HomeMy WebLinkAboutORD NO 4480
ORDINANCE NO. ~
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 17.06.020 OF TITLE
SEVENTEEN OF THE BAKERSFIELD MUNICIPAL CODE
CHANGING THE LAND USE ZONING OF THAT CERTAIN
PROPERTY WITHIN THE CITY OF BAKERSFIELD LOCATED
WEST OF GOSFORD ROAD, BETWEEN PACHECO AND
HARRIS ROADS FROM M-2 (GENERAL MANUFACTURING)
ZONE TO P.C.D. (PLANNED COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT
COMBINING) ON 73.53 ACRES, TO ALLOW DEVELOPMENT
OF THE GOSFORD VILLAGE SHOPPING CENTER (ZONE
CHANGE NO. 02-0030).
WHEREAS, the Proposed Project includes General Plan Amendment No. 02-
0030 and Concurrent Zone Change No. 02-0030 to allow the development of a retail
commercial center known as the Gosford Village Shopping Center, which includes 700,000
square feet on 73.53 acres of property located west of Gosford Road, between Pacheco and
Harris Roads, in the City of Bakersfield, County of Kern, State of California, as shown in
attached Exhibit "1;" and
WHEREAS, the requested zone change is as follows:
Zone Chanae No. 02-0030:
Castle and Cooke Commercial -CA, Inc. has filed an application for a zone change from
M-2 (General Manufacturing) to a PCD (Planned Commercial Development) on 73.53
acres on property located on the east side of Gosford Road, between Pacheco and
Harris Roads to allow development of a commercial retail shopping center of a
maximum of 7000,000 square feet on 73.53 acres. The project includes the
development 23 pads for tenants that include various major retail, fast food, and
commercial retail uses, as well as a gas station. The project is anticipated to be
anchored by seven major retail tenants, including Sam's Club, Kohl's Department Store,
and a Wal-Mart Supercenter. The four remaining major retail tenants are not known at
this time. The seven major retail tenants will encompass 582,913 sq ft. Eleven
commercial retail pads are proposed to encompass 102,643 sq ft on the site. The
tenants of three of the commercial retail pads include Petco, Walgreen, Starbucks,
Radio Shack, and Panda Express. The tenants of the remaining eight commercial retail
pads are unknown at this time. The project also includes four pads encompassing
13,000 sq ft for fast food restaurants and the tenants of these restaurant pads are also
not known at this time. Lastly, the proposed project includes one 16-stall membership-
only Sam's Club gas station located adjacent to Harris Road on the southern portion of
the project site; and
WHEREAS, the applicant for the Proposed Project is Castle and Cooke
Commercial Inc., ("Applicant"); and
~M~1>
J- ~
>- -
m
r- t-
o (:)
0RIGINAl
WHEREAS, in February 2003, the City Council of the City of Bakersfield ("City")
adopted Resolution No. 21-03, which certified Final Environmental Impact Report SCH #
2002051156 ("2003 EIR"), and Resolution No. 27-03, and Ordinance No. 4110 which approved
a General Plan amendment and concurrent zone change for the Proposed Project ("2003
Project Approvals"); and
WHEREAS, the adequacy of the 2003 EIR and the validity of the 2003 Project
Approvals were challenged in a lawsuit entitled Bakersfield Citizens for Local Control v. City of
Bakersfield, et al., Kern County Superior Court Case No. 249669 KCT, and in an appeal of the
judgment originally entered by the Kern County Superior Court in the lawsuit, California Court of
Appeal, Fifth Appellate District Case No. F044943 ("2003 Litigation"); and
WHEREAS, in December 2004, the California Court of Appeal, Fifth Appellate
District, rendered an opinion in the 2003 Litigation, which held that the 2003 EIR was
inadequate in certain respects and directed that a writ of mandate issue requiring the City to set
aside its certification of the 2003 EIR and its adoption of the 2003 Project Approvals and to
prepare a new EIR in accordance with the standards and procedures of the California
Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA"); and
WHEREAS, in June 2005, the Kern County Superior Court issued a peremptory
writ of mandate requiring the City to set aside its certification of the 2003 EIR and its adoption
of the 2003 Project Approvals and to prepare a new EIR in accordance with the standards and
procedures of CEQA ("Writ of Mandate"); and
WHEREAS, pursuant to the Writ of Mandate, the City retained the professional
environmental consulting services of Michael Brandman Associates to prepare the required
environmental review and undertook preparation of a new EIR for the Proposed Project; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to CEQA and the Writ of Mandate, the City prepared a
draft environmental impact report for the Proposed Project, which was filed with the State
Clearinghouse as SCH # 2005061169 ("Draft EIR"), and circulated the Draft EIR for public
review and comment as required by law; and
WHEREAS, the City received and responded to public comments on the Draft
EIR and prepared a final environmental impact report ("Final EIR"), which consists of 15
volumes and includes the Draft EIR, technical appendices, public comments and
recommendations on the Draft EIR, the responses of the City to significant environmental
points raised in the review, comment and consultation process, a list of persons, organizations
and public agencies which commented on the Draft EIR, and other materials, and which has
been filed with the Clerk of the City of Bakersfield and has been provided to commenting
agencies and persons; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to CEQA, the City has prepared a Mitigation Monitoring
and Reporting Program, which has been filed with the City Clerk; and
WHEREAS, the law and regulations relating to the preparation and adoption of
Environmental Impact Reports as set forth in CEQA and City of Bakersfield's CEQA
Implementation Procedures, have been duly followed by the city staff and the Planning
Commission; and
2
~ ~AK~'9
o <.f'
-'l
>- -
f- n
_ r-
o (:)
0RIGINAL
WHEREAS, pursuant to the Writ of Mandate, the City Council of the City
adopted Resolution No. 189-07 on September 12, 2007, vacating and setting aside Resolution
No. 21-03, which certified the 2003 EIR, Resolution No. 27-03, and Ordinance No. 4110, which
adopted the 2003 Project Approvals; and
WHEREAS, a duly noticed public hearing was held on September 17, 2007, and
September 20, 2007, before the Planning Commission, at which the Planning Commission
received public testimony and gave direction to City staff regarding the Proposed Project; and
WHEREAS, having reviewed and considered all testimony and materials made
available to the Planning Commission, including but not limited to the Final EIR, the staff reports
and all the testimony and evidence in the record of the proceedings with respect to the
Proposed Project, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 157-07 making findings
and recommending approval of the related General Plan Amendment with which the City
Council concurs; and
WHEREAS, by Resolution No. 158-07 on September 20,2007, the Planning
Commission recommended approval and adoption of an ordinance amending Title 17 of the
Municipal Code to approve Zone Change No. 02-0030 as delineated on attached Zoning Map
No. 123-20 marked Exhibit "6," by this Council and this Council has fully considered the
recommendations made by the Planning Commission as set forth in that Resolution and
restated herein; and
SECTION 1.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of Bakersfield as
follows:
1. The City Council finds the facts recited above are true and incorporates
them herein by this reference;
2. The City Council finds and determines that the applicable provisions of
CEQA, Public Resources Code section 21000, et seq., and its implementing state guidelines,
14 California Code of Regulations section 15000, et seq. ("CEQA Guidelines"), and the City of
Bakersfield's CEQA Implementation Procedures have been duly observed in connection with
the preparation of the Final Environmental Impact Report (SCH #2005061169), the public
hearings and the considerations of this matter and all of the previous proceedings related
thereto.
3. The City Council has certified said Gosford Village Shopping Center EIR.
4. All required notices have been given.
5. The City Council finds and determines that:
A. The public necessity, general welfare and good zoning practice
justify the recommended change of zone from M-2 (General Manufacturing) to PCD (Planned
Commercial Development) zone on 73.53 acres, as shown on Exhibit "1".
3
~ 'QAK~1>
o ~
>- -
r- m
- r-
j (:)
r)f:l1r.INAl
B. The project site, with prior approval of General Plan Amendment
No. 02-0030, is designated GC (General Commercial) on 73.53 acres on the Metropolitan
Bakersfield General Plan Land Use Plan.
C. The recommended zone change is consistent with the
Metropolitan Bakersfield General Plan, subject to prior approval of General Plan Amendment
No. 02-0030.
D. Attached Exhibit "3" depicting the site plan and typical elevations
for said project are approved, subject to conditions of approval contained in Exhibit "2".
E. Attached Exhibit "4" containing the CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations are appropriate and incorporated into the project.
F. Attached Exhibit "4" containing the Statement of Overriding
Considerations related to significant unavoidable traffic/transportation (cumulative), and air
quality (short-term) impacts, and cumulative noise impacts are appropriate and incorporated
into the project.
G. That Section 17.06.020 (Zoning Map) of the Municipal Code of the
City of Bakersfield be amended by changing the land use zoning from M-2 (General
Manufacturing to PCD (Planned Commercial Development Combining) on 73.53 acres, as
shown and described in Exhibit "6," Legal Description and Zone Map 123-20, herein attached.
H. That Zone Change No. 02-0030, as outlined above, is hereby
approved with conditions of approval and mitigation measures as shown on Exhibit "2" and the
Gosford Village Shopping Center Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program as found in
attached Exhibit "5", subject to prior approval of General Plan Amendment No. 02-0030.
SECTION 2.
This ordinance shall be posted in accordance with the Bakersfield Municipal Code and
shall become effective not less than thirty (30) days from and after the date of its passage.
---------()()()---------
4
~ ~AK~1>
o <P
>- ~
f- m
- r-
o (:)
0RIGlNAL
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Ordinance was passed and adopted by the
Council of the City of Bakersfield at a regular meeting thereof held on DEe 1 2 2007 by
the following vote:
~ COUNCILMEMBER
~: COUNCILMEMBER
ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBER
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBER
CA~N. BENH-;;; WEI: ~. HA~N. SUL'[jVAN. SC~ER
~
~..-L-
C
CITY CLERK and Ex Offi i Clerk of the
Council of the City of Bakersfield
APPROVED DEe 1 2 2007
By:
Exhibits for Ordinance
1 Zone Change Location Map
2 Mitigation/Conditions of Approval
3 PCD Site Plan ad Elevations
4 CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations
5 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
6 Legal Description and Zone Map 123-20
By jengl S:\GV\CC\GV-ZC-Ord.doc
November 29. 2007
5
'OM~1>
J- ~
>- -
r- m
__ r-
o (:)
ORIGINAL
EXHIBIT "2"
MITIGATION I CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
GPAlZC 02-0030
GOSFORD VILLAGE SHOPPING CENTER
MITIGATION MEASURES
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
1. Prior to the issuance of a Urban Development grading permit, the project applicant shall pay a
Habitat Mitigation Fee in accordance with Section 15.78.030 of the City of Bakersfield Municipal
Code and the Implementation/Management agreement for the MBHCP. (Mitigation Measure (MM)
5.3.A.1.)
2. The MBHCP and the Standardized Recommendations for Protection of the San Joaquin Kit Fox
(1989) require specified take avoidance measures for the San Joaquin Kit Fox. In addition, the
MBHCP encourages the relocation of known kit foxes prior to development, if practical. To this end,
the following pre-construction and construction mitigation measures shall be required as conditions
of approval: (MM 5.3.A.2.)
Pre-Construction Mitigation Measures - Relocation
3. No later than sixty days (60) days prior to any ground disturbing activities or grading, a pre-
construction survey shall be completed by a qualified biologist to determine the continued presence
or absence of kit foxes on site. A second survey shall be conducted no more than thirty (30) days
prior to the onset of construction or ground disturbing activities. If kit foxes are deemed to be
present on site, USFWS shall be immediately contacted telephonically and in writing and circular
exclusion zones shall be established around the kit fox dens following consultation with USFWS
and consistent with the requirements contained within the USFWS' the Standardized
Recommendations for Protection of the San Joaquin Kit Fox (1989). (MM 5.3.A.2(a))
4. No later than forty five (45) days prior to any ground disturbing activities or grading, the developer
shall contact a qualified biologist holding proper permits and/or agreements pursuant to Section
4.7.5 of the MBHCP Implementation Agreement and provide approval to that biologist to relocate
known kit foxes located on site to relocation preserves approved by USFWS or qualified Habitat
Management Lands covered by the MBHCP. (MM 5.3.A.2(b))
5. No later than forty five (45) days prior to any ground disturbing activities or grading, the developer
shall contact the ESRP at Stanislaus State University, and shall authorize a qualified biologist
working for the ESRP to radio-telemetry collar any known kit foxes located on site, to the extent
feasible, to gather data for use in connection with ESRP ecological research programs. (MM
5.3.A.2(c))
6. No later than fourteen (14) days prior to any ground disturbing activities or grading, all known dens
shall be monitored for at least three (3) consecutive days to ensure that dens are unoccupied prior
to den excavation. (MM 5.3.A.2(d))
7. No later than five (5) business days prior to the initiation of any ground disturbing activities or
grading (Grading Start Date), developer shall notify the Regional Offices of CDFG and USFWS in
writing of its intent to destroy unoccupied dens and initiate grading. At this time, Developer shall
again authorize qualified representatives of CDFG and USFWS to attempt to relocate known kit
foxes, to the extent feasible. If CDFG and USFWS are unable to relocate known kit foxes by the
Grading Start Date, Developer shall be required to eliminate known kit fox dens in the manner set
forth below. (MM 5.3.A.2(e))
By Jeng / S:IGV\CCIConditions.doc
November 30, 2007
<oM~1r.
<<. If
o <"\
>- P
l- r
-0 c
0RIGINA\
Exhibit "2"
GPAlZC 02-0030
Page 2 of 21
Pre-Construction Mitigation Measures - Den Destruction
8. Pursuant to Section 4.7.4 and Exhibit K of the MBHCP, and consistent with the USFWS' the
Standardized Recommendations for Protection of the San Joaquin Kit Fox (1989), known kit fox
dens located on the project site shall be excavated and destroyed under the direct supervision of a
qualified biologist. Prior to the destruction of dens, the dens shall be monitored for at least three (3)
consecutive days to determine whether the den is active or dormant. Activity at the den can be
monitored by placing tracking medium at den entrances and by spot lighting. If no den activity is
observed during this period, the den should be destroyed immediately pursuant to the den
destruction procedures set forth below. (MM 5.3.A.2(f))
9. Destruction of dens shall be accomplished by careful excavation with hand tools until it is certain
that no kit foxes are inside. The den shall be fully excavated and back filled with dirt and
compacted to ensure that kit foxes cannot reenter or use the den during the construction period.
(MM 5.3.A.2(g))
10. If a kit fox is found inadvertently inside a den during excavation, the animal shall be allowed to
escape unhindered, or, to the extent feasible, representatives from the ESRP and/or CDFG or
USFWS shall be contacted to attempt to relocate and/or collar the kit fox pursuant to the MBHCP
and/or applicable ESRP protocol. (MM 5.3.A.2(h))
Construction Mitigation Measures
11. To prevent inadvertent entrapment of kit foxes during the construction phase of the project, all
excavated, steep walled holes or trenches more than two feet deep shall be covered at the close of
each working day by plywood or similar materials or provided with one or more escape ramps
constructed of earth fill or wooden planks. Each excavation shall contain at least one ramp, with
long trenches at least one ramp shall be placed every .25 mile. Slope of ramps shall be no steeper
than 1: 1. Before such holes or trenches are filled, they shall be fully inspected for trapped kit foxes.
If at any time a trapped or injured kit fox is discovered, representatives from ESRP andlor CDFG or
USFWS shall be contacted immediately to attempt to relocate and/or collar the kit fox pursuant to
the MBHCP and/or applicable ESRP protocol. Escape ramps shall also be installed immediately to
allow trapped animals to escape. Mm 5.3.A.2(i))
12. All pipes, culverts, or similar structures with a diameter of 4" or greater shall be kept capped or
otherwise covered to prevent injury of kit foxes. If such pipes, culverts or similar structures are not
capped or otherwise covered, they shall be inspected daily prior to burial or closure to prevent
entrapment of kit fox or other sensitive species. (MM 5.3.A.2(j))
13. All food, garbage in plastic shall be disposed of in closed containers and regularly removed from the
site to minimize attracting kit foxes and other sensitive species to the site. (MM 5.3.A.2(k))
14. No dogs, cats, or other animals shall be permitted on the project site. (MM 5.3.A.2(1))
15. If rodent control is deemed necessary during construction, a zinc phosphide based rodenticide shall
be used. (MM 5.3.A.2(m))
16. Developer shall provide a sensitive species identification and avoidance education program for all
construction employees that consists of a consultation in which persons knowledgeable in kit fox
biology and legislative protection to explain endangered species protocols, habitat needs and the
measures and conditions of approval being taken to reduce impacts to the species during project
construction and implementation. A fact sheet conveying this information shall be prepared for
distribution to all contractors, their employees, and any and all other personnel who are working on
the construction site. (MM 5.3.A.2(n))
~AK~1>
J- ~
>- -
I- m
_ r-
o t;,
ORIGINAl
Exhibit "2"
GPAlZC 02-0030
Page 3 of 21
17. Night time construction shall be prohibited. In addition, all construction vehicles shall observe a 20
mph speed limit on the project site and developer shall create established staging, parking and
storage areas to ensure the prevention of accidental direct impacts and takes of kit foxes. (MM
5.3.A.2(0))
18. Pre-construction surveys shall include a survey for burrowing owl and raptor nests. A pre-
construction survey shall be conducted by a qualified biologist and shall be conducted no later than
thirty (30) days prior to any grading or ground disturbing activities. Additional clearance surveys
conducted by a qualified biologist shall be again undertaken within fourteen (14) days of initial
ground disturbance or grading to ensure that no owls have re-entered the site. Construction or
operational activities associated with project features that occur within portions of the project site
containing occupied and/or suitable habitat for the burrowing owl and raptor nests shall be restricted
to periods outside the breeding season for this species. The breeding season for burrowing owls
runs from February 1 through August 31. (MM 5.3.A.3.)
If construction or operational activities occur during the breeding season for burrowing owls,
surveys are required prior to such construction to determine the presence/absence of this species
within the impact area. Focused surveys shall be conducted under CDFG and Burrowing Owl
Consortium protocol by a qualified biologist from February 1 to August 31. If this species is
determined to occupy any portion of the project site, consultation with the CDFG and USFWS is
required and no construction activity shall take place within 500 feet of an active nest/burrow until it
has been determined that the nest/burrow is no longer active, and all juveniles have fledged the
nest/burrow. No disturbance to active burrows shall occur without appropriate permitting through
the MBTA and/or CDFG.
If active burrowing owl burrows are detected outside the breeding season (September 1 through
January 31), passive relocation may be approved following consultation with the CDFG and
USFWS. If needed, the installation of one-way doors shall be installed as part of a passive
relocation program. Burrowing owl burrows shall be excavated with hand tools by a qualified
biologist when determined to be unoccupied, and backfilled to ensure that animals do not reenter
the holes/dens.
19. The discovery of any previously unidentified protected species that are not covered under the
MBHCP, including those protected under the MBTA and the Fish & Game Code, shall be avoided
and evaluated by a qualified biologist during surveys. The USFWS and CDFG shall be notified of
the presence of any previously unreported protected species. Any unanticipated take of protected
wildlife shall be reported immediately to the USFWS and CDFG. (MM 5.3.A.4.)
CULTURAL RESOURCES
20. Prior to the commencement of any ground disturbing activities, all earth-moving and excavation
contractor employees and an authorized representative of a local California Native American Tribe
representative shall attend a meeting on the project site informing them of the potential for
inadvertently discovered cultural resources and/or human remains and protection measures to be
followed to prevent destruction of any and all cultural resources discovered on site. The project
applicant and the City of Bakersfield Planning staff shall meet with representatives who have
provided input during the environmental process (Le., Ron Wermuth who represents the
Tubutatulabal, Kawailsu, Koso, and Yokuts tribes and also the Chumash Council of Bakersfield).
The purpose of the meeting is to determine who could represent the Native American interest and
provide monitoring. If more than one Native American monitor is identified, the selected Native
American monitors will all attend the pre-construction meeting. The orientation shall be conducted
by the Project Archeologist and shall include information regarding the potential for objects to occur
on site, a summary of applicable environmental law, procedures to follow if potential cultural AK~
resources are found, and measures to be taken if cultural resources are found and the measures tg<. '0 1>~
>- m
r- r-.
:J (:)
0RIGINAl
Exhibit "2"
GPAlZC 02-0030
Page 4 of 21
be taken if cultural resources and/or human remains are unearthed as part of the project. The
Project Archaeologist shall prepare and provide a summary report to the Project Construction
Manager who shall maintain the summary report on file. The report shall include the following:
(MM 5.4.A.1.)
1) When and where the session took place
2) Topics discussed in the session
3) A session attendance roster signed by employees attending the tailgate session
4) Provide a copy to City Planning
5) Provide a copy to Southern San Joaquin Valley Information Center
During grading activities, a qualified archaeological monitor or his representative shall monitor
earth-moving activities on the project site. Once the qualified archaeologist determines that
monitoring is no longer necessary, monitoring activities can be discontinued. If archaeological
resources are uncovered or discovered during construction activities, no further excavation or
disturbance of the area where the resources were found shall occur until a qualified archaeologist,
with consultation from a local Native American monitor evaluates the find. The local Native
American monitor or monitors who attended the pre-construction meeting will be consulted. If the
find is determined to be a unique archaeological resource, the project applicant shall, within forty-
eight hours of notification, provide five percent of one half of 1 percent of the projected cost of the
project to the City to ascertain the appropriate mitigation measures as required by Public Resources
Code Section 21083.2(b), (c) and (d). Appropriate mitigation shall include planning construction to
avoid archaeological sites, capping or covering archaeological sites with a layer of soil before
building on the affected site, or excavation to adequately recover the scientifically consequential
information from and about the resource. If the mitigation costs exceed the initial deposit by the
developer, an amount no greater than one-half of one percent of the project costs shall be paid by
developer to City to implement the mitigation treatment plan. Any payments made by developer
that exceed the actual costs of the mitigation treatment plan shall be reimbursed to the developer.
Work may continue on other parts of the project site while the unique archaeological resource
mitigation takes place. The contingency funding contained in this Mitigation Measure 5.4.A.1 is
inclusive, and not cumulative of the contingency funding contained in Mitigation Measures 5.4.B.1
and 5.4.C.1.
If the qualified archaeologist determines that the find is a unique archaeological resource, the
resource site shall be evaluated and recorded in accordance with requirements of the State Office
of Historic Preservation (OHP). Prior to disposition of recovered artifacts, consultation with
culturally affiliated Native Americans shall occur. The Native Americans that will be consulted will
be those who attended the pre-construction meeting. If the site is determined to be significant, an
adequate amount of data at the specific site shall be collected by the qualified archaeologist and the
findings of the report shall be submitted to the City and the San Joaquin Valley Information center.
If the site is determined to be not significant, the site need not be mitigated for as described above.
21. Prior to the commencement of any ground disturbing activities, all earth-moving and excavation
contractor employees and an authorized representative of a local California Native American Tribe
representative shall attend a meeting on the project site informing them of the potential for
inadvertently discovered cultural resources and/or human remains and protection measures to be
followed to prevent destruction of any and all cultural resources discovered on site. The project
applicant and the City of Bakersfield Planning staff shall meet with representatives who have
provided input during the environmental process (Le., Ron Wermuth who represents the
Tubutatulabal, Kawailsu, Koso, and Yokuts tribes and also the Chumash Council of Bakersfield).
The purpose of the meeting is to determine who could represent the Native American interest and ~p..K~1>
J- ~
>- -
r- m
_ r-
') (:)
r)RIGINAl
Exhibit "2"
GPAlZC 02-0030
Page 5 of 21
provide monitoring. If more than one Native American monitor is identified, the selected Native
American monitors will all attend the pre-construction meeting. The orientation shall be conducted
by the Project Archeologist and shall include information regarding the potential for objects to occur
on site, a summary of applicable environmental law, procedures to follow if potential cultural
resources are found, and measures to be taken if cultural resources are found and the measures to
be taken if cultural resources and/or human remains are unearthed as part of the project. The
Project Archaeologist shall prepare and provide a summary report to the Project Construction
Manager who shall maintain the summary report on file. The report shall include the following:
(MM 5.4.B.1.)
. When and where the session took place
. Topics discussed in the session
· A session attendance roster signed by employees attending the tailgate session
· Provide a copy to City Planning
· Provide a copy to Southern San Joaquin Valley Information Center
During grading activities, a qualified archaeological monitor or his representative shall monitor
earth-moving activities on the project site. Once the qualified archaeologist determines that
monitoring is no longer necessary, monitoring activities can be discontinued. If historical resources
are uncovered during construction activities, no further excavation or disturbance of the area where
the resources were found shall occur until a qualified archaeologist examines the find. If the find is
determined to be a potentially historical resource, the project applicant shall, within forty-eight hours
of notification, provide five percent of one half of 1 percent of the projected cost of the project to the
City to ascertain the appropriate mitigation measures as required by Public Resources Code
Section 21083.2(b), (c) and (d). Appropriate mitigation shall include planning construction to avoid
archaeological sites, capping or covering archeological sites with a layer of soil before building on
the affected site, or excavation to adequately recover the scientifically consequential information
from and about the resource. If the mitigation costs exceed the initial deposit by the developer, an
amount no greater than one-half of one percent of the project costs shall be paid by developer to
City to implement the mitigation treatment plan. Any payments made by developer that exceed the
actual costs of the mitigation treatment plan shall be reimbursed to the developer. Work may
continue on other parts of the project site while the historical resource mitigation takes place. The
contingency funding contained in this Mitigation Measure 5.4.B.1 is inclusive, and not cumulative of
the contingency funding contained in Mitigation Measures 5.4.A.1 and 5.4.C.1.
If the qualified archaeologist determines that the find is a significant historical resource, the
resource site shall be evaluated and recorded in accordance with requirements of the State Office
of Historic Preservation (OHP). Prior to disposition of recovered artifacts, consultation with
culturally affiliated Native Americans shall occur. The Native Americans that will be consulted will
be those who attended the pre-construction meeting. If the site is determined to be significant, an
adequate amount of data at the site shall be collected by the qualified archaeologist and the
findings of the report shall be submitted to the City and San Joaquin Valley Information Center. If
the site is determined to be not significant, the site need not be mitigated for as described above.
22. If paleontological resources are uncovered during construction activities, no further excavation or
disturbance of the area where the resources were found shall occur until a qualified paleontologist
examines the find. If the find is determined to be a potentially significant paleontological resource,
the project applicant shall, within forty-eight hours of notification, provide five percent of one half of
1 percent of the projected cost of the project to the City to ascertain the appropriate mitigation
measures as required by Public Resources Code Section 21083.2(b), (c) and (d). Appropriate
mitigation shall include planning construction to avoid paleontological sites, capping or covering 'QAK~.(\
J- "l(p
-'l'\
>- -
I::: J!!
J (:)
fJRIGINAL
Exhibit "2"
GPAlZC 02-0030
Page 6 of 21
paleontological sites with a layer of soil before building on the affected site, or excavation to
adequately recover the scientifically consequential information from and about the resource. If the
mitigation costs exceed the initial deposit by the developer, an amount no greater than one-half of
one percent of the project costs shall be paid by developer to City to implement the mitigation
treatment plan. Any payments made by developer that exceed the actual costs of the mitigation
treatment plan shall be reimbursed to the developer. Work may continue on other parts of the
project site while the paleontological resource mitigation takes place. The contingency funding
contained in this Mitigation Measure 5.4.C.1 is inclusive, and not cumulative of the contingency
funding contained in Mitigation Measures 5.4.A.1 and 5.4.B.1. (MM 5.4.C.1.)
If the qualified paleontologist determines that the find is a significant paleontological resource, the
resource site shall be excavated and all recovered fossils shall be curated for documentation in a
summary report and transferred to the Buena Vista Museum of Natural History in the City of
Bakersfield.
23. In the event of the accidental discovery or recognition of any human remains on the project site, the
following steps shall be taken: (MM 5.4.D.1.)
. There shall be no further excavation or disturbance of the site or any nearby area
reasonably suspected to overlie adjacent human remains until:
i. The coroner of the county in which the remains are discovered determines that
no investigation of the cause of death is required, and
ii. If the coroner determines the remains to be Native American:
1. The coroner shall contact the NAHC within 24 hours.
2. The NAHC shall identify the person or persons it believes to be the most
likely descended from the deceased Native American.
3. The most likely descendent may make recommendations to the
landowner or the person responsible for the excavation work, for means
of treating or disposing of, with appropriate dignity, the human remains
and any associated grave goods as provided in Public Resources Code
Section 5097.98, or
4. Where the following conditions occur, the landowner or his authorized
representative shall rebury the Native American human remains and
associated grave goods with appropriate dignity on the property in a
location not subject to further and future subsurface disturbance pursuant
to Public Resources Code Section 5097.98(e).
iii. The NAHC is unable to identify a most likely descendent
iv. The most likely descendant is identified by the NAHC, but fails to
make a recommendation within 48 hours of being granted access
to the site; or
v. The landowner or his authorized representative rejects the
recommendation of the descendant, and a mediation by the NAHC
fails to provide measures acceptable to the landowner.
HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
24. Prior to any onsite construction activities, any stained soils observed in the Preliminary Hazards
Study shall be assessed by a licensed engineer or geologist approved by the Director of Prevention
Services. All stained soil shall be cleaned and properly disposed of per the requirements set forth
in the applicable federal, state, and local laws. (MM 5.5.A.1.)
'OM~1>
J- 0>
, -f\
>- -
I- m
_ r-
o (:)
()RiGINAl
Exhibit "2"
GPA/ZC 02-0030
Page 7 of 21
25. Prior to any onsite construction activities, soils shall be sampled and analyzed by a licensed
engineer or geologist approved by the Director of Prevention Services to determine the level of
residue for pesticides, herbicides, chemicals, and associated metals. If residue is found to be within
acceptable amounts per the Kern County Environmental Health Department (KCEHD) and
Environmental Protection Agency/Department of Toxic Substance Control (DTSC) standards then
grading and construction may begin. If the residue is found to be greater than the KCEHD and
DTSC standards, all contaminated soils exceeding the acceptable limits shall be remediated and/or
properly disposed of per KCEHD and DTSC requirements. An appropriate verification closure letter
from KCEHD and DTSC shall be obtained and submitted to the City of Bakersfield. Depending on
the extent of contaminated soils, a verification closure letter from the California Regional Water
Quality Control Board may also need to be submitted to the City of Bakersfield. Site remediation
can occur by the use of on-site transportable thermal treatment units or bio-remediation. The soil
can also be excavated and shipped off-site to fixed incineration or bio-remediation facilities. (MM
5.5.A.2. )
26. If previously unidentified hazardous materials are discovered during grading or construction of the
project, the applicant shall suspend all work immediately and shall implement the health and safety
procedures required by law including, but not limited to evacuation of the site and/or affected area,
the provision of emergency medical treatment if needed and notification of the following agencies:
the City of Bakersfield, DTSC, the City and County Fire Departments, and RWQCB. The regulatory
agency with jurisdiction over the hazardous material encountered shall evaluate and determine the
type of contamination encountered and shall prescribe the remediation measures, which shall be
implemented. (MM 5.5.A.3.)
TRAFFIC AND TRANSPORTATION
27. Prior to the issuance of building permits, the project applicant shall participate in the Local Impact
Mitigation Fee Program and pay the project's fair share of local improvements as outline in Table
5.6 19 below. City shall ensure that the improvements outlined in Table 5.6 19 below will be
constructed pursuant to the fee program at that point in time necessary to avoid identified significant
impacts on traffic. (MM 5.6.A.1.)
28. Prior to the issuance of building permits, the project applicant shall participate in the RTIF Program
and pay the project's fair share regional improvements as outline in Table 5.6 19 below. City shall
ensure that the improvements outlined in Table 5.6 19 below will be constructed pursuant to the fee
program at that point in time necessary to avoid identified significant impacts on traffic. (MM
5.6.A.2.)
29. City shall participate in a multi-jurisdictional effort with Caltrans and KernCOG to develop a study to
identify fair share contribution funding sources attributable to and paid from private and public
development to supplement other regional and State funding sources necessary to implement the
Kern County improvements identified by Caltrans in its SR-99 Business Plan. The study shall
include fair share contributions related to private and or public development based on nexus
requirements contained in the Mitigation Fee Act (Government Code Section 66000 et seq.) and 14
Cal. Code of Regulations Section 15126.4(a)(4) and, to this end, the study shall recognize the
statewide and regional contributions to impacts to SR-99 that are not attributable to local
development such that local private and public development are not paying in excess of such
developments' fair share obligations. The fee study shall also be compliant with Government Code
Section 66001 (g) and any other applicable provisions of law. The study shall set forth a timeline
and other agreed-upon relevant criteria for implementation of the recommendations contained
within the study to the extent the other agencies agree to participate in the fee study program. (MM
5.6.A.3. )
<QM~1>
J- ~
>- m
>- r-
.:s \:)
0RIGINAl
Exhibit "2"
GPA/ZC 02-0030
Page 8 of 21
30. The Traffic Study has concluded that the two identified segments of SR-99 will operate at LOS F
without the project at 2030. The project's contributions to traffic on these two identified SR-99
segments will not cause a degradation of LOS below LOS F, but nevertheless will contribute to
cumulative congestion on these identified segments. In the SR-99 Business Plan, Caltrans has
identified concept facilities in metropolitan Bakersfield, which have been conceptually programmed
to be constructed by 2030. In its SR-99 Business Plan, Caltrans has recognized that even with the
construction of the identified concept facilities, many segments in the urban areas will continue to
operate at LOS F or E, but some may operate at LOS D. In its SR-99 Business Plan, Caltrans has
identified the phased, eight-lane widening of SR-99 from Bear Mountain Blvd. to Wilson Road from
its current status as a six-lane facility. The total project costs in 2007 dollars has been identified as
$57 million. Approximately eight and on-half miles of roadway exist between Bear Mountain Blvd.
and the Wilson Road. This equates to a cost of approximately $6.7 million per mile. Of the eight
and one half miles identified for improvement, approximately 2.8 miles are impacted by the
proposed project, for a total cost of approximately $18.76 million. Using Caltrans' fair share
formula, the project's contribution to trips on this 8.5 miles of impacted segment amounts to 0.23%
of the total 2030 volume. Again using Caltrans' fair share formula, this equates to a fair share
contribution of $43,100. Consistent with the SR-99 Business Plan's recognition that development
has a role in participating in the funding of mainline improvements, prior to the issuance of the first
building permit for the project, the project applicant shall pay $43,100 to the City pro-rated among
each developable parcel as its fair share contribution to its cumulative impacts to the identified
segments of SR-99 (Developer's Fair Share Contribution). City shall hold Developer's Fair Share
Contribution in trust and shall apply Developer's Fair Share Contribution to any fee program
adopted or agreed upon by the City, KernCOG and Caltrans as a result of implementation of
Mitigation Measure 5.6.A.3. The NB loop on-ramp to SR-99 from EB White Lane is currently
identified on the Caltrans' ramp meter location list of the Ramp Meter Development Plan (August
2006). The project's proportionate share for the NB loop on-ramp metering is 4.99%. Pursuant to
Caltrans, the cost of this improvement is estimated to be $600,000. Thus, using Caltrans' fair share
formula, the fair share percentage to be paid by the project applicant to Caltrans is $29,940. The
applicant shall pay $29,940 to Caltrans for this improvement prior to the issuance of the first
building permit for the project. (MM 5.6.A.4.)
31. Consistent with any and all applicable PUC General Orders and Regulations, the City shall place
clearly identified signage and markings (designated as California MUTCD R8-8) on the northbound,
southbound, eastbound and westbound lanes immediately adjacent to the existing railroad
crossings at Gosford Road, Pacheco Road and Panama Lane (as applicable) that inform vehicle
drivers to DO NOT STOP ON TRACKS in the event traffic is queued at or near the existing railroad
crossings. In addition, the northbound, southbound, eastbound and westbound curbs (as
applicable) shall be designated as red-zone No Parking Zones within 75 feet of the track to allow a
vehicle inadvertently stopped on the tracks to reverse out and park adjacent to the curb. KEEP
CLEAR or pavement hatch markings shall also be placed prior to the crossings. The project
applicant shall pay the City for all costs associated with the signage and markings. (MM 5.6.C.1)
32. The project applicant shall install a six foot high, tamper resistant fence along the project property
lines immediately to the west of the project site. The fence shall be inspected no less than every
calendar quarter by the project applicant and or City staff, and the fence shall preclude pedestrian
access from the project site to the neighboring industrial site to the west. (MM 5.6.C.2.)
AIR QUALITY
33. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the following shall be incorporated into the construction
plan. (MM 5.7.A.1.)
'QAK~1>
J- ~
>- -
m
r- r-
'0 (:)
0RIGINAl
Exhibit "2"
GPAlZC 02-0030
Page 9 of 21
. During all phases of construction, construction equipment shall be properly and routinely
maintained, as recommended by manufacturer manuals, to control exhaust emissions.
. During all phases of construction, all contractors shall follow all the rules in Regulation
VIII.
. During all phases of construction, all contractors shall restrict equipment and vehicle
idling to five minutes or less.
. The Project proponent shall develop a ride-share incentive program for construction
workers. The program shall be submitted to the City for review and approval.
. On-site electrical hook ups shall be installed for electric hand tools such as saws, drills,
and compressors, to substantially decrease the need for fuel powered electric
generators and other fuel-powered equipment.
. During construction, only low volatility paints and coatings shall be used. All paints shall
be applied using either high volume low-pressure (HVLP) spray equipment or by hand
application.
34. Prior to issuance of a building permit, to reduce emissions from mobile sources the project applicant
shall provide payment in an amount equal to the applicable regional transportation improvement
fund traffic impact fees and the local transportation impact fee applicable to the project to facilitate
the implementation of the intersection and roadway segment improvements that are identified as
mitigation in Section 5.6 Traffic and Transportation. (MM 5.7.A.2.)
35. The project applicant shall integrate pedestrian infrastructure such as pedestrian pathways that
connect buildings throughout the project, including at least one connection between the western
and eastern buildings. The walkways should create a safe and inviting walking environment for
people wishing to walk from one building to another. Walkways should be installed to direct
pedestrians from the street sidewalk to the buildings. Sidewalks shall be designed for high visibility
(brightly painted, different colors of concrete, etc.) when crossing parking lots, streets, and similar
vehicle paths. (MM 5.7.A.3.)
36. Major 1, 2, 2A, 3, 4, 5, and 6 tenants shall display up to date documentation regarding area transit
routes and bicycle routes in a visible and convenient location for employees and customers. (MM
5.7.A.4.)
37. Major 1, 2, 2A, 3, 4, 5, and 6 tenants shall coordinate together to appoint an Employee
Transportation Coordinator to work with the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District and the
two stores to develop and implement an appropriate commuting program. At a minimum, the
program shall provide bus passes discounted at least 50 percent for employees. The employees
shall be provided with written documentation regarding the commuting program. The commuting
program shall be submitted to the Planning Director and the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution
Control District. In addition, the project shall include provisions that require individual parcelS to
install preferential parking for van pooling and carpooling for site employees. This measure will be
verified by the Planning Department during the building and plan check process. (MM 5.7.A.5.)
38. To encourage employees to bike andlor walk to work, all establishments shall provide at a minimum
three employee storage lockers for every 25 employees. This measure shall be approved to the
satisfaction of the Planning Director. (MM 5.7.A.6.)
39. The project applicant shall incorporate the following into the building plans of all buildings to reduce
electricity usage associated with lighting and to reduce energy demands. (MM 5.7.A.7.)
. The main store area lighting shall use high output linear florescent lamps. These lamps
use half the energy of T81amps, which are commonly used. ~M~~
J- tP
"fi
~ -
r::: f!'
o (:)
ORIGINAL
Exhibit "2"
GPA/ZC 02-0030
Page 10 of 21
. In the produce section (if applicable), focused lighting shall be placed 12.5 feet above
the items.
. Dimming controls and daylight harvesting shall be utilized. Light sensors shall be placed
around the stores and either dim or turn off the artificial lights in areas where sufficient
daylight is available.
. Artificial lighting levels shall be reduced by at least 20 percent during the night in entry
vestibules and in portions of the main sales floor to help customers' eyes adjust to the
change of light when going in and out of the store.
. Use light emitting diode (LED) lighting in grocery cases, jewelry cases, and the
monument signs (if applicable).
. Install energy-efficient and automated heating and air conditioning units.
. Install energy efficient interior lighting when possible.
. Prior to issuance of certificates of occupancy for all buildings, the applicant for each
retail building proposed on an individual parcel shall demonstrate an ability to achieve an
energy efficient rating that achieves twelve (12 %) beyond Title 24 requirements that are
in effect. A wide variety of means exist to achieve this energy efficiency standard,
including the use of, or a combination of the use of, building insulation material having a
greater "R-value," the use of photo voltaic (e.g., solar) energy systems, and efficient
lighting technologies and programs.
. Prior to issuance of certificates of occupancy for all buildings, the applicant for each
building proposed on an individual parcel shall submit site plans illustrating the use of
light-colored roofing materials, as opposed to dark roofing materials, when possible.
40. The landscaping shall be maintained by contractors who operate with equipment that complies with
the most recent CARB standards, or standards adopted no more than three years prior to date of
use. (MM 5.7.A.8.)
41. The Project applicant shall enter into a voluntary emission reduction program (Air Quality Mitigation
Agreement) with the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District (SJVAPCD) to offset the
project's air emissions during construction and operation of ROG, NOx, and PM10 to net zero. This
Mitigation Agreement requires the SJV APCD and the applicant to identify off-site emission
reduction mitigation programs to reduce the project's net impact on air quality. The SJV APCD shall
commit in writing to reduce the net emissions and to manage and monitor the emission reduction
projects over time. Proof of the Air Quality Mitigation Agreement must be provided to the
satisfaction of the Planning Director prior to recordation of the final map. Proof of compliance shall
include quantification of emission reduction. The Project applicant is responsible for all costs to
determine the emission reductions associated with the projects. The following design features for
the project shall be implemented: (MM 5.7.A.9.)
