~~
't-;;;'¡ijE
....",co
Lri m øol::
e:
o
>.
D
'C
0>
>
e
0.
0.
«
0>"
e:.s::
'e:~
:>~
'Ce:
0>
'" E
e: .,
0_
"tiS a.
.!II E
E'-
0>=
..
¡¡¡,c
" <II
"'~
,ce:
~.~
"ä.
.=~
0>
e: "
0>=
.,
N .
.- e:
.5,g ~
e: 0 ~
.- 2 :>
E1ií::!
o e:"
1-8E
0>
~~.~
to "ë' g
oriQ..2
-,..._..._..._--,-~._-_._~._-_.
"
o
~~~ ~~ ~~ o~ ~ g ~~£
....::1 CQ) ~.~ .s::'- 0.'"
-oct! Cl)co ~> 0- :>-0. ...
c:~~ rJ)~øÞ..2 si õ ~~30'5~
·mca> ::JQ)Q)_~ me:~ ~ -0
~Q) C:Q)~oE Q)æQ)E
.s:ee '-(0) Q) 8= ~ Q.a. Q.r:'J
mE- _~Cœ ~ p °m~3~
EoC o~œ0c 0 c· ~ ~c
08 ce~~o ~~ ~~=s=mc
CD c: o~'Oü .J2ö ~.º~.c~- 2
:z:. ~ .8 Q) -"C c: 2 S e>tn m CD m g L..
(1)ro i ..·-m_"iñ-~ -ê.s_~U'Jc~
~ ~ø ~~0)~'tJ55~ ~æc:§~8~
~ "E ro ë:=;:io ,ce: 8 .92.. E c "'C 0 ( ) ::J 0 ~
eCD~ CD_"Cm e~- cEEE~~
Kæ EOS.s=.L..Q..5-Q) 58·g..::J~ëi"C
3E ~Ø~'SCDQ)~ ~_~~ œC
"C~ø ~~g! 5 ~ 2jQ).cc:~m
~ø~ Q)'5~~C:oo~ _ g~œ"C
" ~- 0-:5 ø~c:Q)'tJ.g
§.... .~o.coQ)=CÐ Q. 'C:OOC;:J¡¡¡~
~~~~~~~i~~~æ~8~~~iQ.e'v
i2~i"C"C~~&::JQ)~E=~~~8co.£
a.rn 0_c:~oøE c:Q.co.-tnQ) .~
occ-::Jœ-ocEmQ)~~~cO) ~~
~8~~æ¡~~~8~~g8~8§<~~
'"
~
'õ
...
~
.,
0>
'"
Q.
.;;
o
o
N
W
Z
::J
...,
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
'"
'It
o
>
to
a;
o
oc
I
C<:
< ~i\~k,>
() <t: '(fJ
z '"
¡¡: m
r--
r_) t::J
OR:r>iNAI
>-
c
-
.!!
:;¡:
u
..
.c
C (.)
0 '"
"¡¡¡ c
'> t:
0
C c.
..
01 a:
c "
'6 c
..
'"
::s c
CD 'I:
0
-
ë
0
::Iii
c
0
Q) ;¡
..
u '"
c ;¡
.!!! 01 s¡
ã. c
.¡:
E III
0 III
() c
'õ '61
c
c w
0 u
:¡:¡ !E
f! I!
I¡:: I-
.¡:
Q)
>
f
::s
ø
ca
Q)
==
c
o
:¡:¡
ca
01
:¡:¡
¡
01
C
'c
c
ca
ã:
=15
"'0
iišc
- "
C
Q)'C
E Q)
Q.~
'5 E
"'",
"',,-
$,=
'"
:aë5ø
. "C.2 ~
( ) (t .-
C:o-ã)
.~ a: ¡¡¡:!2
ø~.g? :::I
"Ë°-c ~
CD"C (J)......
)( c:::l Q)
Ocao~
Z'C"'-
m" "
CD 0 0- ~
00::: ctI ::I
.g~Q)~
~O ~ E
.
-10... -- (/)'tJ ü~ -·CD....
(õ ~ (õ :::.. Q) c: .~ræ g ~ = S
~c: ~o::: ..Sea e _~c-'¡=
......:::1 _C)~g>.~ a.Q) œ(t Q).....