. Prior to issuance of a grading permit for those areas of the Project site that remain to be
graded, the Developer shall prepare and submit a dust control plan for the Project. The
plan shall be prepared consistent with SJVAPCD Regulation VIII and must be reviewed
and approved by the SJV APCD prior to the commencement of grading activities. Each
contractor working on the Project site shall implement the dust control measures outlined
in the approved dust control plan. The dust control measures selected shall be
incorporated as a note on each grading plan.
. The SJVAPCD maintains New Source Review requirements that direct ownersloperators
of certain types of stationary equipment to obtain an Authority to Construct and Permits
to Operate from the SJVAPCD. As part of this process, the need for emission control 'QAK~1>
equipment is assessed and the SJVAPCD determines whether a Health Risk J- ~
>- -
r- m
_ r-
:) (:)
'IRIGINAl
Exhibit "2"
GPAlZC 02-0030
Page 11 of 21
Assessment must be prepared. Owners/operators of all stationary sources for which
such approvals are required should show proof of compliance with SJVAPCD Rules and
Regulations prior to issuance of certificates of occupancy.
· The Project shall utilize appropriate landscaping to create shade canopies in parking and
common areas of the Project in accordance with City of Bakersfield requirements.
· The Developer of the Project shall accommodate regional and/or local transit stops
within public road rights of way so as to facilitate public transportation to and from the
Project in accordance with City of Bakersfield requirements.
· The Project shall incorporate the installation of bike racks in order to encourage bicycle
transportation to and from the Project.
· The Project shall include sidewalk access to the Project site so as to encourage and
facilitate pedestrian access to the Project.
42. The California Air Resources Board, in Title 13, Chapter 10, Section 2485, Division 3 of the
California Code of Regulations, imposes a requirement that heavy-duty trucks transporting
materials to the project tenants shall not idle for greater than five minutes. Accordingly, all diesel
delivery trucks servicing the project shall not idle more than five minutes per truck trip per day. Wal-
Mart's truck fleet has automatic shut-off systems that automatically turn the vehicles off when the
vehicle has been idling for more than three minutes. Signs that state, "no idling" shall be posted at
all the loading docks in a visible location. The store managers and/or personnel shall communicate
this restriction to the truck drivers as needed. (MM 5.7.C.1.)
43. In the delivery loading areas, electrical hookups shall be provided to allow for supplementing power
for future tenants that may require transportation refrigeration units to deliver supplies. (MM
5.7.C.2.)
44. The maintenance and testing of each standby emergency generator shall not exceed more than
one hour on any given day or more than 50 hours per year. Logs shall be maintained and retained
subject to review by the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District. (MM 5.7.C.3.)
45. Any dry cleaning equipment installed as part of the project must be "Perc-free." Alternatives to Perc
include water-based cleaning and carbon dioxide (C02) cleaning. Wet cleaning systems use
computer-controlled washers and dryers and non-toxic, bio-degradable detergents which are
approved for sewer disposal. Cleaning with C02 is a process that operates within a pressurized
machine. The C02 used in this process is an industrial by-product from existing operations,
primarily anhydrous ammonia (fertilizer) production. There is no net increase in C02 emitted;
therefore, this process does not contribute to other impacts such as greenhouse gas emissions.
(MM 5.7.C.4.)
46. All tenants shall join the California Climate Action Registry (www.climateregistry.org) to report a
minimum of one year of greenhouse gas emissions. This measure shall be fulfilled prior to one
year after project approval. (MM 5.7.H.1.)
47. The applicant shall become a "Forest Founder" of the Tree Foundation of Kern and/or the Kern
River Parkway Foundation. The applicant shall purchase 1,000 trees at $50 per tree to be planted
within Kern County over the next 10 years. The Tree Foundation of Kern and/or the Kern County
River Foundation shall provide appropriate documentation regarding the plan for tree planting and
the phasing of the tree planting. (MM 5.7.H.2.)
48. To increase water use efficiency and decrease waste, the following shall be installed: (MM
5.7.H.3.)
. Automatic shut off valves shall be installed in all project restrooms;
. "Save Water" type signs shall be placed near water faucets; and
~fl..i\(:
~ ')0
o _
>- r
l::: r
tJ (:)
ORIGINAl
Exhibit "2"
GPAlZC 02-0030
Page 12 of 21
· During operation, all tenants shall have recycling programs to ensure that items that are
recyclable (Le., cardboard boxes and paper) are recycled using appropriate City
guidelines and recycling procedures.
NOISE
49. The project applicant shall fund the construction of a new 8-foot high wall adjacent to existing
residences that are along the west side of Gosford Road between White Lane and Pacheco Road.
Based on a review of an aerial photograph, the 8-foot wall will need to extend for approximately
1,600 feet. Based on an approximately $100 per lineal foot of a wall that is 8-feet high, the total
cost to construct the wall is approximately $160,000. Prior to the issuance of the first building
permit for the project, the project applicant shall pay the total cost of a new wall to the City. The
final cost and method of installing the new wall will be determined by the City of Bakersfield Building
Director. (MM 5.8.C.1.)
50. Construction activities shall be limited to the hours between 7 a.m. to 7 p.m. on weekdays, and
between 9 a.m. and 6 p.m. on Saturdays and Sundays to avoid nighttime construction. (MM
5.8.D.1.)
51. All stationary noise -generating equipment, such as pumps and generators, will be located as far as
possible from nearby noise-sensitive receptors, as practicable. Where practicable, noise-
generating equipment will be shielded from nearby noise-sensitive receptors by noise-attenuating
buffers such as structures or haul trucks trailers. Stationary noise sources located less than 200
feet from noise-sensitive receptors will be equipped with noise-reducing engine housings. Portable
acoustic barriers will be placed around noise-generating equipment located within 200 feet of
residences. Water tanks and equipment storage, staging, and warm-up areas will be located as far
from noise-sensitive receptors as possible. (MM 5.8.D.2.)
52. All construction equipment powered by gasoline or diesel engines will be required to have sound-
control devices at least as effective as those originally provided by the manufacturer; no equipment
will be permitted to have an un muffled exhaust. (MM 5.8.D.3).
53. Any impact tools used during demolition of existing infrastructure will be shrouded or shielded. (MM
5.8.D.4.)
54. Mobile noise-generating equipment and machinery will be shut off when not in use. (MM 5.8.D.5.)
55. Construction vehicles accessing the site will be required to use the shortest possible route to and
from local freeways, provided the routes do not expose additional receptors to noise. (MM 5.8.D.6.)
56. Residences within 500 feet of the construction area will be notified of the construction schedule in
writing, prior to construction. The project applicant and the construction contractor will designate a
noise disturbance coordinator who will be responsible for responding to complaints regarding
construction noise. A contact telephone number for the noise disturbance coordinator will be
conspicuously posted on construction site fences and will be included in written notification of
construction schedule sent to nearby residents. (MM 5.8.D.7.)
PUBLIC SERVICES
57. The project developer shall pay applicable SB 50 Level 1 impacts fees at the time of issuance of
building permits in accordance with the statutory rate then in effect. (MM 5.12.C.1.)
'QAK~I)-'
O~ 0'
-'1'\
>- n-
r- r-
o tJ
0RIGINAl
Exhibit "2"
GPA/ZC 02-0030
Page 13 of 21
GEOLOGY AND SOILS
58. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the building plan shall demonstrate that future structures
on the project site will be constructed in accordance with the Uniform Building Code (seismic zone
4, which has the most stringent seismic construction requirements in the United States), and will
adhere to all modern earthquake standards, including those relating to soil characteristics.
PUBLIC WORKS (Discretionarv Conditions)
59. Along with the submittal of any development plan, prior to approval of improvement plans, or with
the application for a lot line adjustment or parcel merger, the following shall occur:
· Developer is responsible for the construction of all infrastructure, both public and private,
within the boundary of the GPA/ZC area. This includes the construction of any and all
boundary streets to the centerline of the street, unless otherwise specified. The
developer is also responsible for the construction of any off site infrastructure required to
support this development, as identified in these conditions. The phasing of the
construction all infrastructure will be addressed at the subdivision map stage.
60. The entire area covered by this General Plan Amendment shall be included in the Consolidated
Maintenance District. The applicant shall pay all fees for inclusion in the Consolidated Maintenance
District with submittal of any development plan, tentative subdivision map, Site Plan Review, or
application for a lot line adjustment for any portion of this GPA area.
61. Prior to issuance of any new building permit, the developer shall pay a major transportation facility
fee for all existing structures on the project site in the amount as described below that is in effect:
a. 35~ per square foot for commercial/industrial use, OR
b. the difference between the original TIF paid with the original building
permits and the new, merged TIF, if the fee is merged into the
regional TIF program.
For orderly development.
62. In addition, prior to issuance of a building permit for any new structure, the developer shall pay a
major transportation facility fee for the new structure in the amount of 35~ per square foot for
commercial/industrial use or the fees in effect at the time of building permit approval. If prior to
issuance of a building permit said fee is merged into the regional TIF program then payment of the
regional TIF fee will be deemed to have satisfied the intent of this condition. This fee is imposed
per City Council approved action plan to pursue funds needed to complete construction of major
transportation facilities to serve growth and development within Metropolitan Bakersfield.
For orderly development.
63. Three full access signalized project entrances onto Gosford Road are proposed. A signal
coordination study shall be submitted and approved which adequately justifies the location of these
signals. Should a signal not be justified, a limited access entrance only will be allowed with no left
turn out permitted. Each signal shall be installed and operational at the time the entrance is opened
to the general public traffic.
Condition satisfied in 2003.
<QMi:-1)>
J- ~
>- -
m
\:::;. r-
o (:)
ORIGINAl
Exhibit "2"
GPAlZC 02-0030
Page 14 of 21
64. For the purpose of implementation of the phasing plan, development of any portion of a phase shall
trigger the improvements required for that phase.
65. No parking signs shall be posted along the north side of Harris Road east of the intersection of
Silver Gate Street to meet the City of Bakersfield sight line standard.
66. Eastbound left turn lane striping shall be installed at the intersection of Wilderness Road/ Harris
road intersection of Harris Road/Ash Road.
67. A dual continuous left turn lane shall be striped from the intersection of Wilderness Road/Harris
Road to the intersection of Harris Road/ Ashe Road.
68. Yellow Flashing lights shall be installed in accordance with the City of Bakersfield standards at the
pedestrian crossing of Harris Road in front of Subaru School.
PLANNING (Discretionarv Conditions)
69. All mechanical and electrical equipment (install on the structure or on the ground) shall be
adequately screened from public view. The screening shall be considered as an element of the
overall design and must blend with the architectural design of the building and/or landscaping as
appropriate. Method of screening shall be approved by the Planning Department.
70. Prior to or with submittal of final development plans, the applicant shall submit an application for a
Comprehensive Sign Plan. No signage, except for miscellaneous temporary construction signage
as allowed by the City's Sign Ordinance is permitted prior to approval of a comprehensive sign plan.
Condition satisfied in 2003.
71. Prior to submittal of Final Development Plans, the applicant shall submit a Security Plan to the
Bakersfield Police Department for review and approval. (Contact the Planning Department for name
of Police Dept. contact person.) with submittal of Final Development Plans, evidence of approval by
the Police Department shall be provided to the City Planning Department.
· Provision for on-site security guards
· Security lighting at parking areas, loading areas, and walkways
· Use of dead bolts, closed circuit televisions, security lighting and alarms and other
design features to increase on-site security
· Elimination of dead spaces and areas of potential concealment
· Provision of visible addresses and access to emergency vehicles.
Condition satisfied in 2003.
72. Developer shall consult with Golden Empire Transit District (GET) prior to submittal of Final Site
Plan Review. Developer shall construct a bus shelter and turnout to accommodate at least 2 busses
within or adjacent to the project site. Developer shall submit a letter from GET with the Final Site
Plan Review, which indicates GET is satisfied with the bus shelter/turnout location and design.
Condition satisfied in 2003.
73. The primary parking areas shall be divided into 4-6 sections. There shall be a minimum of 5
landscaped walkways connecting the major tenants to the satellite pads along Gosford Road.
'OM~-9
J u>
-1'1
>- -
r- m
_ r-
o C)
0RiGINAl
Exhibit "2"
GPAlZC 02-0030
Page 15 of 21
74. Building pad areas, which will not be built on immediately after grading shall be hydroseeded or
turfed and maintained along the other required landscaping. Pad areas to be turfed shall be labeled
as such on final development pads and shall be provided with a perimeter barrier to prevent
vehicular access.
75. Any emergency generator shall be enclosed by an 8-foot masonry wall.
76. The developer shall provide additional landscape berming and additional trees or shrubbery to
provide visual screening of the parking lot areas from Gosford Road between Harris Road and
Pacheco Road for all areas where there are no buildings adjacent to Gosford Road.
77. Final landscaping plans shall be in substantial conformance with the preliminary landscaping plans.
Minimum changes to the landscaping plan may be permitted subject to Planning Director approval.
78. Light fixtures in the front parking lots along Gosford Road shall not exceed a maximum height of 25
feet.
SITE PLAN REVIEW
79. SITE PLAN REVIEW CONDITIONS AND ORDINANCE COMPLIANCE
The following are specific items that you need to resolve before you can obtain a
building permit or be allowed occupancy. These items include conditions and/or
mitigation required by previous site entitlement approvals (these will be specifically
noted), changes or additions that need to be shown on the final building plans, alert
you to specific fees, and other conditions for your project to satisfy the City's
development standards. The item will usuallv need to be shown on the final
buildina Dlans or comDleted before a buildina Dermit is issued. Each has been
grouped by department so that you know whom to contact if you have questions.
A. DEVELOPMENT SERVICES - BUILDING (staff contact - Mark Fick 661/326-3437)
1. An approved grading plan is required prior to final plan approval. The developer shall
submit 4 copies of grading plans and 2 copies of the preliminary soils report to the
Building Division. A final soils report shall also be submitted to the Building Division
before they can issue a building permit. Please note that grading plans must be
consistent with the final building site plans and landscaping plans. Building permits will
not be issued until the grading plan is approved by both the Building Division and Public
Works Department.
2. An approved site utilities plan is required prior to final plan approval.
3. The developer shall include fire resistive wall construction details with the final building
plans for all exterior walls of any building that is within 20 feet of property lines if it is
used for commercial or industrial purposes, or 5 feet of property lines if it is used for
residential purposes.
4. Include with or show on the final building plans information necessary to verify that the
project complies with all disability requirements of Title 24 of the California Building
Code.
'QM~1>
J- ~
>- m
_ r-
) <J
()RIGINAl
Exhibit "2"
GPAlZC 02-0030
Page 16 of 21
5. The developer shall obtain all required approvals from the Kern County Environmental
Health Services Department (2700 "M" Street, Bakersfield, CA; Ph. 661/862-8700) for
any food handling facility, (ie. market, delicatessen, cafe, concession, restaurant) before
building permits can be issued.
6. Buildings or structures exceeding 10,000 square feet in area shall require installation of
an automatic fire sprinkler system.
7. Business identification signs are not considered nor approved under this review. A
separate review and sign permit from the Building Division is required for all new signs,
including future use and construction signs. Signs must comply with the Sign Ordinance
(Chapter 17.60 of the Bakersfield Municipal Code).
8. The Building Division will calculate and collect the appropriate school district impact fee
at the time they issue a building permit.
9. Final building plans shall show pedestrian access pathways or easements for persons
with disabilities from public rights-of-way that connect to all accessible buildings,
facilities, elements, and spaces in accordance with the California Building Code. These
pedestrian access ways shall not be parallel to vehicular lanes unless separated by
curbs or railings.
B. DEVELOPMENT SERVICES - PLANNING (staff contact - Hayward Cox 661/326-3673)
1. The minimum parking required for this project has been computed based on use and
shall be as follows:
Use
Square
Footaae
Parking
Bm!2
Required
Parkina
Major 1 - Retail
Major 2-5, Pads & Shops
Major 2-5, Pads & Shops
Major 6 - Retail
Restaurants
133,126 sJ.
35,000 sJ.
283,051 sJ.
232,000 sJ.
13,000 sJ.
1 space/300 sJ.
1 space/200 sJ.
1 space/250 sJ.
1 space/300 sJ.
1 spacenS sJ.
Total Spaces Required
444 spaces
616 spaces
1 ,132 spaces
773 spaces
173 spaces
3,138 spaces
(Note: 3699 parking spaces are shown on the proposed site plan. By ordinance,
compact and tandem spaces cannot be counted toward meeting minimum parking
requirements)
2.
Minimum parking stall dimensions shall be 9-feet wide by 18-feet long. Vehicles may
hang over landscape areas no more than 2% feet provided required setbacks along
street frontages are maintained, and trees and shrubs are protected from vehicles.
3.
Prior to final site plan review approval, developer shall install bike racks throughout the
project (See Mitigation Measure 5.7.A.9)
4.
All parking lots, driveways, drive aisles, loading areas, and any other vehicular access
ways, shall be paved with concrete, asphaltic concrete (A. C.), or other paved street
surfacing material in accordance with the Bakersfield Municipal Code (Sections
15.76.020 and 17.58.050 N.).
~AK~1>
J- <.f'
-n
>- -
m
r-
.) \:::;
0RIGINAl
'r::
Exhibit "2"
GPA/ZC 02-0030
Page 17 of 21
5. Lighting is required for all parking lots, except residential lots with 4 units or less (Section
17.58.060A). Illumination shall be evenly distributed across the parking area with light
fixtures designed and arranged so that light is directed downward and is reflected away
from adjacent properties and streets. Use of glare shields or baffles may be required for
glare reduction or control of back light. No light poles, standards and fixtures, including
bases or pedestals, shall exceed a height of 40 feet above grade. However, light
standards placed less than 50 feet from residentially zoned or designated property, or
from existing residential development, shall not exceed a height of 15 feet. The final
building plans shall include a picture or diagram of the light fixtures being used and show
how light will be directed onto the parking area. Please note that staff can require
additional adjustments to installed lighting after occupancy to resolve glare of other
lighting problems if they negatively affect adjacent properties. See Condition No. 79
under Planning.
6. Because parking and/or access is being shared with adjacent properties, the developer
shall file with the Planning Division before any building permits are issued a copy of a
recorded map, C. C. and R.'s, or other instrument that ensures that drive aisles, parking,
and access is legally shared in common with adjoining properties as depicted on the site
plan for the life of the project.
7. The developer shall include a copy of a final landscape plan with each set of the final
building plans submitted to the Building Division. Building permits will not be issued until
the Planning Division has approved the final landscape plan for consistency with
approved site plans and minimum ordinance standards (please refer to the attached
landscaping requirements in Chapter 17.61).
(NOTE: At the time a final site inspection is conducted, it is expected that plants will match
the species identified and be installed in the locations consistent with the approved
landscape plan. Changes made without prior approval of the Planning staff may result in
the removal andlor relocation of installed plant materials and delays in obtaining building
occupancy.)
8. Street addresses for the project shall be designated as shown by staff on the returned
site plan. These numbers will be the only addresses assigned by the city unless you
wish to have a different address program. Internal building unit addresses will be only
by suite number and will be the responsibility of the owner or developer to assign to
each tenant.
(It is recommended that you assign suite numbers beginning with 100, 200, 300, etc.
instead of an alphabetic character. If in the future a tenant space were split, you would
then be able to assign a suite number between the existing numbers, which would keep
your suites in numerical order. Keeping an orderly numbering system will make it easier
for customers, emergency personnel, and mail delivery to find the business.)
9. See Condition No. 2-21 (Mitigation Measure 5.3.A.2 &3) regarding compliance with the
Metropolitan Bakersfield Habitat Conservation Plan.
10.
Rooftop areas of commercial buildings (eg. office, retail, restaurant, assembly, hotel,
hospital, church, school), and industrial buildings adjacent to residentially zoned
properties, shall be completely screened by parapets or other finished architectural
'6Mf1>
J- <.f'
"'1"'\
>- -
l- m
.- r-
c> C)
ORIGINAl
Exhibit "2"
GPAlZC 02-0030
Page 18 of 21
features constructed to a height of the highest equipment. unfinished structural element
or unfinished architectural feature of the building.
11. Open storage of materials and equipment shall be surrounded and screened with a solid
wall or fence (screening also applies to gates). This fence shall be at least 6 feet in
height and materials shall not be stacked above the height of the fence. (Note: Fences
taller than 6 feet are allowed in commercial and industrial zones but they will require a
building permit.)
12. Areas used for outside storage, shall be treated with a permanent dust binder or other
permanent dust control measures consistent with the regulations of the San Joaquin
Valley Air Pollution Control District. (Note: All passenger vehicle-parking areas must be
paved.)
13. Refuse collection bin enclosures and container areas are subject to all required
structural setbacks from street frontages, and shall not reduce any parking, loading or
landscaping areas as required by the Zoning Ordinance.
14. In the event a previously undocumented oil/gas well is uncovered or discovered on the
project site, the developer is responsible to contact the Department of Conservation's
Division of Oil, Gas, and Geothermal Resources (DOGGR). The developer is
responsible for any remedial operations on the well required by DOGGR. The developer
shall also be subject to provisions of BMC Section 15.66.080 (B.).
15. The developer shall meet all regulations of the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control
District (Regulation VIII) concerning dust suppression during construction of the project.
Methods include, but are not limited to;, use of water or chemical stabilizer/suppressants
to control dust emissions from disturbed area, stock piles, and access ways; covering or
wetting materials that are transported off-site; limit construction-related speeds to 15
mph on all unpaved areas/ washing of construction vehicles before they enter public
streets to minimize carryouUtrack out; and cease grading and earth moving during
periods of high winds (20 mph or more).
16. Prior to receiving final building or site occupancy, you must contact the Planning Division
(staff contact noted above) for final inspection and approval of the landscaping, parking
lot, lighting, and other related site improvements. Inspections will not be conducted until
all required items have been installed. Any deviations from the approved plans without
prior approval from the Planning Division may result in reconstruction and delays in
obtaining building or site occupancy.
C. FIRE DEPARTMENT (staff contact - Dave Weirather 661/326-3706)
1. Show on the final building plans the following items:
b.
All fire lanes as identified on the returned olans. Any modifications shall be
approved by the Fire Department. Fire lane identification signs shall be installed
every 100 feet with red curbing when curbing is required. All work shall be
completed before occupancy of any building or portion of any building is allowed.
All fire hvdrants. both offsite (nearest to site) and on-site. Include flow data on allx ~Mt::I)iOj
o ;.r\
>- n
'::::: r
o (:)
ORIGINAl
a.
Exhibit "2"
GPA/ZC 02-0030
Page 19 of 21
hydrants. Hydrants shall be in good working condition and are subject to testing
for verification. Fire flow requirements must be met prior to construction
commencing on the project site. Please provide 2 sets of the engineered water
plans to Dave Weirather. (Note: All new fire hydrants must be purchased from
the Fire Department.)
c. All fire scrinkler and/or stand cice svstems. fire alarms and commercial hood
systems. These suppression systems require review and permits by the Fire
Department. The Fire Department will issue guidelines for these various items
as they may apply to this project.
2. The developer must request an inspection of any underground sprinkler feeds at least 24
hours before they are buried. The Prevention Services Division (1600 Truxtun Avenue,
Suite 401, Bakersfield, CA; Ph. 661/326-3979) must complete all on-site inspections of
fire sprinkler systems and fire alarm systems before any building is occupied.
3. The developer shall show on the final building plans a minimum 20-foot wide all-weather
emergency access with an overhead clearance of 13 feet 6 inches within 150 feet of all
buildings on the project site. The Fire Department must approve the final location and
design of this access prior to building permits being issued. This access shall be
constructed before building occupancy will be granted.
4. All access (permanent and temporary) to and around any building under construction
must be at least 20 feet wide, contain no vehicle obstructions, and be graded to prevent
standing water. Barricades must be in place where ditches and barriers exist in or cross
roadways. Emergency vehicle access must always be reliable.
5. If you handle hazardous materials or hazardous waste on the site, the Prevention
Services Division may require a hazardous material management and/or risk
management plan before you can begin operations. Please contact them at 661/326-
3979 for further information.
6. If you treat hazardous waste on the site, the Prevention Services Division may require a
hazardous waste "Tiered" permit before you can begin operations. Please contact them
at 661/326-3979 for further information.
7. If you store hazardous materials on the site in either an underground or a permanent
aboveground storage tank, a permit from the Prevention Services Division is required to
install and operate these tanks. The Prevention Services Division may also require a
Spill Prevention Control and Countermeasure Plan for storage of petroleum products
above ground in quantities of 1,320 gallons or more. Please contact them at 661/326-
3979 for further information.
D. PUBLIC WORKS - ENGINEERING (staff contact - George Gillburg 661/326-3997)
1.
The developer shall install new connection(s) to the public sewer system. This
connection shall be shown on the final building plans submitted to the Building Division
before any building permits will be issued.
~Mt:,
~ 'YU)
-'f\
>- -
f- m
_ r-
() C)
ORIGINAl
Exhibit "2"
GPAlZC 02-0030
Page 20 of 21
2. Show on the final building plans all existing connection(s) to the public sewer system.
3. All on-site areas required to be paved (ie. parking lots, access drives, loading areas,
etc.) shall consist of concrete, asphaltic concrete (Type B, A. C.) or other paved street
material approved by the City Engineer. Pavement shall be a minimum thickness of 2
inches over 3 inches of approved base material (ie. Class II A. B.). This paving standard
shall be noted on the final building plans submitted to the Building Division before any
building permits will be issued.
4. If a grading plan is required by the Building Division, building permits will not be issued
until the grading plan is approved by both the Public Works Department and Building
Division.
5. Before any building or site can be occupied, the developer must reconstruct or repair
substandard off-site street improvements that front the site to adopted city standards as
directed by the City Engineer. Please call the Construction Superintendent at 661/326-
3049 to schedule a site inspection to find out what improvements may be required.
6. A street permit from the Public Works Department shall be obtained before any work can
be done within the public right-of-way (streets, alleys, easements). Please include a
copy of this site plan review decision to the department at the time you apply for this
permit.
7. A sewer connection fee shall be paid at the time a building permit is issued. We will
base this fee at the rate in effect at the time a building permit is issued.
8. A transportation impact fee for regional facilities shall be paid at the time a building
permit is issued, or if no building permit is required, before occupancy of the building or
site. This fee will be based at the rate in effect at the time the building permit is issued.
The Public Works Department will calculate an estimate of the total fee when you submit
construction plans for the project.
9. The legal description (ie. lot and tract number and/or assessor's parcel number) shall be
shown on the final building plans.
E. PUBLIC WORKS - SOLID WASTE (contacts - James Scrivano or John Wilburn 661/326-
3114)
1. You must contact the staff Derson noted above before buildina Dermits can be
issued or work begins on the property to establish the level and type of service
necessary for the collection of refuse and/or recycled materials. Collection
locations must provide enough containment area for the refuse that is generated without
violating required zoning or setback restrictions (see Planning Division conditions).
Levels of service are based on how often collection occurs as follows:
. Cart service
. Front loader bin services
. Roll-off compactor service
1 cubic yard/week or less 1 time per week
1 cubic yard/week - 12 cubic yards/day
More than 12 cubic yards/day
'QMf
J- 'Yu'
-f\
>- -
r- m
_ r-
o (:)
ORIGINAl
Exhibit "2"
GPAlZC 02-0030
Page 21 of 21
2. Show on the final building plans refuse bin enclosures. Each enclosure shall be
designed according to adopted city standard (Detail #S-43), at the size checked below
0. Before occupancy of the building or site is allowed, 66 three-cubic yard front loading
type refuse bin(s) shall be placed within the required enclosure(s).
D 6' deep x 8' wide (1 bin)
o five- 8' deep x 10' wide (2 bins)
D 8' deep x 15' wide (3 bins)
014 - 8' deep x 20' wide (4 bins)
NOTE: All enclosure measurements above are inside dimensions. If both refuse
and recycling containers are to be combined in the same enclosure area, this area must
be expanded in size to accommodate multiple containers/bins (contact the staff person
above for the appropriate enclosure size).
3. Show on the final building plans nine (9) compactor roll-off bin location(s). Please
contact staff for additional information on compactor requirements and placement.
4. Facilities that require infectious waste services shall obtain approval for separate
infectious waste storage areas from the Kern County Health Department. In no
instances shall the refuse bin area be used for infectious waste containment purposes.
5. Facilities that require grease containment must provide a storage location that is
separate from the refuse bin location. This shall be shown on the final building plans.
6. Facilities that participate in recycling operations must provide a location that is separate
from the refuse containment area.
'QM~1>
~ 0'
-(I
>- -
f- m
_ r-
o (:)
0RIGINA!
in! i iWf!!!!!!rrm!~~ I~ I i
lllll'I!1 ~I,IIW/ II
ill! 1!lillllllllllll ~ ~
iiliili Imm~; IllUdlE I I
I
I", i drm' !!~!!!!!'!mllm;l: I i
ir~!~ 'I i I11II1 r"rf"i', ~ !
III !1!!,lljl !1111111I i I
~~ i.~l~ IIII I , ! IIII1II1I111111 ~
11111I1 liliii iilm;sm!lIlm II
I" de P
.1' Hi I" ' I
II ~ i:1
III Ii!
II iil I
Ii Iii. I
111I1 !
:~'l~-
.1! ..,c,
!; -0--
... -.,J
. ~
~
. ~
IRJI~II
il'it! 'I '
II ;i
II ~.
.. ll.
.i oil.
111I1
CasUe Ie Cooke Commereial-CA, Inc.
- ......
11m PUN
EXHIBIT "3"
Ii
f
I
I
,
(I?
I!:;' I
!b ~..
I" \l
.1
I
.."
.."
rn
r-
"3"
~
~
t
J
1!
l
i
f
I ~
l.
, i
~ R !
' rll
1 I
f iJ ~
~~J I
1.1~1 S
~ 1lI- ,- N
tll D::! 0
II) <:l
5 9'
:= !!!
~ III
Q) ;
W ~
CI l!l
~ 5
'S .;,
r:D ~
"'
o
~
IL
IL
o
ili
~
~
c
~
~
'QM~1>
X ~
o _
>- m
r- r-
--:. (:)
'..J !/RIGINAI
EXHIBIT "3"
~ ~
o 9"
.,. w
~ ili
~ ~
w ~
Cl ~
c:: ~
32 <>
'5 0:
!Xl I!!
z
UJ
o
C)
z
0:
Q.
o
:r
'"
~
:5
...
:>
o
~
'"
8
~
~
~
i
<3
c
K
~
~
f
i
~ E
j ~
~ R
~ R .~
~ ~ ;i
,,; .s il,
11 1> U tI!
~ z:g:;:
i a:J~ i
~ ~!-
:jj 1fII~ ~
:l! "'""'" 01
.. ~Ih ~
~ lfIIo ij _
~ 1fII~:i 1::
'OM~1>
~ ~
>- m
- r-
':. (:)
.) 'lRiGINAl
EXHIBIT "4"
CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding
Considerations
for the
Gosford Village Shopping Center
Prepared for:
City of Bakersfield
Development Services Department
1715 Chester Avenue
Bakersfield, CA 93301
661.326.3043
Prepared by:
Michael Brandman Associates
220 Commerce, Suite 200
Irvine, CA 92602
714.508.4100
Contact: Michael E. Houlihan, AICP, Project Director
....
..11..
November 14, 2007
'QM~1>
J- <P
-'l'I
>- -
I- m
__ t-
o ()
nRIGINAI
Gosford Village Shopping Center
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations
Table of Contents
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Section 1: Introduction.. ............ ........................ ............... ..................................... ............. 1
1.1 - Background....................................................................................................... 1
1.2 - Project Description............................................................................................ 3
1.3 - Project Components.... ................ .......... ........... ............................ ..... ................3
1.4 - Project Objectives............................................................................................. 4
1.5 - Record of Proceedings ....... ........ ........... .............. ........ ........... ............... .... ... .....5
1.6 - Custodian and Location of Records....... ........... ............. ...................... ..............6
1.7 - Environmental Review and Public Participation .................................................6
1.8 - General Findings............................................................................................... 8
Section 2: Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative Impacts Which Can Be Mitigated
to a Level of Insignificance .......................................................................11
2.1 - Biological Resources....................................................................................... 11
2.2 - Cultural Resources.......................................................................................... 24
2.3 - Hazards and Hazardous Materials. ..... ... .............. ........ ........................ ............ 37
2.4 - Traffic ........ ........ '" ........... ............ ................. .... ................................. ..............45
2.5 - Air Quality.. ...................... ........... ............... .................. ............. .... ..... ........... ...74
2.6 - Noise.... ......... ......... ............... ..... ........... .............. ........ ........... ........... ..............88
2.7 - Public Services and Utilities............................................................................. 92
Section 3: Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative Impacts Which Cannot Be
Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance....................................................... 95
3.1 - Transportation................................................................................................. 96
3.2 - Air Quality...................................................................................................... 107
3.3 - Noise............................................................................................................. 11 0
Section 4: Feasibility of Project Alternatives ................................................................113
4.1 - No Project/No Development Alternative......................................................... 115
4.2 - No Project/Development in Accordance with the General Plan Alternative ....116
4.3 - Reduced Intensity Alternative........................................................................ 117
4.4 - Panama/Gosford Alternative Site................................................................... 121
Appendix A: Statement of Overriding Considerations
LIST OF TABLES
Table 2.4-1: Impact Fee Programs Intersection and Roadway Segment Improvements.................... 52
Michael Brandman Associates
S:IGV\CCI02160039 ]indings_ll-14-07.doc
<< ~AK~~
,'j,' 0 <.f'
>- ~
f- m
-0 [;
ORIGINA!
Gosford Village Shopping Center
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations
Introduction
SECTION 1:
INTRODUCTION
1.1 - BACKGROUND
In compliance with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Public
Resources Code Section 21000 et seq and the CEQA Guidelines, the City of Bakersfield has
conducted an environmental review of the proposed Gosford Village Shopping Center. A Notice of
Preparation (NOP) was released for public review in June 2005. In May 2007, the Draft
Environmental Report (EIR) was released. After receiving public comment on the Draft EIR, the
City prepared a document entitled Response to Comments on the Draft EIR (RTC). The RTC
document includes the verbatim comments received on the Draft EIR, a list of persons, entities and
agencies providing comments, the City's responses to the significant environmental points raised in
the comment, review and consultation process, and the various written responses to the comments
prepared by the City's technical consultants and the City. These Findings are based upon the
information contained in the record of proceedings, including the Final EIR which includes the Draft
EIR and the technical appendices in Chapter 1, the RTC in Chapter 2, and additional environmental
information in Chapter 3 as well as staff reports, the project applicant's materials, the Mitigation
Monitoring Program, the testimony presented at public hearings, and all of the materials set forth in
the Record of Proceedings, including Section 1.5, below.
CEQA provides that "public agencies should not approve projects as proposed ifthere are feasible
alternatives or feasible mitigation measures available which would substantially lessen the significant
environmental effects of such proj ects[.]" (Public Resources Code Section 21002 [emphasis added])
The procedures required by CEQA "are intended to assist public agencies in systematically
identifying both the significant effects of proposed projects and the feasible alternatives or feasible
mitigation measures which will avoid or substantially lessen such significant effects." (Public
Resources Code Section 21002.
CEQA provides that a public agency has an obligation to balance a variety of public objectives,
including economic, environmental, and social factors and in particular the goals of providing
employment opportunities for highly trained workers, and providing a satisfying living environment
for every Californian. (Public Resources Code Section 21081; CEQA Guidelines, 14 Cal. Code of
Regulations, Section 15021(d).) CEQA also provides that "in the event [that] specific economic,
social, or other conditions make infeasible such project alternatives or such mitigation measures,
individual projects may be approved in spite of one or more significant effects thereof." (Public
Michael Brandman Associates
S:\GV\CC\02160039 ]indings_II-14-07.doc
~M~-9
J- ~
>- -
1 '-- m
c...... r-
V (:)
ORIGINAl
Introduction
Gosford Village Shopping Center
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations
Resources Code Section 21002.) CEQA requires decision-makers to balance the benefits of a
proposed project against its significant unavoidable adverse environmental impacts, and, ifthe
benefits of a proposed project outweigh the significant unavoidable adverse environmental impacts,
the unavoidable adverse environmental impacts may be considered "acceptable" by adopting a
"Statement of Overriding Considerations." (CEQA Guidelines, 14 California Code of Regulations,
Section 15093.) The Statement of Overriding Considerations must set forth the project benefits or
reasons why the Lead Agency is in favor of approving the project and must weigh these benefits
against the project's adverse environmental impacts identified in the Final EIR that cannot be
mitigated to a less-than-significant level.
CEQA's mandates and principles are implemented, in part, through the requirement that agencies
adopt findings before approving projects for which EIRs are required. For each significant
environmental effect identified in an EIR for a proposed project, the approving agency must issue a
written fmding reaching one or more of three conclusions: (I) that "[c]hanges or alterations have been
required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant
environmental effect as identified in the Final EIR," (2) "[s]uch changes or alterations are within the
responsibility and jurisdiction of another public agency and not the agency making the finding [and]
[s ]uch changes have been adopted by such other agency or can and should be adopted by such other
agency," or (3) "[s]pecific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, including
provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make infeasible the mitigation
measures or proj ect alternatives identified in the Final EIR." (Public Resources Code Section 21081;
CEQA Guidelines, 14 California Code of Regulations Section 15091.) CEQA defmes "feasible" to
mean "capable of being accomplished in a successful manner within a reasonable period of time,
taking into account economic, legal, environmental, social and technological factors." (Public
Resources Code Section 21061.1; CEQA Guidelines, 14 California Code of Regulations 15364.)
Because the Gosford Village Shopping Center Final EIR identified significant effects that may occur
as a result of the project, and in accordance with the provisions ofCEQA and the CEQA Guidelines,
the City Council of the City of Bakersfield hereby adopts these Findings of Fact and Statement of
Overriding Considerations. For each of the significant effects identified in Section 2, as set forth in
greater detail in these Findings below, the City Council makes the finding under Public Resources
Code Section 2108 I (a)(1) and/or (a)(2). For each ofthe significant effects identified in Section 3, as
set forth in greater detail in these Findings below, the City Council makes the finding under Public
Resources Code Section 21081(a)(3).
2
Michael Brandman Associates
S:\GV\CC\02160039 ]indings_11-14-07.doc
'QM~-9
J- ~
>- m
r- r-
-0 C)
ORIGINAl
Gosford Village Shopping Center
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Ove"iding Considerations
Introduction
In accordance with the provisions of CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines, the City Council of the City
of Bakersfield has independently reviewed the record of proceedings and based on the evidence in the
Record of Proceedings adopts these Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations.
1.2 - PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The 73.53-acre project site is located in the southwestern portion of the City of Bakersfield, in Kern
County, California. The site is located on the west side of Gosford Road, between Pacheco Road on
the north, and Harris Road on the south. The site is accessible from Gosford Road, a major north-
south arterial road Pacheco Road, a collector road, and Harris Road. Panama Lane and White Lane
are other major east-west arterial roads that connect with Gosford Road, and provide access to the
project site. State Route (SR) 99 provides regional access to the site with on-ramps and off-ramps at
Panama Lane and White Lane.
1.3 - PROJECT COMPONENTS
The proposed project is the development of a retail commercial center, which includes a maximum of
700,000 sq ft on 73.53 acres (Exhibit 3-5). The proposed retail center includes 23 pads for tenants
that include various major retail, fast food, and commercial retail uses as well as a gas station.
The project is anticipated to be anchored by seven major retail tenants. The proposed Wal-Mart
Supercenter will encompass 220,171 sq ft of building area (232,000 square feet including the outdoor
garden center) and will be located in northwest corner ofthe site, south of Pacheco Road. Sam's
Club encompasses 135,505 sq ft) and is located in the southwest corner ofthe site, north of Harris
Road. Kohl's Department Store encompasses 96,077 sq ft and is located on the west portion of the
site, south ofWal-Mart and north of Sam's Club. The project also includes four additional major
retail; however, the specific tenants are not known at this time. These will encompass 108,000 sq ft
and will be located on the west portion of the site, with Majors 2 and 2A located adjacent and south of
Kohl's and Majors 4 and 5 located adjacent and north of Kohl's. Eleven commercial retail pads and
four pads for fast food restaurants are proposed on the east portion of the site, west of Gosford Road.
The tenants of three of the commercial retail pads (Pads E, F, and G) located in the northeast corner
of the site include Petco (Pad E - 15,273 sq ft), Walgreens (Pad G - 14,320 sq ft), and Starbucks,
Radio Shack, Panda Express, and one unoccupied retail space (Pad F - 8,650 sq ft), respectively. The
tenants of the remaining commercial retail pads as well as the restaurant pads are not known at this
time.
Michael Brandman Associates
S:\GV\CC\02160039 ]indings_11-14-07.doc
~ 'QM~-9
o Ul
3>- ~
l- m
- r-
o (')
{)RIGINAl
Introduction
Gosford Village Shopping Center
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Ove"ldlng Considerations
Lastly, the proposed project includes one 16-stall membership-only Sam's Club gas station located
adjacent to Harris Road on the southern portion of the project site. Members of the general public
cannot purchase gasoline at this gas station. Rather, only Sam's Club members may do so.
The project will require the approval of a general plan land use amendment, zone change, tentative
and final subdivision map approvals, site plan review/final development plan approvals, and
landscape approvals. The project applicant proposes a General Plan Land Use Element amendment
by changing the project site designation from Service Industrial (Sn to General Commercial (GC). A
concurrent zone change would be required to change the zone for the project site from General
Manufacturing (M-2) to Planned Commercial Development (PCD). The PCD zone will provide for
the implementation of specific innovative site and architectural design guidelines for the proposed
shopping center.
1.4 - PROJECT OBJECTIVES
The proposed project meets the following project objectives.
1. Provide a shopping center that meets the substantial and unmet retail and service demands of
the residents within the southern and southwest portion of the City.
2. Cluster commercial retail uses that provide goods and services near existing residents.
3. Provide new retail and commercial development that captures the economic demands
generated by the marketplace.
4. Accommodate new development that channels land uses in a phased, orderly manner and is
coordinated with the provision of infrastructure and public improvements.
5. Accommodate infill development to take advantage of existing infrastructure.
6. Recycle and intensify parcels of land which are underutilized.
7. Provide new development that will assist the City in obtaining fiscal balance in the years and
decades ahead by maximizing sales tax revenue.
8. Address community circulation, both vehicular and pedestrian, utilizing available capacity
within the existing circulation system, and provide fair-share system improvements to
deficient intersections or road segments.
9. Encourage excellence and creativity in the general plan and contribute to a community with
a specific sense of identity and a high quality of life.
4
Michael Brandman Associates
S:IGVICCI02160039 ]indings_II-14-07.doc
~I.\K(~
cJ ';j'
~.
>- :0-
f- rr
-- r
o (")
ORIGINAl
GosforcJ Village Shopping Center
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Ove"iding Considerations
Introduction
10. Provide new retail and commercial development that maximizes employment in the
southwest portion of the City.
11. Facilitate a planned development consisting of a Wal-Mart Supercenter, Sam's Club, Kohl's,
and related in-line tenants consistent with the market objectives of the applicant and its
tenants.
1.5 - RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
For purposes of CEQA and these Findings, the Record of Proceedings for the proposed project
consists of the following documents and other evidence, at a minimum:
. The Notice of Preparation (NaP) and all other public notices issued by the City in conjunction
with the proposed project;
. The Final Environmental Impact Report for the proposed project (Final EIR) which consists of
the Draft EIR, the technical appendices, and the Response to Comments;
. The Draft EIR;
. All written comments submitted by agencies or members of the public during the public review
comment period on the Draft EIR;
. All responses to written comments submitted by agencies or members of the public during the
public review comment period on the Draft EIR;
. All written and verbal public testimony presented during a noticed public hearing for the
proposed project at which such testimony was taken;
. The Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP);
. The documents, reports and technical memoranda included or referenced in the technical
appendices ofthe Final EIR;
. All documents, studies, EIRs, or other materials incorporated by reference in the Draft EIR and
Final EIR;
. The Ordinances and Resolutions adopted by the City in connection with the proposed project,
and all documents incorporated by reference therein;
. Matters of common knowledge to the City, including but not limited to federal, state and local
laws and regulations and policy documents;
. Written correspondence submitted to the City in connection with the project;
Michael Brandman Associates
S:\GV\CC\02160039 ]indings_II-14-07.doc
'QM~..()
J- .~
-t\
5 >- n;
_ r-
:.J t::>
rJRIGINAL
Introduction
Gosford Village Shopping Center
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Ove"iding Considerations
. All documents, City Staff Reports, City studies, and all written or oral testimony provided to
the City in connection with the project and any and all testimony received by the San Joaquin
Valley Air Pollution Control District in connection with the project;
. Any documents expressly cited in these Findings;
. The City's General Plan, 2010 Consolidated Plan, Zoning Ordinance, and any applicable
Redevelopment Plans adopted by the Redevelopment Agency of the City and the City;
. All public documents prepared by the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District
relating to the project;
. All testimony and deliberations received or held in connection with the project;
. All documents contained within the previous Record of Proceedings prepared for the project
which served as the basis for trial court and Court of Appeal decisions in Bakersfield Citizens
for Local Control v. City of Bakersfield;
. Any other relevant materials required to be in the record of proceedings by Public Resources
Code Section 21167.6(e) (excluding privileged materials), including materials submitted to the
City by the applicant.
1.6 - CUSTODIAN AND LOCATION OF RECORDS
The documents and other materials which constitute the administrative record for the City's actions
related to the project are located at the City of Bakersfield Development Services Department-
Planning Division, located at 1715 Chester Avenue, Bakersfield, California, 93301, Beale Library
located at 701 Truxtun Avenue, Bakersfield, California, 93301, Kern County Law Library, 1415
Truxtun Avenue, Bakersfield, California, 93301, and much of the documents that constitute the
record may be accessed on the City's website at www.bakersfieldcity.us. The City Planning
Department is the custodian of the record of proceedings for the proj ect. Copies of these documents,
which constitute the record of proceedings, are and at all relevant times have been and will be
available upon request at the office of the Planning Department. This information is provided in
compliance with Public Resources Code section 21081.6(a)(2) and CEQA Guideline section
l5091(e).
1.7 - ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW AND PUBLIC PARTICIPATION
The City prepared an Initial Study (IS) for the proposed project in June 2005. Based on that IS, the
City detennined that the proposed project may have a significant effect on the environment and that
6
Michael Brandman Associates
S:\GV\CC\02160039 ]indings_II-14-07.doc
~ ~AK~1>
o ~
>- -
r- m
- r-
o (:)
ORIGINAL
Gosford Village Shopping Center
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations
Introduction
an EIR should be prepared to analyze the potential impacts associated with approval and
implementation of the proposed project.
On June 29,2005 in accordance with Section 15082 ofthe Guidelines, the City distributed a Notice of
Preparation (NaP) of an Environmental Impact Report to the State Clearinghouse, local and regional
responsible agencies and other interested parties. The City held an advertised, public scoping
meeting on the Nap on August 18,2005 to provide (i) information regarding the proposed project
and (ii) an opportunity for public input regarding project issues that should be addressed in the Draft
EIR. This scoping meeting resulted in a decision to analyze additional environmental factors and to
expand the scope of the environmental review of the project.
A total of nine agencies and other interested parties responded to the Nap. A copy of the IS, Nap,
and the responses received during the 30-day public review period, are contained in Appendix A-3,
Notice of Preparation and Initial Study Responses, in Chapter 1 of the Final EIR.
Over the course of a two year period, the Draft EIR for the proposed project was then prepared and
circulated for review and comment by the public, agencies and organizations for a 45-day public
review period that began on May 15,2007 and ended on July 2,2007. The public comment period
exceeded the minimum 45-day review period identified in CEQA Guideline section 15105. A Notice
of Completion of the Draft EIR was sent to the State Clearinghouse and the Draft EIR was circulated
to State agencies for review through the State Clearinghouse, Office of Planning and Research (SCR.
No. 2005061169). A notice of availability of the Draft EIR for review was mailed to approximately
46 residents within a 300 ft radius of the project site and to interested parties who had requested
notification regarding project EIR issues. During the public review period, 36 comment letters on the
Draft EIR were received. An additional comment letter was received after the close of the public
review period. All of the comments received on the Draft EIR were responded to in writing in the
Response to Comments (RTC) which is a component (Chapter 2) of the Final EIR. Furthermore,
after the preparation of the RTC seven additional public comments in seven letter and e-mail
correspondence were received and were reviewed and addressed in Chapter 3 of the Final EIR.
There have been numerous opportunities for public review and comment concerning the proposed
project and the environmental documents prepared for it, including the public forums set forth below:
. San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District Meetings
. City of Bakersfield Planning Commission Meetings
. City of Bakersfield City Council Meetings
Michael Brandman Associates
S:\GV\CC\02160039 ]indings_11-14-07.doc
<< ~AK~1>
o ~
7 >- -
r- m
_ r-
'J <:)
ORIGINAl.
Introduction
Gosford Village Shopping Center
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of OVe"ldlng Considerations
The Draft EIR was made available for public inspection on the City's web-site, the City of
Bakersfield Planning Services Department, located at 1715 Chester Avenue, Bakersfield, California,
93301, Beale Library, located at 701 Truxtun Avenue, Bakersfield, California, 93301, and the Kern
County Law Library, 1415 Truxtun Avenue, Bakersfield, California, 93301 during the public review
period.
1.8 - GENERAL FINDINGS
The City hereby finds as follows:
. The City is the "Lead Agency" for the proposed project evaluated in the Final EIR;
. The Draft EIR and the Final EIR were prepared in compliance with CEQA and the Guidelines;
. The City has independently reviewed and analyzed the Draft EIR and the Final EIR, and these
documents reflect the independent judgment of the Council! Agency;
. A MMRP has been prepared requiring mitigation measures and/or the changes to the proposed
project, which the City has adopted and made a condition of approval of the proposed project.
The MMRP is incorporated herein by reference and is considered part ofthe record of
proceedings for the proposed project;
. The MMRP designates responsibility and anticipated timing for the implementation of
mitigation; the City will serve as the MMRP Coordinator;
. In determining whether the proposed project has a significant impact on the environment, and
in adopting these Findings pursuant to Section 21081 ofCEQA, the City has complied with
CEQA Sections 21081.5 and 21082.2;
. The impacts of the proposed project have fully been analyzed to the extent feasible at the time
of certification of the Final EIR;
. The City reviewed the comments received on the Draft EIR, and the responses thereto and has
determined that neither the comments received nor the responses to such comments add
significant new information regarding environmental impacts to the Draft EIR. The City has
based its actions on full appraisal of all viewpoints, including all comments received up to the
date of adoption of these Findings, concerning the environmental impacts identified and
analyzed in the Final EIR;
. The responses to the comments on the Draft EIR which are contained in the Final EIR, clarify
and amplify the analysis in the Draft EIR;
8
Michael Brandman Associates
S:\GV\CC\02160039 ]indings_11-14-07.doc
'Q M()>
J (j"l
'1"\
>- -
r- m
...... r-
J (J
0RIGINAl
"
Gosford Village Shopping Center
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Ove"iding Considerations
Introduction
· Having reviewed the information contained in the Draft EIR, Final EIR and the record of
proceedings, as well as the requirements of CEQA and the Guidelines regarding recirculation
of Draft EIRs, and having analyzed the changes in the Draft EIR which have occurred since the
close of their respective public review periods, the City finds that there is no new significant
information in the Final EIR and fmds that recirculation is not required;
· The City has made no decisions that constitute an irretrievable commitment of resources
toward the proposed project prior to certification on the Final EIR, nor has the City previously
committed to a definite course of action with respect to the proposed project;
· The City has independently analyzed the project and the EIR prepared for the project, and has
independently considered the imposition of mitigation measures and all other matters related
thereto, giving no weight to the fact that portions of the project have been partially constructed;
· The City finds, for those reasons set forth in the Final EIR and numerous City Staff Reports,
that the Final EIR complies with and responds to all of the issues raised by and directed to be
addressed by the California Court of Appeal, Fifth District, in its decision entitled Bakersfield
Citizens for Local Control v. City of Bakersfield, Case No F045035;
. Copies of all the documents incorporated by reference in the Final EIR are and have been
available upon request at all times at the offices of the City, custodian or record for such
documents or other materials.
Having received, reviewed and considered all information and documents in the record, the City
hereby conditions the proposed Project as set forth in the Conditions of Approval and Mitigation
Monitoring Program and finds as stated in these Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding
Considerations.
Michael Brandman Associates
S:\GV\CC\02160039 ]indings_11-14-07.doc
~, ~AK~1>
9 0' ~
>- -
r:: f2!
'J (:)
ORIGINAl
This Page Left
Intentionally Blank
<<. ~AK~1>
o ~
>- --
I- m
_ r-
o (:)
ORIGINAL
Gosford Village Shopping Center
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Ove"iding Considerations
Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative Impacts Which
Can Be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance
SECTION 2:
ADVERSE PROJECT-SPECIFIC AND CUMULATIVE IMPACTS WHICH CAN BE
MITIGATED TO A lEVEL OF INSIGNIFICANCE
The Final EIR identified significant project-specific and cumulative adverse impacts of the proposed
project and proposed mitigation measures to avoid or substantially lessen those impacts. Those
impacts and mitigation measures are identified in the following sections. The Bakersfield City
Council finds, based on the facts set forth in the record, which include but are not limited to the facts
as set forth below, that the incorporation of the identified mitigation measures will mitigate the
following identified significant project-specific and cumulative adverse impacts to a level that is
considered less than significant.
2.1 - BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
Impact 5.3.A
The proposed project has a potential to result In a substantial adverse effect, either
directly or through habitat modifications, on any species Identified as a candidate,
sensitive, or special status species In local or regional plans, policies, or
regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service.
2.1.1 - Project-Specific
2.1.1.1 - Potentially Significant Impact
The Final EIR identifies a potentially project-specific significant impact on the federal endangered
and California State threatened San Joaquin kitfox.
Suitable denning habitat was observed on the project site, including several pieces of six-inch
diameter PVC irrigation pipe sections. However, no signs of San Joaquin kit fox (scat, tracks, hair,
bones or prey items etc.) were noted in, around or near these pipes or anywhere on the project site.
Due to the fact that the project site is within the known range of this species, and suitable denning
habitat was identified onsite, there is potential for kit fox to use the project site for foraging and/or
denning. Construction activities associated with the project could result in impacts to this species.
Finding
Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 (a)(I), changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect
as identified in the Final EIR.
Michael Brandman Associates
S:\GV\CC\02160039 ]indings_II-14-07.doc
'QAK~,^
J- '/(p
~
11 >- iii
t:: r-
:J (:)
nRIGINAl.
Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative Impacts Which
Can Be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance
Gosford Village Shopping Center
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations
Facts in Support of Finding
The potentially significant project-specific environmental effect has been eliminated or substantially
lessened to a level that is less than significant by virtue of the following mitigation measure as
identified in the Final EIR and incorporated into the project.
5.3.A.2
The MBHCP and the Standardized Recommendations for Protection of the San Joaquin
Kit Fox (1989) require specified take avoidance measures for the San Joaquin Kit Fox.
In addition, the MBHCP encourages the relocation of known kit foxes prior to
development, if practical. To this end, the following pre-construction and construction
mitigation measures shall be required as conditions of approval:
Pre-Construction Mitigation Measures - Relocation
5.3.A.2(a): No later than sixty days (60) days prior to any ground disturbing activities or
grading, a pre-construction survey shall be completed by a qualified biologist to
determine the continued presence or absence of kit foxes on site. A second survey shall
be conducted no more than thirty (30) days prior to the onset of construction or ground
disturbing activities. If kit foxes are deemed to be present on site, USFWS shall be
immediately contacted telephonically and in writing and circular exclusion zones shall be
established around the kit fox dens following consultation with USFWS and consistent
with the requirements contained within the USFWS' the Standardized Recommendations
for Protection of the San Joaquin Kit Fox (1989).
5.3.A.2(b): No later than forty five (45) days prior to any ground disturbing activities or
grading, the developer shall contact a qualified biologist holding proper permits and/or
agreements pursuant to Section 4.7.5 of the MBHCP Implementation Agreement and
provide approval to that biologist to relocate known kit foxes located on site to relocation
preserves approved by USFWS or qualified Habitat Management Lands covered by the
MBHCP.
5.3.A.2(c): No later than forty five (45) days prior to any ground disturbing activities or
grading, the developer shall contact the ESRP at Stanislaus State University, and shall
authorize a qualified biologist working for the ESRP to radio-telemetry collar any known
kit foxes located on site, to the extent feasible, to gather data for use in connection with
ESRP ecological research programs.
5.3.A.2(d): No later than fourteen (14) days prior to any ground disturbing activities or
grading, all known dens shall be monitored for at least three (3) consecutive days to
ensure that dens are unoccupied prior to den excavation.
12
Michael Brandman Associates
S:\GV\CC\02 I 60039 ]indings_II-14-07.doc
~ 'QAK$"1>
o (j)
>- ~
m
_ r-
j (:)
'lRIG!NAL
Gosford Village Shopping Center
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations
Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative Impacts Which
Can Be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance
5.3.A.2(e): No later than five (5) business days prior to the initiation of any ground
disturbing activities or grading (Grading Start Date), developer shall notify the Regional
Offices of CDFG and USFWS in writing of its intent to destroy unoccupied dens and
initiate grading. At this time, Developer shall again authorize qualified representatives of
CDFG and USFWS to attempt to relocate known kit foxes, to the extent feasible. If
CDFG and USFWS are unable to relocate known kit foxes by the Grading Start Date,
Developer shall be required to eliminate known kit fox dens in the manner set forth
below.
Pre-Construction Mitigation Measures - Den Destruction
5.3.A.2(f): Pursuant to Section 4.7.4 and Exhibit K of the MBHCP, and consistent with
the USFWS' the Standardized Recommendations for Protection of the San Joaquin Kit
Fox (1989), known kit fox dens located on the project site shall be excavated and
destroyed under the direct supervision of a qualified biologist. Prior to the destruction of
dens, the dens shall be monitored for at least three (3) consecutive days to determine
whether the den is active or dormant. Activity at the den can be monitored by placing
tracking medium at den entrances and by spot lighting. If no den activity is observed
during this period, the den should be destroyed immediately pursuant to the den
destruction procedures set forth below.
5.3.A.2(g): Destruction of dens shall be accomplished by careful excavation with hand
tools until it is certain that no kit foxes are inside. The den shall be fully excavated and
back filled with dirt and compacted to ensure that kit foxes cannot reenter or use the den
during the construction period.
5.3.A.2(h): If a kit fox is found inadvertently inside a den during excavation, the animal
shall be allowed to escape unhindered, or, to the extent feasible, representatives from the
ESRP and/or CDFG or USFWS shall be contacted to attempt to relocate and/or collar the
kit fox pursuant to the MBHCP and/or applicable ESRP protocol.
Construction Mitigation Measures
5.3.A.2(i): To prevent inadvertent entrapment of kit foxes during the construction phase
ofthe project, all excavated, steep walled holes or trenches more than two feet deep shall
be covered at the close of each working day by plywood or similar materials or provided
with one or more escape ramps constructed of earth fill or wooden planks. Each
excavation shall contain at least one ramp, with long trenches at least one ramp shall be
placed every .25 mile. Slope of ramps shall be no steeper than 1: 1. Before such holes or
trenches are filled, they shall be fully inspected for trapped kit foxes. If at any time a
trapped or injured kit fox is discovered, representatives from ESRP and/or CDFG or
Michael Brandman Associates
S:\GV\CC\02160039 ]indings_II-14-07.doc
~M~1>
J- %
13>- m
"::: r-
v (:)
QRIGINAL
Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative Impacts Which
Can Be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance
Gosford Village Shopping Center
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations
USFWS shall be contacted immediately to attempt to relocate and/or collar the kit fox
pursuant to the MBHCP and/or applicable ESRP protocol. Escape ramps shall also be
installed immediately to allow trapped animals to escape.
5.3.A.2(j): All pipes, culverts, or similar structures with a diameter of 4" or greater shall
be kept capped or otherwise covered to prevent injury of kit foxes. If such pipes, culverts
or similar structures are not capped or otherwise covered, they shall be inspected daily
prior to burial or closure to prevent entrapment of kit fox or other sensitive species.
5.3.A.2(k): All food, garbage in plastic shall be disposed of in closed containers and
regularly removed from the site to minimize attracting kit foxes and other sensitive
species to the site.
5.3.A.2(l): No dogs, cats, or other animals shall be permitted on the project site.
5.3.A.2(m): If rodent control is deemed necessary during construction, a zinc phosphide
based rodenticide shall be used.
5.3.A.2(n): Developer shall provide a sensitive species identification and avoidance
education program for all construction employees that consists of a consultation in which
persons knowledgeable in kit fox biology and legislative protection to explain
endangered species protocols, habitat needs and the measures and conditions of approval
being taken to reduce impacts to the species during project construction and
implementation. A fact sheet conveying this information shall be prepared for
distribution to all contractors, their employees, and any and all other personnel who are
working on the construction site.
5.3.A.2(0): Night time construction shall be prohibited. In addition, all construction
vehicles shall observe a 20 mph speed limit on the project site and developer shall create
established staging, parking and storage areas to ensure the prevention of accidental
direct impacts and takes of kit foxes.
Implementation of Mitigation Measure 5.3.A.2 would provide for incidental take of species covered
under the MBHCP for which suitable habitat is present on the project site, such as San Joaquin kit
fox, and reduce this potential take impact to less than significant. This mitigation measure is
consistent with the policies contained in the MBHCP and the USFWS' Standard Recommendations
for the Protection of the San Joaquin Kit Fox (1989), which pre-dates the adoption of the MBHCP.
This mitigation measures is consistent with those proposed and recommended by M.H. Wolfe and
Associates in the biota report and with those contained in the subsequent Biological Resource
14
Michael Brandman Associates
S:\GV\CC\02t60039 ]indings_t t-t4-07.doc
~Mf1
J- ~
>- ..-
rn
\;: r-
v e;,
ORIGINAl
Gosford Village Shopping Center
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Ove"iding Considerations
Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative Impacts Which
Can Be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance
Assessment Letter Report prepared by Michael Brandman Associates. The implementation of this
mitigation measure ensures that San Joaquin kit foxes will not be taken through implementation of the
proposed project.
References: Pages 5.6-30 through 5.6-37 in Chapter 1 ofthe Final EIR and any documents referenced
in or incorporated by reference in Section 5.3, Biological Resources, in Chapter 1 of the Final EIR.
2.1.1.2 - Potentially Significant Impact
The Final EIR identifies a potentially project-specific significant impact on the habitat for the federal
endangered and California State threatened San Joaquin kit fox.
Suitable denning habitat was observed on the project site, including several pieces of six-inch
diameter PVC irrigation pipe sections. However, no signs of San Joaquin kit fox (scat, tracks, hair,
bones or prey items etc.) were noted in, around or near these pipes or anywhere on the project site.
Due to the fact that the project site is within the known range of this species, and suitable denning
habitat was identified onsite, there is potential for kit fox to use the project site for foraging and/or
denning. Construction activities associated with the project could result in the loss of habitat for the
San Joaquin kit fox species.
Finding
Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 (a)(I), changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect
as identified in the Final EIR.
Facts in Support of Finding
The potentially significant project-specific environmental effect has been eliminated or substantially
lessened to a level that is less than significant by virtue of the following mitigation measure as
identified in the Final EIR and incorporated into the project.
5.3.A.1
Prior to the issuance of a Urban Development grading permit, the project applicant shall
pay a Habitat Mitigation Fee in accordance with Section 15.78.030 of the City of
Bakersfield Municipal Code and the ImplementationlManagement agreement for the
MBHCP.
Michael Brandman Associates
S:IGV\CCI02 I 60039 ]indings_II-14-07.doc
~M~-9
J- ~
15>- -
f- rn
_ r-
o (:)
0RIGINAl
Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative Impacts Which
Can Be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance
Gosford Village Shopping Center
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations
The MBHCP established programmatic habitat mitigation through the establishment of a Habitat
Mitigation Fee. The MBHCP was expressly designed to mitigate impacts resulting from loss of
habitat incurred through authorized development activity. Habitat Mitigation Fees are collected by
the applicable local lead agency and are used for the acquisition, preservation, and protection of
habitats for endangered species covered by the MBCHP, such as open grassland for the San Joaquin
kit fox. Land that is acquired by MBHCP Habitat Mitigation Fees would also indirectly provide
preservation and protection of habitats for common and special-status plant and wildlife species not
covered under the MBHCP, an additional benefit of regional habitat conservation plans such as the
MBHCP. The MBHCP has a very pronounced and successful track record of implementing the
acquisition strategies set forth in the MBHCP. Since the approval of the MBHCP in late 1994, the
Implementation Trust has acquired, using the proceeds ofthe Habitat Mitigation Fees collected,
approximately 13,973 acres of endangered species habitat in accordance with the acquisition
strategies contained in the MBHCP. The vast majority of the acreages already acquired by the Trust
include thousands of acres of habitat suitable for the San Joaquin kit fox and many other common and
special-status species which share similar habitat requirements. Based on the acquisition strategies
contained in the MBHCP, future acreage acquisitions will also include hundreds and thousands of
acres suitable for kit fox and other species as well. Implementation of Mitigation Measure 5.3.A.1
would reduce the impact to San Joaquin kit fox habitat to less than significant.
References: Pages 5.6-30 through 5.6-38 in Chapter 1 ofthe Final EIR, and any documents
referenced in or incorporated by reference in Section 5.3, Biological Resources, in Chapter 1 of the
Final EIR; any and all correspondence between Michael Brandman Associates and/or the City and
USFWS, CDFG, and/or ESRP.
2.1.1.3 - Potentially Significant Impact
The Final EIR identifies a potentially project-specific significant impact on the California State
Species of Special Concern, the burrowing owl.
Suitable foraging habitat and a few potential burrows were determined to exist on the project site.
Potential impacts to the burrowing owl and habitat for this species are considered significant. No
burrowing owls were observed on the project site during surveys for the prevjous biota report
conducted by M.H. Wolfe in January and February 2002, however this mobile species may disperse
onto the site prior to the commencement of construction activities, and preconstruction clearance
surveys were recommended prior to any disking or ground disturbance associated with project
implementation.
16
Michael Brandman Associates
S:\GV\CC\02160039 _Findings_11-14-07.doc
'QAK~1>
J- ~
>- -
f- m
_ r-
o (:)
ORIGINAL
Gosford Village Shopping Center
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations
Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative Impacts Which
Can Be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance
Finding
Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 (a)(1), changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect
as identified in the Final EIR.
Facts in Support of Finding
The potentially significant project-specific environmental effect has been eliminated or substantially
lessened to a level that is less than significant by virtue of the following mitigation measure as
identified in the Final EIR and incorporated into the project.
5.3.A.3
Pre-construction surveys shall include a survey for burrowing owl and raptor nests. A
pre-construction survey shall be conducted by a qualified biologist and shall be
conducted no later than thirty (30) days prior to any grading or ground disturbing
activities. Additional clearance surveys conducted by a qualified biologist shall be again
undertaken within fourteen (14) days of initial ground disturbance or grading to ensure
that no owls have re-entered the site. Construction or operational activities associated
with project features that occur within portions of the project site containing occupied
and/or suitable habitat for the burrowing owl and raptor nests shall be restricted to
periods outside the breeding season for this species. The breeding season for burrowing
owls runs from February 1 through August 31.
If construction or operational activities occur during the breeding season for burrowing
owls, surveys are required prior to such construction to determine the presence/absence
ofthis species within the impact area. Focused surveys shall be conducted under CDFG
and Burrowing Owl Consortium protocol by a qualified biologist from February 1 to
August 31. If this species is determined to occupy any portion of the project site,
consultation with the CDFG and USFWS is required and no construction activity shall
take place within 500 feet of an active nest/burrow until it has been determined that the
nest/burrow is no longer active, and all juveniles have fledged the nest/burrow. No
disturbance to active burrows shall occur without appropriate permitting through the
MBTA and/or CDFG.
If active burrowing owl burrows are detected outside the breeding season (September
through January), passive relocation may be approved following consultation with the
CDFG and USFWS. If needed, the installation of one-way doors shall be installed as part
of a passive relocation program. Burrowing owl burrows shall be excavated with hand
tools by a qualified biologist when determined to be unoccupied, and backfilled to ensure
that animals do not reenter the holes/dens.
Michael Brandman Associates
S:IGV\CCI02160039 ]indings_11-14-07.doc
17
~AK~1>
J- ~
>- -
r- m
_ r-
:.) (:)
0RIGINAI
Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative Impacts Which
Can Be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance
Gosford Village Shopping Center
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations
5.3.A.4
The discovery of any previously unidentified protected species that are not covered under
the MBHCP, including those protected under the MBT A and the Fish and Game Code,
shall be avoided and evaluated by a qualified biologist during surveys. The USFWS and
CDFG shall be notified of the presence of any previously unreported protected species.
Any unanticipated take of protected wildlife shall be reported immediately to the USFWS
and CDFG.
Implementation of Mitigation Measures 5.3.A.3 and 5.3.A.4 will mitigate impacts to the burrowing
owl to less than significant. Implementation of these mitigation measures ensures that no owl will be
taken in violation of the MBT A and Fish & Game Code. It should be noted that these mitigation
measures are consistent with the 1995 DFG Standardized mitigation measures to protect owls from
takes construction, and are applied to projects throughout the State pursuant to CDFG protocol.
CDFG has been consulted and has concurred with the Final EIR's analysis and conclusions as they
pertain to burrowing owls.
References: Pages 5.3-31; 5.3-35 through 5.3-38 in Chapter 1 of the Final EIR and any documents
referenced in or incorporated by reference in Section 5.3, Biological Resources, in Chapter 1 of the
Final EIR; and Response to Comment X-14 in Chapter 2 of the Final EIR.
2.1.1.4 - Potentially Significant Impact
The Final EIR identifies a potentially project-specific significant impact on the habitat for the
California State Species of Special Concern, the burrowing owl.
Suitable foraging habitat and a few potential burrows were determined to exist on the project site.
Potential impacts to the burrowing owl habitat for this species are considered significant.
Finding
Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 (a)(1), changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect
as identified in the Final EIR.
Facts in Support of Finding
The potentially significant project-specific environmental effect has been eliminated or substantially
lessened to a level that is less than significant by virtue of the following mitigation measure as
identified in the Final EIR and incorporated into the project.
18
Michael Brandman Associates
S:\GV\CC\02160039 ]indings_II-14-07.doc
~M~1>
J- ~
).. m
- r-
) (:)
i")RIGINAL
Gosford Village Shopping Center
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations
Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative Impacts Which
Can Be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance
5.3.A.1
Prior to the issuance of a Urban Development grading permit, the project applicant shall
pay a Habitat Mitigation Fee in accordance with Section 15.78.030 of the City of
Bakersfield Municipal Code and the Implementation/Management agreement for the
MBHCP.
Although this species is not directly covered under the terms of the MBHCP, the provisions of the
MBHCP pertaining to San Joaquin kit fox do provide adequate mitigation for this species in the
acquisition ofland for the type of habitat that is being removed. Because the project applicant shall
be required to pay MBHCP Habitat Mitigation Fees to be used for the acquisition of open habitat to
reduce impacts on the San Joaquin kit fox, these resulting acquisition activities are also considered
adequate in further reducing impacts to the loss of burrowing owl habitat. Due to the fact that San
Joaquin kit fox and burrowing owl share similarities in their respective habitat requirements, habitat
purchased through MBHCP Habitat Mitigation Fees by the applicant for San Joaquin kit fox
protection will also provide for habitat for the burrowing owl. Based on the acquisition strategies
outlines in the MBHCP, this habitat would include, but would not be limited to, very high quality
lower elevation open grassland and/or sparse scrub habitat with a suitable prey base and burrows
and/or burrowing substrate for denning and nesting. Due to the fact that San Joaquin kit fox is a
highly mobile species with a relatively large home range, land that is collectively acquired for this
species through the MBHCP process is large enough to provide an umbrella protection for many
common and special-status plant and wildlife species, including species such as burrowing owl, as
intended in most regional habitat conservation plans such as the MBHCP. Due to similarities in
required habitat, this umbrella protection created by the acquisition of habitat for San Joaquin kit fox
would include habitat for burrowing owl as well. With the payment of the MBHCP Habitat
Mitigation Fees and eventual purchase of land that is suitable and could be used for kit fox habitat as
well as burrowing owl habitat, the loss of onsite habitat would be less then significant.
References: Pages 5.3-31 space through 5.3-33; 5.6-36 through 5.6-38 in Chapter 1 ofthe Final EIR
and any documents referenced in or incorporated by reference in Section 5.3, Biological Resources, in
Chapter 1 ofthe Final EIR; and Response to Comment X-13 in Chapter 2 of the Final EIR..
Michael Brandman Associates
S:IGV\CCI02160039 ]indings_11-14-07.doc
<oAK~1>
J- ~
19 >- -
r::: J!2
o e:,
0RIGINA.l
Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative Impacts Which
Can Be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance
Gosford Village Shopping Center
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations
2.1.2 - Cumulative
2.1.2.1 - Potentially Significant Impact
The Final EIR identifies a potentially cumulative significant impact on the federal endangered and
California State threatened San Joaquin kit fox.
Implementation of the proposed project, in conjunction with future development associated with the
Metropolitan Bakersfield General Plan build-out, would contribute to a potential significant
cumulative impact on the San Joaquin kit fox. The project's impacts to San Joaquin kit fox are
considered cumulatively considerable and therefore significant.
Finding
Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 (a)(1), changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect
as identified in the Final EIR.
Facts in Support of Finding
The potentially significant project-specific environmental effect has been eliminated or substantially
lessened to a level that is less than significant by virtue of the following mitigation measure as
identified in the Final EIR and incorporated into the project.
Implementation of Mitigation Measure 5.3.A.2 identified above for the project-specific impact, is
required.
Implementation of Mitigation Measure 5.3.A.2 will reduce cumulative impacts to the San Joaquin kit
fox to less than significant. The MBHCP has been designed as a specific mitigation measure to
reduce direct and cumulative impacts to species covered by the terms of the MBHCP. These
measures insure that necessary precautionary action is taken prior to development so that no take of
any individual kit fox and no cumulative impact to the kit fox results from any project subject to the
terms of the MBHCP.
References: Pages 5.3-32 through 5.3-35; 5.6-38 through 5.6-39 in Chapter 1 ofthe Final EIR and
any documents referenced in or incorporated by reference in Section 5.3, Biological Resources, in
Chapter 1 of the Final EIR.
20
Michael Brandman Associates
S:\GV\CC\02160039 ]indings_11-14-07.doc
~M~1>
J- ~
>- iii
r- r-
o (:)
()RI~INAI
Gosford Village Shopping Center
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations
Adverse Project-Speciflc and Cumulative Impacts Which
Can Be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance
2.1.2.2 - Potentially Significant Impact
The Final EIR identifies a potentially cumulative significant impact on the habitat for the federal
endangered and California State threatened San Joaquin kit fox.
As described above, implementation ofthe proposed project could result in indirect significant
impacts to San Joaquin kit fox. The proposed project would be subject to the terms and conditions of
the adopted MBHCP, and ImplementationlManagement Agreement for the MBHCP, with regard to
potential impacts to San Joaquin kit fox. Additionally, implementation ofthe proposed project, in
conjunction with future development associated with the Metropolitan Bakersfield General Plan
buildout, would contribute to a potential significant cumulative loss of habitat for San Joaquin kit fox,
including potential denslburrows for San Joaquin kit fox and foraging habitat. The project's impacts
to San Joaquin kit fox are considered cumulatively considerable and therefore significant.
Finding
Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 (a)(l), changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect
as identified in the Final EIR.
Facts in Support of Finding
The potentially significant project-specific environmental effect has been eliminated or substantially
lessened to a level that is less than significant by virtue of the following mitigation measure as
identified in the Final EIR and incorporated into the project.
Implementation of Mitigation Measures 5.3.Al, identified above for the project-specific impact, is
required.
As noted above, the MBHCP established programmatic habitat mitigation through the establishment
of a Habitat Mitigation Fee. The MBHCP was expressly designed to mitigate impacts resulting from
loss of habitat incurred through authorized development activity. Habitat Mitigation Fees are
collected by the applicable local lead agency and are used for the acquisition, preservation, and
protection of habitats for endangered species covered by the MBCHP, such as open grassland for the
San Joaquin kit fox. Land that is acquired by MBHCP Habitat Mitigation Fees would also indirectly
provide preservation and protection of habitats for common and special-status plant and wildlife
species not covered under the MBHCP, an additional benefit of regional habitat conservation plans
such as the MBHCP. The MBHCP has a very pronounced and successful track record of
implementing the acquisition strategies set forth in the MBHCP. Since the approval of the MBHCP
Michael Brandman Associates
S:IGV\CCI02 I 60039 ]indings_II-14-07.doc
~M~1>
J- ~
21 >- jT",
1::; T-
O (:)
ORIGINAl
Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative Impacts Which
Can Be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance
Gosford Village Shopping Center
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations
in late 1994, the Implementation Trust has acquired, using the proceeds of the Habitat Mitigation Fees
collected, approximately 13,973 acres of endangered species habitat in accordance with the
acquisition strategies contained in the MBHCP. The vast majority of the acreages already acquired
by the Trust include thousands of acres of habitat suitable for the San Joaquin kit fox and many other
common and special-status species which share similar habitat requirements. Based on the
acquisition strategies contained in the MBHCP, future acreage acquisitions will also include hundreds
and thousands of acres suitable for kit fox and other species as well. Implementation of Mitigation
Measure 5.3.A.l would reduce the impact to San Joaquin kit fox habitat to less than significant.
References: Pages 5.6-33; 5.6-36 through 5.6-38 in Chapter 1 of the Final EIR, and any documents
referenced in or incorporated by reference in Section 5.3, Biological Resources, in Chapter 1 of the
Final EIR; any and all correspondence between Michael Brandman Associates and/or the City and
USFWS, CDFG, and/or ESRP.
2.1.2.3 - Potentially Significant Impact
The Final EIR identifies a potentially cumulative significant impact on the California State Species of
Special Concern, the burrowing owl.
Implementation of the proposed project, in conjunction with future development associated with the
Metropolitan Bakersfield General Plan build-out, would contribute to a potential significant
cumulative impact on the burrowing owl. The project's impacts to the burrowing owl are considered
cumulatively considerable and therefore significant.
Finding
Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 (a)(1), changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect
as identified in the Final EIR.
Facts in Support of Finding
The potentially significant project-specific environmental effect has been eliminated or substantially
lessened to a level that is less than significant by virtue of the following mitigation measure as
identified in the Final EIR and incorporated into the project.
Implementation of Mitigation Measures 5.3.A.3 and 5.3.A.4 identified above for the project-specific
impact, is required.
22
Michael Brandman Associates
S:\GV\CC\02160039 _Findings_II-14-07.doc
~ ~M~-9
o <P
-1'1
>- -
l- m
__ t-
O <::>
ORIGINAl.
Gosforcl Village Shopping Center
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations
Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative Impacts Which
Can Be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance
Implementation of Mitigation Measures 5.3.A.3 and 5.3.A.4 will reduce cumulative impacts to the
burrowing owl to less than significant. These mitigation measures ensure that no inadvertent takes of
burrowing owls occur, and that necessary precautionary action is taken prior to development.
References: Pages 5.3-32; 5.6-35 through 5.3-36; 5.6-38 through 5.6-39 in Chapter I of the Final EIR
and any documents referenced in or incorporated by reference in Section 5.3, Biological Resources, in
Chapter I of the Final EIR.
2.1.2.4 - Potentially Significant Impact
The Final EIR identifies a potentially cumulative significant impact on the habitat for the California
State Species of Special Concern, the burrowing owl.
Suitable foraging habitat and a few potential burrows were determined to exist on the project site.
Potential impacts to the burrowing owl habitat for this species are considered significant.
Finding
Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 (a)(1), changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect
as identified in the Final EIR.
Facts in Support of Finding
The potentially significant project-specific environmental effect has been eliminated or substantially
lessened to a level that is less than significant by virtue of the following mitigation measure as
identified in the Final EIR and incorporated into the project.
Implementation of Mitigation Measures 5.3.A.I, identified above for the project-specific impact, is
required.
As noted above, although this species is not directly covered under the terms ofthe MBHCP, the
provisions of the MBHCP pertaining to San Joaquin kit fox do provide adequate mitigation for this
species in the acquisition ofland for the type of habitat that is being removed. Because the project
applicant shall be required to pay MBHCP Habitat Mitigation Fees to be used for the acquisition of
open habitat to reduce impacts on the San Joaquin kit fox, these resulting acquisition activities are
also considered adequate in further reducing impacts to the loss of burrowing owl habitat. Due to the
fact that San Joaquin kit fox and burrowing owl share similarities in their respective habitat
Michael Brandman Associates
S:\GV\CC\02160039 ]indings_11-14-07.doc
~ 'QAK~-9
23 0 ~
>- -
r- m
_ r-
o (:)
0RIGINAI
Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative Impacts Which
Can Be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance
Gosford Village Shopping Center
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations
requirements, habitat purchased through MBHCP Habitat Mitigation Fees by the applicant for San
Joaquin kit fox protection will also provide for habitat for the burrowing owl. Based on the
acquisition strategies outlines in the MBHCP, this habitat would include, but would not be limited to,
very high quality lower elevation open grassland and/or sparse scrub habitat with a suitable prey base
and burrows and/or burrowing substrate for denning and nesting. Due to the fact that San Joaquin kit
fox is a highly mobile species with a relatively large home range, land that is collectively acquired for
this species through the MBHCP process is large enough to provide an umbrella protection for many
common and special-status plant and wildlife species, including species such as burrowing owl, as
intended in most regional habitat conservation plans such as the MBHCP. Due to similarities in
required habitat, this umbrella protection created by the acquisition of habitat for San Joaquin kit fox
would include habitat for burrowing owl as well. With the payment of the MBHCP Habitat
Mitigation Fees and eventual purchase of land that is suitable and could be used for kit fox habitat as
well as burrowing owl habitat, the loss of onsite habitat would be less then significant.
References: Pages 5.3-31 space through 5.3-33; 5.6-36 through 5.6-38 in Chapter 1 of the Final EIR
and any documents referenced in or incorporated by reference in Section 5.3, Biological Resources, in
Chapter 1 ofthe Final EIR; and Response to Comment X-13 in Chapter 2 of the Final EIR.
2.2 - CUL rURAL RESOURCES
Impact 5.4.A:
The project may potentially cause a substantial adverse change in the significance
of an archaeological resource.
2.2.1 - Project-Specific
2.2.1.1 - Potentially Significant Impact
The Final EIR identifies a potentially project-specific significant impact to unknown archaeological
resources.
The discovery of a prehistoric human burial within a mile of the proj ect area, and the fact that historic
activities that have occurred in the vicinity of the project area renders it possible that unknown
archaeological resources may be located on the project site. Therefore, implementation of the
proposed project could possibly result in significant impacts on unknown archaeological resources.
Finding
Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 (a)(1), changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect
as identified in the Final EIR.
24
Michael Brandman Associates
S:IGV\CCI02160039 ]indings_11-14-07.doc
~ ~M(:-9
o %
>- m
'::: r-
u C)
0RIGINAI
Gosford Village Shopping Center
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations
Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative Impacts Which
Can Be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance
Facts in Support of Finding
The potentially significant project-specific environmental effect has been eliminated or substantially
lessened to a level that is less than significant by virtue of the following mitigation measure as
identified in the Final EIR and incorporated into the project.