~~ ~~~~ ~ Q)= i ~i-
.§"'¡: .9-.2:2 ~ 0 .= g' ~ 2"ë 5-
o-f6 g.!§~:s ~ ~.S·§ ~ 0,s!;! a.
tl) Q. CP ê_ctJ æ~'~='C ~ ~~O
~~ lj-ðe..öE-g.-EU'J"i¡ roj9"C"'!
CD" ."''''::> N ","'Eo
=-ö.æ(l):S'-õ~=Q)rg~ è:_m
"O¡¡:~"C~~1'"SÓ;e~ ï5~~( )
~.S3l3~~êezz~~ ~q::Q)~
0::: ~:5! 0::: U) co 0._ CD (t ~ . 0) g>tõ ~
':::I::II:::IE....-o '-en ... x
"'0 .0 O)~ <'0 '- ~ ~ :::I c: "0 1:: "C·c Q) Q)
1:øoJ:ø":cn'Coø.,g? æ::::l§
-0 t'Oï...u~"C 2-_ ~=.J::J co "C N_
cQ.CDc: CQ)C 0 O>§"O0~
roä;5m"'C:::Iœ~,g2=o '-Q,)Q)Q)
"C( )õ"C~"'Cü(t Q)~~Eõ~o>-~
~5~~g~_2~c:( )( )~glQ)~
0:: "C :::II'V () 'š: 0 g.~ 8 _ CD ø ro...... .- ~"
~mæ1Q)tæQ)~ ~_~()§Q)~~~
O:::lEO~~~5~<ctlCI) .J::J~o(t
.
.
.
.
.
>-
.c
'0
Q)
>
°
a.
c.
«
£:
o
~m6~i~
--g:st--š
(/) :::I ~ ¿ C"1ij
CD..c tl. 0 I!?.c:
'3't:.=:gmU)
g.e « :ë 0 .
'-_>E-SCùi
",,,,c..ouc
_en= ~(l.Q
ü ttI~c:«~
.~UJ>~.22;·E-
e@ca..~cn
a..~-5Q):g ~
to g~ m CD ~
Q) Ë 0 ·ë;,.5 S "0
S -")::'1. CD
u.(/)_>
- c e O:¡::l
_ero-::'I ·5
°ccno(/)_.2
o Q)ü m= Q)
cü..c:a..E>"
o -< ::'I
:;:;-_""")cc"O
üoocnoo!:
2 -:0=;+:1
ø § == õ ~s .9
c·->·C.- ::'1"0
Om ø~ C)Q)
ü-c·-EØ-
55 .2 a C)~ ¡
..c E :!!e·~... E
T""Q):3_>Q)G)
cbã.~5.2"Oã.
Lri.Éet::ü:e 5.5
.... ...-.' ~... -_..__....~-_.._.~. --_...~-_.. -.--.----
-~----_.._~_...-
"'~g>
¡so..
-ê >-'£:
:J ro"O.b
(/)~_.-
"OQ)o~
CDEG)o.
~:;:;:c 0
a. I ro::Æ:
x Q) Q. 0
",~mO
.cON
'0- "'
~_.!II i?
.a01i:i~
.!II E -6 e
'0 c.
>.:3G)Q.
ø .s J5 ~
5.£ëñ 0
'S: E 'S:~
E ~"'
o.ro~Q)
~ "'=
"'~£:
1;5=",E
~g~,g
.
-EQ)
°0""
Eo ; '"
"1;;"'
_5 ,,=
.5"0 E
E.!!!,g
to ~ C)
=Õ0> oE
~ ~!Ë .
m~"O~
~:g 'õ'ëj
2..Q)G)~
"'~:¡¡ °
"O...aI~
m 0 Coo
2>.BN
-:;m(/)(I)
aI"O'- Q)
..c:Ù5(/)..c:
'" '0 "
=EaIaI
m.. c> e
... I ¡;;. Q.
S :E -5 g-
m ~ ::>
;:=(/)2)
.
'"
~
õ
'"
~
'"
'"
'"
I).
,¡.;
o
o
N
W
Z
:::J
--,
""
'\!i
>
m
ã;
°
i;:'
I
~f"'I\[/ý
"<il!,r
O....J '-;"r'
)-.« ñ
\---- Z ì-
õÜ: (":,
OFi:r:~:';Þ.,l
. -
.!!
:¡¡
U
G>
.<=
c:: 0
0 '"
"i¡¡ c:
'S: 'E
Õ &.