5.4.A.1
Prior to the commencement of any ground disturbing activities, all earth-moving and
excavation contractor employees and an authorized representative of a local California
Native American Tribe representative shall attend a meeting on the project site informing
them of the potential for inadvertently discovered cultural resources and/or human
remains and protection measures to be followed to prevent destruction of any and all
cultural resources discovered on site. The project applicant and the City of Bakersfield
Planning staff shall meet with representatives who have provided input during the
environmental process (i.e., Ron Wermuth who represents the Tubutatulabal, Kawailsu,
Koso, and Yokuts tribes and also the Chumash Council of Bakersfield). The purpose of
the meeting is to determine who could represent the Native American interest and
provide monitoring. If more than one Native American monitor is identified, the selected
Native American monitors will all attend the pre-construction meeting. The orientation
shall be conducted by the Project Archeologist and shall include information regarding
the potential for objects to occur on site, a summary of applicable environmental law,
procedures to follow if potential cultural resources are found, and measures to be taken if
cultural resources are found and the measures to be taken if cultural resources and/or
human remains are unearthed as part of the project. The Project Archaeologist shall
prepare and provide a summary report to the Project Construction Manager who shall
maintain the summary report on file. The report shall include the following:
I) When and where the session took place
2) Topics discussed in the session
3) A session attendance roster signed by employees attending the tailgate session
4) Provide a copy to City Planning
5) Provide a copy to Southern San Joaquin Valley Information Center
During grading activities, a qualified archaeological monitor or his representative shall
monitor earth-moving activities on the project site. Once the qualified archaeologist
determines that monitoring is no longer necessary, monitoring activities can be
discontinued. If archaeological resources are uncovered or discovered during
construction activities, no further excavation or disturbance of the area where the
resources were found shall occur until a qualified archaeologist, with consultation from a
local Native American monitor evaluates the find. The local Native American monitor or
monitors who attended the pre-construction meeting will be consulted. If the find is
Michael Brandman Associates
S:\GV\CC\02160039 ]indings_11-14-07.doc
'QAK~1>
J- (fl
-t\
25 >-
:: ~
) (:)
iJRIGINAL
Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative Impacts Which
Can Be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance
Gosford Village Shopping Center
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations
determined to be a unique archaeological resource, the project applicant shall, within
forty-eight hours of notification, provide five percent of one half of 1 percent of the
projected cost of the project to the City to ascertain the appropriate mitigation measures
as required by Public Resources Code Section 21083.2(b), (c) and (d). Appropriate
mitigation shall include planning construction to avoid archaeological sites, capping or
covering archaeological sites with a layer of soil before building on the affected site, or
excavation to adequately recover the scientifically consequential information from and
about the resource. If the mitigation costs exceed the initial deposit by the developer, an
amount no greater than one-half of one percent of the proj ect costs shall be paid by
developer to City to implement the mitigation treatment plan. Any payments made by
developer that exceed the actual costs of the mitigation treatment plan shall be
reimbursed to the developer. Work may continue on other parts of the project site while
the unique archaeological resource mitigation takes place. The contingency funding
contained in this Mitigation Measure 5.4.A.l is inclusive, and not cumulative of the
contingency funding contained in Mitigation Measures 5.4.B.1 and 5.4.C.l.
If the qualified archaeologist determines that the find is a unique archaeological resource,
the resource site shall be evaluated and recorded in accordance with requirements of the
State Office of Historic Preservation (OHP). Prior to disposition of recovered artifacts,
consultation with culturally affiliated Native Americans shall occur. The Native
Americans that will be consulted will be those who attended the pre-construction
meeting. If the site is determined to be significant, an adequate amount of data at the
specific site shall be collected by the qualified archaeologist and the findings of the report
shall be submitted to the City and the San Joaquin Valley Information center. If the site
is determined to be not significant, the site need not be mitigated for as described above.
The project site is heavily disturbed from previous activities, including plowing, grading, and
irrigation. Archeological investigations, including site surveys and literature reviews yielded no
evidence of archeological resources. However, as noted above, there is always the potential for
unknown resources to be unearthed. Mitigation Measure 5.4.A.I requires compliance with Public
Resources Code Section 21083 .2(b), (c) and (d) and evaluations of any finds by the OHP.
Compliance with these regulations is considered full mitigation for direct impacts associated with the
potential unearthing of previously unknown archeological resources. In addition, the developer did
not discover any archeological resources when previous grading and construction was done in 2003.
26
Michael Brandman Associates
S:IGVICCI02160039 _Findings_11-14-07.doc
~ ~M~1>
o ~
>- -
m
_ r-
j (:)
0RIGINAl
Gosford Village Shopping Center
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations
Adverse Project-Speclflc and Cumulative Impacts Which
Can Be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance
References: Pages 5.4-13 through 5.4-14 in Chapter 1 of the Final EIR, Response to Comments I-I, in
Chapter 2 of the Final EIR, and any documents referenced in or incorporated by reference in Section
5.4, Cultural Resources, in Chapter 1 of the Final EIR.
2.2.2 - Cumulative
2.2.2.1 - Potentially Significant Impact
The Final EIR identifies a potentially cumulative significant impact to unknown archaeological
resources.
As noted above, it is unlikely that there are any archeological resources on the site; however, in the
event that unknown archeological impacts are discovered, the proposed project could contribute to a
potentially significant cumulative impact.
Finding
Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 (a)(1), changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect
as identified in the Final EIR.
Facts in Support of Finding
The potentially significant cumulative effect has been eliminated or substantially lessened to a level
that is less than significant by virtue of the following mitigation measure as identified in the Final EIR
and incorporated into the proj ect.
Implementation of Mitigation Measure 5.4.A.1 identified above for the project-specific impact, is
required.
A noted above, there is always the potential for unknown resources to be unearthed. Mitigation
Measure 5.4.A.1 requires compliance with Public Resources Code Section 2l083.2(b), (c) and (d) and
the evaluation of any fmds by the OHP. Compliance with these regulations is considered full
mitigation for cumulative impacts associated with the potential unearthing of previously unknown
archeological resources. In addition, the project applicant did not discover any archaeological
resources when previous grading and construction was done in 2003.
Michael Brandman Associates
S:IGV\CCI02160039 ]indings_11-14-07.doc
<( 'OAK~?>
o Ul
>- ~
27 r:: ~
::J <::>
0RlGINAL
Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative Impacts Which
Can Be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance
Gosford Village Shopping Center
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations
References: Pages 5.4-13 through 5.4-14; 5.4-21 and 5.4-22 in Chapter 1 of the Final EIR, Response
to Comments 1-1, in Chapter 2 of the Final EIR, and any documents referenced in or incorporated by
reference in Section 5.4, Cultural Resources, in Chapter 1 of the Final EIR.
Impact 5.4.8
The project could potentially cause a substantial adverse change in the significance
of a historical resource.
2.2.3 - Project-Specific
2.2.3.1 - Potentially Significant Impact
The Final EIR identifies a potentially project-specific significant impact to unknown historical
resources.
Based on the record search and field surveys conducted on the project site, no known historical
resources are located on the project site. However, it is possible, but unlikely, for unknown historical
resources to be located on the project site. Therefore implementation ofthe proposed project could
result in significant impacts on unknown historical resources.
Finding
Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 (a)(1), changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect
as identified in the Final EIR.
Facts in Support of Finding
The potentially significant project-specific effect has been eliminated or substantially lessened to a
level that is less than significant by virtue of the following mitigation measure as identified in the
Final EIR and incorporated into the project.
5.4.8.1
Prior to the commencement of any ground disturbing activities, all earth-moving and
excavation contractor employees and an authorized representative of a local California
Native American Tribe representative shall attend a meeting on the project site infonning
them of the potential for inadvertently discovered cultural resources and/or human
remains and protection measures to be followed to prevent destruction of any and all
cultural resources discovered on site. The project applicant and the City of Bakersfield
Planning staff shall meet with representatives who have provided input during the
environmental process (i.e., Ron Wermuth who represents the Tubutatulabal, Kawailsu,
Koso, and Yokuts tribes and also the Chumash Council of Bakersfield). The purpose of
the meeting is to determine who could represent the Native American interest and
28
Michael Brandman Associates
S:\GV\CC\02160039 _Findings_11-14-07.doc
<<. <oM~1'
o U'
-'1"'-
>- -
I- m
.'- r--
o <J
ORIPINA.l
GosforrJ Village Shopping Center
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Ove"ldlng Considerations
Adverse Project-Speclfic and Cumulative Impacts Which
Can Be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance
provide monitoring. If more than one Native American monitor is identified, the selected
Native American monitors will all attend the pre-construction meeting. The orientation
shall be conducted by the proj ect Archeologist and shall include information regarding
the potential for objects to occur on site, a summary of applicable environmental law ,
procedures to follow if potential cultural resources are found, and measures to be taken if
cultural resources are found and the measures to be taken if cultural resources and/or
human remains are unearthed as part ofthe project. The Project Archaeologist shall
prepare and provide a summary report to the Project Construction Manager who shall
maintain the summary report on file. The report shall include the following:
I) When and where the session took place
2) Topics discussed in the session
3) A session attendance roster signed by employees attending the tailgate session
4) Provide a copy to City Planning
5) Provide a copy to Southern San Joaquin Valley Information Center
During grading activities, a qualified archaeological monitor or his representative shall
monitor earth-moving activities on the project site. Once the qualified archaeologist
determines that monitoring is no longer necessary, monitoring activities can be
discontinued. If historical resources are uncovered during construction activities, no
further excavation or disturbance of the area where the resources were found shall occur
until a qualified archaeologist examines the fmd. If the find is determined to be a
potentially historical resource, the project applicant shall, within forty-eight hours of
notification, provide five percent of one half of I percent ofthe projected cost of the
project to the City to ascertain the appropriate mitigation measures as required by Public
Resources Code Section 2I083.2(b), (c) and (d). Appropriate mitigation shall include
planning construction to avoid archaeological sites, capping or covering archeological
sites with a layer of soil before building on the affected site, or excavation to adequately
recover the scientifically consequential information from and about the resource. If the
mitigation costs exceed the initial deposit by the developer, an amount no greater than
one-half of one percent of the project costs shall be paid by developer to City to
implement the mitigation treatment plan. Any payments made by developer that exceed
the actual costs of the mitigation treatment plan shall be reimbursed to the developer.
Work may continue on other parts of the project site while the historical resource
mitigation takes place. The contingency funding contained in this Mitigation Measure
5.4.B.I is inclusive, and not cumulative of the contingency funding contained in
Mitigation Measures 5A.A.I and 5A.C.1.
Michael Brandman Associates
S:IGV\CCI02160039 ]indings_11-14-07.doc
~ ,?>AK~1>
29 ~ ~
':: ~
o C)
rJRIGINAL
Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative Impacts Which
Can Be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance
Gosford Village Shopping Center
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations
If the qualified archaeologist determines that the find is a significant historical resource,
the resource site shall be evaluated and recorded in accordance with requirements of the
State Office of Historic Preservation (OHP). Prior to disposition of recovered artifacts,
consultation with culturally affiliated Native Americans shall occur. The Native
Americans that will be consulted will be those who attended the pre-construction
meeting. If the site is determined to be significant, an adequate amount of data at the site
shall be collected by the qualified archaeologist and the fmdings of the report shall be
submitted to the City and San Joaquin Valley Information Center. If the site is
determined to be not significant, the site need not be mitigated for as described above.
The project site is heavily disturbed from previous activities, including plowing, grading, and
irrigation. Base on the record search and field surveys conducted on the project site there is no
evidence of historical resources. However, as noted above, there is always the potential for unknown
resources to be unearthed. Mitigation Measure 5.4.B.1 requires compliance with Public Resources
Code Section 21083 .2(b ), (c) and (d) and the evaluation of any finds by the OHP. Compliance with
these regulations is considered full mitigation for direct and cumulative impacts associated with the
potential ofthe discovery of previously unknown historical resources. In addition, the project
applicant did not discover any historical resources when previous grading and construction was done
in 2003.
References: Pages 5.4-14 through 5.4-17; 5.4-21 and 5.4-22 in Chapter 1 of the Final EIR, Response
to Comments 1-1, in Chapter 2 of the Final EIR, and any documents referenced in or incorporated by
reference in Section 5.4, Cultural Resources, in Chapter 1 of the Final EIR.
2.2.4 - Cumulative
2.2.4.1 - Potentially Significant Impact
The Final EIR identifies a potentially cumulative significant impact to unknown historical resources.
As noted above, there are no known historical resources on the site; however, it is possible, but
unlikely, for unknown historical resources to be located on the project site. Therefore, any impact to
unknown historical resources could contribute to a potentially significant cumulative impact.
30
Michael Brandman Associates
S:IGVICCI02160039 ]indings_11-14-07.doc
~ <OA/(~l'
o c.fl
>- ~
r- m
- r-
(.) ()
ORIGINAl
Gosford ViI/age Shopping Center
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations
Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative Impacts Which
Can Be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance
Finding
Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 (a)(I), changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect
as identified in the Final EIR.
Facts in Support of Finding
The potentially significant cumulative environmental effect has been eliminated or substantially
lessened to a level that is less than significant by virtue of the following mitigation measure as
identified in the Final EIR and incorporated into the project.
Implementation of Mitigation Measure 5.4.B.1 identified above for the project-specific impact, is
required.
As noted above, there is always the potential for unknown resources to be unearthed. Mitigation
Measure 5.4.B.l requires compliance with Public Resources Code Section 21083.2(b), (c) and (d) and
evaluation of any fmds by the OHP. Compliance with these regulations is considered full mitigation
for cumulative impacts associated with the potential of the discovery of previously unknown
historical resources. In addition, the project applicant did not discover any historical resources when
previous grading and construction was done in 2003.
References: Pages 5.4-14 through 5.4-17; 5.4-21 through 5.4-22, in Chapter 1 ofthe Final EIR,
Response to Comments I-I, in Chapter 2 of the Final EIR, and any documents referenced in or
incorporated by reference in Section 5.4, Cultural Resources, in Chapter 1 of the Final EIR.
Impact 5.4.C
The project could directly or Indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource.
2.2.5 - Project-Specific
2.2.5.1 - Potentially Significant Impact
The Final EIR identifies a potentially project-specific significant impact to unknown paleontological
resources.
Alluvial deposits in the project area are considered to be geologically too young to contain significant
fossil remains. The area is considered to have a low potential for paleontological resources.
However, while, there is a low potential for the project to impact paleontological resources, it is
possible, but unlikely, that unknown paleontological resources may be located below ground at the
Michael Brandman Associates
S:IGV\CCI02160039 ]indings_11-14-07.doc
'OM~1>
J- d1
~
31 >- iii
_ r-
.:J (:)
ORIGINAL
Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative Impacts Which
Can Be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance
Gosford Village Shopping Center
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations
project site. Therefore, implementation of the proposed project could result in significant project-
specific impacts on unknown paleontological resources.
Finding
Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 (a)(1), changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect
as identified in the Final EIR.
Facts in Support of Finding
The potentially significant project-specific environmental effect has been eliminated or substantially
lessened to a level that is less than significant by virtue of the following mitigation measure as
identified in the Final EIR and incorporated into the project.
5.4.C.1
If paleontological resources are uncovered during construction activities, no further
excavation or disturbance of the area where the resources were found shall occur until a
qualified paleontologist examines the find. If the find is determined to be a potentially
significant paleontological resource, the project applicant shall, within forty-eight hours
of notification, provide five percent of one half of 1 percent of the projected cost of the
project to the City to ascertain the appropriate mitigation measures as required by Public
Resources Code section 21083.2(b), (c) and (d). Appropriate mitigation shall include
planning construction to avoid paleontological sites, capping or covering paleontological
sites with a layer of soil before building on the affected site, or excavation to adequately
recover the scientifically consequential information from and about the resource. If the
mitigation costs exceed the initial deposit by the developer, an amount no greater than
one-half of one percent ofthe project costs shall be paid by developer to City to
implement the mitigation treatment plan. Any payments made by developer that exceed
the actual costs of the mitigation treatment plan shall be reimbursed to the developer.
Work may continue on other parts of the project site while the paleontological resource
mitigation takes place. The contingency funding contained in this Mitigation Measure
5.4.C.l is inclusive, and not cumulative of the contingency funding contained in
Mitigation Measures 5.4.A.1 and 5.4.B.1.
If the qualified paleontologist determines that the find is a significant paleontological
resource, the resource site shall be excavated and all recovered fossils shall be curated for
documentation in a summary report and transferred to the Buena Vista Museum of
Natural History in the City of Bakersfield.
32
Michael Brandman Associates
S:\GV\CC\02160039 ]indings_II-14-07.doc
~ 'QAK~1>
o 0'
>- ~
\.- m
- r-
) (:)
0RIGINAt
Gosford Village Shopping Center
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations
Adverse Project-Speclflc and Cumulative Impacts Which
Can Be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance
The project site is heavily disturbed from previous activities, including plowing, grading, and
irrigation. Based on the record search and field surveys conducted on the project site there is no
evidence of paleontological resources. However, as noted above, there is always the potential for
unknown resources to be unearthed. Mitigation Measure 5.4.C.l requires compliance with Public
Resources Code Section 2l083.2(b), (c) and (d). Compliance with these regulations is considered full
mitigation for direct impacts associated with the potential of the discovery of previously unknown
paleontological resources. In addition, the project applicant did not discover any paleontological
resources when previous grading and construction was done in 2003.
References: Pages 5.4-16 through 5.4-17; 5.4-21 through 5.4-22, in Chapter 1 ofthe Final EIR, and
any documents referenced in or incorporated by reference in Section 5.4, Cultural Resources, in
Chapter 1 of the Final EIR.
2.2.6 - Cumulative
2.2.6.1 - Potentially Significant Impact
The Final EIR identifies a potentially significant cumulative impact to unknown paleontological
resources.
As noted above, there are no known, paleontological resources on the site; however, it is possible, but
unlikely, for unknown paleontological resources to be located on the project site. Therefore, any
impact to an unknown paleontological resource could contribute to a potentially significant
cumulative impact.
Finding
Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 (a)(1), changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect
as identified in the Final EIR.
Facts in Support of Finding
The potentially significant environmental effect has been eliminated or substantially lessened to a
level that is less than significant by virtue of the following mitigation measures as identified in the
Final EIR and incorporated into the project.
Michael Brandman Associates
S:\GV\CC\02160039 ]indings_II-14-07.doc
~M~1>
33 J- ~
>- -
\.- m
_ T-
'J (:)
0RIGINAl.
Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative Impacts Which
Can Be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance
Gosford Village Shopping Center
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Ove"ldlng Considerations
Implementation of beyond Mitigation Measure 5.3.C.l identified above for the project-specific
impact, is required.
As noted above, there is always the potential for unknown resources to be unearthed. Mitigation
Measure 5.4.C.I requires compliance with Public Resources Code Section 21083.2(b), (c) and (d).
Compliance with these regulations is considered full mitigation for cumulative impacts associated
with the potential of the discovery of previously unknown paleontological resources. In addition, the
project applicant did not discover any paleontological resources when previous grading and
construction was done in 2003.
References: Pages 5.4-16 through 5.4-17; 5.4-21 through 5.4-22 in Chapter 1 of the Final EIR, and
any documents referenced in or incorporated by reference in Section 5.4, Cultural Resources, in
Chapter 1 of the Final EIR.
Impact 5.4.0
The proposed project could result In the disturbance of human remains.
2.2.7 - Project-Specific
2.2.7.1 - Potentially Significant Impact
The Final EIR identifies a potentially project-specific significant impact to unknown human remains.
Based on the record search and field surveys conducted on the project site, no known human remains
are located on the project site. Since a prehistoric human burial was identified within a mile of the
project area, it is possible but unlikely, that unknown human remains could be present. Therefore, the
project could result in potentially significant impacts on unknown human remains.
Finding
Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 (a)(1), changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect
as identified in the Final EIR.
Facts in Support of Finding
The potentially significant project-specific environmental effect has been eliminated or substantially
lessened to a level that is less than significant by virtue of the following mitigation measure as
identified in the Final EIR and incorporated into the project.
34
Michael Brandman Associates
S:\GV\CC\02160039 ]indings_II-14-07.doc
'QM~1>
J- OJ
-'l'
>- -
,_ m
- ,....
J (:)
0RIGINAL
Gosford Village Shopping Center
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Ove"ldlng Considerations
Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative Impacts Which
Can Be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance
5.4.0.1
In the event of the accidental discovery or recognition of any human remains on the
project site, the following steps shall be taken:
· There shall be no further excavation or disturbance of the site or any nearby area
reasonably suspected to overlie adjacent human remains until:
- The coroner of the county in which the remains are discovered determines
that no investigation of the cause of death is required, and
- If the coroner determines the remains to be Native American:
o The coroner shall contact the NARC within 24 hours.
o The NARC shall identify the person or persons it believes to be the
most likely descended from the deceased Native American.
o The most likely descendent may make recommendations to the
landowner or the person responsible for the excavation work, for
means of treating or disposing of, with appropriate dignity, the human
remains and any associated grave goods as provided in Public
Resources Code Section 5097.98, or
· Where the following conditions occur, the landowner or his authorized
representative shall rebury the Native American human remains and associated
grave goods with appropriate dignity on the property in a location not subject to
further and future subsurface disturbance pursuant to Public Resources Code
Section 5097.98(e).
- The NARC is unable to identify a most likely descendent
- The most likely descendant is identified by the NARC, but fails to make a
recommendation within 48 hours of being granted access to the site; or
- The landowner or his authorized representative rejects the recommendation
of the descendant, and a mediation by the NARC fails to provide measures
acceptable to the landowner.
The project site is heavily disturbed from previous activities, including plowing, grading, and
irrigation. However, as noted above, there is always the potential for unknown human remains to be
unearthed. Mitigation Measure 5.4.D.1 requires compliance with Public Resources Code Section
5097.98 and the NARC recommendations. Compliance with this regulation and NARC
recommendations is considered full mitigation for direct impacts associated with the potential of the
discovery of previously unknown human remains. In addition, the proj ect applicant did not discover
any human remains when previous grading and construction was done in 2003.
Michael Brandman Associates
S:\GV\CC\02160039 ]indings_11-14-07.doc
~ ~AK~1>
o u>
35 >- ~
I- m
_ r-
:.:J <:::>
I)RIGINAl
Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative Impacts Which
Can Be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance
Gosford Village Shopping Center
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations
References: Pages 5.4-17 through 5.4-19; 5.4-21 through 5.4-22 in Chapter 1 of the Final EIR,
Response to Comments I-I, in Chapter 2 of the Final EIR, and any documents referenced in or
incorporated by reference in Section 5.4, Cultural Resources, in Chapter 1 of the Final EIR.
2.2.8 - Cumulative
2.2.8.1 - Potentially Significant Impact
The Final EIR identifies a potentially cumulative significant impact to unknown human remains.
As noted above, there are no known human remains on the site; however, it is possible, but unlikely,
for unknown human remains to be located on the project site. Therefore, any impact to unknown
human remains could contribute to a potentially significant cumulative impact to human remains.
Finding
Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 (a)(1), changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect
as identified in the Final EIR.
Facts in Support of Finding
The potentially significant cumulative environmental effect has been eliminated or substantially
lessened to a level that is less than significant by virtue of the following mitigation measure as
identified in the Final EIR and incorporated into the project.
Implementation of Mitigation Measure 5.4.D.1 identified above for the project-specific impact, is
required.
As noted above, there is always the potential for unknown human remains to be unearthed.
Mitigation Measure 5.4.D.1 requires compliance with Public Resources Code Section 5097.98 and
the NARC recommendations. Compliance with this regulation and NARC recommendations is
considered full mitigation for cumulative impacts associated with the potential of the discovery of
previously unknown human remains. In addition, the project applicant did not discover any human
remains when previous grading and construction was done in 2003.
36
Michael Brandman Associates
S:IGV\CCI02160039 _Findings_11-14-07.doc
~ ~~K~-)>
o Q)
~
>- -
r- m
_ r-
:J (:)
0RIGINAl
Gosford Village Shopping Center
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations
Adverse Project-Speclflc and Cumulative Impacts Which
Can Be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance
References: Pages 5.4-17 through 5.4-19; 5.4-21 through 5.4-22, in Chapter I of the Final EIR,
Response to Comments I-I, in Chapter 2 of the Final EIR, and any documents referenced in or
incorporated by reference in Section 5.4, Cultural Resources, in Chapter I of the Final EIR.
2.3 - HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
Impact 5.5.A
There Is potential for the proposed project to create a significant hazard to the
public or the environment through routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous
materials.
2.3.1 - Project-Specific
2.3.1.1 - Potentially Significant Impact
The Final EIR identifies a potentially project-specific impact to construction workers during
excavation and site preparation activities of construction.
The results of a Preliminary Hazards Materials Evaluation indicate that there are no environmental
concerns at the project site or surrounding properties. Nevertheless, excavation and site preparation
activities during construction of the proposed project could present previously unknown hazards to
construction workers.
The Evaluation identified former land uses and site conditions that involved hazardous or potentially
hazardous materials. The site formerly contained rubbish, abandoned and functioning water wells,
chemical tanks, a diesel fuel tan1e The site also has a history of pesticide use. Stained soils
associated with the active well, chemical tanks, and the diesel tank were observed on the project site.
If site preparation activities encounter hazardous wastes, impacts are potentially significant.
The majority of the project site has been used for agricultural production in which agricultural
chemicals could have been used from 1981 to 1998. According to the Kern County Department of
Agriculture, pesticides, herbicides, associated metals and/or chemical products were used at the
project site and on surrounding land within a one-mile radius of the site. These chemicals may be
present in near surface soils at residual concentrations of concern. Potential hazardous impacts from
the potential past application of chemicals to the majority of the site is a potentially significant impact
to construction workers if they are encountered during site preparation activities.
Michael Brandman Associates
S:IGV\CCI02160039 ]indings_11-14-07.doc
~ 'QAK~1>
o lfl
37 >- ~
t:::: J!!
o C)
ORIGINAl
Adverse Project-Speclfic and Cumulative Impacts Which
Can Be MItigated to a Level of Insignificance
Gosford Village Shopping Center
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations
Finding
Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 (a)(1), changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect
as identified in the Final EIR.
Facts in Support of Finding
The potentially significant project-specific environmental effect has been eliminated or substantially
lessened to a level that is less than significant by virtue of the following mitigation measure as
identified in the Final EIR and incorporated into the project.
5.5.A.1
5.5.A.2
5.5.A.3
Prior to any onsite construction activities, any stained soils observed in the Preliminary
Hazards Study shall be assessed by a licensed engineer or geologist approved by the
Director of Prevention Services. All stained soil shall be cleaned and properly disposed
of per the requirements set forth in the applicable federal, state, and local laws.
Prior to any onsite construction activities, soils shall be sampled and analyzed by a
licensed engineer or geologist approved by the Director of Prevention Services to
determine the level of residue for pesticides, herbicides, chemicals, and associated
metals. If residue is found to be within acceptable amounts per the Kern County
Environmental Health Department (KCEHD) and Environmental Protection
AgencylDepartment of Toxic Substance Control (DTSC) standards then grading and
construction may begin. If the residue is found to be greater than the KCEHD and DTSC
standards, all contaminated soils exceeding the acceptable limits shall be remediated
and/or properly disposed of per KCEHD and DTSC requirements. An appropriate
verification closure letter from KCEHD and DTSC shall be obtained and submitted to the
City of Bakersfield. Depending on the extent of contaminated soils, a verification closure
letter from the California Regional Water Quality Control Board may also need to be
submitted to the City of Bakersfield. Site remediation can occur by the use of on-site
transportable thermal treatment units or bio-remediation. The soil can also be excavated
and shipped off-site to fixed incineration or bio-remediation facilities.
If previously unidentified hazardous materials are discovered during grading or
construction of the project, the applicant shall suspend all work immediately and shall
implement the health and safety procedures required by law including, but not limited to
evacuation of the site and/or affected area, the provision of emergency medical treatment
if needed and notification of the following agencies: the City of Bakersfield, DTSC, the
City and County Fire Departments, and RWQCB. The regulatory agency with
jurisdiction over the hazardous material encountered shall evaluate and determine the
38
Michael Brandman Associates
S:\GV\CC\02160039 ]indings_II-14-07.doc
~ r:oAK~1>
o <P
>- ~
r- ",
- r--
-;J <::>
0RIGINAl
Gosford ViI/age Shopping Center
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations
Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative Impacts Which
Can Be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance
type of contamination encountered and shall prescribe the remediation measures, which
shall be implemented.
Project mitigation measures require the testing and removal of stained soils. Additionally, soils will
be tested to determine the level of pesticide, herbicide, and chemical, and associated metals residues
(if any). All testing, remediation and removal activities are regulated by federal, state, and local laws
that are overseen by various government agencies including but not limited to, California EP A,
DTSC, KCEHD, RWQCB, and the City of Bakersfield Fire Department. In the event that previously
unknown hazardous materials or wastes are discovered, materials and/or wastes are subject to the
same agency regulations as identified materials/wastes and all work shall be immediately suspended
until the required agencies are notified and the materials/wastes, the associated health and
environmental risks are identified, and proper remediation has occurred. Implementation of the above
mitigation measures will reduce the project-specific impacts to less than significant.
References: Pages 5.5-22 through 5.5-26 in Chapter I of the Final EIR, and any documents
referenced in or incorporated by reference in Section 5.5, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, in
Chapter 1 of the Final EIR.
2.3.2 - Cumulative
2.3.2.1 - Potentially Significant Impact
The Final EIR identifies a potentially cumulative significant impact to construction workers during
construction activities.
Potential construction related impacts associated with construction activities (Le. disturbance of
stained soils or pesticide residue) are site specific, but could contribute to the cumulative exposure of
hazards to construction workers within Bakersfield. This exposure could create a significant
cumulative impact.
Finding
Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 (a)(1), changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect
as identified in the Final EIR.
Michael Brandman Associates
S:\GV\CC\02160039 ]indings_II-14-07.doc
~ 'QM~1>
() 0"'
39 >- -::::
f- m
- t-
O (:)
0RIGINAI
Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative Impacts Which
Can Be MItigated to a Level of Insignificance
Gosford Village Shopping Center
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Ove"lding Considerations
Facts in Support of Finding
The potentially significant cwnulative environmental effect has been eliminated or substantially
lessened to a level that is less than significant by virtue of the following mitigation measure as
identified in the Final EIR and incorporated into the project.
Implementation of Mitigation Measures 5.5A.I through 5.5.A.3 identified above for the project-
specific impact, are required.
As mentioned above, soils will be sampled and analyzed to determine the level of pesticide,
herbicide, and chemical, and associated metals residues (if any). All testing, remediation and removal
activities are regulated by federal, state, and local laws that are overseen by various government
agencies including but not limited to, California EP A, DTSC, KCEHD, RWQCB, and the City of
Bakersfield Fire Department. In the event that previously unknown hazardous materials or wastes are
discovered, materials and/or wastes are subject to the same agency regulations as identified
materials/wastes and all work shall be immediately suspended until the required agencies are notified
and the materials/wastes, the associated health and environmental risks are identified, and proper
remediation has occurred. Implementation of the above mitigation measures will reduce cwnulative
impact to less than significant.
References: Pages 5.5-22 through 5.5-26 in Chapter I of the Final EIR, and any docwnents
referenced in or incorporated by reference in Section 5.5, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, in
Chapter I of the Final EIR.
Impact 5.5.8
The proposed project could create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions
involving the likely release of hazardous materials Into the environment.
2.3.3 - Project-Specific
2.3.3.1 - Potentially Significant Impact
The Final EIR identifies a potentially project-specific to the public and environment during
construction related activities.
There are some stained soils located near the center of the project site and there has been illegal
dwnping onsite in the past. Given the extent of hazards associated with the stained soil is unknown,
there is potential for the disturbance of theses soils to result in significant hazardous threats during
4()
Michael Brandman Associates
S:\GV\CC\02160039 ]indings_11-14-07.doc
~M("1>
J- ~
>- -
\;: J!2
u C)
ORIGINAL
Gosford Village Shopping Center
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations
Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative Impacts Which
Can Be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance
earth moving and other construction related activities. There is also the potential for additional
dumpsites or unknown hazardous materials to be identified during site construction.
Grading and construction activities may involve the limited transport, storage, usage, or disposal of
hazardous materials, such as the fueling/servicing of construction vehicles and equipment. As with
any such activity, there is the potential for an accidental release.
Finding
Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 (a)(1), changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect
as identified in the Final EIR.
Facts in Support of Finding
The potentially significant project-specific environmental effect has been eliminated or substantially
lessened to a level that is less than significant by virtue of the following mitigation measure as
identified in the Final EIR and incorporated into the project.
Implementation of Mitigation Measures 5.5 .A.l through 5.5 .A.3 identified above is required.
Project mitigation measures require the testing and removal of stained soils. Additionally, soils will
be tested to determine the level of pesticide, herbicide, and chemical, and associated metals residues
(if any). All testing, remediation and removal activities are regulated by federal, state, and local laws
that are overseen by various government agencies including but not limited to, California EP A,
DTSC, KCEHD, RWQCB, and the City of Bakersfield Fire Department. In the event that previously
unknown hazardous materials or wastes are discovered, materials and/or wastes are subject to the
same agency regulations as identified materials/wastes and all work shall be immediately suspended
until the required agencies are notified and the materials/wastes, the associated health and
environmental risks are identified, and proper remediation has occurred. Implementation of the above
mitigation measures will reduce the project-specific impacts to less than significant.
References: Pages 5.5-22 through 5.5-29 in Chapter 1 of the Final EIR, and any documents
referenced in or incorporated by reference in Section 5.5, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, in
Chapter 1 of the Final EIR.
Michael Brandman Associates
S:IGV\CCI02160039 ]indings_II-14-07.doc
<oAK~1>
J- OJ
41 >- ~
r- m
..- t-
O (:)
ORIGINAL
Adverse Project.Speclfic and Cumulative Impacts Which
Can Be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance
Gosford Village Shopping Center
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations
2.3.4 - Cumulative
2.3.4.1 - Potentially Significant Impact
The Final EIR identifies a potentially cumulative to the public and environment during construction
related activities.
As previously discussed, the site contains stained soils, debris piles, and potentially soils containing
pesticide residues. Without the proper characterization of the onsite soils, disturbance could result in
an accidental release or hazardous materials incident; yet disturbance would not trigger or contribute
to a greater disturbance at cumulative project sites. Even though no cumulative impacts at specific
sites would occur from project implementation, the project could contribute to the cumulative
exposure of accidental release or hazardous materials incident within the city.
Finding
Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 (a)(1), changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect
as identified in the Final EIR.
Facts in Support of Finding
The potentially significant cumulative effect has been eliminated or substantially lessened to a level
that is less than significant by virtue of the following mitigation measure as identified in the Final EIR
and incorporated into the proj ect.
As noted above, all remediation and removal activities are regulated by federal, state, and local laws
that are overseen by various government agencies including but not limited to, California EP A,
DTSC, KCEHD, RWQCB, and the City of Bakersfield Fire Department. The project may participate
in the Conditionally Exempt Small Generator program for the disposal of wastes during construction.
If the applicant does not meet the criteria to participate or opts not to participate, a licensed hauler to
dispose of waste at a registered facility. All transportation of wastes are regulated by the Federal
Hazardous Materials Transportation Act and through the Resource and Conservation Recovery Act;
both of which establish guidelines for the transportation and penalties for improper transportation of
hazardous materials and wastes. Project mitigation measures require the testing and removal of
stained soils. Additionally, soils will be tested to determine the level of pesticide, herbicide, and
chemical, and associated metals residues (if any). All testing, remediation and removal activities are
regulated by federal, state, and local laws that are overseen by various government agencies including
but not limited to, California EPA, DTSC, KCEHD, RWQCB, and the City of Bakersfield Fire
Department. In the event that previously unknown hazardous materials or wastes are discovered,
42
Michael Brandman Associates
S:\GV\CC\02160039 _Findings_II-14-07.doc
~ 'QAK~1>
o OJ
>- ~
f- m
- r-
o (:)
ORIGINAL
Gosford Village Shopping Center
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations
Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative Impacts Which
Can Be MItigated to a Level of Insignificance
materials and/or wastes are subject to the same agency regulations as identified materials/wastes and
all work shall be immediately suspended until the required agencies are notified and the
materials/wastes, the associated health and environmental risks are identified, and proper remediation
has occurred. Implementation of the above mitigation measures will reduce the project's contribution
to cumulative impacts to less than significant.
References: Pages 5.5-22 through 5.5-29 in Chapter I of the Final EIR, and any documents
referenced in or incorporated by reference in Section 5.5, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, in
Chapter I of the Final EIR.
Impact 5.5.0
The proposed project could emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or
acutely hazardous, materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an
existing or proposed school.
2.3.5 - Project-Specific
2.3.5.1 - Potentially Significant Impact
The Final EIR identifies a potentially project-specific hazardous emissions impact to Sing Lum
School.
The project is located within one-quarter mile of the Sing Lum School. As discussed earlier, there are
stained soils, illegal dumping, and potential pesticide residue on the project site. Given that the extent
of hazards associated with the soil is unknown, there is the potential that the disturbance of these soils
could result in hazardous threats during earth moving and other construction related activities.
Therefore, this potential hazardous emissions impact is considered significant.
Finding
Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 (a)(I), changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect
as identified in the Final EIR.
Facts in Support of Finding
The potentially significant project-specific effect has been eliminated or substantially lessened to a
level that is less than significant by virtue of the following mitigation measure as identified in the
Final EIR and incorporated into the project.
Implementation of Mitigation Measures 5.5.A.I through 5.5.A.3 identified above is required.
Michael Brandman Associates
S:\GV\CC\02 I 60039 ]indings_II-14-07.doc
43
~1\K~1>
J- ~
>- -
m
I::: r-
'J C)
ORIGINAl
Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative Impacts Which
Can Be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance
Gosford VII/age Shopping Center
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations
Implementation of Mitigation Measures 5.5.A.l through 5.5.A.3 will reduce potential hazardous
emissions impacts on the Sing Lum School to less than significant. These measures include testing
and removal of stained soils. The testing, remediation, and removal activities are regulated by
federal, state, and local laws that are overseen by various government agencies including but not
limited to, California EP A, DTSC, KCEHD, and the City of Bakersfield Fire Department.
References: Pages 5.5-22 through 5.5-32 in Chapter 1 of the Final EIR, and any documents
referenced in or incorporated by reference in Section 5.5, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, in
Chapter 1 of the Final EIR.
2.3.6 - Cumulative
2.3.6.1 - Potentially Significant Impact
The Final EIR identifies a potentially cumulative significant hazardous emissions impact to Sing Lum
School.
As noted above, the proposed project is within one-quarter mile of an existing school. The project
site contains soils that potentially contain pesticide residues. Disturbance of these soils during
construction activities could result in potential hazardous threats. These potential hazardous impacts
of the project could contribute to cumulative hazardous impacts in the project vicinity from grading of
land that was used for agriculture. Therefore, grading activities associated with the proposed project
could contribute to significant cumulative hazardous emissions impacts.
Finding
Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 (a)(1), changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect
as identified in the Final EIR.
Facts in Support of Finding
The potentially significant cumulative environmental effect has been eliminated or substantially
lessened to a level that is less than significant by virtue of the following mitigation measure as
identified in the Final EIR and incorporated into the project.
Implementation of Mitigation Measures 5.5.A.l through 5.5.A.3, identified above for project-specific
impact is required.
44
Michael Brandman Associates
S:IGVICCI02160039 ]indings_11-14-07.doc
~F\K~'9
J- tP
-"('.
>- -
l- m
__ f"-
a ()
ORIGINAl
Gosford Village Shopping Center
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations
Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative Impacts Which
Can Be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance
As noted above, implementation of Mitigation Measures 5.5.A.I through 5.5.A.3 will reduce potential
hazardous emissions impacts on the Sing Lum School to less than significant. These measures
include testing and removal of stained soils. The testing, remediation, and removal activities are
regulated by federal, state, and local laws that are overseen by vatjious government agencies including
but not limited to, California EPA, DTSC, KCEHD, and the City of Bakersfield Fire Department.
References: Pages 5.5-22 through 5.5-32 in Chapter I of the Final EIR, and any documents
referenced in or incorporated by reference in Section 5.5, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, in
Chapter I of the Final EIR.
2.4 - TRAFFIC
Impact 5.6.A
The project would cause an increase In traffic which Is substantial In relation to the
existing traffic load and capacity of the street system, or Individually or
cumulatively exceed a LOS standard established by the county congestion
management agency for designated roadways or highways.
2.4.1 - Project-Specific
2.4.1.1 - Potentially Significant Impact
The Final EIR identifies a potentially project-specific significant impact to 21 unsignalized
intersection scenarios, involving seven different intersections, and four signalized intersection
scenarios, involving three different intersections in the year 2008 plus project conditions.
The study area is generally bounded by Stockdale Highway on the north, McCutchen Road/Hosking
Avenue on the south, SR 99 on the east, and Buena Vista Road on the west. The study area boundary
was set based upon a threshold of 50 PM peak hour project trips. Therefore, only intersections and
roadways with a minimum of 50 PM peak hour project trips were considered for analysis. This study
area selection process was reviewed with and concurred in by the City of Bakersfield, County of
Kern, and Caltrans. The study area included 58 intersections, of which 18 are unsignalized (14 of
which currently exist) and 40 are signalized intersections (37 of which currently exist).
The estimated daily traffic volumes generated by the proposed development are based on the data
obtained from the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation, 7th Edition. Rate
equations and directional splits for ITE Land Use Codes 820 (Shopping Center) 813 (Free-Standing
Discount Superstore), and 944 (Gasoline/Service Stations) were used to estimate project trip
generation during the week (peak hour of adjacent street traffic) and on Saturday (peak hour of
generator).
Michael Brandman Associates
S:IGV\CCI02160039 ]indings_11-14-07.doc
~AK~"9
J- ~
45 >- -
t::: ~
o (:)
ORIGINAl
Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative Impacts Which
Can Be MItigated to a Level of Insignificance
Gosford Village Shopping Center
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations
A capture rate of five percent was applied to ITE Land Use Code 813 and a capture rate of 30 percent
was applied to ITE Land Use Code 944 to account for trips which travel to the site for a dual purpose.
A pass-by rate of 15 percent was applied to ITE Land Use Code 813 and 820, and a 40 percent pass-
by rate was applied to IrE Land Use Code 944 to account for trips which are made as intermediate
stops between trip origin and ultimate destination without a route diversion. The total estimated
average daily trips associated with the proposed project for 2008 is 20,417 and 25,455 in 2012.
As shown in Table 5.6-10 in Chapter I of the Final EIR, under weekday and Saturday peak hours, 21
unsignalized intersection scenarios at seven different intersections, and four signalized intersection
scenarios at three intersections will experience significantly impacts under baseline plus interim 2008
project buildout conditions. It should be noted that some intersection scenarios do not exist under
baseline conditions and thus the respective LOS is not identified below:
Unsignalized
· Old River Road and White Oak Drive - Eastbound (Morning peak hours - LOS C degrading to
LOS D).
· Lily Drive and White Lane - Southbound (Morning peak hours - LOS C degrading to LOS D);
· Lily Drive and White Lane - Southbound (Evening peak hours - LOS E degrading to LOS F);
· Old River Road and Harris Road - Eastbound (Evening peak hours - LOS A degrading to
LOS D);
· Old River Road and Harris Road - Westbound (Evening peak hours - LOS A degrading to
LOS F);
· Old River Road and Harris Road - Westbound (Saturday peak hours - LOS B degrading to
LOS F);
· Old River Road and Harris Road - Eastbound (Saturday peak hours - LOS B degrading to
LOS F);
· Buena Vista Road and Panama Lane - Overall Intersection (Morning peak hours - LOS E
degrading to LOS F);
· Buena Vista Road and Panama Lane - Overall Intersection (Evening peak hours - LOS B
degrading to LOS F);
· Old River Road and Panama Lane - Northbound (Evening peak hours - LOS B degrading to
LOS F);
· Old River Road and Panama Lane - Southbound (Evening peak hours - LOS C degrading to
LOS F);
46
Michael Brandman Associates
S:IGV\CCI02160039 _Findings_11-14-07.doc
~AK~?>
J- ~
>- -
m
r- r-
"0 ~
0RiGINAL
Gosford Village Shopping Center
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations
Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative Impacts Which
Can Be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance
· Reliance Drive and Panama Lane - Southbound (Morning peak hours - LOS C degrading to
LOS F);
· Reliance Drive and Panama Lane - Southbound (Saturday peak hours - LOS C degrading to
LOS F);
· Reliance Drive and Panama Lane - Southbound (Evening peak hours - LOS D degrading to
LOS F);
· Reliance Drive and Panama Lane - Northbound (Evening peak hours - degrading to LOS F);
· Reliance Drive and Panama Lane - Northbound (Saturday peak hours - degrading to LOS D);
· Golden Gate Drive and Panama Lane - Northbound (Morning peak hours - degrading to
LOS D);
· Golden Gate Drive and Panama Lane - Northbound (Evening peak hours - degrading to
LOS F);
· Golden Gate Drive and Panama Lane - Southbound (Evening peak hours LOS B - degrading to
LOS F);
· Golden Gate Drive and Panama Lane - Southbound (Saturday peak hours - LOS B degrading
to LOS E);
· Golden Gate Drive and Panama Lane - Northbound (Saturday peak hours - degrading to
LOS D);
Signalized
· Coffee Road and Stockdale Highway (Morning peak hours - LOS D degrading to LOS F);
· Gosford Road and Panama Lane (Evening peak hours - LOS E degrading to LOS F);
· Gosford Road and Panama Lane (Saturday peak hours - LOS C degrading to LOS D);
· Wible Road and Panama Lane (Saturday peak hours - LOS C degrading to LOS D)
Finding
Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 (a)(1), changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect
as identified in the Final EIR.
Michael Brandman Associates
S:\GV\CC\02 I 60039 ]indings_II-14-07.doc
<QMt:'1>
~ ~,
47 >- ii
l::; [;
U ORIGINAl
Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative Impacts Which
Can Be MItigated to a Level of Insignificance
Gosford Village Shopping Center
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations
Facts in Support of Finding
The potentially significant project-specific environmental effect has been eliminated or substantially
lessened to a level that is less than significant by virtue of the following mitigation measure as
identified in the Final EIR and incorporated into the project.
To reduce impacts on the transportation network, the City of Bakersfield implements two separate
transportation impact fee programs: The Metropolitan Transportation Impact Fee Program and the
Local Mitigation Impact Fee Program. These two programs are discussed below.
Metropolitan Bakersfield Transportation Impact Fee Program
The Metropolitan Bakersfield Transportation Impact Fee was adopted by both the City of Bakersfield
and County ofKem in 1992. The fee program is known as the Regional Transportation Impact Fee
(RTIF) Program. The impact fee is imposed on new development and includes a Regional
Transportation Facilities List and a Transportation Impact Fee Schedule. The Facilities List includes
many of the facilities needed to maintain a LOS C or better for new growth or to prevent the
degradation of facilities, which are currently operating below LOS C as shown in the Metropolitan
Bakersfield General Plan Circulation Element. The Fee Schedule sets forth the fees to be collected
from new development to pay for each development's fair share cost of the facilities.
The RTIF Program was last updated in 2005 and the Facilities List was expanded to include
additional roadway segments and traffic signals. The RTIF pays for the construction of both regional
and local facilities that are required to maintain, where possible, LOS C for the Metropolitan
Bakersfield transportation system or to prevent the degradation of facilities, which are currently
operating below LOS C, where possible. Projects involving General Plan amendments are evaluated
by adding traffic to the projected 20-year traffic forecast to determine if the RTIF improvements
could accommodate the project involving the General Plan amendment. Improvements required
beyond those identified within the RTIF Program are categorized as Local Mitigation and are covered
by the Local Mitigation Impact Fee Program, which is discussed below.
The RTIF is imposed on new development through the application of the Transportation Impact Fee
Ordinance and collected at the building permit stage for any development that produces additional
vehicular trips over that attributed to the land being developed before the new development is in
place. The Facilities List includes those improvements needed on the regional transportation network
for the long-term time horizon year, based on socioeconomic data provided by the KemCOG.
48
Michael Brandman Associates
S:\GV\CC\02 I 60039 ]indings_II-14-07.doc
'QAK~1>
J- tJ1
-(I
>- m
c:. t-
.J (:)
0RIGINAl
Gosford Village Shopping Center
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations
Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative Impacts Which
Can Be MItigated to a Level of Insignificance
After the impact fees are collected, they are placed in a separate interest bearing account in a
Transportation Development Fund, per the requirements of the Government Code Section 66000 et
seq. The timing to use the transportation funds is established through the 5-year Capital Improvement
Program (CIP), which the City's Public Works Department oversees. Periodically (Le., each year),
the City conducts traffic counts, reviews traffic accidents and reviews traffic trends throughout the
City. The City uses this data to determine the timing for the improvements listed on the Facilities
List and to ensure that the construction of needed improvements occurs prior to or concurrent with the
time at which the LOS is forecasted to fail to achieve the performance levels established by the City.
In this way, improvements typically are constructed before the LOS falls below the City's
performance standards to ensure that significant impacts are avoided. Improvements are identified
within each of the 5 year CIP period and reviewed periodically to determine if improvements should
be shifted into another year based on the traffic counts, accidents, and trends. The CIP establishes a
time frame to fund the improvement, design improvements and to fund the requisite costs related to
hiring a contractor to build the improvements.
Local Mitigation Impact Fee Program
The City of Bakersfield has established a Local Mitigation Impact Fee Program for traffic
improvements that are not listed on the RTIF Project Facilities List. These improvements are
typically associated with collector streets but may also be associated with local streets. Furthermore,
if an improvement is required for a specific project, and it was beyond what was contemplated with
the RTIF Program, then the improvement is required as a Local Mitigation requirement.
Similar to the RTIF Program, after the impact fees are collected, they are placed in a separate interest
account, per the requirements of the Government Code Section 66000 et seq. The timing to use the
transportation funds is determined similarly to the RTIF Program. The timing is established through
the 5-year Capital Improvement Program. This program is also overseen by the City's Public Works
Department. Periodic traffic counts, review of traffic accidents, and review of traffic trends
throughout the City are also performed by City staff. The City uses this data to determine the timing
for the improvements listed on the Facilities List. Improvements are identified within each of the 5
years and reviewed periodically to determine if improvements should be shifted into another year
based on the traffic counts, accidents, and trends. The City uses the this data to determine the timing
for the improvements listed on the Facilities List and to ensure that needed improvements are
constructed prior to that time at which the LOS is forecast to fall below the performance levels
established by the City. In this way, improvements are constructed before the LOS falls below the
City's performance standards to ensure that significant impacts are avoided. The Capital
Improvement Program establishes a timeframe to fund the improvement as well as design
improvements and for the City to hire a contractor to build the improvements.
Michael Brandman Associates
S:IGV\CCI02160039 ]indings_II-14-07.doc
-oMt"y
J- ~
49 >- m
r- r-
o (:)
ORIGINAL
Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative Impacts Which
Can Be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance
Gosford Village Shopping Center
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations
The City has an established, proven track record with respect to implementing the RTIF and the Local
Mitigation Fee and Transportation Improvement Programs. Many of the streets included within the
study area for this report are at various stages of widening and improvement based on the City's
collection of fees. Under these programs, as a result of its continual monitoring of the local
circulation system, the City ensures that RTIF and non-RTIF improvements are constructed prior to
when the LOS would othetwise fall below the City's established performance criteria.
Table 5.6-19 in Chapter 1 of the Final EIR identifies the incremental intersection and roadway
improvements needed by the years 2008 and 2030, and the total improvements needed by the year
2030 to maintain, where possible, LOS C. This table identifies which of the total 2030 improvements
are covered by the Local Mitigation Fee Program as opposed to the RTIF program. The project's
proportionate share responsibility for the cost of local mitigation improvements in the year 2030 is
calculated according to the following equation.
[ (Proj ect Traffic) x 100]
(2030 + Project Traffic) - (2006 Traffic)
This equation has been adopted by the City of Bakersfield and is utilized by Caltrans and other
agencies throughout the state. It provides for a reasonably conservative estimate of the cost of local
mitigation since it takes only future traffic into consideration and does not account for other
transportation fees or sources of income.
The improvements listed in Table 5.6-19 in Chapter 1 of the Final EIR are comprised oflane
additions, installation of signals and signal modifications. Lane additions are shown as the number of
lanes required and the direction of travel. For example, I.EBT indicates one additional eastbound
through-lane. Depending upon the width of existing pavement and right-of-way, these improvements
may involve only striping modifications or they may involve construction of additional pavement
width. Specific signal modifications, which are identified, involve changing the operational
characteristics of selected right turn movements from being pennitted during the red phase to also
include a green arrow to allow a protected phase during the overlapping left turn of the intersecting
street.
5.6.A.1
Prior to the issuance of building pennits, the project applicant shall participate in the
Local Impact Mitigation Fee Program and pay the project's fair share oflocal
improvements as outline in Table 5.6-19 in Chapter 1 of the Final EIR. City shall ensure
that the improvements outlined in Table 5.6-19 in Chapter 1 of the Final EIR will be
so
Michael Brandman Associates
S:\GV\CC\02160039 ]indings_11-14-07.doc
((;M~1>
J- ~
>- m
r- r-
o c::,
0RIGINAL
Gosford Village Shopping Center
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations
Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative Impacts Which
Can Be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance
constructed pursuant to the fee program at that point in time necessary to avoid identified
significant impacts on traffic.
5.6.A.2
Prior to the issuance of building permits, the project applicant shall participate in the
RTIF Program and pay the project's fair share regional improvements as outline in Table
5.6-19 in Chapter 1 ofthe Final EIR. City shall ensure that the improvements outlined in
Table 5.6-19 in Chapter I of the Final EIR will be constructed pursuant to the fee
program at that point in time necessary to avoid identified significant impacts on traffic.
The implementation of the intersection and roadway segment (which includes the freeway ramps)
improvements identified in Table 5.6-19 in Chapter 1 ofthe Final EIR for 2008 plus interim project,
2012 plus full project buildout, and 2030 plus project scenarios will reduce the potential significant
impacts at the intersections and roadway segments that are listed above to less than significant (see
Table 2.4-1). The intersection improvements include installation of signals and through/turning lanes,
and the roadway improvements include the addition of lanes. The technical traffic impact analysis
underlying the Final EIR and the Final EIR were reviewed by Caltrans and KemCOG. These
agencies approved of the methodologies and conclusions contained in the traffic impact analysis and
the Final EIR, and also agreed that implementation of the City's two fee programs will mitigate the
identified roadway segments and intersections to less than significant levels.
Michael Brandman Associates
S:IGV\CCI02160039 ]indings_11-14-07.doc
~M~1>
j- ~
51'>' iii
.- r-
~ (:)
nRIGINAL
.c::8 .!~
.S:! c:
I~ .!! ~
8:!;
J!l- =..:.
CJ6,
l!.li ?t- ?t- 'Ill:-I
?t- c: ~
e.E ?t- ?t- ?t- ?t- ?t- ?t- - \0 ?t- ?t- ?t- C'l ?t- ".S
....... \0 l"'l C'l lI"\ 0- lI"\ ~ \0 00 r- lI"\ ~ ~]
~i r-: \0 00 ~ r- "! c-.i 0\ ~ C'l -0 0 0-
- .,j. -0 l"'l c-.i l"'l - - - .,j. - - r-.: c: ",I
.!leD l!!'"
::s.... ~~
e " ...:l eN
as t:Cl .!(l
li ~ .CJ U
~ ...s~ ~ ~~. ~ - ...s~ .1-< ...:l.~ ~ .~. . i;;
" I ~~ ~ ~~E-<E-< ~ 5:2
.gt7l ~ ~~ ~ ~~t:Cl 1 ~~ ~~ 1 t:Cl r:ii
.... !! t:Cl ~t:Cl ~
J: .c-.i~ ~ . - ~. (/)
- ....;- .- .- . f""""Il . .
- - - .- .... ~ - - - . CZi - --
~ ...:l. ...:l. ~ .1-< . (/) .~. ....s ~ E-<. E-< . ...:l....:l. . ~.
....c: II) ~ ~ ~~E-< 3 ...:l~ ~ ...:l~ E-< 1 ...:l~~...:l ~
.l<1 - ~~ ~ .~ ~ . ~ . ffi~~ ~ ~ . .~
c
CD oS
~ E - -- --- -- - - - c-.i"";c-.i - ..... f""""Il f""""Il f""""Il f""""Il -
CD
~ > ...s E-<. . . E-<.
e ...:l. ~~ ~.
~ c. ~ ~t:Cl ...:l ~ ~ ~~ ...:l~
'Ill: .5 . (/) ~ .~ ~ .
- ....; - - -- . -
-
- ~ ...:l. ~ ~ . - ...s ...s~ ~ ....s
c I E-<. ~
CD ~ ~ ~ ~ffi 1 ~ ~~ ~ ] ~~E-< t:Cl
E t:Cl t:Cl t:Cl ~
~ ~ .(/)
~ - - . . 0.0 .- . -
- -- CZi - - -- - .... - "-
f/) ~ ...:l"~ ~" ~"~ ...s~ ~ "E-< ~...sE-< E-<" (/) . ~ " ~
~ ~ 3 ~ ...:l~ j ...:l~...:l ~
>- t:Clt:Cl ffi~ ~~ ~ . ~~~ ~ ~ .~
; ~~ oS
'0 - - - - "";c-.i -- -- C'l - C'l - -- - -
llS
0
~
'0 ...:l
c
llS ~
C
0 ~ -
Tj I
CD ~ ] 1
l!! - bI)
.... CZi
CD ~ (/)
- 3 1
.E ~
II) oS
E - .....
l!
C) ...:l
e t:Cl
Q. ~
: ~ -
I
II. ~ 1 ]
13
- 0.0
llS CZi ....
c. ~. (/)
.5 ~ 3 j
.... oS
-do -
N 5 5
CD ~
:ti al 00 00
.... ~ ~
"0 ~ ] -
llS lU ~ lU ...:l
I- ~ ~ lU ~
~ 5 0 0 ~ ...:l
i ~ .1 -< ~ lU .:3 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
i ] bI) < ~ ~ 'E ~
i u .S .s ii: ~ 0 a'i:l ~ ~ ~
c: li .9 u ~ a'i:l a'i:l (/) "i a'i:l ~ ~
~ c: (/) a'i:l a'i:l
t7li8 a'i:l a'i:l a'i:l ~ "i "i ~ "i
C:"t7l "i "i "i a'i:l ~ ~ "i "i s ~ a'i:l a'i:l a'i:l
UI ~ ~ "i 0 0 "i "0
~] ~] ~ ~
~~ ~ l-< ;> l-< al
'E 'E ~ ~ 'E > 'E > ~ 8 ~ ~
.c::.... 8] ii: ~ ii: ~ 5 ii:
(1)0 cIa cIa ~ cIa..2 cIa..2 ~ lU
&& ffbl) ~ ~ 58 58 ~ = ~ = ;:g ,?;> .S
o .... 0 0 < o 0 o 0 = ~ .....
;!! .5 ~ u:I: 0 0 Ot:Cl Ot:Cl t:Cl 0 -< (/) ~M~1>
s'ti...
c: c:
l!iteD 0 OJ
~
~~I \0 r- oo 0 l"'l lI"\ 0- 0 C'l >- m
\0 - - l"'l r-
8~~ l"'l ~ lI"\ lI"\ lI"\ lI"\ lI"\ \0 r- r- r- oo 00 0 ~ r-
<::,
. )RIGINAl
.c:B
.!:!c
~~
ac
l.r
eS
-....
.~~
:c~
.!!~
::s...,
~1lI
u.2
i~
III III
~f
!;
.:.
t~
~
~
~
~
01(
C/)
C
i
i i
C 'iii
~ C
Oli8
CIlI~
It; ...
ilf"t3
Cl)l)~
&~~
'!!Cl)
~1'"
-eu:i
~~j
8~~
.!!
c
G>
E
~
e
0-
.5
-
C
G>
E
i
tn
>-
lIS
~
'a
lIS
&.
'a
C
lIS
C
o
ts
G>
!!
G>
-
.5
III
E
l!
Q
e
0..
:
LL.
-
U
lIS
0-
.5
-
..;
c
o
o
-
....
~
N
G>
:a
lIS
....
~ ~
C"l ~ 0\
~ ~ :
- r--: C"l
E-<
r:r:l
~
-
~
C"l
0\
..j.
l""l
E-< E-<~ ~ ~
~ ~ ~~
-
Jai ~
~~ ~
-
J ~~
~ ~
..... '1""""'4 ~....... .....
E-< ~~
~ ~
- -
~ ~ ~
- - -
J Pi ~~~ ~
~ ~ ~~ ~
...... ....... ............ ......
~ ~
E E
~ ~
cId cId
'i 'i
o 0
~ ~
! f
l""l "'f" on
00 00 0\
E-<
r:r:l
~
E-<~
~
-
.-
u
'.6
rI)
Q
cId
'i
o
~]
~ >
c.S~
rI) ::l
o 0
C)r:r:l
o
J
-
>
~
c.S
rI)
o
C)
cId
'i
~-
't:l 0
M ~u
c.S
rI)
c3Jl
~
"'f"
-
o
"'f"
~
ffi
-
~
ffi
-
o
~
s
>
~
c.S
rI)
o
C)
cId
'i
~C"l
~~
~!
o =
C)~
o
o
-
~
-
-
C"l
l""l
~~E-<
r:r:lr:r:l
~oo
~,....:
~~J
~~
--
....f
~
Pi
~
-
JE-<
~~
--
o
~
::::
>
~
c.S
rI)
o
C)
cId
't:l
'"
~l""l
't:l 0
M U
~!
o =
C)~
-
o
-
~
0\
o
..j.
J
~
-
I
1
Ci3
:::: ~ ~~
S r:r:l r:r:l
.s ~ ~
J
~
-
I
1
.....
00
-~
Sr:r:l
.s~
....:l
r:r:l
~
-
....:l~
~
-
.~ 'i
::I: ~
cId .~
~ .....
8 ~
S 'i
~ ~
.S ~
S C2
Elo 'i
o :s
::s~ 0
C"l
o
-
~
-
'.c:
0\
~
~
-
E-<~ E-<~
J~~
~~~ 3
- ~-
I ~ ~
13~
Ci3 ~~-~
3~~
~ . ~
.=l--
~~
~r:r:l
r:r:loo
~ .
.-
- ~
I~
13
.....
00 ~
-~
'3~
.s~
~~
~
- ~
I~
13
00 *'
-~~
'3~r:r:l
~ . ~
.=l--
\0 r--
- -
- -
~
C"l
~
l""l
l""l
~
r--
..0
C"l
E-<
r:r:l
~
-
I~
1~
00_ ..
-~
'3~
~ .
..... -
~
r:r:l
~
-
J
~
....:l~ E-<
~r:r:l
,00
- .
~-
....:l ~
~~
-
I
1
Ci3
::::~
Sr:r:l
.s~
--
'i
~
.~
::I:
cId
'i
~
~
c.S
rI)
o
C)
'i
~
.~
::I:
cId
't:l
'"
~
o
~
;..::l
~
00
-
-
0\
-
-
~ ~
on -
0\ 0
..0 ori
E-<~
r:r:l
~- ~
"7 ~~ ~
1.r:r:l ~
-~
.......~"'...... ......
~ ~1-<~ ~
i ~~ ~
.....- -
~ E-<~
E-<r:r:l
r:r:loo
~~
'7~
-~
~~
.....
00 ~
-~~
S~r:r:l
~ .~
.=l--
1
Ci3
-
'3
.s
'i
~
.~
::I:
cId
't:l
'"
~
~
<:
o
C"l
-
~
r:r:l
~
-
J
~
-
'i
~
.~
::I:
cId
'i
~
o
.S
.-
00
-
C"l
-
~.g
.!!~
l,)~
~3
01( -I
c:~
IlI'S
~]
C 1
~~
-~
~-
1lI81
.c:u
.~u
:I;;
9
<ii
AK~1>
J- ~
>- ~ iTi
t::: r-
o (:)
ORIGINAl
.c:!
.\:! c:
i~
~1
a~
eS
......
!:~
;:a!:
..!!!Q)
~....
e"
as
i~
""
.g~
l~
.l.
Ill;
.,..u
l
I
o:t
~
i
! i
c: ~
~'tJ5
C2lc:U
c: "
'~t ~
Q; " -~
0" .
.c:...
Cl)O~
&&0
;II .5: 'C;
~"-
b.5 c:
I; u;: Q)
i~j
8~a
n
c
CD
E
CD
>
e
Q,
.5
..
c
CD
E
If
fn
i;'
~
'0
III
o
~
'0
C
III
C
o
:g
CD
l!!
CD
..
.5
III
E
l!
Q
e
Q.
z
u.
~
Q,
.5
..:.:.
..J
c
o
(,)
-
....
~
N
CD
:is
III
I-
r-<. r-<. .
~.~ ~ ~
~ 'N~
NN. .N
, ....:l ....:l ...s
]~~~
'~N NN
i ~~~. ~
,.!::lNNN-
. E-.:' E-.:'
~~~
~,....;-
'7...s...s
1~3
en ~ ...
:=r-<.~....:l
Sffi~~
],....;.....;,....;
....:l.
~
'7 ...s ....:l.
]~~
OIl ._
....-
00 .
-E-.:'r-<....:l
s~~~
~ ~ . ~
..=............1""""4
I
~
~
'i
~
~
;>
j~
o
'V
-
'if?
00
-o:i-
....:l
~
~
-
....:l.
~
-
. ...s ....:l
....:l~~
~~rI)
~ .,....;
N N .
, ~.....:l
]ffi~
OIl ._
00 -. r-<.
-r-<~
Sffi~
'sNN
...s
~
-
I
]
OIl
oo....:l
j~
I
~
~
~
is
~
;>
.~
J~
-
'V
-
....:l. ...s ~. ~
ffi~ ~~
C"iN ...1""""4--:
'~~E-.:'E-.:'
l~,....;~~
.'1""'41""""4 1""""4 f"'-t
00 . r-<. . .
l~~~~
,.!::lNNNN
r-<.
~.~
~ .
.-
'7 ....:l. ....:l
l~~
.'1""'41""""4,......
00 . .
-r-<....:l
]53
...s
~
'7...s...s
1~3
....-
00 .
:::l r-<. r-< ....:l
::l~~~
~~~~
~1""""41""""4"""
~
I
~
~
'i
~
~
~
~
"C
o
N
'V
-
~. ~.
ffi ~
,....; ...1"""'4
r-< .
~.~ ~ ~
~ .ZrI)
NN.NN
. ....:l . .
....:l~....:l....:l
ffi~~~
"":""';<"i"":
....:l. r-<
~~
. 00
N .
-
E-.:'.
~~
.....;-:
E-.:' r-<.
~~
--
r-<.
~
-
.....:l
~~
--
~
I
~
~
'i
~
"E
oS
""
o
e,:,
('f')
'V
-
'if? 'if?
00 00
V') 00
r...: -o:i-
~
~
~
-
....:l
.~
r-<rI)
~ .
~-
N .
,r-<
]~
OIl""';
....
00 .
_....:l
]~
....:l.
~
-
I
1
00
3~ r-<
,s ~ 5
,....:l
l~
V5 ...
_....:l
S~
,s,....;
~
....:l
I
~
~
'i
~
u
.~
~
~
-
1-<
~
00
N
~
~
~
-
~ ~
ffi ~
,....; ..........
r-< .
~.~~~
~ .ZrI)
N-.NN
. ....:l....:l. .
....:l~~....:l
~~;Z;~
...... ...-. ...... ......
~
I
~
~
'i
~
~
-<
V')
'V
-
'if?
N
-
r...:
-....:l
~
~
r-<.
~.~
~,....;
- .
,....:l
l~
....-
00 .
:=r-<....:l
Sffi~
;a .~
~............. .......
...s
~
~
-
,....:l
l~
00 ...
_....:l
S~
,s,....;
....:l.
~
,
]
OIl
00
:=....:l
s~
,s~
I
~
~
~
is
~
e,:,
5
~~
\0
'V
-
~
~
r-<.
~
-
r-<. r-<
~ ~
~ ~
I I
~ ~
~ ~
'i 'i
~ ~
u ~
~ ~
r-- 00
'V 'V
- -
~~
.!! ~
~....
=;:;:
o:t -I
c: !fJ.
".9
~]
c: ",I
eM
lQ~
li-
!~
.\:!u
~:>
9
ri:i
M~1>
J- ~
>-
. ... m
t;: '" t-
o (:)
0R1GINAl
.c:~
.S:! I::
l.g
ff~
:tB'
eS
-...
!t 0
~l
.!I CD
::s.....
EIlI
as
i)
III III
~OI
'" ;e
!~
ta
~
I
'll:
I/)
I::
~
I!
i ~
i ~
(,)'bO
011::(,)
1::1lI~
It...
o~J:j
.c:...l:
Cl)O~
~ ~...
;:::.s 0
s'ti....
~I::
l!"'CD
~~i
C)~~
l)
c
G)
E
G)
>
~
Q.
.5
...
c
G)
E
~
t/)
>-
;
'0
ca
o
IX
'0
C
ca
c
o
:g
G)
r!
CD
...
.5
II)
E
l!
CD
~
D.
I
u.
13
ca
Q.
.5
-
..;
c
o
o
-
~
~
N
CD
:a
ca
~
'<t.
N
~
("'l
E-<
~
tI)
N
~:f
~
~
-
E-<"
~
" E-<"
~~
~ .
.-
- "
"~
~~
~ .
.-
~"~" E-<
ffi~~
~~N
JE-<
~~
"";N
~r:
ffi~
.....;.....;
r: ~"
~~
--
~
~EQE-<
~~~
~ .tI)
.- .
- -
"J "
E-<EQ~
~~~
-- -
~
!
~
c(l
"i
~
Q)
:c
~
0'1
v
-
JE-< J
~~ ~
.....;...... ~
IJ
-~
.~~
tI) "
=E-<
J3
"i
Q) ~
:E .g
.a .d
~ .a
c(l ~
"i c(l
~ "i
~ ~
;> ~
5"i ~
&l ~ 0
o N
l' l'
- -
'E-<
1~
....-
tI) "
3~
.6~
'<t.
N
~
-
E-<
ffi
N
~"
~
-
JE-<
~~
....;-
I ~"
]~
bI)~
....-
tI) "
-E-<
3~
~ .
....-
~" ~"~" Iii"
~ 'N~
.N N
'7JJJ
-~~~
'~NNN
i ~"~ ~ ~
~N1"'""41""""11""""1
~
~
~
-
I ~"
13
....
tI) "
- ~
] ~
"i
~
Q)
:E
.a
Q)
~
c(l
"i
~
'E
..s
'"
o
~
]
~
u
()
:E
c(l
"i
~
~
;>
Oil
5"i
&l~
("'l
l'
-
'"
0'1
-
E-<" "
"~ ~
~ ~
~
~ .~
.N_
- " "
I~E-<
-~~
~ . .
.~ 1""""1.......
tI) " "
-E-<~E-<
3ffi~~
]C'i""':""';
"~
~~
~tI)
~....;
- "
I~
]~
bI)"";
....
tI) "
-~
3~
.6....;
c:l
]
~
u
()
:E
c(l
"i
~
~
2-0
-0 Oil
o~
00
0'1
-
i~~" ~
~N....;~
N " -
I ~E-<" "
-EQ~1ii
~~ .~
r;i -" c-: c-:
-E-<~~ E-<
3~~~ ~
~~ . ~ ~
..:lNNN -
~"
~
-
'~
1~
....-
tI) "
-~
]3
-0
Oil
~
c:l
]
~
u
()
:E
c(l
"i
~
'E
..s
'"
o
~
0'1
0'1
-
!
~
c(l
Q)
()
fa
~
~
~
o
i Q)
~j
00
o
("'l
';.g
.!! $
8;!;
1/)-
1/)-
'll:-'
I::~
1lI.-
~~
I:: I
&~
Gj-
-9
.c:u
.!:!u
::i!!>
9
oii
E-<"
~
-
]"
bI)
r;i
-~
3~
.6~
~
~
~
i
u
c(l
"i
~
~
~
2 ~
:g .t:
00
00
N
("'l
M~1>
J- <.f'
't\
~ II) m
._ II) r-
~) (:)
f')RIGINAI
.c:~ ~.g
.Ii! e:
~~ .!! S
u'
0'"
-rp: ",'7
"'-
at <!. ct -I
e: t
eS 00 <!. <!. "..
-... - 0 1,0 ~]
~~ ..0 q q
~ - C'l on e: I
J!CI) e~
::s.... ~~
~ " Gj-
"l:)
0.2 .c:u
i) .Uu
i;;
"" 9
.gi' Vi
1~ en IZl IZl
- ~ j
C
at -
..:. E C'l C'l
-la ~ ~ "0
~ e ~
~ Q,
.5
~ -
ct C
at
E ~ ~ ~
C)
at 1Zl~ rJi rJi
", IZl IZl IZl IZl IZl IZl IZl IZl
~ j ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ j j
~ - ~ - ~ - - - - - ~ ~ -
- C'l C'l C'l C'l C'l C'l C'l C'l
'g C'l .... ~:.a ....
~ "0"3 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ "0"0 ~ ~ ~
IV ~ 1:1 "0 CI)
0 ~ s < S
0::
'g
c ~
IV ....
C "0
0 1:1
1S ~
G)
!!
G) rJi IZl
- j j ~
.5
en -
E - C'l C'l
I! ~ ~ ~
C)
e
0..
I
u.
13
IV
Q, IZl
.5 j
.;.:.
..; C'l
C "0
0 ~
(J
-
~
~ ] 'g
N 2 I I IZl ~
at .... .~ ~
~ -E c ~ OJ:)
~ :Q ~ 0
i IV 'g CI) ::I: 0\ ~ ]
... ii ~ p.. p.. III I - IZl
IZl 0
i III ~ I "0 1 - 0 ::I: g
i 'g 'g '" ~ ::I:
~ 0 ~ ~ 00 p..
e: 'iij S () I ~ ~ CI) ~ ~
~~8 .g ] CI) '3 'g ~
g IZl 0 I :E 0
tile: .~ () III ~
e:"tIl ! p.. p.. ~ -E I '"
~te: - i ~
.0 ~'g ::I: () IZl
Q;,,~ CI)"O '.6 .~
01.1;:' '" ~ p.. p.. III '"
.c:... 8 0 ~ 0 ..0 IZl
U)O~ ~ CI) ~ ~ 'g~ is ::I: p.. p..
:~ .~j s~ ~ ~ ~ o = ~ .0 .0 .0 ~
~ IZl 5 ... ~~ '"
-.s~ .... ,J:l "'''>: '" ~ ~
~i- ~ ~ :> () ~ 'E 'E 'E.9 ~ ~ ~ ~ CI) CI)
~iti Oi 58 i:iZ CI) .s CI) .s"O .s ::l a ~ a .2
~~ lZlu CI)"O ]ih CI) CI) :S
~~i 8 ~ aj c3j IZl '" ,J:l '" .B > ~ CI)
::l () o 0 o () IZl 0 1Zl.... < ~
8~~ 1Ilp.. 1Il::E ~~ ~::E <~ <::I: 00<
.c:~ .!.g
Jic:
~~ .!! ~
.2l'- 8:!:
uC: =~
ll'~ ?I: ~-I
eS ?I: ?I: ?I: c:gj,
\0 IlI.S
-.... r--; .... tr) tr) i~
~~ t"l "<t r-- t"l
~II .... N .,f r-: c: ",I
.!!~ l!'"
::s.... ~~
gill Is
oS .c:u
"tIj .!:!U
~ :1$
u& 9
~~ -rIl <ii
rIl rIl rIl
I: II) j j j ~
-
c
CD ....
is E N N N ....
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
t e
i a.
.5
-
~ c
CD
E ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~
U) rJf rIl rJf rIl~ rJf rIl rIl rJf rIl
>- ~ j ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
ftS
~ .... fa .... fa .... fa ;::; fa .... - .... fa -
~ N ._ N "<t ._ ::e "C:e N N N ._ N
"C"C ~ "C"C "C "C ~1 ~
ftS ~s "C Q) ~ s ~ s ~ ~
0 < El
0::
~
C
ftS
C
0
ts
CD
!!
CD rIl fa
- ~
..5 1
II) -
E N r-:
L! ~ ~ 0
0
Q N
e ~
Q. 2
I -5
r....
LL. .(
'tS I:!:l
ftS ::E
a. rIl fa
.5 j "0
:e !ij
S r--
- N 0
..; ~ "C 0
C N
0 ~ i
0
-
.... 'E !ij
... 'i .....
N 'i ~ .s 'i 'i i
rIl ~ 'i
CD ] ~ ;> 0 ~ ~
~ :is c.:J ! ~ I '5'0
~ ftS ..8 ~ ~ ..2 'i s::
... rIl 'i Q) :9 w
0 rIl .S ~ ~
.. l! ::I:: < ;:I ~ ~ '>
l]:l .....
s J 'i tIl I ~ U
c: III ~ 'i 'i s ~ 'i "C 'i ~
~"tIlS ~ rIl iiZ
;> to ~
~ 'E ~ ~ "3
~c:o ::s '5
C:1lI 1 'E ~
'l t.r 5 .s ..8 Q) ~ 0 tIl
.s rIl .Ej .g o:g
o~:s! rIl :i! ;:I 0 rIl
.c:....t:: 0 l]:l c.:J < tIl >.~
lI)O~ p.. c.:J ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~'i
-t)I)
&~ .g .g ]~ 5 ~
,!!,s't) 0 ~ .g~
~i" ~ Q) I] to 1 1 1 1 ~'E Q.. .. <<~ K~1>
~iti ..2 a rIl ~"C 8.s ..".; 8
~~.i :9 ~ .~ fa 13 () rIl ~ tIl !3 0 ~
~c3 o 0
~< ::I:: p..~ p..~ p.. p.. p.. p.. Z- tIl >- -
8~~ "" m
\0- Il) t-
'-=.
'.J (:)
1jf:lIGINAL
Adverse Project-Specif1c and Cumulative Impacts Which
Can Be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance
Gosford Village Shopping Center
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations
The implementation of the improvements at the intersections identified in Table 5.6-19 in Chapter I
of the Final EIR for 2008 plus project scenarios will reduce the potential significant impacts at the
intersections that are listed above to less than significant (see Table 2.4-1). The intersection
improvements include installation of signals and through/turning lanes. The technical traffic impact
analysis underlying the Final EIR and the Final EIR were reviewed by Caltrans and KernCOG. These
agencies approved of the methodologies and conclusions contained in the traffic impact analysis and
the Final EIR, and also agreed that implementation of the City's two fee programs will mitigate the
identified intersections to less than significant levels.
References: Pages 5.6-28 through 5.6-39; and 5.6-68 through 5.6-77 in Chapter I of the Final EIR,
the comment letter from the California Department of Transportation dated June 27,2007, Response
to Comments B-1 in Chapter 2 of the Final EIR, and any documents referenced in or incorporated by
reference in Section 5.6, Traffic and Transportation, in Chapter I of the Final EIR.
2.4.2 - Project-Specific
2.4.2.1 - Potentially Significant Impact
The Final EIR identifies a potentially project-specific significant impact to 46 unsignalized
intersection scenarios involving 13 different intersections, and eight signalized intersection scenarios
involvingfive different intersections in the Year 2012 plus project conditions.
As shown in Table 5.6-11 in Chapter 1 of the Final EIR, 46 unsignalized intersection scenarios
involving 13 intersections, and eight signalized intersection scenarios involving five different
intersections will experience significant impacts under baseline plus full 2012 project (full buildout)
conditions. It should be noted that some intersection scenarios do not exist under baseline conditions
and thus the respective LOS is not identified:
Unsignalized
. Old River Road and White Oak Drive - Eastbound (Morning peak hours - LOS C degrading to
LOS F);
. Old River Road and White Oak Drive - Eastbound (Evening peak hours - LOS A degrading to
LOS F);
. Old River Road and White Oak Drive - Eastbound (Saturday peak hours - LOS C degrading to
LOS D)
. Old River Road and White Oak Drive - Westbound (Morning peak hours - LOS B degrading to
LOS D);
58
Michael Brandman Associates
S:IGVICCI02160039 ]indings_II-14-07.doc
~M~1>
J- ~
>- -
m
l::: r-
() (:)
ORIGINAL
Gosford Village Shopping Center
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations
Adverse Project-Speclfic and Cumulative Impacts Which
Can Be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance
. Old River Road and White Oak Drive - Westbound (Evening peak hours LOS B degrading to
LOS F);
. Lily Drive and White Lane - Southbound (Morning peak hours - LOS C degrading to LOS E);
. Lily Drive and White Lane - Southbound (Evening peak hours - LOS E degrading to LOS F);
. Mountain Vista Drive and Harris Road - Northbound (Evening peak hours - LOS A degrading
to LOS D);
. Mountain Vista Drive and Harris Road - Southbound (Evening peak hours - LOS A degrading
to LOS D);
. Old River Road and Harris Road - Eastbound (Evening peak hours - LOS A degrading to
LOS F);
. Old River Road and Harris Road - Eastbound (Saturday peak hours - LOS B degrading to
LOS F);
. Old River Road and Harris Road - Westbound (Evening peak hours - LOS A degrading to
LOS F);
. Old River Road and Harris Road - Westbound (Saturday peak hours LOS B degrading to
LOS F);
. Ashe Road and Harris Road - Overall Intersection (Evening peak hours - LOS B degrading to
LOS E);
. Buena Vista Road and Panama Lane - Overall Intersection (Morning peak hours LOS E
degrading to LOS F);
. Buena Vista Road and Panama Lane - Overall Intersection (Evening peak hours - LOS B
degrading to LOS F);
. Mountain Vista Drive and Panama Lane - Northbound (Evening peak hours - degrading to
LOS D);
. Old River Road and Panama Lane - Northbound (Evening peak hours - LOS B degrading to
LOS F);
. Old River Road and Panama Lane - Northbound (Morning peak hours - LOS B degrading to
LOS F);
. Old River Road and Panama Lane - Southbound (Evening peak hours LOS C degrading to
LOS F);
. Old River Road and Panama Lane - Southbound (Morning peak hours LOS B degrading to
LOS F);
Michael Brandman Associates
S:\GV\CC\02160039 ]indings_II-14-07.doc
<oAK~1>
J- ~
59 >- -
. m
,....... r-
o (:)
0RIGINAt
Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative Impacts Which
Can Be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance
Gosford Village Shopping Center
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations
· Old River Road and Panama Lane - Southbound (Saturday peak hours LOS B degrading to
LOS D);
· Reliance Drive and Panama Lane - Northbound (Morning peak hours - degrading to LOS D);
· Reliance Drive and Panama Lane - Northbound (Evening peak hours - degrading to LOS F);
· Reliance Drive and Panama Lane - Southbound (Morning peak hours - LOS C degrading to
LOS F);
· Reliance Drive and Panama Lane - Southbound (Evening peak hours - LOS D degrading to
LOS F);
· Reliance Drive and Panama Lane - Southbound (Saturday peak hours - LOS C degrading to
LOS F)
· Reliance Drive and Panama Lane - Northbound (Saturday peak hours - degrading to LOS D);
· Golden Gate Drive and Panama Lane - Northbound (Morning peak hours - degrading to
LOS E);
· Golden Gate Drive and Panama Lane - Northbound (Evening peak hours - degrading to
LOS F);
· Golden Gate Drive and Panama Lane - Northbound (Saturday peak hours - degrading to
LOS F);
· Golden Gate Drive and Panama Lane - Southbound (Morning peak hours - LOS B degrading to
LOS F);
· Golden Gate Drive and Panama Lane - Southbound (Evening peak hours - LOS B degrading to
LOS F);
· Golden Gate Drive and Panama Lane - Southbound (Saturday - LOS B degrading to LOS F);
· Buena Vista Road and McCutchen Road - Eastbound (Morning peak hours - degrading to
LOS F);
· Buena Vista Road and McCutchen Road - Eastbound (Evening peak hours - degrading to
LOS F);
· Buena Vista Road and McCutchen Road - Eastbound (Saturday peak hours - degrading to
LOS D);
· Buena Vista Road and McCutchen Road - Westbound (Morning peak hours - LOS A degrading
to LOS F);
· Buena Vista Road and McCutchen Road - Westbound (Evening peak hours - LOS A degrading
to LOS F);
· Buena Vista Road and McCutchen Road - Westbound (Saturday peak hours - LOS A
degrading to LOS D)
60
Michael Brandman Associates
S:\GV\CC\02160039 ]indings_11-14-07.doc
coMt:"-9
~ ~
>- IT1
I::;:: t-
V C)
ORIGINAJ
Gosford Village Shopping Center
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Ove"idlng Considerations
Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative Impacts Which
Can Be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance
· Old River Road and McCutchen Road - Eastbound (Evening peak hours - LOS A degrading to
LOS F);
· Old River Road and McCutchen Road - Westbound (Evening peak hours - LOS A degrading to
LOS E);
· Gosford Road and McCutchen Road - Eastbound (Morning peak hours - LOS B degrading to
LOS F);
· Gosford Road and McCutchen Road - Eastbound (Evening peak hours - LOS A degrading to
LOS F);
· Gosford Road and McCutchen Road - Westbound (Morning peak hours - degrading to LOS E);
· Gosford Road and McCutchen Road - Westbound (Evening peak hours - degrading to LOS F).