CI ~
c:: ..,
'6 c:
..
'S '"
c:
IX! ;:
0
-
ë
0
::E
c:
0
II> ..
..
0 '"
c:: ..
.! CI i
Q. c::
.¡:
E CD
0 CD
U c::
"61
'õ c
c w
0 u
~ IE
I!
Iõ' l-
.;:
CD
>
f
::::J
ell
III
II>
::E
c::
o
i
CI
:¡::
¡
CI
c::
.¡:
c::
III
¡¡:
!š
=..
..~
.<= ~
"'0
",0>
.."
e'>
..~
f~
..u
0."
'C~
"..
....
tn'á.>.
'C",-.::
......
e..c:3
~C)
~ ~ IE
~-g-g
~4>iõ'
> ~
~8~
.
i~ø
~i~
o.N'"
§=~
'"
sl9ro
1i5 U'J .!:2
~.2'E
o _~ ~
'C<;"
æ~ ro
"''''
$! CD·E
'ë{)~ ~
§~ s
cn.........
1ijU).£!3c
-acom
E ~ ~ ~
,g .... en....
g¡.!: §:
êiS5-E:æ
:::J 0 Co....
Ot'CctlO
.
c:
..
=
'"
'"
~
j2
'"
'0
'"
e
'0
'"
>
..
0.
"
::>
c: "
0::>
'Co
"'.<=
8,<;
",0.
~~
-5 "Ë
"''''
oc~
...---_. --"~-'-'--'---"-'"
!,!O ~~
';;¡[:S'C
Q)< Q)....
~>õ8.
g~i5~
gCõ>:Scn
O",Q)
"'-')(
:; U),...g to
oCcn.J:
..:.::::8-CQ)e
".. Q) > 0
g~~oE
._)(N ...
"~Q)c:0
C 0. Q) co (þ
]iw1ä=e
.S Q) Q) ~:5
~£=~;5
",.- !í
"Oâ)......oø
CQ)<o:t õ
~ E ~ ~:2
- 'CQ)
19¡;J!:!....>
~ :; æ ~~
.
.
_.._-_..~_.-
CD....- ....
ª,J2 .~ ~
o i Eo...:
ø~~e.~
~:so~198
:s>.œ_u
::J--"' c:
-Q)!!' ::>
.~~S€e
øco~~cn
tt:I 0)'- c> Q)
Q) c: UJ c: .:?:
....-- :::J'e: 1tí
ctI~U)Q,)-
"C CD > CD
~õ~8~
-.:: c: e- >
~e;:)~o
=ëctla.....Q5
_..cco>
ro.!:2~~8
~~ ~.§Æ
:ëui1;)=.g
SQ)C:~:<=::
(I) =ã. 8 û) ª
.
-c ¿:5
æ.Q·!í
--
.. '"
o»C:
""0
'C 0,-
:::J ><ë c»
-c Q) CD.5
ø ~ §-tó
c:0) ~
OC:=
'-.- ¡¡:
~ 0.'0 e
·-eco.
Eoctl>
Q)cn_.D
ø _ a 0
:::JO)........
-CCOQ;l
:c - 16
CD.c CI 3:
> 2 .!:
~ '0-
"S, C7) eO
.a '" "
_ 0
- C) o;:æ
g-ê:ê.!:2
5m~a.
üõ~ g.
.
C:'CU¡
]jC:::>
c:"'C
'ëij ~ Q)
E..c::ã
œ g:~
.....'- >
ii!1.!!""
0'" E
+1=
!!lgJo
'~.!2 .....
S_ø
.... ~
E _ >-
",0-
C:;t: ~
'e E'-
0'- <;
a. - i
'" 11 '"
c: tV cñ
~.8~s
c: G) .... ·CiS
~: gz.~
~..g~
.
'0," >-'0"""
::> - '-", E'-
E ~Si= I!!
_tV12:ooG)
03:~e-~
C-g~o.~D
~e'õc:e-
tv Q)Q)O
-"Q)'¡;:>
::::J:=U)s::>m
E.Q::>_-:>
::::J ='_a.c
00. Q)Q)~
~_ >.u·õ c:
æm~etV
G) u~ :J en
~mi:~<nc: .
:¡::¡;'-gG) >-0-
Q)~S~.D(ñæ
> ._ <n-
O e.c.c"C·-....