Signalized
· Coffee Road and Stockdale Highway (Morning peak hours - LOS D degrading to LOS F);
· Coffee Road and Stockdale Highway (Evening peak hours - LOS D degrading to LOS E);
· Gosford Road and Panama Lane (Morning peak hours - LOS B degrading to LOS E);
· Gosford Road and Panama Lane (Evening peak hours- LOS E degrading to LOS F);
· Gosford Road and Panama Lane (Saturday peak hours- LOS C degrading to LOS E);
· Ashe Road and Panama Lane (Evening peak hours - LOS C degrading to LOS D);
· Wible Road and White Lane (Evening peak hours - LOS C degrading to LOS D).
· Wible Road and Panama Lane (Saturday peak hours- LOS C degrading to LOS D).
Finding
Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 (a)(1), changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect
as identified in the Final EIR.
Facts in Support of Finding
The potentially significant project-specific environmental effect has been eliminated or substantially
lessened to a level that is less than significant by virtue of the following mitigation measure as
identified in the Final EIR and incorporated into the project.
Implementation of Mitigation Measures 5.6.A.l and 5.6.A.2 are required.
Michael Brandman Associates
S:\GV\CC\02160039 ]indings_11-14-07.doc
~AK~.6
~ .~
61 ~ "!'.
m
,- r-
-:J (:)
"RI(,INAl
Adverse Project-Speclfic and Cumulative Impacts Which
Can Be MItigated to a Level of Insignificance
Gosford Village Shopping Center
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations
The implementation of the improvements at the intersections shown above in Table 2.4-1 and
identified in Table 5.6-19 in Chapter 1 ofthe Final EIR for 2012 plus project scenario will reduce the
potential significant impacts at these intersections that are listed above to less than significant. The
technical traffic impact analysis underlying the Final EIR and the Final EIR were reviewed by
Caltrans and KernCOG. These agencies approved ofthe methodologies and conclusions contained in
the traffic impact analysis and the Final EIR, and also agreed that implementation of the City's two
fee programs will mitigate the identified intersections to less than significant levels.
References: Pages 5.6-39 through 5.6-47; and 5.6-68 through 5.6-77 in Chapter 1 of the Final EIR,
Response to Comment B-1, in Chapter 2 of the Final EIR, and any documents referenced in or
incorporated by reference in Section 5.6, Traffic and Transportation, in Chapter 1 of the Final EIR.
2.4.2.2 - Potentially Significant Impact
The Final EIR identifies a potentially project-specific significant impact to three roadway segment
under the year 2008 plus project conditions.
As shown in Table 5.6-12 in Chapter 1 ofthe Final EIR, there are three roadway segments that will be
significantly impacted by the proposed project because the project will degrade the operation ofthe
roadway segments from LOS C or better to below LOS C. These roadway segments are:
· Buena Vista Road - Panama Lane to McCutchen Road (LOS degrading to LOS F)
· Wible Road - Panama Lane to Hosking Avenue (LOS B degrading to LOS D)
· Panama Lane - Akers Road to Wible Road (LOS C degrading to LOS E)
Finding
Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 (a)(1), changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect
as identified in the Final EIR.
Facts in Support of Finding
The potentially significant project-specific environmental effect has been eliminated or substantially
lessened to a level that is less than significant by virtue of the following mitigation measure as
identified in the Final EIR and incorporated into the project.
Implementation of Mitigation Measures 5.6.A.l and 5.6.A.2 are required.
62
Michael Brandman Associates
S:IGV\CCI02160039 Jindings_II-14-07.doc
~AK~1>
J- <.fl
-1"1
m
r-
/ (:)
0RIGINAl.
Gosford Village Shopping Center
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Ove"lding Considerations
Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative Impacts Which
Can Be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance
The implementation of the improvements at the three roadway segments shown above in Table 2.4-1
and identified in Table 5.6-19 in Chapter 1 ofthe Final EIR for 2008 plus project scenario will reduce
the potential significant impacts at the three roadway segments that are listed above to less than
significant. The technical traffic impact analysis underlying the Final EIR and the Final EIR were
reviewed by Caltrans and KernCOG. These agencies approved of the methodologies and conclusions
contained in the traffic impact analysis and the Final EIR, and also agreed that implementation ofthe
City's two fee programs will mitigate the identified roadway segments to less than significant levels.
References: Pages 5.6-48 through 5.6-51; and 5.6-68 through 5.6-77 in Chapter 1 of the Final EIR,
Response to Comment B-1, in Chapter 2 of the Final EIR, and any documents referenced in or
incorporated by reference in Section 5.6, Traffic and Transportation, in Chapter 1 of the Final EIR.
2.4.2.3 - Potentially Significant Impact
The Final EIR identifies a potentially project-specific significant impact to four roadway segment
under the year 2012 plus project conditions.
As shown in Table 5.6-13 in Chapter 1 ofthe Final EIR, the addition ofproject related traffic will
significantly impact four roadway segments:
· Buena Vista Road - Panama Lane to McCutchen Road (LOS degrading to LOS F);
· Gosford Road - Pacheco Road to Panama Lane (LOS A degrading to LOS E);
· Wible Road - Panama Lane to Hosking Avenue (LOS B degrading to LOS D); and
· Panama Lane - Akers Road to Wible Road (LOS C degrading to LOS F)
Finding
Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 (a)(1), changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect
as identified in the Final EIR.
Facts in Support of Finding
The potentially significant project-specific environmental effect has been eliminated or substantially
lessened to a level that is less than significant by virtue of the following mitigation measure as
identified in the Final EIR and incorporated into the project.
Implementation of Mitigation Measures 5.6.A.l and 5.6.A.2 are required.
Michael Brandman Associates
S:\GV\CC\02160039 ]indings_11-14-07.doc
'QMt:1>
J- ~
63:>- _
m
r-
.J (:)
r)RlGINAI.
Adverse Project-Speclflc and Cumulative Impacts Which
Can Be MItigated to a Level of Insignificance
Gosford Village Shopping Center
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations
The implementation of the improvements at the four roadway segments shown above in Table 2.4-1
and identified in Table 5.6-19 in Chapter I of the Final EIR for 2012 plus project scenario will reduce
the potential significant impacts at the four roadway segments that are listed above to less than
significant. The technical traffic impact analysis underlying the Final EIR and the Final EIR were
reviewed by Caltrans and KemCOG. These agencies approved of the methodologies and conclusions
contained in the traffic impact analysis and the Final EIR, and also agreed that implementation of the
City's two fee programs will mitigate the identified roadway segments to less than significant levels.
References: Pages 5.6-51 through 5.6-54; and 5.6-68 through 5.6-77 in Chapter I of the Final EIR,
Response to Comment B-1, in Chapter 2 of the Final EIR, and any documents referenced in or
incorporated by reference in Section 5.6, Traffic and Transportation, in Chapter I ofthe Final EIR.
2.4.2.4 - Potentially Significant Impact
The Final EIR identifies a potentially project-specific significant impact for one freeway ramp
intersection under one scenario, under the 2012 plus project condition.
As shown in Table 5.6-15 in Chapter I of the Final EIR, one freeway intersection operates at below
LOS C or worse at the full project buildout year:
· SR 99 at White Lane - Northbound On-Ramp eastbound approach (Evening peak hours LOS C
degrading LOS D)
Finding
Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 (a)(I), changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect
as identified in the Final EIR.
Facts in Support of Finding
The potentially significant project-specific environmental effect has been eliminated or substantially
lessened to a level that is less than significant by virtue of the following mitigation measure as
identified in the Final EIR and incorporated into the project.
Implementation of Mitigation Measures 5.6.A.2 identified above for the project-specific impact, is
required.
tu
Michael Brandman Associates
S:\GV\CC\02160039 ]indings_11-14-07.doc
~AK~?>
~ tP
""\"\
>- -
r- m
.- t-
V <:::>
()RIGINAL
Gosford Village Shopping Center
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations
Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative Impacts Which
Can Be MItigated to a Level of Insignificance
The implementation of improvements at the SR-99 and Panama Lane northbound on-ramp identified
in Table 5.6-19 in Chapter 1 of the Final EIR for 2012 plus project scenarios will reduce the potential
significant impacts at this freeway ramp to less than significant (see Table 2.4-1 for improvements).
The technical traffic impact analysis underlying the Final EIR and the Final EIR were reviewed by
Caltrans and KernCOG. These agencies approved of the methodologies and conclusions contained in
the traffic impact analysis and the Final EIR, and also agreed that implementation of the Metropolitan
Transportation Impact Fee Program will mitigate the identified freeway ramp to less than significant
levels.
References: Pages 5.6-51 through 5.6-55; and 5.6-68 through 5.6-77 in Chapter 1 of the Final EIR,
Response to Comment B-1, in Chapter 2 of the Final EIR, and any documents referenced in or
incorporated by reference in Section 5.6, Traffic and Transportation, in Chapter 1 of the Final EIR.
2.4.3 - Cumulative
2.4.3.1 - Potentially Significant Impact
The Final EIR identifies a potentially cumulative significant impact for 62 unsignalized intersection
scenarios involving, 18 different intersections, and 56 signalized intersection scenarios involving 26
different intersections, under the 2030 plus project condition.
For purposes of a cumulative impacts analysis, the traffic analysis assumes that all related projects for
which land use applications have been filed or that have been publicly announced, are ultimately
approved by the City or County and will be constructed and operational by 2030, the year for which
the cumulative analysis was performed. These projects are reflected in the 2030 time horizon and are
included in this study even though many ofthese projects are in the embryonic stage, and even
though it is probable that many of these projects either will not be built, will be built at lower
densities planned at this time, or will be subject to their own project conditions and mitigation
measures which will also mitigate cumulative traffic impacts.
As shown in Table 5.6-16 in Chapter 1 of the Final EIR, 62 unsignalized intersection scenarios
involving 18 different intersections, and 56 signalized intersection scenarios involving 26 different
intersections will experience significant impacts under the cumulative year 2030 conditions.
Unsignalized
· Old River Road & White Oak Drive - Eastbound (Morning peak hours LOS C degrading to
LOS F, evening peak hours LOS A degrading to LOS F) and Westbound (Morning peak hours
LOS B degrading to LOS F, evening peak hours LOS B degrading to LOS F);
Michael Brandman Associates
S:\GV\CC\02160039 ]indings_II-14-07.doc
~ 'QAK~1>
o ~
65 >- -
r:: ~
::J <::>
0R1GINAL
Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative Impacts Which
Can Be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance
Gosford Village Shopping Center
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations
· Lily Drive & White Lane- Southbound (Morning peak hours LOS C degrading to LOS F,
evening peak hours LOS E degrading to LOS F);
· Mountain Vista Drive & Harris Road - Northbound (Morning peak hours LOS A degrading to
LOS F, evening peak hours LOS A degrading to LOS F) and Southbound (Morning peak hours
LOS A degrading to LOS F, evening peak hours LOS A degrading to LOS F);
· Old River Road & Harris Road - Eastbound (Morning peak hours LOS A degrading to LOS F,
evening peak hours LOS A degrading to LOS F) and Westbound (Morning peak hours LOS A
degrading to LOS F, evening peak hours LOS A degrading to LOS F);
· Reliance Drive & Harris Road (Morning peak hours LOS A degrading to LOS D, evening peak
hours LOS A degrading to LOS F);
· Ashe Road & Harris Road (Morning peak hours LOS B degrading to LOS F, evening peak
hours LOS B degrading to LOS F);
· Buena Vista Road & Panama Lane (Morning peak hours LOS E degrading to LOS F, evening
peak hours LOS B degrading to LOS F);
· Mountain Vista Drive & Panama Lane - Northbound (Morning peak hours degrading to LOS
F, evening peak hours degrading to LOS F) and Southbound (Morning peak hours degrading to
LOS F, evening peak hours degrading to LOS F);
· Old River Road & Panama Lane - Northbound (Morning peak hours LOS B degrading to LOS
F, evening peak hours LOS B degrading to LOS F) and Southbound (Morning peak hours LOS
B degrading to LOS F, evening peak hours LOS C degrading to LOS F);
· Reliance Drive & Panama Lane - Northbound (Morning peak hours degrading to LOS F,
evening peak hours degrading to LOS F) and Southbound (Morning peak hours LOS C
degrading to LOS F, evening peak hours LOS D degrading to LOS F);
· Golden Gate Drive & Panama Lane - Northbound (Morning peak hours degrading to LOS F,
evening peak hours degrading to LOS F) and Southbound (Morning peak hours LOS B
degrading to LOS F, evening peak hours LOS B degrading to LOS F);
· Buena Vista Road & Berkshire Road - Eastbound (Morning peak hours degrading to LOS F,
evening peak hours degrading to LOS F) and Westbound (Morning peak hours degrading to
LOS F, evening peak hours degrading to LOS F);
· Old River Road& Berkshire Road - Eastbound (Morning peak hours degrading to LOS F,
evening peak hours degrading to LOS F) and Westbound (Morning peak hours degrading to
LOS F, evening peak hours degrading to LOS F);
66
Michael Brandman Associates
S:\GV\CC\02160039 _Findings _11-14-07.doc
'OAK~1>
J- lP
~
>- -
_ m
_ r-
) C)
'lRIGINAl
Gosford Village Shopping Center
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Ove"ldlng Considerations
Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative Impacts Which
Can Be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance
· Gosford Road & Berkshire Road - Eastbound (Morning peak hours degrading to LOS F,
evening peak hours degrading to LOS F) and Westbound (Morning peak hours degrading to
LOS F, evening peak hours degrading to LOS F);
· Buena Vista Road & McCutchen Road - Eastbound (Morning peak hours degrading to LOS F,
evening peak hours degrading to LOS F) and Westbound (Morning peak hours LOS A
degrading to LOS F, evening peak hours LOS A degrading to LOS F);
· Old River Road & McCutchen Road - Eastbound (Morning peak hours LOS A degrading to
LOS F, evening peak hours LOS A degrading to LOS F) and Westbound (Morning peak hours
LOS A degrading to LOS F, evening peak hours LOS A degrading to LOS F);
· Gosford Road & McCutchen Road - Eastbound (Morning peak hours LOS B degrading to LOS
F, evening peak hours LOS A degrading to LOS F) and Westbound (Morning peak hours
degrading to LOS F, evening peak hours degrading to LOS F);
· Old River Road & Campus Park Drive (Morning peak hours LOS B degrading to LOS F,
evening peak hours LOS A degrading to LOS F);
Signalized
· Coffee Road and Stockdale Highway (Morning peak hours - LOS D degrading to LOS F);
· Coffee Road and Stockdale Highway (Evening peak hours - LOS D degrading to LOS F);
· Coffee Road and Stockdale Highway (Saturday - peak hours - LOS C degrading to LOS D);
· Gosford Road and Camino Media (Morning peak hours - LOS B degrading to LOS D);
· Gosford Road and Camino Media (Evening peak hours - LOS C degrading to LOS E);
· Old River Road and Ming Avenue (Morning peak hours - LOS C degrading to LOS F);
· Old River Road and Ming Avenue (Evening peak hours - LOS C degrading to LOS D);
· Old River Road and Ming Avenue (Saturday - peak hours - LOS B degrading to LOS F);
· Gosford Road and Ming Avenue (Evening peak hours - LOS C degrading to LOS F);
· Gosford Road and Ming Avenue (Morning peaks hours - LOS C degrading to LOS F);
· Ashe Road and Ming Avenue (Morning peak hours - LOS C degrading to LOS D);
· Ashe Road and Ming Avenue (Evening peak hours - LOS C degrading to LOS F);
· Old River Road and Ridge Oak Drive (Morning peak hours - LOS B degrading to LOS F);
· Gosford Road and North Laurelglen Boulevard (Morning peak hours - LOS A degrading to
LOS D);
Michael Brandman Associates
S:\GV\CC\02 I 60039 ]indings_II-14-07.doc
~ 'QAK~-9
o ~
67 >- iii
t::: t-
O ORIGINAt>
Adverse Project-Speclfic and Cumulative Impacts Which
Can Be MItigated to a Level of Insignificance
Gosford Village Shopping Center
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations
· Gosford Road and South Laurelglen Boulevard (Morning peak hours - LOS C degrading to
LOS F);
· Buena Vista Road and White Lane (Morning peak hours - LOS C degrading to LOS F);
· Buena Vista Road and White Lane (Evening peak hours - PM C degrading to LOS F);
· Buena Vista Road and White Lane (Saturday peak hours - LOS C degrading to LOS E);
· Gosford Road and White Lane (Morning peak hours - LOS B degrading to LOS D);
· Gosford Road and White Lane (Evening peak hours - LOS C degrading to LOS E);
· Gosford Road and White Lane (Saturday peak hours - degrading from LOS C and LOS D);
· Old River Road and White Lane (Morning peak hours - LOS C degrading to LOS D);
· Old River Road and White Lane (Evening peak hours - LOS B degrading to LOS D);
· Old River Road and White Lane (Saturday peak hours - LOS B degrading to LOS D);
· Ashe Road and White Lane (Morning peak hours - LOS D degrading to LOS F);
· Ashe Road and White Lane (Evening peak hours - LOS D degrading to LOS F);
· Ashe Road and White Lane (Saturday peak hours - LOS C degrading to LOS D);
· Gosford Road and Gosford Village Entrance I (Evening peak hours - degrading to LOS D);
· Gosford Road and Gosford Village Entrance 1 (Saturday peak hours- degrading to LOS E);
· Gosford Road and Gosford Village Entrance 2 (Evening peak hours - degrading to LOS D);
· Gosford Road and Gosford Village Entrance 2 (Saturday peak hours - degrading to LOS D);
· Gosford Road and Gosford Village Entrance 3 (Saturday peak hours - degrading to LOS F);
· Stine Road and White Lane (Evening peak hours - LOS C degrading to LOS E);
· Wible Road and White Lane (Saturday peak hours - LOS C degrading to LOS D);
. Wible Road and White Lane (Morning peak hours - LOS C degrading to LOS D);
. Wible Road and White Lane (Evening peak hours - LOS C degrading to LOS E);
· Gosford Road and District Boulevard (Evening peak hours - LOS C degrading to LOS D);
. Gosford Road and Harris Road (Morning peak hours - LOS C degrading to LOS E);
. Gosford Road and Harris Road (Evening peak hours - LOS B degrading to LOS F);
. Gosford Road and Harris Road (Saturday peak hours - LOS C degrading to LOS E);
· Gosford Road and Panama Lane (Morning peak hours - LOS B degrading to LOS F);
68
Michael Brandman Associates
S:IGVICCI02160039 ]indings_11-14-07.doc
<< ~M~1>
o ~
>- -
l- IT
_ r-
(.J C)
ORIGINA!
Gosford Village Shopping Center
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations
Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative Impacts Which
Can Be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance
· Gosford Road and Panama Lane (Evening peak hours - LOS E degrading to LOS F);
· Gosford Road and Panama Lane (Saturday peak hours - LOS C degrading to LOS F);
· Ashe Road and Panama Lane (Morning peak hours - LOS B degrading to LOS F);
· Ashe Road and Panama Lane (Saturday peak hours - LOS B degrading to LOS F)
· Ashe Road and Panama Lane (Evening peak hours - LOS C degrading to LOS F);
· Stine Road and Harris Road (Evening peak hours - LOS C degrading to LOS D);
· Stine Road and Panama Lane (Evening peak hours - LOS C degrading to LOS D);
· Akers Road and Panama Lane (Morning peak hours - LOS B degrading to LOS D);
· Akers Road and Panama Lane (Evening peak hours - LOS B degrading to LOS D);
· Akers Road and White Lane (Evening peak hours - LOS B degrading to LOS E);
· Wible Road and Panama Lane (Morning peak hours - LOS C degrading to LOS F);
· Wible Road and Panama Lane (Saturday peak hours- LOS C degrading to LOS F);
· Albertson's Entrance and Panama Lane (Morning peak hours - LOS B degrading to LOS E);
· Albertson's Entrance and Panama Lane (Evening peak hours - LOS B degrading to LOS F);
· Albertson's Entrance and Panama Lane (Saturday peak hours - LOS A degrading to LOS E).
Finding
Pursuant to cEQA Guidelines Section 15091 (a)(l), changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect
as identified in the Final EIR with the exception ofthe following intersections: (1) Buena Vista Road
and Panama Lane (evening peak hours), (2) Coffee Road and Stockdale Highway (morning and
evening peak hours), (3) Old River Road and Ming Avenue (morning, evening, and Saturday peak
hours), (4) Gosford Road and Ming Avenue (morning and evening peak hours), (5) Old River Road
and White Lane (morning peak hours), (6) Gosford Road and White Lane (morning, evening, and
Saturday peak hours), (7) Stine Road and White Lane (evening peak hours), (8) Wible Road and
White Lane (evening and Saturday peak hours), (9) Wible Road and Panama Lane (morning and
Saturday peak hours), (10) Ashe Road and Panama Lane (evening peak hours) (11) Gosford Road and
District Boulevard (Saturday peak hours).
Michael Brandman Associates
S:IGV\CCI02160039 ]indings_11-14-07.doc
~M~/.)
<< '15)
69 0 -t\
>- -
l- n,
_ t"-
O C:;
ORIGINAl
Adverse Project-Speclfic and Cumulative Impacts Which
Can Be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance
Gosford Village Shopping Center
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations
Facts in Support of Finding
With the exception of the following intersections (1) Buena Vista Road and Panama Lane (evening
peak hours), (2) Coffee Road and Stockdale Highway (morning and evening peak hours), (3) Old
River Road and Ming Avenue (morning, evening, and Saturday peak hours), (4) Gosford Road and
Ming Avenue (morning and evening peak hours), (5) Old River Road and White Lane (morning peak
hours), (6) Gosford Road and White Lane (morning, evening, and Saturday peak hours), (7) Stine
Road and White Lane (evening peak hours), (8) Wible Road and White Lane (evening and Saturday
peak hours), (9) Wible Road and Panama Lane (morning and Saturday peak hours), (10) Ashe Road
and Panama Lane (evening peak hours) (11) Gosford Road and District Boulevard (Saturday peak
hours), potentially significant cumulative environmental effect has been eliminated or substantially
lessened to a level that is less than significant by virtue of the following mitigation measure as
identified in the Final EIR and incorporated into the project.
Implementation of Mitigation Measures 5.6.A.1 and 5.6.A.2 identified above for the project-specific
impact, is required.
The implementation of the improvements at the 26 signalized and 18 unsignalized intersections
identified in Table 5.6-16 in Chapter 1 of the Final EIR for 2030 plus project scenarios will reduce the
potential significant impacts at the intersections that are listed above with the exception of (1) Buena
Vista Road and Panama Lane (evening peak hours), (2) Coffee Road and Stockdale Highway
(morning and evening peak hours), (3) Old River Road and Ming Avenue (morning, evening, and
Saturday peak hours), (4) Gosford Road and Ming Avenue (morning and evening peak hours),
(5) Old River Road and White Lane (morning peak hours), (6) Gosford Road and White Lane
(morning, evening, and Saturday peak hours), (7) Stine Road and White Lane (evening peak hours),
(8) Wible Road and White Lane (evening and Saturday peak hours), (9) Wible Road and Panama
Lane (morning and Saturday peak hours), (10) Ashe Road and Panama Lane (evening peak hours)
(11) Gosford Road and District Boulevard (Saturday peak hours), to less than significant (see Table
2.4-1). The intersection improvements include installation of signals and through/turning lanes. The
technical traffic impact analysis underlying the Final EIR and the Final EIR were reviewed by
caltrans and KerncOG. These agencies approved of the methodologies and conclusions contained in
70
Michael Brandman Associates
S:IGV\CCI02160039 _Findings_11-14-07.doc
<< ~Mt:1) ,
o %
>- -
\::;: g:
o C)
ORIGINAl
Gosford Village Shopping Center
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations
Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative Impacts Which
Can Be MItigated to a Level of Insignlticance
incorporated by reference in Section 5.6, Traffic and Transportation, in Chapter 1 of the Final EIR,
and Chapter 3 of the Final EIR.
2.4.3.2 - Potentially Significant Impact
The Final EIR identifies a potentially cumulative significant impactfor 31 roadway segments under
the 2030 plus project conditions.
As shown in Table 5.6-17 in Chapter 1 of the Final EIR, there are 31 roadway segments that will be
significantly impacted under cumulative conditions that could be improved to less than significant.
· Buena Vista Road - Pacheco Road to Panama Lane (LOS A degrading to LOS F);
· Buena Vista Road - Panama Lane to McCutchen Road (LOS degrading to LOS F);
· Old River Road - Harris Road to Panama Lane (LOS degrading to LOS F);
· Gosford Road - Stockdale Highway to Ming Avenue (LOS A degrading to LOS F);
· Gosford Road - Ming Avenue to North Laurelglen Boulevard (LOS A degrading to LOS D);
· Gosford Road - White Lane to Pacheco Road (LOS A degrading to LOS F);
· Gosford Road - Pacheco Road to Panama Lane (LOS A degrading to LOS F);
· Gosford Road - Panama Lane to Berkshire Road (LOS A degrading to LOS F);
· Gosford Road - Berkshire Road to McCutchen Road (LOS A degrading to LOS F);
· Ashe Road - District Boulevard to Harris Road (LOS A degrading to LOS D);
· Ashe Road - Harris Road to Taft Highway (SR 119) (LOS A degrading to LOS F);
· Stine Road - Panama Lane to Hosking Avenue (LOS A degrading to LOS F)
· Akers Road - Panama Lane to Hosking Avenue (LOS A degrading to LOS E)
· Wible Road - White Lane to Pacheco Road (LOS A degrading to LOS D)
· Wible Road - Panama Lane to Hosking Avenue (LOS B degrading to LOS F);
· Ming Avenue - Old River Road to Gosford Road (LOS A degrading to LOS E);
· Ming Avenue - Gosford Road to E. Portal Drive (LOS A degrading to LOS D);
· White Lane - Stine Road to Wible Road (LOS B degrading to LOS D);
· White Lane - Gosford Road to Ashe Road (LOS A degrading to LOS F);
· White Lane - Ashe Road to Stine Road (LOS A degrading to LOS D);
Michael Brandman Associates
S:IGV\CCI02160039 ]indings_11-14-07.doc
~Mt:'1>
71 ~ ~
>- -
\::;: l!2
(.) C)
ORIGINAL
Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative Impacts Which
Can Be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance
Gosford Village Shopping Center
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations
· Harris Road - Gosford Road to Ashe Road (LOS A degrading to LOS D);
· Panama Lane - Allen Road to Buena Vista Road (LOS A degrading to LOS F);
· Panama Lane - Buena Vista Road to Gosford Road (LOS A degrading to LOS F);
· Panama Lane - Gosford Road to Ashe Road (LOS A degrading to LOS F);
· Panama Lane - Ashe Road to Stine Road (LOS A degrading to LOS E);
· Panama Lane - Stine Road to Akers Road (LOS A degrading to LOS F);
· Panama Lane - Akers Road to Wible Road (LOS C degrading to LOS F);
· Panama Lane - Wible Road to SR 99 (LOS A degrading to LOS E);
· SR 99 - Ming Avenue to White Lane (LOS B degrading to LOS F);
· SR 99 - Panama Lane to Taft Highway (LOS A degrading to LOS F); and
· McCutchen Road - Old River Road to Gosford Road (LOS A degrading to LOS F).
Finding
Pursuant to cEQA Guidelines Section 15091 (a)(I), changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect
as identified in the Final EIR with the exception ofthe following 12 roadway segments: (1) Gosford
Road - Stockdale Highway to Ming Avenue, (2) Gosford Road - Ming Avenue to N. Laurelglen, (3)
Gosford Road - White Lane to Pacheco Road, (4) Gosford Road - Pacheco Road to Panama Lane, (5)
Ming Avenue - Old River Road to Gosford Road, (6) Ming Avenue - Gosford Road to EI Portal
Drive, (7) White Lane - Gosford Road to Ashe Road, (8) White Lane - Ashe Road to Stine Road, (9)
White Lane - Stine Road to Wible Road, (10) Panama Lane - Wible Road to SR 99, (11) SR-99 _
Ming Avenue to White Lane, and (12) SR-99 - Panama Lane to Taft Highway.
Facts in Support of Finding
With the exception of the following 12 roadway segments: (1) Gosford Road - Stockdale Highway to
Ming Avenue, (2) Gosford Road - Ming Avenue to N. Laurelglen, (3) Gosford Road - White Lane to
Pacheco Road, (4) Gosford Road - Pacheco Road to Panama Lane, (5) Ming Avenue - Old River
Road to Gosford Road, (6) Ming Avenue - Gosford Road to EI Portal Drive, (7) White Lane-
Gosford Road to Ashe Road, (8) White Lane - Ashe Road to Stine Road, (9) White Lane - Stine Road
to Wible Road (10) Panama Lane - Wible Road to SR-99, (11) SR-99 - Ming Avenue to White Lane,
and (12) SR-99 - Panama Lane to Taft Highway, the potentially significant cumulative environmental
effect has been eliminated or substantially lessened to a level that is less than significant by virtue of
the following mitigation measure as identified in the Final EIR and incorporated into the project.
72
Michael Brandman Associates
S:IGV\CCI02160039 ]indings_11-14-07.doc
~Mf-9
~ ~
>- "'"
r- Jr
S ~
ORIGINAl
Gosford Village Shopping Center
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations
Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative Impacts Which
Can Be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance
Implementation of Mitigation Measures 5.6.A.l and 5.6.A.2 identified above for the project-specific
impact, is required.
The implementation of the improvements at the 31 roadway segments identified in Table 5.6-19 in
Chapter 1 of the Final EIR for 2030 plus project scenarios will reduce the potential significant
impacts at the roadway segments that are listed above with the exception of (1) Gosford Road -
Stockdale Highway to Ming Avenue, (2) Gosford Road - Ming Avenue to N. Laurelglen, (3) Gosford
Road - White Lane to Pacheco Road, (4) Gosford Road - Pacheco Road to Panama Lane, (5) Ming
Avenue - Old River Road to Gosford Road, (6) Ming Avenue - Gosford Road to EI Portal Drive, (7)
White Lane - Gosford Road to Ashe Road, (8) White Lane - Ashe Road to Stine Road, (9) White
Lane - Stine Road to Wible Road, (10) Panama Lane - Wible Road to SR 99, (11) SR-99 - Ming
Avenue to White Lane, and (12) SR-99 - Panama Lane to Taft Highway (see Table 2.4-1 for
improvements). The technical traffic impact analysis underlying the Final EIR and the Final EIR
were reviewed by caltrans and KerncOG. These agencies approved of the methodologies and
conclusions contained in the traffic impact analysis and the EIR, and also agreed that implementation
of the City's two fee programs will mitigate the identified roadway segments to less than significant
levels.
References: Pages 5.6-64 through 5.6-67; and 5.6-68 through 5.6-77 in Chapter 1 of the Final EIR,
Response to Comment B-1, in Chapter 2 of the Final EIR, and any documents referenced in or
incorporated by reference in Section 5.6, Traffic and Transportation, in Chapter 1 ofthe Final EIR.
2.4.4 - Cumulative
2.4.4.1 - Potentially Significant Impact
The Final EIR identifies a potentially cumulative significant impact for one freeway ramp intersection
under two scenarios, under the 2030 plus project conditions.
As shown in Table 5.6-18 in Chapter 1 ofthe Final EIR, one freeway intersection during the morning
and evening peak hours operates at below LOS C or worse under the cumulative year 2030 condition:
. SR 99 at White Lane Northbound On-Ramp from the eastbound approach
(Morning peak hours - LOS C degrading to LOS D); and
. SR 99 at White Lane Northbound On-Ramp from the eastbound approach
(Evening peak hours - LOS C degrading to LOS E).
Michael Brandman Associates
S:IGV\CCI02160039 ]indings_11-14-07,doc
~Mt:'L\
~ .~
73 >- '!'.
\::;: l!2
'J f:J
nRIGINAI
Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative Impacts Which
Can Be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance
Gosford Village Shopping Center
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations
Finding
Pursuant to cEQA Guidelines Section 15091 (a)(I), changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect
as identified in the Final EIR.
Facts in Support of Finding
The potentially significant cumulative environmental effect has been eliminated or substantially
lessened to a level that is less than significant by virtue of the following mitigation measure as
identified in the Final EIR and incorporated into the project.
Implementation of Mitigation Measures 5.6.A.2 identified above for the project-specific impact, is
required.
The implementation of improvements at the SR-99 and White Lane northbound on-ramp identified in
Table 5.6-19 in Chapter 1 of the Final EIR for 2030 plus project scenarios will reduce the potential
significant impacts at this freeway ramp to less than significant (see Table 2.4-1 for improvements).
The technical traffic impact analysis underlying the Final EIR and the Final EIR were reviewed by
caltrans and KemcOG. These agencies approved of the methodologies and conclusions contained in
the traffic impact analysis and the Final EIR, and also agreed that implementation of the City's Local
Mitigation Impact Fee Program will mitigate the identified freeway ramp to less than significant
levels.
References: Pages 5.6-67 through 5.6-77 in Chapter 1 ofthe Final EIR, Response to Comment B-1, in
Chapter 2 of the Final EIR, and any documents referenced in or incorporated by reference in Section
5.6, Traffic and Transportation, in Chapter 1 of the Final EIR.
2.5 - AIR QUALITY
Impact 5.7.A
The proposed project has the potential to result In emissions of ozone precursors
(ROG or NOx), PM2.5 or PM10 (pollutants for which the San Joaquin Valley Air
Basin is in nonattalnment) over the thresholds of significance.
2.5.1 - Project-Specific
2.5.1.1 - Potentially Significant Impact
The Final EIR identifies a potentially project-specific (short-term construction plus operational)
significant impact to the public and environment in the San Joaquin Valley Air Basin.
74
Michael Brandman Associates
S:IGVICCI02160039 _Findings_11-14-07.doc
~M~--9
~ ~
>- -
r- m
__ r-
U C)
ORIGINAl
Gosford Village Shopping Center
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations
Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative Impacts Which
Can Be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance
Total estimated short-term and long-term emissions beginning with construction through buildout for
the proposed project are shown in Table 5.7-13 in Chapter 1 ofthe Final EIR, in Section 5.7, Air
Quality in Chapter 1 ofthe Final EIR. As shown in the table, during all years, the project exceeds one
or more ofthe thresholds for ROG, NOx, and/or PMI0 (see page 5.7-64 in Chapter 1 of the Final
EIR). Total estimated short-term and long-term emissions for the proposed project using mobile
emissions converted to EMFAC2007 equivalent are shown in 5.7-14 in Section 5.7, Air Quality, in
Chapter 1 ofthe Final EIR. As shown in the table, during all years, the project exceeds one or more
ofthe thresholds for ROG, NOx, and/or PMI0.
Table 5.7-13 and 5.7-14 in Chapter 1 of the Final EIR demonstrate that, without mitigation, the short-
term construction and operational impacts ofthe proposed project will exceed the SN APeD's
thresholds for ROG, NOx, and/or PMl O.
Finding
Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 (a)(I), changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect
as identified in the Final EIR.
Facts in Support of Finding
The potentially significant project-specific environmental effect has been eliminated or substantially
lessened to a level that is less than significant by virtue of the following mitigation measures as
identified in the Final EIR and incorporated into the project.
5.7.A.1
Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the following shall be incorporated into the
construction plan.
. During all phases of construction, construction equipment shall be properly and
routinely maintained, as recommended by manufacturer manuals, to control
exhaust emissions.
· During all phases of construction, all contractors shall follow all the rules in
Regulation vm.
. During all phases of construction, all contractors shall restrict equipment and
vehicle idling to five minutes or less.
. The Project proponent shall develop a ride-share incentive program for
construction workers. The program shall be submitted to the City for review and
approval.
Michael Brandman Associates
S:IGVICCI02160039 ]indings_11-14-07.doc
~Mt:'-^
<< .~
75 ~ ~
l- m
..- t-
V C)
ORIGINAl
Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative Impacts Which
Can Be MItigated to a Level of Insignificance
Gosford Village Shopping Center
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations
5.7.A.2
5.7.A.3
5.7.A.4
5.7.A.5
· On-site electrical hook ups shall be installed for electric hand tools such as saws,
drills, and compressors, to substantially decrease the need for fuel powered electric
generators and other fuel-powered equipment.
· During construction, only low volatility paints and coatings shall be used. All
paints shall be applied using either high volume low-pressure (HVLP) spray
equipment or by hand application.
Prior to issuance of a building permit, to reduce emissions from mobile sources the
project applicant shall provide payment in an amount equal to the applicable regional
transportation improvement fund traffic impact fees and the local transportation impact
fee applicable to the project to facilitate the implementation of the intersection and
roadway segment improvements that are identified as mitigation in Section 5.6 Traffic
and Transportation.
The project applicant shall integrate pedestrian infrastructure such as pedestrian pathways
that connect buildings throughout the project, including at least one connection between
the western and eastern buildings. The walkways should create a safe and inviting
walking environment for people wishing to walk from one building to another.
Walkways should be installed to direct pedestrians from the street sidewalk to the
buildings. Sidewalks shall be designed for high visibility (brightly painted, different
colors of concrete, etc.) when crossing parking lots, streets, and similar vehicle paths.
Major 1, 2, 2A, 3, 4, 5, and 6 tenants shall display up to date documentation regarding
area transit routes and bicycle routes in a visible and convenient location for employees
and customers.
Major 1,2, 2A, 3, 4, 5, and 6 tenants shall coordinate together to appoint an Employee
Transportation Coordinator to work with the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control
District and the two stores to develop and implement an appropriate commuting program.
At a minimum, the program shall provide bus passes discounted at least 50 percent for
employees. The employees shall be provided with written documentation regarding the
commuting program. The commuting program shall be submitted to the Planning
Director and the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District. In addition, the
project shall include provisions that require individual parcels to install preferential
parking for vanpooling and carpooling for site employees. This measure will be verified
by the Planning Department during the building and plan check process.
76
Michael Brandman Associates
S:IGVICCI02160039 _Findings_11-14-07.doc
~Mt:'1>
~ ~
>- -
r- m
_ r-
rJ C)
ORIGINAL
Gosford Village Shopping Center
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations
Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative Impacts Which
Can Be MItigated to a Level of Insignificance
5.7.A.6
To encourage employees to bike and/or walk to work, all establishments shall provide at
a minimum three employee storage lockers for every 25 employees. This measure shall
be approved to the satisfaction ofthe Planning Director.
5.7.A.7
The project applicant shall incorporate the following into the building plans of all
buildings to reduce electricity usage associated with lighting and to reduce energy
demands.
. The main store area lighting shall use high output linear florescent lamps. These
lamps use half the energy ofT8lamps, which are commonly used.
. In the produce section (if applicable), focused lighting shall be placed 12.5 feet
above the items.
. Dimming controls and daylight harvesting shall be utilized. Light sensors shall be
placed around the stores and either dim or turn off the artificial lights in areas
where sufficient daylight is available.
. Artificial lighting levels shall be reduced by at least 20 percent during the night in
entry vestibules and in portions ofthe main sales floor to help customers' eyes
adjust to the change of light when going in and out of the store.
. Use light emitting diode (LED) lighting in grocery cases, jewelry cases, and the
monument signs (if applicable).
. Install energy-efficient and automated heating and air conditioning units.
. Install energy efficient interior lighting when possible.
. Prior to issuance of certificates of occupancy for all buildings, the applicant for
each retail building proposed on an individual parcel shall demonstrate an ability to
achieve an energy efficient rating that achieves twelve (12 %) beyond Title 24
requirements that are in effect. A wide variety of means exist to achieve this
energy efficiency standard, including the use of, or a combination of the use of,
building insulation material having a greater "R-value," the use of photo voltaic
(e.g., solar) energy systems, and efficient lighting technologies and programs.
. Prior to issuance of certificates of occupancy for all buildings, the applicant for
each building proposed on an individual parcel shall submit site plans illustrating
the use of light-colored roofmg materials, as opposed to dark roofing materials,
when possible.
Michael Brandman Associates
S:IGV\CCI02160039 ]indings_11-14-07.doc
<< ~I\Kt1f;
o ~.