Eo"o",E:!2
J:: tV .....C' Q)€
e ",0..._"
__ (/} 0. (/}ot=.
"C.~o·-E:J>-
C:"C"O<ng"C1i.i
coê5C:~uÆ~
~_G)(/}co.o~
E'C"'2 .-0.
.- C:.c .... -~ )(
..Jm_.QO>Q)
.
'"
~
õ
'"
~
Q)
0)
..
0..
.;;
o
o
N
W
Z
::>
-,
'"
t
>
e
en
o
æ
I
oc
'òÅf.:-
Þ'x ~<'"
- 'cP
~ -(I
> u.-
m
- r-
l) CJ
Cr'('('Ir...;,.1.L
-
.!!
:¡¡:
¡¡
.z=
C <J
0 '"
e
"ii 'f
os: 0
Õ c.
~
CII 't>
C e
'6 to
'"
'S e
aI 't:
0
-
'E
0
~
e
0
'" ~
'"
U '"
c i
.!!! CII
ë. c
.¡:
E Q)
0 Q)
(,) c
Õ '61
c
c W
0 u
;: E
.,
u I!
¡¡: I-
.¡:
Q)
>
C
~
:I
II)
.,
'"
:e
c
o
;:
.,
CII
B
:e
CII
C
·C
c
.,
ii:
0> 0>
e e
'3' 'i¡;
0" .
:gC1J~
.....-rom
UJ·c (/)
'" ","'
=-<1>
a."'~
Q)E8:
0> "
...... II>
C:01::;
.s _ ~
~~=
00.0
Q)ES
u e "'
.¡g~o;
~ o·~
"' E
'" e '"
.z=o.z=
-~ t)
Q) =ë ....
N'OO
:=(01-
.0 '"
",,,,-
û55~
.
'"
;;
êií
$
.¡¡;
'"
;;
E
,g
:5
o
~ .
u>-
'" '"
~'O
-t:
$0
;Q~
.~~
> u
'" '"
> '"
0....
EO
",'0
cr:15
.z=~
0>"
.- 0
.z=.z=
.... ,
0'"
"' e
'00
0",
.¡::
., ~
a."
>
0>0
.§ ..c:
"a.
'OE
"'0
~N
"S;: c:
:¡::¡ro
U.z=
"'-
O>~
c$
~~
œ ~
rnS .
Q)(/)=ë'
~"O .g
".1::: .,
Osa.
.
.
;5õ1ij
3' m g.
>-"",
ã.
E13'O
O'C CD
0û.í!E
",!!2
=....::J
~'CE
II> c Q)
'"
0> 't>
.~..- æ
>..,.
"'CO
a...,. e
" .
2~O(/)
eæ3~
g ~$
00 '"
~O~E
-0.(0)
ro « (t c:
-3..>£3">
~ëhö~
.
.;
'"
"'
'"
.z=
a.
.5
'C
~
"
'0
c
8
.,
.0
'0
:;
o
.z=
"'
0>
C
'is
œ
C)
~~
1&
'x
~~
0:;
'00'
e e
'"
Q)
15:=
.,1':
.0"
Õ
e ~
>
~8
"'
'" ¿
~ c.2
ø.QÕ
13]í2
Æ.,CDØ
e :? S
Cl.>u
.
.
'O~
",ê
'0",
œ
0>.,
!!:c
23 "Ci)
., '"
"',22
~
~.!!
~:t:::-o
"' .$
....(/}~
CDro9'
g. E
~§8
-8 ~.!!1
_ c
~ ø.2
..,.... ro 13
e 2
Cl.",_
CD co ~
.z=eo
f-"'u
.
>-
.0
'0
.,
>
o
5-
a.
<t
'0"
",.z=
.0-
"5.9
"''0
~!!
",'E-
t'O= ~
"'- '"
l::o:E
o e >
~..ï5
,,".0
'0.0 ii!