77 >- iT
\::;: r
U b
ORIGINAl
Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative Impacts Which
Can Be MItigated to a Level of Insignificance
Gosford Village Shopping Center
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations
5.7.A.8
5.7.A.9
The landscaping shall be maintained by contractors who operate with equipment that
complies with the most recent CARB standards, or standards adopted no more than three
years prior to date of use.
The Project applicant shall enter into a voluntary emission reduction program (Air
Quality Mitigation Agreement) with the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control
District (SN APeD) to offset the project's air emissions during construction and
operation of ROG, NOx, and PMI0 to net zero. This Mitigation Agreement requires the
SN APeD and the applicant to identify off-site emission reduction mitigation programs
to reduce the project's net impact on air quality. The SN APeD shall commit in writing
to reduce the net emissions and to manage and monitor the emission reduction projects
over time. Proof of the Air Quality Mitigation Agreement must be provided to the
satisfaction ofthe Planning Director prior to recordation of the final map. Proof of
compliance shall include quantification of emission reduction. The Project applicant is
responsible for all costs to determine the emission reductions associated with the projects.
The following design features for the project shall be implemented:
· Prior to issuance of a grading permit for those areas ofthe Project site that remain
to be graded, the Developer shall prepare and submit a dust control plan for the
Project. The plan shall be prepared consistent with SN APeD Regulation vrn and
must be reviewed and approved by the SN APeD prior to the commencement of
grading activities. Each contractor working on the Project site shall implement the
dust control measures outlined in the approved dust control plan. The dust control
measures selected shall be incorporated as a note on each grading plan.
· The SN APeD maintains New Source Review requirements that direct
owners/operators of certain types of stationary equipment to obtain an Authority to
Construct and Permits to Operate from the SN APeD. As part of this process, the
need for emission control equipment is assessed and the SN APeD determines
whether a Health Risk Assessment must be prepared. Owners/operators of all
stationary sources for which such approvals are required should show proof of
compliance with SN APeD Rules and Regulations prior to issuance of certificates
of occupancy.
· The Project shall utilize appropriate landscaping to create shade canopies in
parking and common areas of the Project in accordance with City of Bakersfield
requirements.
78
Michael Brandman Associates
S:IGVICCI02160039 _Findings_11-14-07,doc
<< ~p..Kt:'1>
o <.P
-1'1
>- -
l- m
_ r-
J f:J
ORIGINAl
Gosford Village Shopping Center
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations
Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative Impacts Which
Can Be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance
· The Developer of the Project shall accommodate regional and/or local transit stops
within public road rights of way so as to facilitate public transportation to and from
the Project in accordance with City of Bakersfield requirements.
· The Project shall incorporate the installation of bike racks in order to encourage
bicycle transportation to and from the Project.
· The Project shall include sidewalk access to the Project site so as to encourage and
facilitate pedestrian access to the Project.
The Air Quality Mitigation Agreement was selected as the primary project design strategy/mitigation
for this project because it was recommended by the SN APeD and is the most innovative mitigation
tool utilized by the SN APeD. The Mitigation Agreement achieves full mitigation of the project's
impacts to non-attainment criteria pollutants. It should be noted that the applicant voluntarily agreed
to enter into the Mitigation Agreement. Thus the Mitigation Agreement could very well be
characterized as a design feature of the project. Ultimately, however, whether characterized as a
design feature or a mitigation measure, the Mitigation Agreement fully mitigates the project's impacts
with respect to criteria pollutants for which the SN AB is in non-attainment.
With implementation of the Air Quality Mitigation Agreement (5.7.A.9), the project fully mitigates
ROG, NOx, and particulate matter, as shown in Table 5.7-22, (see page 5.7-74 in Chapter I of the
Final EIR) Table 5.7-23(see page 5.7-75 in Chapter I of the Final EIR)
The Air Quality Mitigation Agreement obligates the project applicant and the SN APeD to fully
mitigate the net air quality nonattainment criteria pollutant impacts ofthe project as quantified in the
air quality assessment prepared for the proj ect. Full mitigation is accomplished through the removal
or retrofitting of stationary and/or mobile source equipment such that the project emissions will result
in no net increase in nonattainment air quality impacts over those nonattainment air quality impacts,
which would otherwise exist without the development of the project.
As set forth on pages 5.7-2 through 5.7-4 of the Final EIR, the air quality assessment undertaken to
analyze the project's direct and indirect effects on air quality was the product of extensive
collaboration with the SN APeD. The SN APeD was heavily involved the in the preparation of the
technical studies and analyses of the project's air quality impacts. The SN APeD approved all of the
protocols and technical studies underlying the Final EIR. In its comment letter on the Final EIR, the
SN APeD stated as follows:
Michael Brandman Associates
S:IGV\CCI02160039 ]indings_11-14-07.doc
~P.Kt:'1>
~ lP
~
79 = m
_ r-
) ()
'lRIGINAI
Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative Impacts Which
Can Be MItigated to a Level of Insignificance
Gosford Village Shopping Center
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations
· The methodology used in preparation of the Air Quality Assessment and Air Quality Analysis
in the DEIR is correct;
· The types and quantities of net air quality impacts associated with the project is correctly stated
in the Air Quality Assessment and DEIR;
· The Developer has voluntarily entered into a contractual agreement (Development Mitigation
Contract), with the District to fully mitigate the project's potential impact in air quality;
· The mitigation measures identified in the Air Quality Assessment and DEIR are appropriate
and adequate to mitigate the air quality impacts associated with the project; and
· The Developer has identified emission reduction opportunities and provided funding to the
District such that the air quality impacts associated with the project will be fully mitigated, as
contemplated in the above-referenced Development Mitigation Contract.
Therefore, changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid
or substantially lessen the significant environmental effects of the project, and the project's
contribution to direct and cumulative impacts is less than significant with mitigation.
In 2006 the SJV APeD and the project developer executed the Air Quality Mitigation Agreement for
the project, which is contained in Appendix G-4 of the technical appendices of the EIR. The
SJV APeD approved the execution of this Air Quality Mitigation Agreement at a public board
meeting in the fall, 2006. Pursuant to the Air Quality Mitigation Agreement, the project developer
has already provided funding to the SJV APeD to fund measures and programs to mitigate all project
non-attainment criteria emissions to net zero. The Air Quality Mitigation Agreement is a binding
contract and pursuant to Mitigation Measure 5.7.A.9, proof ofthe Mitigation Agreement must be
provided to the City prior to the recordation of the final map. As stated above, the project developer
and the SJV APeD have already executed the Mitigation Agreement, and the project developer has
already provided funding to the SJV APeD to commence implementation of the emissions reductions
programs.
The SJV APeD has a successful track record implementing such Air Quality Mitigation Agreements.
The SJV APeD has successfully implemented Air Quality Mitigation Agreements with Tejon
Industrial Corporation, and Castle & Cooke Commercial. In addition, in Center for Biological
Diversity v. County of Kern (Case No. F050685), the Fifth District Court of Appeal upheld and
affirmed Kern County Superior Court determination that SJV APeD Air Quality Mitigation
Agreements are effective design features and/or mitigation measures that eliminate a project's criteria
80
Michael Brandman Associates
S:IGVICCI02160039 _Findings_11-14-07.doc
~Mt:'1>
~ ~
>- m
r- r-
-:") C)
ORIGINAL
Gosford Village Shopping Center
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations
Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative Impacts Which
Can Be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance
air emissions to net zero. Accordingly, implementation of the Air Quality Mitigation Agreement is
expected to achieve full mitigation of the projects criteria pollutant air impacts. (see pages 5.7-73
through 5.7-77 and Appendix G-5 in Chapter 1 of the Final EIR).
Reference: Pages 5.7-58 through 5.7-64; 5.7-67 through 5.7-71; 5.7-73 through 5.7-77 in Chapter 1 of
the Final EIR, Response to Comments E-l, X-8, and X-IO, and any documents referenced in or
incorporated by reference in Section 5.7, Air Quality, in Chapter 1 ofthe Final EIR.
2.5.2 - Cumulative
2.5.2.1 - Potentially Significant Impact
The Final EIR identifies a potentially cumulative (short-term construction plus operational)
significant impact to the public and environment in the San Joaquin Valley Air Basin.
The combination of unmitigated project related pollutants with pollutants from other sources within
the basin would cumulatively contribute to a significant impact. Cumulative unmitigated construction
emissions are displayed in Table 5.7-15 in Chapter 1 ofthe Final EIR. The average construction
emissions for the project and Panama Lane Shopping Center are presented. The cumulative
construction emissions for the list of project was estimated for 2009. Cumulative unmitigated
operational emissions are displayed in Table 5.7-16 in Chapter 1 of the Final EIR. These emissions
may be overstated due to the fact that the list includes many discretionary projects that are subject to
mitigation measures which have yet to be determined. Without design features or mitigation
measures, these emissions are cumulatively considerable due to indirect source emissions and are
therefore considered, according to GAMAQI, to be significant.
Finding
Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 (a)(1), changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect
as identified in the Final EIR.
Facts in Support of Finding
The potentially significant cumulative environmental effect has been eliminated or substantially
lessened to a level that is less than significant by virtue of the following mitigation measure as
identified in the Final EIR and incorporated into the project.
Michael Brandman Associates
S:IGV\CCI02160039 ]indings_11-14-07.doc
~ M $,y
~ ~
81 >- iii
t::;. r-
V (:)
ORIGINAl
Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative Impacts Which
Can Be MItigated to a Level of Insignificance
Gosford Village Shopping Center
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations
Implementation of Mitigation Measure 5.7.A.l through 5.7.A.9 identified above for the project-
specific impact, are required.
Cumulative construction emissions after the implementation of the above mitigation measures are
displayed Table 5.7-24 in (see page 5.7-6 in Chapter 1 of the Final EIR) and cumulative operational
emissions are displayed in Table 5.7-25 in Chapter 1 of the Final EIR (see pages 5.7-77 in Chapter 1
of the Final EIR). As shown in the tables, the above mitigation measures fully reduces project
emissions of ozone precursors and particulate matter to no net increase.
The Air Quality Mitigation Agreement was recommended to be utilized as a design feature/mitigation
measure by the SN APeD in its comments on the NOP for the project. The Air Quality Mitigation
Agreement was selected as the primary project design/mitigation measure for the project because it is
the most innovative mitigation tool utilized by the SN APeD. While similar to the SN APeD's new
Indirect Source Rule (Rule 9510) (ISR), the Air Quality Mitigation Agreement achieves full
mitigation of the project's impacts to non-attainment criteria pollutants. Accordingly, implementation
of the Air Quality Mitigation Agreement eliminates cumulative emissions to the extent the project
achieves net zero emissions from mitigation offsets.
Reference: Pages 5.7-71 through 5.7-76 in Chapter 1 of the Final EIR, Response to Comments E-1,
X-8, and X-I0, and any documents referenced in or incorporated by reference in Section 5.7, Air
Quality, in Chapter 1 of the Final EIR.
Impact 5.7.C
The proposed project may violate an air quality standard or contribute substantially
to an existing or projected air quality violation and therefore will expose sensitive
receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations.
2.5.3 - Cumulative
2.5.3.1 - Potentially Significant Impact
The Final EIR identifies a potentially cumulative significant impact to sensitive receptors.
Potential cumulative impacts from the project, Panama Lane Shopping Center, and 275 other
stationary source projects within a six mile radius of the project were predicted using the U.S. EPA
AERMOD atmospheric dispersion model.
82
Michael Brandman Associates
S:IGV\CCI02160039 ]indings_11-14-07.doc
~M<:1>
~ <[;-
>- iT,
\::;: r-
U C)
ORIGINAl
Gosford Village Shopping Center
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations
Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative Impacts Which
Can Be MItigated to a Level of Insignificance
The modeling shows that the particulate matter background concentrations already exceed the State
standards without any new projects. On this basis, the project's incremental contribution of
particulate matter would be considered significant within the six-mile radii.
Finding
Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 (a)(I), changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect
as identified in the Final EIR.
Facts in Support of Finding
The potentially significant cumulative environmental effect has been eliminated or substantially
lessened to a level that is less than significant by virtue of the following mitigation measure as
identified in the Final EIR and incorporated into the project.
Mitigation Measures 5.7.A.1 through 5.7.A.9 are required. In addition, the following mitigation
measures are required.
5.7.C.1
5.7.C.2
5.7.C.3
5.7.C.4
The California Air Resources Board, in Title 13, Chapter 10, Section 2485, Division 3 of
the California Code of Regulations, imposes a requirement that heavy-duty trucks
transporting materials to the project tenants shall not idle for greater than five minutes.
Accordingly, all diesel delivery trucks servicing the project shall not idle more than five
minutes per truck trip per day. Wal-Mart's truck fleet has automatic shut-off systems that
automatically turn the vehicles off when the vehicle has been idling for more than three
minutes. Signs that state, "no idling" shall be posted at all the loading docks in a visible
location. The store managers and/or personnel shall communicate this restriction to the
truck drivers as needed.
In the delivery loading areas, electrical hookups shall be provided to allow for
supplementing power for future tenants that may require transportation refrigeration units
to deliver supplies.
The maintenance and testing of each standby emergency generator shall not exceed more
than one hour on any given day or more than 50 hours per year. Logs shall be maintained
and retained subject to review by the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District.
Any dry cleaning equipment installed as part of the project must be "Perc-free."
Alternatives to Perc include water-based cleaning and carbon dioxide (C02) cleaning.
Michael Brandman Associates
S:IGV\CCI02160039 _Findings_11-14-07.doc
~Mf.)'
~ ~
83 >- rn
r- r-
S D
ORIGINAL
Adverse Project-Speciflc and Cumulative Impacts Which
Can Be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance
Gosford Village Shopping Center
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations
Wet cleaning systems use computer-controlled washers and dryers and non-toxic, bio-
degradable detergents which are approved for sewer disposal. Cleaning with C02 is a
process that operates within a pressurized machine. The C02 used in this process is an
industrial by-product from existing operations, primarily anhydrous ammonia (fertilizer)
production. There is no net increase in C02 emitted; therefore, this process does not
contribute to other impacts such as greenhouse gas emissions.
The discussion set forth in connection with Mitigation Measure 5.7.A.9 in the Final EIR is
incorporated here by reference. The Air Quality Mitigation Agreement is the primary project design
strategy/mitigation for the project to reduce the project's non-attainment criteria pollutant emissions
to net zero. Therefore, with mitigation the project would not contribute to cumulative particulate
matter concentrations in the six mile radius cumulative study area.
In 2006 the SN APeD and the project developer executed the Air Quality Mitigation Agreement for
the project, which is contained in Appendix G-4 of the technical appendices in Chapter 1 ofthe Final
EIR. The SN APeD approved the execution of this Air Quality Mitigation Agreement at a public
board meeting in the fall, 2006. Pursuant to the Air Quality Mitigation Agreement, the project
developer has already provided fimding to the SN APeD to fund measures and programs to mitigate
all project non-attainment criteria emissions to net zero. The Air Quality Mitigation Agreement is a
binding contract and pursuant to Mitigation Measure 5.7 A.9, proof of the Mitigation Agreement must
be provided to the City prior to the recordation of the final map. As stated above, the project
developer and the SN APeD have already executed the Mitigation Agreement, and the proj ect
developer has already provided fimding to the SN APeD to commence implementation of the
emissions reductions programs.
The SN APeD has a successful track record implementing such Air Quality Mitigation Agreements.
The SN APeD has successfully implemented Air Quality Mitigation Agreements with Tejon
Industrial Corporation, and Castle & Cooke Commercial. In addition, in Center for Biological
Diversity v. County of Kern (Case No. F050685), the Fifth District Court of Appeal upheld and
affirmed Kern County Superior Court determination that SN APeD Air Quality Mitigation
Agreements are effective design features and/or mitigation measures that eliminate a project's criteria
air emissions to net zero. Accordingly, implementation of the Air Quality Mitigation Agreement is
expected to achieve full mitigation ofthe project's criteria pollutant air impacts. (See pages 5.7-73
through 5.7-77 and Appendix G-5 in Chapter 1 of the Final EIR).
84
Michael Brandman Associates
S:IGV\CCI02160039 ]indings_11-14-07.doc
~Mt:'1>
~ ~
>- m
l- r-
-0 C)
0RIGINAL
Gosford Village Shopping Center
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations
Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative Impacts Which
Can Be MItigated to a Level of Insignificance
Reference: Pages 5.7-73 through 5.7-77 and pages 5.7-93 through 5.7-95 in Chapter 1 of the Final
EIR; Response to Comments E-l, X-8, and X-lO any and all documents referenced in or incorporated
by reference in Section 5.7, Air Quality, in Chapter 1 of the Final EIR.
Impact 5.7.H
The proposed project may contribute to global climate change.
2.5.4 - Cumulative
2.5.4.1 - Potentially Significant Impact
The Final EIR identifies a potentially cumulative significant impact to global climate change.
The project participates in a potential impact to global climate change by its incremental contribution
combined with the cumulative increase of all other sources of greenhouse gases, which when taken
together form global climate change impacts.
The following discussion reviews the project's potential generation of greenhouse gases and its
incremental contribution to the cumulative effect of the greenhouse gases. A two-tiered approach is
used, as follows: 1) project inventory of greenhouse gas emissions; and 2) project compliance with
the emission reduction strategies contained in the California Climate Action Team's Report to the
Governor.
Greenhouse Gas Inventory. The emissions are estimated in tons per year, which are converted to
teragrams of carbon dioxide equivalents (Tg CO2 Eq.) using the formula: Tg CO2 Eq. = (tons of gas)
x (GWP) x (0.902 metric tons of gas) x (1,000,000). One Tg is equal to one million metric tons. The
global warming potential (GWP) for the gases assessed are located in Table 5.7-4 in Chapter 1 of the
Final EIR.
Note that emissions models such as EMF AC and URBEMIS evaluate aggregate emissions and do not
demonstrate, with respect to a global impact, how much of these emissions are "new" emissions
specifically attributable to the proposed project in question. For most projects, the main contribution
of greenhouse gas emissions is from motor vehicles, but how much of those emissions are "new" is
uncertain. New projects do not create new drivers. Some mixed use and transportation-oriented
projects can actually reduce the number of vehicle miles traveled that a person drives; this reduction
is not typically discussed in CEQA documents. Therefore, it is anticipated that the project will not
substantially add to the global inventory of greenhouse gas emissions. This is especially true
considering that the project is adding retail uses next to residential uses. Nevertheless, greenhouse
Michael Brandman Associates
S:IGV\CCI02160039 ]indings_11-14-07.doc
<< ~AK~1>
o ~
>- -
l- m
_ t-
O C)
ORIGINAl
85
Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative Impacts Which
Can Be MItigated to a Level of Insignificance
Gosford Vl/lage Shopping Center
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations
gas emissions are estimated using procedures similar to those for criteria pollutants. Thus, the
greenhouse gas emissions attributable to the project are likely significantly overstated.
The primary greenhouse gas generated by the project would be carbon dioxide. At buildout, total
unmitigated carbon dioxide equivalents would be 0.05 Tg C02 Eq., which is 0.01 percent of
California's 2004 emissions ((0.05 Tg C02 Eq. divided by 492 Tg C02 Eq. = 0.0001 * 100 = 0.01
percent). The City of Bakersfield and the San Joaquin Valley Air Basin currently do not have
greenhouse gas inventories. Other related projects include the Panama Lane Shopping Center, which
estimated approximately 0.03 Tg C02 Eq. at buildout. Therefore, those inventories combined equal
0.08 Tg C02 Eq, which is 0.02 percent of California's GHG emissions in 2004. The project
inventory is 0.0007 percent of 2005 U.S. emissions (7260.4 Tg C02 Eq.) and 0.0003 percent of
reported 2004 global emissions (20,135 Tg C02 Eq.).
Finding
Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 (a)(I), changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect
as identified in the Final EIR.
Facts in Support of Finding
The potentially significant cumulative environmental effect has been eliminated or substantially
lessened to a level that is less than significant by virtue of the fact that the project is compliant with
the applicable 2006 CAT Greenhouse Gas Emission Reduction Strategies. In addition, the following
mitigation measures have also been added and incorporated into the project.
Mitigation measures 5.7.A.l through 5.7.A.9 and 5.7.C.1 through 5.7.C.3 are required. In addition,
following mitigation measures are required.
5.7.H.1
All tenants shall join the California Climate Action Registry (www.climateregistry.org)
to report a minimum of one year of greenhouse gas emissions. This measure shall be
fulfilled prior to one year after proj ect approval.
5.7.H.2
The applicant shall become a "Forest Founder" of the Tree Foundation of Kern and/or the
Kern River Parkway Foundation. The applicant shall purchase 1,000 trees at $50 per tree
to be planted within Kern County over the next 10 years. The Tree Foundation of Kern
and/or the Kern County River Foundation shall provide appropriate documentation
regarding the plan for tree planting and the phasing of the tree planting.
86
Michael Brandman Associates
S:IGV\CCI02160039 ]indings_11-14-07.doc
~M~1>
~ ~
>- -
l- m
_ T-
O C)
ORIGINAL
Gosford Village Shopping Center
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations
Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative Impacts Which
Can Be MItigated to a Level of Insignificance
5.7.H.3
To increase water use efficiency and decrease waste, the following shall be installed:
· Automatic shut off valves shall be installed in all project restrooms;
· "Save Water" type signs shall be placed near water faucets; and
· During operation, Lowe's, Wal-Mart, and Office Depot shall have recycling
programs to ensure that items that are recyclable (i.e., cardboard boxes and paper)
are recycled using appropriate City guidelines and recycling procedures.
California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger announced on June 1,2005 through Executive
Order S-3-05, GHG emission reduction targets as follows: by 2010, reduce GHG emissions to 2000
levels; by 2020, reduce GHG emissions to 1990 levels; by 2050, reduce GHG emissions to 80 percent
below 1990 levels. Some literature equates these reductions to 11 percent of the current GHG
emissions by 2010 and 25 percent of the current GHG emissions by 2020.
AB-32 requires that by January 1, 2008, CARB shall determine what the statewide greenhouse gas
emissions level was in 1990, and approve a statewide greenhouse gas emissions limit that is
equivalent to that level, to be achieved by 2020. While the level of 1990 GHG emissions has not
been approved on this date, other publications indicate that levels varied from 425 to 468 Tg CO2 Eq.
(CEC 2006). In 2004, the emissions were estimated at 492 Tg CO2 Eq.
Under AB 32, CARB has the primary responsibility for reducing GHG emissions. However, the
CAT Report contains strategies that many other California agencies can take. The 2006 CAT Report
strategies that apply to the project are contained in Table 5.7-45 in Chapter 1 ofthe Final EIR. As
shown in the table, the project complies with all feasible and applicable measures to bring California
to the emission reduction targets.
Thus, the project is consistent with the strategies to reduce California's emissions to the levels
proposed in Executive Order S-3-05. Therefore, the project's incremental contribution to cumulative
climate change impacts is less than significant.
Mitigation measure 5.7.A.9 will offset ozone precursor emissions to zero. While the CARB's
position on ozone precursors is that it is difficult to make an accurate determination of the
contribution of ozone precursors (NOx and ROG) to global warming, Mitigation Measure 5.7.A.9
completely eliminates the potential of ozone as a project contribution to climate change. Therefore,
Michael Brandman Associates
S:IGV\CCI02160039 ]indings_11-14-07.doc
~Mt:'1>
3- tP
87 '>- '!'.
_ m
_ r-
) C)
tJR!GINAl
Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative Impacts Which
Can Be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance
Gosford Village Shopping Center
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations
project emissions, including ozone precursors, would not significantly contribute to global climate
change after the implementation of the above mitigation measures.
Reference: Pages 5.7-115 through 5.7-121; 5.7-122 through 5.7-128 in Chapter 1 of the Final EIR,
and any documents referenced in or incorporated by reference in Section 5.7, Air Quality, in Chapter
1 of the Final EIR.
2.6 - NOISE
Impact 5.8.C
Land uses outside the project site would be exposed to noise levels that result In a
substantial permanent Increase in ambient noise levels.
2.6.1 - Project-Specific
2.6.1.1 - Potentially Significant Impact
The Final EIR identifies a potentially project-specific significant noise impact to noise sensitive uses
along two roadway segments in the year 2012 plus project conditions.
Implementation of the proposed project would result in the addition of traffic volumes on the roadway
system in the vicinity of the project site. Using traffic data provided by Ruettgers and Schuler, an
analysis was conducted to identify the estimated future CNEL generated by traffic, and indicates
whether the increase above future ambient (i.e., without project) traffic is substantial as defmed by the
City's Noise Element.
As shown in Table 5.8-10 in Chapter 1 of the Final EIR, noise sensitive uses along two roadway
segments will experience a significant impact under the 2012 plus project conditions. These roadway
segments are:
· Harris Road between Old River Road and Progress Road
· Gosford Road between White Lane and Pacheco Road
Finding
Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 (a)(1), changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect
as identified in the Final EIR with the exception ofthe roadway segment of Harris Road between Old
River Road and Progress Road.
88
Michael Brandman Associates
S:IGVICCI02160039 _Findings_11-14-07.doc
<<. ~AKt:'1>
o lP
-'('I
m
- r-
) C)
'lRIGlNAL
'>-
Gosford Village Shopping Center
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations
Adverse Project-Speciflc and Cumulative Impacts Which
Can Be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance
Facts in Support of Finding
With the exception of the roadway segment of Harris Road between Old River Road and Progress
Road, the potentially significant project-specific environmental effect has been eliminated or
substantially lessened to a level that is less than significant by virtue of the following mitigation
measure as identified in the Final EIR and incorporated into the project.
5.8.C.1
The project applicant shall fund the construction of a new 8-foot high wall adjacent to
existing residences that are along the west side of Gosford Road between White Lane and
Pacheco Road. Based on a review of an aerial photograph, the 8-foot wall will need to
extend for approximately 1,600 feet. Based on an approximately $100 per lineal foot of a
wall that is 8-feet high, the total cost to construct the wall is approximately $160,000.
Prior to the issuance of the fIrst building permit for the project, the project applicant shall
pay the total cost of a new wall to the City. The final cost and method of installing the
new wall will be determined by the City of Bakersfield Building Director.
The addition of an 8-foot high wall along the west side of Gosford Road between White Lane and
Pacheco Road will reduce the 2012 with project noise level to 65 dB CNEL from 67 dB CNEL.
Therefore, the implementation of Mitigation Measure 5.8.C.1 will reduce the potential 2012 noise
level to 65 dB CNEL, which is the City's exterior noise standard, which mitigates the identified
roadway segment to a less than significant level.
Impact 5.8.0
Construction activities associated with the proposed project could result in
substantial temporary or periodic increases in ambient noise levels.
2.6.2 - Project-Specific
2.6.2.1 - Potentially Significant Impact
The Final EIR identifies a potentially project-specific significant impact to sensitive receptors in
proximity to the construction site.
Excessive noise levels resulting from construction activities generally would occur in the daytime
hours only since standards exempt construction noise if construction activities are limited to the hours
of 6:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m., Monday through Friday and 8:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m. weekends
(BMC 9.22.050). Construction noise would last the duration of construction, although it would be the
most noticeable during the initial months of site intensive grading and building construction. Noise
sensitive receptors in proximity to the construction site may experience excessive noise levels
resulting from construction activities and could result in significant noise impacts.
Michael Brandman Associates
S:IGV\CCI02160039 ]indings_11-14-07.doc
<< ~AKt:'?>
o 0>
89>- '!'.
- m
- r-
::> C)
0RIGINAL
Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative Impacts Which
Can Be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance
Gosford Village Shopping Center
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations
Finding
Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 (a)(1), changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect
as identified in the Final EIR.
Facts in Support of Finding
The potentially significant project-specific environmental effect has been eliminated or substantially
lessened to a level that is less than significant by virtue of the following mitigation measure as
identified in the Final EIR and incorporated into the project.
5.8.0.1
5.8.0.2
5.8.0.3
5.8.0.4
5.8.0.5
5.8.0.6
5.8.0.7
Construction activities shall be limited to the hours between 7 a.m. to 7 p.m. on
weekdays, and between 9 a.m. and 6 p.m. on Saturdays and Sundays to avoid nighttime
construction.
All stationary noise -generating equipment, such as pumps and generators, will be located
as far as possible from nearby noise-sensitive receptors, as practicable. Where
practicable, noise-generating equipment will be shielded from nearby noise-sensitive
receptors by noise-attenuating buffers such as structures or haul trucks trailers.
Stationary noise sources located less than 200 feet from noise-sensitive receptors will be
equipped with noise-reducing engine housings. Portable acoustic barriers will be placed
around noise-generating equipment located within 200 feet of residences. Water tanks
and equipment storage, staging, and warm-up areas will be located as far from noise-
sensitive receptors as possible.
All construction equipment powered by gasoline or diesel engines will be required to
have sound-control devices at least as effective as those originally provided by the
manufacturer; no equipment will be permitted to have an unmuffled exhaust.
Any impact tools used during demolition of existing infrastructure will be shrouded or
shielded.
Mobile noise-generating equipment and machinery will be shut off when not in use.
Construction vehicles accessing the site will be required to use the shortest possible route
to and from local freeways, provided the routes do not expose additional receptors to
nOIse.
Residences within 500 feet of the construction area will be notified of the construction
schedule in writing, prior to construction. The project applicant and the construction
90
Michael Brandman Associates
S:IGV\CCI02160039 ]indings_11-14-07.doc
<< ~Mt:'1>
o ~
>- -
\-_ m
_ r-
o 0RIGINA{0
Gosford Village Shopping Center
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations
Adverse Project-5peciflc and Cumulative Impacts Which
Can Be MItigated to a Level of Insignificance
contractor will designate a noise disturbance coordinator who will be responsible for
responding to complaints regarding construction noise. A contact telephone number for
the noise disturbance coordinator will be conspicuously posted on construction site
fences and will be included in written notification of construction schedule sent to nearby
residents.
Compliance with the mitigation measures above will limit construction activities in conformance with
the City's Municipal Code, as well as requiring the construction equipment be equipped with mufflers
and be maintained in accordance with the equipment's factory specifications. These two measures
will reduce temporary construction noise levels to less than significant.
References: Pages 5.8-36 through 5.8-39 in Chapter I of the Final EIR.
2.6.3 - Cumulative
2.6.3.1 - Potentially Significant Impact
The Final EIR identifies a potentially cumulative significant impact to sensitive receptors in proximity
to the construction site.
Based on the cumulative projects list, the closest construction site that might be under construction at
the same time as the proposed project is directly adjacent to the project site. In addition, there are
other potential projects that may be under construction at the same time as the proposed project;
however, these additional sites are greater than 0.5 mile from the site. These other construction
projects located greater than 0.5 mile from the site will not substantially contribute short-term
construction noise to the adjacent residences because noise from these construction sites would fade
into the background and would not be perceptible at the residences near the project site. Peak
construction noise levels at construction sites could be approximately 90 dB within 50 feet of the
noise source. The likelihood that the peak noise levels at construction sites that are adjacent to each
other occur is low due to the various stages associated with construction activities. However, since
the proposed project may result in construction activities that could cause excessive noise, the
combination ofproject construction activities and adjacent project construction activities could result
in the residences near the project site to be subjected to cumulatively considerable temporarily
substantial noise levels.
Michael Brandman Associates
S:IGV\CCI02160039 ]indings_11-14-07.doc
<< ~AKt:'?>
o (j'l
-n
91 ~ iTi
- r-
..J ()RIGINA~
Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative Impacts Which
Can Be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance
Gosford Village Shopping Center
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations
Finding
Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 (a)(I), changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect
as identified in the Final EIR.
Facts in Support of Finding
The potentially significant project-specific environmental effect has been eliminated or substantially
lessened to a level that is less than significant by virtue of the following mitigation measure as
identified in the Final EIR and incorporated into the project.
Compliance with the mitigation measures above will limit construction activities in conformance with
the City's Municipal Code as well as requiring the construction equipment be equipped with mufflers
and be maintained in accordance with the equipment's factory specifications. Mitigation Measures
5.8.D.l through 5 .8.D. 7 will reduce the project's contribution to cumulative temporary construction
noise levels to less than significant.
References: Pages 5.8-37 through 5.6-39 of Chapter 1 of the Final EIR.
2.7 - PUBLIC SERVICES AND UTILITIES
Impact 5.12.C
The project would not result in substantial adverse physical Impacts associated
with the provision or need of new or physically altered police protection facilities,
the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order
to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance
objectives.
2.7.1 - Project-Specific
2.7.1.1 - Potentially Significant Impact
The Final EIR identifies a potentially project-specific significant impact to K-12 school services.
As a worst-case scenario, the proposed project would indirectly cause the addition of a maximum of
83 residents based on the number people that may move to the area to fill managerial positions
created by the project. This increase may create a demand for housing that may include school age
children, which would indirectly create a demand for school services.
92
Michael Brandman Associates
S:IGV\CCI02160039 ]indings_11-14-07.doc
<<. "0AKt:'1>
o 0'
-t\
>- -
_ m
_ r-
) (:)
0RIGINAL
Gosford Village Shopping Center
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations
Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative Impacts Which
Can Be MItigated to a Level of Insignificance
Finding
Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 (a)(1), changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect
as identified in the Final EIR.
Facts in Support of Finding
The potentially significant project-specific environmental effect has been eliminated or substantially
lessened to a level that is less than significant by virtue of the following mitigation measure as
identified in the Final EIR and incorporated into the project.
5.12.C.1
The project developer shall pay applicable SB 50 Levell impacts fees at the time of
issuance of building permits in accordance with the statutory rate then in effect.
In accordance with Section 65995 of the California Government Code, the project applicant will be
required to pay a school impact fee. Impact fees are determined by the findings of the annual School
Facilities Needs Analyses prepared by each school district throughout the State. Therefore, the
applicant will be required to pay the school impact fee as published at the time of project
commencement. As cited in the Government Code, the payment of the statuary fee, "is deemed to be
full and complete mitigation of the impacts of any legislative or adjunctive act, or both involving, but
not limited to, the planning, use, or development of real property, or any change in governmental
organization or reorganization."
Reference: Pages 5.12-12 through 5.12-13 in Chapter 1 of the FinalEIR.
2.7.2 - Cumulative
2.7.2.1 - Potentially Significant Impact
The Final EIR identifies a potentially cumulative significant impact to K-12 school services.
The proposed project will potentially result in a demand for school services. Any project-specific
demands would contribute to a cumulative demand for K-12 school services in the project area.
Thus, the project will contribute to a cumulative demand for school services.
Michael Brandman Associates
S:IGVICCI02160039 ]indings_11-14-07.doc
<< ~AK~1>
o OJ
93>- ~
- m
- r-
:J <::>
0RIGINAL
Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative Impacts Which
Can Be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance
Gosford Village Shopping Center
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations
Finding
Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 (a)(1), changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect
as identified in the Final EIR.
Facts in Support of Finding
The potentially significant cumulative environmental effect has been eliminated or substantially
lessened to a level that is less than significant by virtue of the following mitigation measure as
identified in the Final EIR and incorporated into the project.
Implementation of Mitigation Measure 5.12.C.l identified above for the project-specific impact, is
required.
As noted above, in accordance with Section 65995 of the California Government Code, the project
applicant will be required to pay a school impact fee. Impact fees are determined by the findings of
the annual School Facilities Needs Analyses prepared by each school district throughout the State.
Therefore, the applicant will be required to pay the school impact fee as published at the time of
project commencement. As cited in the Government Code, the payment of the statuary fee, "is
deemed to be full and complete mitigation of the impacts of any legislative or adjunctive act, or both
involving, but not limited to, the planning, use, or development of real property, or any change in
governmental organization or reorganization."
Reference: Pages 5.12-12 through 5.12-13 in Chapter 1 of the Final EIR.
94
Michael Brandman Associates
S:IGV\CCI02160039 ]indings_11-14-07.doc
<< ~ AKt:'-)>
o <.P
)... '!'.
.- m
r-
.:J ()
nRIGINAL
Gosford Village Shopping Center
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations
Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative Impacts
Which Cannot Be MItigated to a Level of Insignificance
SECTION 3:
ADVERSE PROJECT-SPECIFIC AND CUMULATIVE IMPACTS WHICH CANNOT
BE MITIGATED TO A LEVEL OF INSIGNIFICANCE
The Final EIR identified three significant impacts of the proposed project that can not be mitigated to
less than significant: (1) short-term 2003 air quality impact, (2) a project-specific and cumulative
noise impact, and (3) a cumulative traffic impact.
The significant and unavoidable cumulative traffic impacts include 11 intersections and 12 roadway
segments.
The significant and unavoidable project-specific air quality impact is a possible short-term air quality
violation due to construction activities that occurred in 2003 which involved extensive grading
operations that caused the emission of fugitive dust in addition to the particulate matter emissions
from construction vehicle exhaust.
The significant and unavoidable project-specific and cumulative noise impacts along the roadway
segment of Harris Road between Old River Road and Progress Road and a significant and
unavoidable cumulative noise impact along the roadway segment of Gosford Road between White
Land and Pacheco Road.
The Bakersfield City Council finds, based on the facts set forth in the record, which include but are
not limited to the facts as set forth below, those facts contained in the Final EIR, and any other facts
set forth in materials prepared by the City and/or City consultants, that there are no further additional
roadway improvements beyond those identified in Table 5.6-15 in Chapter 1 ofthe Final EIR that can
mitigate those intersections and roadway segments that are discussed below and which cannot be
mitigated to less than significant levels. Any additional improvements beyond those identified in the
Final EIR would create negative impacts across a broad segment of environmental, economic, legal,
and social areas and would create other more significant collateral traffic impacts.
Additionally, no feasible mitigation measures, changes, or alterations are available to reduce the
short-term air quality violation that occurred in 2003 as a result ofthe previous grading of the project
site. Furthermore, no feasible mitigation measures to reduce the project's increase in noise and its
incremental increase to cumulative noise impacts are available along the two roadway segments.
Michael Brandman Associates
S:IGV\CCI02160039 ]indings_11-14-07.doc
<< ~AKt:'1>
o <.P
-'fI
9C m
- r-
,) <::>
0RIGINAL
Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative Impacts
Which Cannot Be MItigated to a Level of Insignificance
Gosford Village Shopping Center
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations
Therefore, as outlined in Public Resources Code section 21081(b) and CEQA Guidelines section
15093, the project will require a Statement of Overriding Considerations for cumulative adverse
traffic impacts, a project-specific short-term (2003) air quality impact and project-specific and
cumulative adverse noise impacts (see Attachment A).
3.1 - TRANSPORTATION
Impact 5.6.A
The project would cause an increase In traffic which is substantial in relation to the
existing traffic load and capacity of the street system, or which individually or
cumulatively exceed a LOS standard established by the county congestion
management agency for designated roadways or highways.
3.1.1 - Cumulative
3.1.1.1 - Potentially Significant and Unavoidable Impact
The Final EIR identifies a potentially significant and unavoidable cumulative impact to 11 city
intersections and 10 city roadway segments.
For purposes of a cumulative impacts analysis, the traffic analysis assumes that all related projects for
which land use applications have been filed or that have been publicly announced, are ultimately
approved by the City or County and will be constructed and operational by 2030, the year for which
the cumulative analysis was performed. These projects are reflected in the 2030 time horizon and are
included in this study even though many of these projects are in the embryonic stage, and even
though it is probable that many of these projects either will not be built, will be built at lower
densities planned at this time, and will also be subject to their own project-specific mitigation
measures and/or design features that will mitigate such projects' impacts.
Based on the speculative and highly conservative projections of potential 2030 traffic volumes, the
following 11 city intersections and 10 city roadway segments were determined to potentially operate
at deficient levels of service at 2030. Since the proposed project would contribute traffic volumes to
these city intersections and city roadway segments, the project is considered to contribute to a
significant cumulative traffic impact at these projected 2030 deficient city intersections and city
roadway segments.
City Intersections
Unsignalized
. Buena Vista Road and Panama Lane (evening peak hour LOS F);
96
Michael Brandman Associates
S:IGV\CCI02160039 ]indings_11-14-07.doc
<< ~Mt:'1>
o ~
>- -
I-- m
_ t-
'.) C)
0RIGINAl
Gosford Village Shopping Center
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations
Adverse Project-5pecific and Cumulative Impacts
Which Cannot Be MItigated to a Level of Insignificance
Signalized
. Coffee Road and Stockdale Highway (morning peak hour LOS F and evening peak hour
LOS F);
. Old River Road and Ming Avenue (morning peak hour LOS F, evening peak hour LOS D and
Saturday peak hour LOS F);
. Gosford Road and Ming Avenue (morning peak hour LOS F and evening peak hour LOS F);
. Old River Road and White Lane (morning peak hour LOS D);
. Gosford Road and White Lane (morning peak hour LOS D, evening peak hour LOS E and
Saturday peak hour LOS D);
. Stine Road and White Lane (evening peak hour LOS E);
. Wible Road and White Lane (evening peak hour LOS E and Saturday peak hour LOS D);
. Wible Road and Panama Lane (morning peak hour LOS F and Saturday peak hour LOS F);
. Ashe Road and Panama Lane (evening peak hour LOS F); and
. Gosford Road and District Boulevard (Saturday peak hour LOS D).
City Roadway Segments
. Gosford Road - Stockdale Highway to Ming Avenue (LOS A degrading to LOS F);
. Gosford Road - Ming Avenue to N. Laurelglen (LOS A degrading to LOS D);
. Gosford Road - White Lane to Pacheco Road (LOS A degrading to LOS F);
. Gosford Road - Pacheco Road to Panama Lane (LOS A degrading to LOS F);
. Ming Avenue - Old River Road to Gosford Road (LOS A degrading to LOS E);
. Ming Avenue - Gosford Road to EI Portal Drive (LOS A degrading to LOS D);
. White Lane - Gosford Road to Ashe Road (LOS A degrading to LOS F);
. White Lane - Ashe Road to Stine Road (LOS A degrading to LOS D);
. White Lane - Stine Road to Wible Road (LOS B degrading to LOS D); and
. Panama Lane - Wible Road to SR 99 (LOS A degrading to LOS E).