~uiQ)
","'.z=
C.z=-
,2 g~
iZ"''O
"Ë (/) ~
., E '"
Q)eB
.c 0>"'
-es
~ Co U
.~ c: Q)
.co.o
~:æ:æ
ogiij
--"Ë c)
_e
.0 .,.3'
0»0
cb~=
i.ÖcoS
c
0
e- ,¡gee",;;
0" ,g¡.Q ",;;.3'
","' g¡en '" Ö
"'"'
.!2)ro 0'- ...--
:t:::Q) EQ)"SæO C>
E_ en CD;; eEü ~
'" c mQ. 'õ
~.§" .Q ~.c- « I"-
"'.ec>j~>
"''€ .f!), c::::J ~U) ~
" '" E"eCl. '"
"'a. Q)õ£D:: ~Q) c>
~ ro
16.9 > Wü£ Cl.
c13 ~ _> CQ) oi)
"S; coo.. CD:.ë·!:: 0
"'", e cr:.c I ª 0
'Em CWl-l"CIQ) N
.,,,, 0.'- > 0.... w
E- >.c-cië=§ z
~5 ttI 0 0'- =>
E+:JE ...._
a.u coea..$ro -,
'0 .5
c ..: .....9-0)< c~ 0>
" ., 8.~ e ~Q)o ""
LL 0:2 0
c o.~ o co a.= .9 (,) >
.2 Cl.:g me. ~....a.. '"
~ ~" > c: a>< W
Q).c 0 c:: a.>
-,"' o c>ú"S.Q-, 0
~ en '" :J :::J C" Q) en jÿ
.,;; ,: Q)2"CaJ>( ) I
0 ;; -0 '==e~~= cr:
0 E- ¡¡¡
Q. '0 œ~ .
<t :; ::d! j.¡. ii, /...~[
> 0 ~€ "..-¡j
-, .z= Oz 'ó'
(J) en a.J2 .>- ü: ;:.
j-- rn
Õ r-
c'
(Y1'(::!~,j_",: -'
-------
- -
.!!!
:;¡¡
~
J:
C (J
0 '"
Iii c::
:e
'S; 0
õ ...
..
01 0::
"
C c::
:¡; ..
'"
.:¡ c::
In ;:
S
"
0
::Ii
c::
0
II> ;;
'"
0 ;:¡
c i
.!!! 01
Õ. c
.¡:
E II>
0 II>
(,) c
'õ 'ij)
c
c w
0 0
B IE
t!
I;:: ....
;:
II>
>
II>
...
::J
II>
III
II>
:E
c
o
:¡:;
III
01
E
:E
01
c
'ë
c
III
ii:
ë 6 ~~ ~ 53·s
~'m ëã- .~.8~
g¡'- > - ..
Q) ~ ~g. 'Ë ~ø>o
~ Q) Q) Q) ..c CD
m_"tŠc: CD"C
_°(1)0,8 Q) 50)
~ 'ë'E £ 'is£
c.C:o..-c( ) ::J"C
EO Q)c "'01::
'-~~mg13C: em
cO e0Q)C1> >-
o~o·_::J·_E ggcri
'ëñë-Û)u2<D '-Q)-
.~m~Q)~a.Q. ~O)~
~ 5-s ~ c ~.5 'Ë CO!E
::1-0..... Q)"Ct:
':-oP-ëi5E Q)m~
œc:i3°.~o-g 5-m
a.> to roC1>E4:: co .-.ê-
..c <ngQ)cn o m..... 0
--Q)m c:: §;;O~
3: 8«iß.Q)·Q (1)'- '>.- ~
Æ 0 E CD:5 ~ 10 Õ ~. Q) .E
>õ:+:;O 'Ë0-6æ~Q)
&. a.~~õ CD.3lEü E£
'õ§~.!€~
.-'- (I)"'"
~«íõ~c
;, .Q)~ co·- £i
.......:t:::COC<DO
E co..... ro
Q) Q)(I)a:la.
:5 ..... :2 .0. E
UJ 0..... Õ._
:!::ÕEC'e~
._ ._ <11._
..J~o"'Oa.ëõ
(.).- CD 0 ::J
Æ.E-rots- 0-
e Q)::I:= Q)'!:::::
a. CT en (t
c Q) ~ 0 Q)
~ co en 5~~
_ Q) ø 0.::::::'
<f.I"'O m :='
õ"5.":;: Q) fôE
oEEeo
Q) "'0 a. -
~(t _f6Q5E
ro..c a. ~
(1)-0£-0
;;"'ã; Cã)Q>
'+=E.Q>5.
O)~(t m~fI)
C Q).....-.....
1:::: ,:¿ 01.::::::' -":>.,
::Jcoo:=Q)~
Om CiE50
.
C cñe.!::: ( ) Q) 2'(1) eDt)
~ü to co ~5.s.ª:5.~
(.)0::: ~Q)oC)C:(I).....e
::JUjC5EC:Q)cn.Ec..
-g ,0 e=~'Ë U)
a::õQ...... II) !R'- Q)~:2
Q)<c.eüæø en_
c'is'> a:: 0 C Q) ::J Õ
o ¡;:; -") è:' O.c "C
·-a.U)oUJ>olñ- ~
r.n _......=(1) c::)
-~Q)Æl::o.a·- ~œØ
e£-Œl..... E~a..e
u.J->~.sl~Q,)..Q-
gx.c._ c£ Q) Q,)w aI'¿
"'C æ:"'C Q) .l: ~ Q) en =
Q) 0 Q) C t: ~-.l:.l: ro ro
.:Jt. >oº:J~ot-- >
C~e(l)(I)o- c:::Q)ø
Æ:ã §:'ê -g i m :; ~ ·ffi
õ~alcuroE:~"rl~tsE
5š Q) m'- ts·9!.(~·£ e
a>ooQ,)= ro.!l c eëõa..
(1)<.).0 .l:£=e.oc<r:
~~Q)o=~ m U_O
U W > :J E"È UJ ~= «
....._al"'Ca.. ° Q):.E L-3;
ð.~.cQ) oJ::E-.9a..~
:s£.£.5 E ~ E æ«-
cueo-j9(1)Q)u >O"'C
.c +=cual.ccoc c
t-<.) ~ ......Q_._,c._« ro
.
1i)$~Q)
8¥jU,s
"'Coø>
'" ,s,c
E '"
~:2016
"'C>->
e Q) 0
~o 0._ a.~
.Do.
~ >.S (t
:Sale.
.!!1 E ~-g
.~..... aI ro
..'"
0.",_
ø.Q c c
.QQ)roQ)
_~( )E
0"'C E 1:::'
c:: '"
UJQ>Q5g-
().c.co
a::-õ ci
W - me)
"'0 ~ -s..S; a..
_0- >,J'c«
~~e~2;
cnø5a..cn
,,"''''
",,OJ:
> -
e ~.....
~E.e (j)
.. ~
c;E$ õ
"I!!~ IX)
"áëo ~
:J 0. C>
eQ)Q) ro
5Q):ë a..
o-:.~ an
Ucõ.. g
CLOo. N
«-..
>= w
.,_ Q) Z
~~~-rl ;;
,s~~'ê Ii
.9 5 a.. ~
:2CÞ.9-c ~
.. '" <D
o.õ~ ..
!ß ~.!:! g ;i
CD -c:s 5:
"- .5 " ~" 't,A~~
) -,y
UJ ..,.-,
~ <iF:
'- n~:r::!~~)
.
.
: -
.!!
:;¡:
"
"
~
c 0
0 '"
ïii c
'> t:
0
Õ c.
"
œ Q;
c 'tJ
'5 c
..
'S '"
c
In 't:
0
-
'E
0
2!
c
0
III ~
U '"
C :;:;
.!J! œ ~
õ.. c
"¡:
E III
0 III
U c
'õ '61
c
c W
0 u >-
i IE .L>
U I! 'C
¡¡:: l- ( )
>
.¡: e
III c.
> c. c
« 0
e
::I
III
lIS
III
::E
c
o
:;::
lIS
œ
E
::E
œ
c
ï:
c
lIS
¡¡:
""0 Q)= '-
Q).c (Q ~
Q)""".c ::J
0....(1)0
~.eU):ë
"'''
-CD CD>
g::: >
(1):;-
'æQ)°i
~=~~
!!l'5Eo.
.- 0 c:
~"5[g
""OSOe
m 1: u5.2
0.- Q) Õ
cn"CE2cñ
~.æ~ø"C
"'" " .,
.- 0 c: e
.£: 0. co 0
Q) co",
> Q) 0 C
§ .0 ~ ~ëi)
-.p= 21:::::: ø
oco......::¡E
2..c U)"C U
1i)ø§ x
c"Oo""OS
o C_ Q)_
()rooBo
..c:c>~
C.oe~
.L>E:¡::¡Q.œ
~ e '"
~.,.,:o( )o
1/)....."o.oE
>-
.c
'C
!:
e
C.
C.
«
c
o
... Q)'" Q) '- (1)
~.co.2oE
E-'C.!-S
.- -æ Q) .c'"
CI),s:; 0.-0 ::I Q)
...UJQ.Q)"c'c
o"'~-
.s ()o~
ø... Q).......-
1::: ",""" 0. -
mOrn'-'C
Q)ccc:o=
..2: O>_,-·c ~
13 5 - Q) 0.....
~ t/) X J:J "C ~
:ß~.e:ææõ
.g.g~~ 01'-
0.._ c: 0
_ ",,_ Cf .-
ëij::loe>ccn
~ J2 ~.s ~ ~
§'õcæa>..Qø
:¡::¡ .... Q,) 0-"'0...... Q)
(.)(1)_Oc~.g.
2ã)cQ)co 0-
00 E ~£ C)g.E
§.~ e ~_E "0
o"Co.~Ee·ê
C)taoæoi:J
c..c->Ec..c
'c:;¡:"C 0 Q) '-
::I ~'Q) (.) Q) 0
o rn Q.Q)£g"O
Q) 0. ( ) Q)
~ "'S: c " C.
ctI::Jo~·-",o.
<,?õ_( )2-~e
~.5 g.£ '(6.Q 1:
I/) en.=.::: O"c (.) Q)
'tJ n. CD >-.,æ
~()..cëi5=
:¡::¡~""'5'S!U>
ccn~'>'§~
~::¡'¡;''''CU:
.- 0'" Q)CJ)
C Q) _ 0-_
::1£.9 ~::::)
c..c'õ_-c
~.- "C 0 C
ø"'C CD a. co
5m~~-C)
.- UJ co It= 0 U.
>Q)::¡:;iQ)o
e....o-o.::.t::u
a.:g ro C ~ ¢I
>- ro >. >-..c
c:_..cQ)c-
cog-g.D-=r:.e
-~co~~.2:
o CO:J~.- $
11)~(õ(I'J~.~
() () > Q.;:::I
C ,- 11) <9 (I'J 11)
æ"§-g~~ê
euiCt!oü'-
Q..~ "0 $ ~
,," 0
Q)Q)"O'O....'ã
~Q.·õcQ.
1-(l'J>Ct!"Om
'Oct! Q)C;
Q)Q)U)tQ)
_ü-o<:8...c
C"')Q)-[LQ)-
~ë(õU)'-(õ
1.ÒQ.-æ::¡3-æ
>-
.L>
'C
"
>
e
C.
C.
«
c:
o
"C Q) (I'J fA Q)"C Q)
11)-'C:: cas=. C~
ê6~.oo-ca-
-oQ)(I)O -
e>."C I- 0
c()~~ ~.!E
oe.o:ecn'cm
"'2- §~J!!13~~ &c
_ ~ ~ -g E CJ}.Q
~ce~JS! ,gõ
oct!_= Q)::J2
()Q)«g,~::c"C1i.í
"C::c ~3mec
æ.i9.9i~og,ch8
g..o Q) U () 1i.í -
(l'Ju'tij-_Q)mo
·c m (I) ,Ct! Ct! '- ~ (I)
.cc.oc Õ
Q) 0 Q. eõ œ Q) Q)
"C ~ ë Q."C ::c -5 g.
§~~ fà"æ1j=~
Û;;¡( )o8.0·~-æ
2'-+!'-(I)Q. '-
_CO(I'J"C·- ë.E
(I) a.$ (I) "C _ Q)
cQ)cot:Q)c1i.í~
8 (l)e8.1i.í$1iScl1
Q)CJ}(I)mÄc::J
_.0 c:>CDO
<1ijjg..> ,,~
s=.-.þQ)E(I)=
(I).9CDg::J(õm
r--- (I) .0 "C E 'I:: ~
I 'C:: (1)_ (1)'_ CD (I)
T"'&JE1ã....)(-~
...--: CD (I).t=. 0 co CO,_
I.O"C:!:(I)_EEU
a>
~
Õ
a>
~
"
0>
.,
Cl
.;;
o
o
('oj
W
Z
:J
...,
'"
'It
o
>
.,
ii;
o
ii:
.. '\)AKk
.\ cc'"
,,)" - .{¡~
~. W-i....
r- ...J ñí
- «-
ù z'-
r _(::0
,/T8'~\L