Michael Brandman Associates
S:IGV\CCI02160039 ]indings_11-14-07.doc
<< ~AKt:'1>
o ~
9C iii
'- t-
O C)
IJRIGINAL
Adverse Project-5peclflc and Cumulative Impacts
Which Cannot Be MItigated to a Level of Insignificance
Gosford Village Shopping Center
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations
Findings
Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 (a)(1), changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the environmental effect as
identified in the Final EIR.
Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 (a)(3), specific economic, legal, social, technological or
other considerations, including provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers,
make infeasible mitigation measures identified in the Final EIR.
Although changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid
or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect identified in the Final EIR (as discussed
above), there are no feasible mitigation measures which can mitigate these impacts to a level of less
than significant. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15093, therefore, the City has balanced the
benefits of the project against its unavoidable environmental risks and has determined that this impact
is acceptable for the reason stated in the Statement of Overriding Considerations in Attachment A.
Facts in Support of Findings
Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15901 (a)(I), changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the project, which lessen the cumulative effect on the 9 of the 11 identified
intersections, and one of the ten roadway segments in the year 2030 to the maximum extent feasible
by virtue of implementation of the mitigation measures identified in the Final EIR. However, the
project's contribution to cumulative traffic at the two intersections would still be considered
significant and unavoidable.
The improvements to lessen the significant impacts at nine city intersections and one city roadway
segment (see Table 2.4-1) are part oftwo separate transportation impact fee programs (i.e., the Local
Mitigation Impact Fee Program and Regional Transportation Impact Fee Program). The following
improvements are part of Mitigation Measures 5.6.A.l and 5.6.A.2 described on pages 5.6-68 through
5.6-77 in Chapter 1 of the Final EIR.
Intersection Improvements under the Local Mitigation Impact Fee Program
(Mitigation Measure 5.6.A.l)
Intersections
. Coffee Road and Stockdale Highway - 1 westbound right turn lane and 1 northbound right turn
lane
. Gosford Road and Ming Avenue - 1 westbound right turn lane and 1 northbound right turn lane
98
Michael Brandman Associates
S:IGVICCI02160039 _Findings_11-14-07.doc
x ~AKt:'1>
o ~
>- -
m
- r-
':J C)
0RIGINAI.
Gosford Village Shopping Center
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations
Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative Impacts
Which Cannot Be MItigated to a Level of Insignificance
· Old River Road and White Lane - 1 northbound through lane and 1 westbound right turn lane
· Stine Road and White Lane - 1 westbound right turn lane and 1 southbound right turn lane
· Wible Road and White Lane - 1 eastbound right turn lane, 1 northbound through lane, and 1
southbound through lane
· Wible Road and Panama Lane - 1 eastbound through lane, 1 eastbound right turn lane, and 2
southbound through lane
· Ashe Road and Panama Lane - I southbound left turn lane and 2 southbound through lanes
· Gosford Road and District Boulevard - 1 eastbound left turn lane, 1 eastbound right turn lane, I
westbound left turn lane, and 1 westbound right turn lane
Intersection and Roadway Segment Improvements under the Regional Transportation Impact
Fee Program (Mitigation Measure 5.6.A.2)
Intersections
· Buena Vista Road & Panama Lane - Install signal, 2 eastbound left turn lanes, 2 eastbound
through lanes, 2 westbound left turn lanes, 2 westbound through lanes, 2 westbound right turn
lanes, 2 northbound left turn lanes, 2 northbound through lanes, 2 northbound right turn lanes,
2 southbound left turn lanes, 2 southbound through lanes, and 1 southbound right turn lanes
· Wible Road and Panama Lane - 1 westbound left turn lane, I westbound right turn lane, 1
northbound left turn lane, and 1 northbound through lane
· Ashe Road and Panama Lane - 1 eastbound left turn lane, 2 eastbound through lanes, 1
eastbound right turn lane, 1 westbound left turn lane, 1 westbound through lane, 1 northbound
left turn lane, 2 northbound through lane, and 1 northbound right turn lane
Roadway Segment
. Gosford Road: Pacheco Road - Panama Lane - add 2 lanes
City Intersections and Roadway Segments and Intersections
No additional improvements are recommended for the local city intersections and city roadway
segments listed above (i.e., non SR-99 impacts) because the improvements that have been
recommended in Table 5.6-19 in Chapter 1 ofthe Final EIR are in accordance with City design
standards and because the projected impacts to certain intersections and roadway segments twenty-
three years from now are based on the somewhat speculative assumption that all identified projects
will be constructed at the densities currently announced. The implementation of any other
improvements that would further reduce the impacts to the above-referenced intersections andsroadways is infeasible because such improvements would be in excess of current City standards
Michael Brandman Associates
S:\GV\CCI02160039 ]indings_11-14-07.doc
<<. '?;.A.K~1>
o tfl
>- -tI
991:::. J!l
o 0RIGfNAlC)
Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative Impacts
Which Cannot Be MItigated to a Level of Insignificance
Gosford Village Shopping Center
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations
contained within the City's Circulation Element. If City standards are exceeded, unexpected right-of-
way takes may need to be forcibly acquired from businesses and residential properties abutting these
intersections and roadway segments. Under City policy, the City does not condemn right of way
from businesses or residences for intersection and segment improvements that are in excess of City
standards. Because such acquisitions are beyond identified City standards, such acquisitions are
inconsistent with the investment-backed and quality of life expectations of property owners abutting
such right of way. As an example, numerous single-family residences front lengthy portions of the
segment of White Lane identified above; under City policy, the City typically does not condemn
private residences for roadway improvements. This policy is designed to facilitate the social
prerogative of not altering the physical character of such residences by eliminating front yards and
establishing right of way within several feet of residential dwellings. In addition, the over-sizing of
the identified intersections through establishment of triple-left hand turning lanes is undesirable
infeasible from a public safety and health and welfare standpoint. Triple-left hand turning
movements typically account for a high percentage of vehicle accidents. This is so because the
middle lane turning movement is tightly constrained and cannot fade into adjacent lanes.
Furthermore, additional turning movements or lanes would increase the width of the intersections or
roadways, and therefore, increase the length of time for pedestrians to cross the intersections or
roadways. This would likely require the alteration of signal timing for the intersections, which could
in turn cause other operational issues that degrade other parts ofthe circulation system. Finally,
forced acquisitions beyond City standards at intersections can also create significant parking and
ingress and egress problems. For example, the intersection at Wible Road and Panama Lane contains
business uses and parking fields immediately adjacent to the currently existing right of way.
Widening beyond City standards would eliminate parking and would negatively impact ingress and
egress.
Reference: Pages 5.6-55 through 5.6-79 in Chapter 1 of the Final EIR; City Staff Report and related
attachments dated September 20,2007; any and all documents and materials referenced in Section
5.6, Traffic and Transportation, in Chapter 1 ofthe Final EIR, and the comment letters received by
Caltrans in Chapter 2 of the Final EIR.
100
Michael Brandman Associates
S:IGV\CCI02160039 ]indings_11-14-07.doc
<< -:0 AKt:'1>
o (j)
)... '!'.
- m
- r-
) C)
f)RIGINAL
Gosford Village Shopping Center
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations
Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative Impacts
Which Cannot Be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance
3.1.2 - Cumulative
3.1.2.1 - Potentially Significant and Unavoidable Impact
The Final EIR identifies a potentially significant and unavoidable cumulative impact to two freeway
roadway segments.
For purposes of a cumulative impacts analysis, the traffic analysis assumes that all related projects for
which land use applications have been filed or that have been publicly announced, are ultimately
approved by the City or County and will be constructed and operational by 2030, the year for which
the cumulative analysis was performed. These projects are reflected in the 2030 time horizon and are
included in this study even though many of these projects are in the embryonic stage, and even
though it is probable that many of these projects either will not be built, will be built at lower
densities planned at this time, and will also be subject to their own project-specific mitigation
measures and/or design features that will mitigate such projects' impacts.
Based on the highly conservative projections of potential 2030 traffic volumes, the following two SR-
99 freeway segments were determined to potentially operate at deficient levels of service at 2030 after
mitigation. Since the proposed project would contribute traffic volumes to these freeway segments,
the project is considered to contribute to a significant cumulative traffic impact at these projected
2030 deficient SR-99 freeway segments:
· SR 99 - Ming Avenue to White Lane (LOS B degrading to LOS F)
· SR 99 - Panama Lane to Taft Highway (LOS A degrading to LOS F)
Findings
Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 (a)(1), changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the environmental effect as
identified in the Final EIR.
Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 (a)(3), specific economic, legal, social, technological or
other considerations, including provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers,
make infeasible mitigation measures identified in the Final EIR.
Although changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid
or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect identified in the Final EIR (as discussed
above), there are no feasible mitigation measures which can mitigate these impacts to a level of less
Michael Brandman Associates
S:IGV\CCI02160039 ]indings_11-14-07.doc
X 'OAKt:'1J
o <.J1
-n
101~ m
- r-
.J C)
,)RIGINAl
Adverse Project-Spec/t;c and Cumulative Impacts
Which Cannot Be MItigated to a Level of Insignificance
Gosford Village Shopping Center
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations
than significant. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15093, therefore, the City has balanced the
benefits ofthe project against its unavoidable environmental risks and has determined that this impact
is acceptable for the reason stated in the Statement of Overriding Considerations in Attachment A.
Facts in Support of Findings
Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15901 (a)(1), changes or alterations have been required in, or
incorporated into, the project, which lessen the cumulative effect on the two SR-99 freeway segments
in the year 2030 to the maximum extent feasible by virtue of implementation ofthe mitigation
measures identified in the Final EIR. However, the project's contribution to cumulative traffic at the
two SR-99 freeway segments would still be considered significant and unavoidable.
Changes and or expansions to the SR-99 Freeway mainline are not within the jurisdiction of the City
of Bakersfield. Rather, those improvements are planned, funded, and constructed by the State
through a complicated legislative and political process involving the State Legislature, the California
Transportation Commission (CTC), the California Business Transportation and Housing Agency, and
the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans).
In California, most State Highway System Improvements are programmed through two documents,
the State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) or the State Highway Operation and
Protection Program (SHOPP). State and federal fuel taxes generate most of the funds used to pay for
these improvements. Funds expected to be available for transportation improvements are identified
through a Fund Estimate prepared by Caltrans and adopted by the eTC. These funds, along with
other fund sources, are deposited in the State Highway Account to be programmed and allocated to
specific project improvements in both the STIP and SHOPP by the eTC.
The STIP is built from Regional Transportation Improvement Programs (RTIPS) proposed by
Regional Transportation Planning Agencies (RTPAsIMPOs) throughout California and the
Interregional Transportation Improvement Program (ITIP) proposed by Caltrans. Of the funds made
available by the CTC for the STIP, 25 percent is made available for Caltrans to propose expansion
and capacity-enhancing improvements on the statutorily designated Interregional Road System.
Seventy-five percent of the funds are made available to the RTP As/MPOs to propose all types of
improvements on all other State Highway System Roads, other non-State highway roads eligible to
use federal funds, and on the Interregional Road System. Transportation funds generally come from a
variety of sources including National Highway System funds, state fuel taxes, federal fuel taxes, sales
taxes on fuel, truck weight fees, roadway and bridge tolls, user fares, local sales tax measures,
development fees, where applicable, bond revenues, and state and local general and matching funds.
102
Michael Brandman Associates
S:IGV\CCI02160039 _Findings_11-14-07.doc
~ ~AKt:'t.
>- -:
l- n
- t"-
O <::::
ORIGIN.'ll.
Gosford Village Shopping Center
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations
Adverse Project-5peclfic and Cumulative Impacts
Which Cannot Be MItigated to a Level of Insignificance
Improvements to State highway systems are deemed to be matters of federal, State, regional and local
concern. On the federal level, the City, through its Congressional delegation, has aggressively sought
federal monies for regional roadway improvements. Indeed, in 2006, Congress allocated over $630
million towards regional transportation facilities located within the City. The Safe, Accountable,
Flexible, Efficient, Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU), was signed into
law on Aug. 10, 2005. Seven hundred, twenty two million dollars were earmarked by Congressman
William Thomas for local transportation improvement projects, with $630 million allocated for
projects in the Greater Bakersfield area. This amount will be used to fund regional transportation
projects that will greatly improve the transportation infrastructure in the Bakersfield metropolitan
area. On the State level, Caltrans has approved the SR-99 Corridor Enhancement Master Plan and the
SR-99 Business Plan, which are intended to provide a valley-wide blueprint to enhance SR-99 as
development occurs within the Central Valley. In addition, in 2005, Governor Schwarzenhager,
through Executive Order S-5-05, established the California Partnership for the San Joaquin Valley
(San Joaquin Valley Partnership), which is an intra-agency task force comprised of State, regional
and local officials tasked with establishing strategic proposals to accommodate growth in the Central
Valley occurring in the next twenty years. The San Joaquin Valley Partnership works closely with
Caltrans and the Highway 99 Task Force established by the Great Valley Center to monitor
improvements needed on SR 99 to accommodate future growth. More recently, in November 2006,
the State voters approved Statewide proposition IB, which provided for a Statewide bond issuance of
$19 billion for transportation infrastructure improvements. On the local level, the City, through its
Circulation Element contained within its General Plan, maintains numerous policies whereby the City
commits to working closely with KernCOG and Caltrans on identifying needed improvements to SR-
99. In addition, Councilmember Susan Benham has been appointed by the Governor to serve on the
San Joaquin Valley Partnership, which is a comprehensive intra-jurisdictional program designed to,
among other tasks, work with local, regional, and statewide issues on transportation issues.
Neither the State nor any other state agency such as Caltrans currently has a development impact fee
program for the construction of the required mainline improvements at the 2030 time horizon; nor is
there currently any mechanism in place that would ensure that funds contributed to Caltrans or to the
State to ameliorate impacts on freeway mainlines will be used for their intended purpose. In addition,
because SR-99 is controlled exclusively by the State, there is no mechanism by which the City can
construct or guarantee the construction of any improvements to SR-99 (Conversation with Caltrans
District 6 Staff, January 23,2007).
The Traffic Study prepared for the project concluded that two segments of SR-99 (Ming Avenue _
White Lane and Panama Lane - Taft Highway) would operate at LOS F even without the project at
the cumulative 2030 time horizon. The project's contributions to the cumulative impacts at the 2030
Michael Brandman Associates
S:IGV\CCI02160039 ]indings_11-14-07.doc
~, ~AI\.i::-r
0' ~
>- -
103 \::;: ~I
o b
ORIGINAl
Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative Impacts
Which Cannot Be MItigated to a Level of Insignificance
Gosford Village Shopping Center
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations
time horizon are relatively de minimis, involving only a small percentage of the forecast traffic
occurring on the identified segments at the 2030 time horizon. In its SR-99 Business Plan, Caltrans
has identified the phased widening of SR-99 from Bear Mountain Boulevard to approximately Wilson
Road as eight lanes as a Priority Category 2 program. In its Circulation Element, the City has
committed to working with Caltrans and KernCOG in participating in travel demand studies
applicable to freeway mainlines. In addition, in its SR-99 Business Plan, Caltrans has recognized that
development funding has a role to play toward funding a fair share of impacts to SR-99:
There is a recognition that the development community has a role toward funding a fair share
of impacts to Route 99. Caltrans and local agencies should work together toward agreements
on policies that address appropriate developer funding responsibility. The development
community has a role in participating in the funding of mainline improvements as well as
interchange needs of Route 99. This would be a fair share based upon analysis of direct
impacts attributable to each new development. As an example, this could take the form of
direct financial contribution, right of way dedication, or participation in local or regional fee
program. These are details that will need to be refined on a local agency-by-agency basis
(SR-99 Business Plan, p. 40).
As set forth above, currently Caltrans has not entered into any agreement with the City nor has
Caltrans adopted a program by which Caltrans can ensure that developer fair share contributions will
assist in the funding of identified improvements to SR -99. Indeed, Caltrans has typically taken the
position that State fuel taxes are and will continue to serve as the primary mechanism by which
mainline improvements are funded. Nevertheless, consistent with Caltrans SR-99 Business Plan, and
consistent with the City's Circulation Element, the following mitigation measures are recommended:
5.6.A.3
City shall participate in a multi-jurisdictional effort with Caltrans and KernCOG to
develop a study to identify fair share contribution funding sources attributable to and paid
from private and public development to supplement other regional and State funding
sources necessary to implement the Kern County improvements identified by Caltrans in
its SR-99 Business Plan. The study shall include fair share contributions related to
private and or public development based on nexus requirements contained in the
Mitigation Fee Act (Government Code Section 66000 et seq.) and 14 Cal. Code of
Regulations Section 15126.4(a)(4) and, to this end, the study shall recognize the
statewide and regional contributions to impacts to SR-99 that are not attributable to local
development such that local private and public development are not paying in excess of
such developments' fair share obligations. The fee study shall also be compliant with
Government Code Section 66001 (g) and any other applicable provisions of law. The
study shall set forth a timeline and other agreed-upon relevant criteria for implementation
104
Michael Brandman Associates
S:IGV\CCI02160039 _Findings_11-14-07.doc
~Mt:'1>
~ U'
-f'
>- n
l- r-
'0 <:::
ORIGINAl
Gosford Village Shopping Center
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations
5.6.A.4
Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative Impacts
Which Cannot Be MItigated to a Level of Insignificance
of the recommendations contained within the study to the extent the other agencies agree
to participate in the fee study program.
The Traffic Study has concluded that the two identified segments of SR-99 will operate at
LOS F without the project at 2030. The project's contributions to traffic on these two
identified SR-99 segments will not cause a degradation of LOS below LOS F, but
nevertheless will contribute to cumulative congestion on these identified segments. In
the SR-99 Business Plan, Caltrans has identified concept facilities in metropolitan
Bakersfield, which have been conceptually programmed to be constructed by 2030. In its
SR-99 Business Plan, Caltrans has recognized that even with the construction of the
identified concept facilities, many segments in the urban areas will continue to operate at
LOS F or E, but some may operate at LOS D. In its SR-99 Business Plan, Caltrans has
identified the phased, eight-lane widening of SR-99 from Bear Mountain Blvd. to Wilson
Road from its current status as a six-lane facility. The total project costs in 2007 dollars
has been identified as $57 million. Approximately eight and on-half miles of roadway
exist between Bear Mountain Blvd. and the Wilson Road. This equates to a cost of
approximately $6.7 million per mile. Of the eight and one half miles identified for
improvement, approximately 2.8 miles are impacted by the proposed project, for a total
cost of approximately $18.76 million. Using Caltrans' fair share formula, the project's
contribution to trips on this 8.5 miles of impacted segment amounts to 0.23% ofthe total
2030 volume. Again using Caltrans' fair share formula, this equates to a fair share
contribution of $43,100. Consistent with the SR-99 Business Plan's recognition that
development has a role in participating in the funding of mainline improvements, prior to
the issuance of the first building permit for the project, the project applicant shall pay
$43,100 to the City pro-rated among each developable parcel as its fair share contribution
to its cumulative impacts to the identified segments of SR-99 (Developer's Fair Share
Contribution). City shall hold Developer's Fair Share Contribution in trust and shall
apply Developer's Fair Share Contribution to any fee program adopted or agreed upon by
the City, KernCOG and Caltrans as a result of implementation of Mitigation Measure
5.6.A.3. The NB loop on-ramp to SR-99 from EB White Lane is currently identified on
the Caltrans' ramp meter location list of the Ramp Meter Development Plan (August
2006). The project's proportionate share for the NB loop on-ramp metering is 4.99%.
Pursuant to Caltrans, the cost of this improvement is estimated to be $600,000. Thus,
using Caltrans' fair share formula, the fair share percentage to be paid by the project
applicant to Caltrans is $29,940. The applicant shall pay $29,940 to Caltrans for this
improvement prior to the issuance of the first building permit for the project.
105
~M~..y
~ U'
-(
>- -
l- n
_ r-
o C)
ORIGINAL
Michael Brandman Associates
S:IGV\CCI02160039 ]indings_11-14-07.doc
Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative Impacts
Which Cannot Be MItigated to a Level of Insignificance
Gosford Village Shopping Center
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations
Implementation of Mitigation Measures 5.6.A.3 and 5.6.A.4 will not reduce the project's 2030
cumulative impacts to less than significant levels but can reasonably be expected to reduce adverse
impacts. While Caltrans has recognized that private development has a role to play in funding fair
share improvements to impacts to SR-99, neither Caltrans nor the State has adopted a program that
can ensure that locally-contributed impact fees will be tied to improvements to freeway mainlines and
only Caltrans has jurisdiction over mainline improvements. Because Caltrans has exclusive control
over state highway improvements, ensuring that developer fair share contributions to mainline
improvements are actually part of a program tied to implementation of mitigation is within the
jurisdiction of Caltrans, and Caltrans can and should work with the City, KernCOG and other
agencies to create the adoption of such mitigation programs.
In addition, state highway funding is an extraordinarily complex Statewide and regional problem that
the State has grappled with for decades. By definition, state highways are impacted by interstate,
Statewide and regional traffic. To this end, in early 2007, State Senator Alan Lowenthal (D, Long
Beach), Chair of the Senate Transportation Committee, held hearings on alternative funding
mechanisms for State highway improvements, including legislation that would allow private
companies to build and operate State highways. Several such proposals have been considered in
connection with SR-91 in Riverside and SR 125 in San Diego. The State Legislature, Caltrans, the
Executive Branch through Executive Order S-5-05, and public-private partnerships such as the
Highway 99 Task Force, are all engaged in multi-jurisdictional and creative solutions to feasibly
alleviating congestion on the State's highways. Finally, Caltrans has recognized that even with
construction of the concept facilities identified in the SR-99 Business Plan, many urban areas along
SR-99 will nevertheless operate at LOS E or LOS F.
References: Pages 5.6-55 through 5.6-84 in Chapter 1 of the Final EIR; City Staff Report and related
attachments dated September 20,2007; any and all documents and material referenced in Section 5.6,
Traffic and Transportation, in Chapter 1 of the Final EIR, the comment letters received by Caltrans in
Chapter 2 of the Final EIR, and Chapter 3 of the Final EIR.
106
Michael Brandman Associates
S:IGV\CCI02160039 ]indings_11-14-07.doc
<< ~AK$1>
o ~
>- r,
t-
O r;
ORiGINAl
Gosford Village Shopping Center
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations
Adverse Project-5peciflc and Cumulative Impacts
Which Cannot Be MItigated to a Level of Insignificance
3.2 - AIR QUALITY
Impact 5.7.C
The proposed project may violate an air quality standard or contribute substantially
to an existing or projected air quality violation and therefore will expose sensitive
receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations.
3.2.1 - Project-Specific
3.2.1.1 - Potentially Significant and Unavoidable Impact
The Final EIR identifies a potentially significant and unavoidable project-specific particulate matter
impact in 2003 to the nearest sensitive receptors, which are neighborhood residences that are north
and east of the project site.
Health impacts from particulate matter were evaluated by determining the maximum concentrations
ofPMI0 and PM2.5 generated by the proposed project. Construction activities that occurred in 2003
on the project site may have exceeded the PMI0 and PM2.5 significance thresholds established by the
San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District. The construction activities involved extensive
grading operations that caused the emission of fugitive dust in addition to the particulate matter
emissions from construction vehicle exhaust. As shown on Table 5.7-32 in Chapter 1 of the Final
EIR, the 24-hour significance threshold of 5 J!glm3 for PMI0 and PM2.5 was exceeded with a
maximum incremental project-related impact of 17.90 J!glm3 ofPMI0 and 5.89 J!glm3 ofPM2.5.
During the construction activities, fugitive dust is caused by the travel of heavy-duty construction
vehicles over disturbed soils and from the action of winds loosening up dust particles and suspending
dust in the air. Over 90% ofthe particulate matter impacts noted in 2003 are due to fugitive dust
emissions. The fugitive dust emissions that were used in the model resulted from assuming that 30
acres per day were disturbed. The URBEMIS2002 default is 1.1 ofthe total project area disturbed,
which would be approximately 9 acres, which would result in a factor of three decrease in
concentrations. Therefore, the emissions of fugitive dust were likely overestimated.
Air dispersion modeling of particulate matter impacts from fugitive dust is fraught with high levels of
uncertainty. The lack of adequate knowledge in estimating emissions during the construction process
leads to uncertainty. In addition, the dispersion modeling fails to record the gravitational setting and
deposition of fugitive dust emitted within a meter or so from the ground. By its nature, construction
activities are short-term and highly localized in nature. The impacts are dependent upon the intensity
of the construction activity and the location and duration of the dust-generation process in relation to
nearby receptors. Such activities can change dramatically even over a period of one-hour.
Michael Brandman Associates
S:IGVICCI02160039 ]indings_11-14-07.doc
~Mt:'1>
~ <.P
107 >- -t\
t- J!-'
-0 C)
ORIGINAl
Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative Impacts
Which Cannot Be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance
Gosford Village Shopping Center
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations
The SN APeD's approach to analyses of construction impacts is to require implementation of
effective and comprehensive control measures rather than to require detailed quantification of
emission concentrations for modeling of direct impacts. Particulate matter emitted during
construction can vary greatly depending on the level of activity, the specific operations taking place,
the equipment being operated, local soils, weather conditions, and other factors, making
quantification difficult. Despite this variability in emissions, experience has shown that there are a
number of feasible control measures that can be reasonably implemented to significantly reduce
fugitive dust emissions during construction. The SN APeD has determined that compliance with
Regulation VIII and Rule 9510 for all sites and implementation of all other control measures
indicated in Tables 6-2 and 6-3 of the GAMAQI (as appropriate, depending on the size and location
of the project site) would constitute sufficient mitigation to reduce particulate matter impacts to a
level considered less-than-significant.
Regulation VIII was in place during the past phases of construction and was complied with by the
proj ect.
Even with the above uncertainty considerations, local project related emissions of PM 10 and PM2.5
may have resulted in sensitive receptor exposure to substantial pollutant concentrations in the
construction year 2003, as shown in Table 5.7-32 in Chapter 1 of the Final EIR. In addition, the
project may have caused a violation of the state PMIO air quality standard in 2003 at the nearest
sensitive receptor, as the state PM 10 standard is 50 J.l.glm3 and as shown in Table 5.7-32 in Chapter 1
of the Final EIR, the maximum PM 10 concentration at the sensitive receptor is 17.90 J.l.glm3. The
maximum 24-hour concentration of PM 10 in 2003 was 136 J.l.glm3 (Table 5.7-1 in Chapter 1 of the
Final EIR). Though it is unlikely that this maximum concentration would have occurred during
heavy site grading, the project may have substantially contributed to a federal 24-hour PM 10
violation at the nearest sensitive receptors, which are the neighborhood residences that are north and
east of the project site. This is a temporary but potentially significant impact. Since this impact has
already occurred, no additional mitigation can be adopted to reduce impacts to less than significant.
It should be noted that past grading occurred during a very short period.
Populations at greatest risk from particulate matter exposure include children, people of all ages with
asthma, and the elderly with illnesses like bronchitis, emphysema and pneumonia. The residences
that were exposed to the highest concentrations are located along the eastern boundary of the project
site. It is not possible to definitely identify what the health effects to the residents may have been, if
any, because health effects are determined by a number of factors, including the actual concentrations
(dose), the health of the individual exposed (the response), and the amount of time exposed (dose).
108
Michael Brandman Associates
S:IGV\CCI02160039 ]indings_11-14-07.doc
<< ~AKt:'1>.
o 0'
'"'f
>- -
t- n
__ r-
o C)
ORIGINAl
Gosford Village Shopping Center
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations
Adverse Project-5peciflc and Cumulative Impacts
Which Cannot Be Mitigated to a Level of Insignificance
Generic health effects from short-term (acute) exposure to particulate matter include the following:
exacerbation of symptoms in sensitive patients with respiratory or cardiovascular disease; coughing;
exacerbation of asthma; increased airway reactivity; phlegm; wheezing; reduction in lung function.
Finding
Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 (a)(3), specific economic, legal, social, technological or
other considerations, including provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers,
make infeasible mitigation measures identified in the Final EIR.
There are no feasible mitigation measures which can mitigate this impact to a level below
significance. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15093, therefore, the City has balanced the
benefits of the project against its unavoidable environmental risks and has determined that this impact
is acceptable for the reason stated in the Statement of Overriding Considerations in Attachment A.
Facts in Support of Finding
This significant unavoidable impact has already occurred, and there are no feasible mitigation
measures that can undo past activities. Thus, the potential health risk associated with the short-term
2003 PMlO and PM2.5 emissions can not be mitigated to less than significant. The four alternatives
evaluated in Section 6 in Chapter 1 of the Final EIR and described in Section 4 of these Findings are
not capable of reducing the short-term 2003 PM 1 0 and PM2.5 emissions that may have resulted in a
potential health risk because there are not feasible actions that can undo past activities.
Reference: Pages 5.7-82 through 5.7-95 in Chapter 1 of the Final EIR; City Staff Report and related
attachments dated September 20,2007; and any documents referenced in or incorporated by reference
in Section 5.7, Air Quality, in Chapter 1 of the Final EIR.
Michael Brandman Associates
S:\GV\CCI02160039 ]indings_11-14-07.doc
<< ~AKt:'1>
o U1
>- ~
109::. f!!
o C)
ORIGINAl
Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative Impacts
Which Cannot Be MItigated to a Level of Insignificance
Gosford Village Shopping Center
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations
3.3 - NOISE
Impact 5.8.C
Land uses outside the project site would be exposed to noise levels that result In a
substantial permanent increase In ambient noise levels.
3.3.1 - Project-Specific
3.3.1.1 - Potentially Significant and Unavoidable Impact
The Final EIR identifies a potentially project-specific significant and unavoidable noise impact for
one roadway segment under the 2008 plus project conditions and under the 2012 plus project
conditions.
The roadway segment of Harris Road between Old River Road and Progress Road will result in a
project-specific noise increase along this segment of 5.8 dB CNEL in 2008 and 6.3 dB CNEL in
2012. Since the noise levels without the project in 2008 and 2012 are predicted to be less than 60
dBA CNEL, the project would result in a noise increase of 5.0 dBA CNEL or greater, and existing
residential uses are adjacent to this roadway segment, significant noise impacts would occur along
this segment in 2008 and 2012.
The existing residential uses along this roadway segment exists as well as 6-foot high block walls.
These existing residences would experience an exterior noise level on their property of 62.2 dB
CNEL in 2008 and 63 dB CNEL in 2012. Both of these noise levels do not exceed the City's current
exterior noise level standard of greater than 65 dBA CNEL. The significant impact is not creating
noise levels above the standard, but creating a significant increase in noise levels from ambient noise
levels that would occur without the project.
Finding
Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 (a)(3), specific economic, legal, social, technological or
other considerations, including provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers,
make infeasible mitigation measures identified in the Final EIR.
There are no feasible mitigation measures which can mitigate this impact to a level below
significance. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15093, therefore, the City has balanced the
benefits of the project against its unavoidable environmental risks and has determined that this impact
is acceptable for the reason stated in the Statement of Overriding Considerations in Attachment A.
110
Michael Brandman Associates
S:IGV\CCI02160039 _Findings_11-14-07.doc
~M~1>
~ <.f'
-f\
)... -
l- m
_ T-
O C:;
ORIGINAL
Gosford Village Shopping Center
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations
Adverse Project.Speclflc and Cumulative Impacts
Which Cannot Be MItigated to a Level of Insignificance
Facts in Support of Finding
The roadway segment of Harris Road between Old River Road and Progress Road will experience a
substantial project generated noise increase to the noise environment in the 2008 plus project and
2012 plus project conditions. It is infeasible to mitigate this potentially significant impact. It is not
feasible to modify the existing residential block walls to lower the increase in project generated noise
because block walls are typically designed for the height that they are built at. It is also infeasible for
the Lead Agency to demolish the existing walls on private property and build new ones of increased
height so that noise level increases are lowered even though the overall noise level does not exceed
the City's exterior noise level for residences. Therefore, this potentially significant noise impact
along this roadway segment cannot be feasibly mitigated.
3.3.2 - Cumulative
3.3.2.1 - Potentially Significant and Unavoidable Impact
The Final EIR identifies a potentially cumulative significant impact for two roadway segments under
the 2030 plus project conditions.
The roadway segment of Harris Road between Old River Road and Progress Road will result in a
project increase in cumulative noise levels of 4.6 dBA CNEL in 2030. The roadway segment of
Gosford Road between Pacheco Road and Panama Lane will result in a project increase in cumulative
noise levels of 1.3 dBA CNEL in 2030. Both of these roadway segments would exceed the City's
cumulative noise standard under the 2030 plus project conditions.
The addition of project traffic to cumulative traffic volumes along Harris Road between Old River
Road and Progress Road, and Gosford Road between Pacheco Road and Panama Lane is predicted to
result in a substantial noise increase to the cumulative noise environment. This substantial noise
increase is significant because these roadway segments have existing noise sensitive land uses
adjacent to them.
There are existing block walls along the residential uses on Harris Road between Old River and
Progress Road, and Gosford Road between Pacheco Road and Panama Lane. The predicted 2030
noise levels along both ofthese roadway segments are 62.9 dBA CNEL for Harris Road between Old
River Road and Progress Road and 63.2 dBA CNEL for Gosford Road between Pacheco Road and
Panama Lane. Both of these noise levels are within the City's exterior noise standards for residential
uses (i.e. 65 dB CNEL or less). The significant impact is not creating noise levels above the noise
standard, but creating a significant increase in noise levels from the ambient noise level that would
occur without the project.
Michael Brandman Associates
S:IGV\CCI02160039 ]indings_11-14-07.doc
~Mt:'1>
~ <P
-f'
111 >- -
t::. ~
o <:::>
ORIGINAL
Adverse Project-Specific and Cumulative Impacts
Which Cannot Be MItigated to a Level of Insignificance
Gosford Village Shopping Center
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations
Finding
Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 (a)(3), specific economic, legal, social, technological or
other considerations, including provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers,
make infeasible mitigation measures identified in the Final EIR.
There are no feasible mitigation measures which can mitigate this impact to a level below
significance. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines 15093, therefore, the City has balanced the benefits of
the project against its unavoidable environmental risks and has determined that this impact is
acceptable for the reason stated in the Statement of Overriding Considerations in Attachment A.
Facts in Support of Finding
The roadway segments of Harris Road between Old River Road and Progress Road, and Gosford
Road between Pacheco Road and Panama Lane will experience a substantial project generated noise
increase to the environment in the 2030 plus project conditions. It is infeasible to mitigate this
potentially significant impact. It is not feasible to modify the existing residential block walls to lower
the increase in project generated noise because block walls are typically designed for the height that
they are built at. It is also infeasible for the Lead Agency to demolish the existing walls on private
property and build new ones of increased height so that noise level increases are lowered even though
the overall noise level does not exceed the City's exterior noise level for residences. Therefore, this
potentially significant noise impact along these two roadway segments cannot be feasibly mitigated.
112
Michael Brandman Associates
S:IGVICCI02160039 _Findings_11-14-07.doc
~Mt:'1>
~ o~
>- -
l- m
_ r-
(.) C)
ORIGINAL
Gosford Village Shopping Center
CEQA Findings of Fact
and Statement of Overriding Considerations
Feasibility of Project Alternatives
SECTION 4:
FEASIBILITY OF PROJECT ALTERNATIVES
In preparing and adopting fmdings, a lead agency need not necessarily address the feasibility of both
mitigation measures and environmentally superior alternatives when contemplating the approval of a
project with significant environmental impacts. Where the significant impacts can be mitigated to a
level of insignificance solely by the adoption of mitigation measures, the lead agency has no
obligation in drafting its fmdings to consider the feasibility of environmental superior alternatives,
even iftheir impacts would be less severe than those of the project as mitigated. Accordingly, in
adopting the fmdings concerning alternatives for the proposed project, the City of Bakersfield
considers only those significant environmental impacts that cannot be avoided or substantially
lessened through mitigation.
Where, as here, a project will result in some unavoidable significant environmental impacts even after
application of all feasible mitigation measures identified in the Final EIR, the lead agency must
consider the feasibility of alternatives to the project which could avoid or substantially lessen the
unavoidable significant environmental impacts. "Feasible" means capable of being accomplished in a
successful manner within a reasonable time, taking into account economic, environmental, legal,
social and technological factors (CEQA Guidelines Section 15364).
If there are no feasible proj ect alternatives, the lead agency must adopt a Statement of Overriding
Considerations with regard to the project pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines Section 15093. If there
is a feasible alternative to the project, the lead agency must consider in detail only those alternatives
which could feasibly attain most of the basic objectives ofthe project; however, the lead agency must
consider alternatives capable of eliminating significant environmental impacts even if these
alternatives would impede to some degree the attainment of the project objectives (CEQA Guidelines
Section 15126(d)).
These fmdings contrast and compare the alternatives where appropriate in order to demonstrate that
the selection ofthe proposed project, while still resulting in certain unavoidable significant
environmental impacts, has substantial planning, fiscal and other benefits. In rejecting certain
alternatives, the City of Bakersfield has examined the project objectives and weighed the ability of
the various alternatives to meet the objectives. The City of Bakersfield believes that there is no
alternative to the proposed project that is both environmentally superior to the proposed project and
Michael Brandman Associates
S:IGV\CCI02160039 _Findings_11-14-07.doc
113
~AKt:'1>
Ox OJ
'1'".
>- -
r- m
__ r-
c> C)
ORIGINAL
Feasibility of Project Alternatives
Gosford Village Shopping Center
CEQA Findings of Fact
and Statement of Overriding Considerations
achieves the project objectives of the planning effort. The objectives of the proposed project that
have been considered by the City of Bakersfield are:
· Provide a shopping center that meets the substantial and unmet retail and service demands of the
residents within the southern and southwest portion ofthe City.
· Cluster commercial retail uses that provide goods and services near existing residents.
· Provide new retail and commercial development that captures the economic demands generated
by the marketplace.
· Accommodate new development that channels land uses in a phased, orderly manner and is
coordinated with the provision of infrastructure and public improvements.
· Accommodate infill development to take advantage of existing infrastructure.
· Recycle and intensify parcels of land which are underutilized.
· Provide new development that will assist the City in obtaining fiscal balance in the years and
decades ahead by maximizing sales tax revenue.
· Address community circulation, both vehicular and pedestrian, utilizing available capacity within
the existing circulation system, and provide fair-share system improvements to deficient
intersections or road segments.
· Encourage excellence and creativity in the general plan and contribute to a community with a
specific sense of identity and a high quality of life.
· Provide new retail and commercial development that maximizes employment in the southwest
portion of the City.
· Facilitate a planned development consisting of a Wal-Mart Supercenter, Sam's Club, Kohl's, and
related in-line tenants consistent with the market objectives ofthe applicant and its tenants.
The Final EIR examined a reasonable range of alternatives to the proposed project to determine
whether any alternative could meet the project's objectives while avoiding or substantially lessening
one or more of the project's significant unavoidable impacts. These findings examine each
alternative to determine feasibility. In determining the feasibility of alternatives, the lead agency may
take into account factors such as whether the alternative could be accomplished in a successful
manner within a reasonable period of time in light of economic, environmental, legal, social and
technological factors.
114
Michael Brandman Associates
S:IGVICCI02160039 ]indings _11-14-07.doc
~ ~~Kt:'1><f)
"'\',
>-
'::: J!'
o C)
ORIGINAL
Gosford Village Shopping Center
CEQA Findings of Fact
and Statement of Overriding Considerations
Feasibility of Project Alternatives
The Final EIR has concluded that after adherence to all applicable regulatory requirements, inclusion
of design features and incorporation of all feasible mitigation measures, the project will nevertheless
have three remaining significant adverse environmental impacts: (1) cumulative 2030 impacts to 10
city roadway segments, 11 city intersections, and two SR-99 freeway segments (2) a short term 2003
violation of the applicable air quality standard for PMI0 and PM2.5 which occurred in 2003 when
previous grading occurred and (3) project-specific and cumulative noise impacts. Accordingly, the
Final EIR analyzed four alternatives to the proposed project. The alternatives, which are analyzed in
Section 6 in Chapter 1 of the Final EIR, include No Project/No Development Alternative, No
Project/Development in Accordance with the General Plan Alternative, Reduced Intensity
Alternative, Panama Lane and Gosford Road. The following summarizes the feasibility of these
alternatives as a means to reduce or avoid the significant unmitigated impacts associated with the
project.
4.1 - NO PROJECT/NO DEVELOPMENT ALTERNATIVE
The purpose and rationale of selecting the No Project Alternative was to comply with CEQA
Guideline section 15126.6(e) and allow decision makers to compare the impacts of approving the
proposed project with the impacts of not approving the proposed project. Under the No Project/No
Development Alternative (No Project Alternative), the entire project site would remain unchanged
and no new development would occur onsite. Under this Alternative, the Gosford Village Shopping
Center site would continue to exist as an undeveloped and underutilized parcel.
The City of Bakersfield finds that the No Project Alternative would not generate traffic trips from the
project site and would not contribute to potential significant cumulative traffic impacts. While this
Alternative would not generate traffic trips, the same significant and unavoidable impacts identified
with the project with respect to eight ofthe 10 city roadway segments, eight of the 11 intersections,
and two SR-99 freeway segments, would remain even in the absence of development ofthe project.
The No Project Alternative would remain in its present state, which is undeveloped land, and would
substantially lessen the proposed project's significant temporary impact related to peak construction
pollutant concentrations. In addition, the No Project Alternative would not increase noise levels
along roadway segments in the vicinity of the project site and would avoid the significant project-
specific and cumulative noise impacts ofthe proposed project.
However, the No Project Alternative would not meet any of the project objectives, including but not
limited to, creating a commercial center that will enhance the economic growth of the City of
Bakersfield; maximizing development intensity on the site to reduce traffic congestion, and air
Michael Brandman Associates
S:IGV\CCI02160039 ]indings_11-14-07.doc
115
~Mt:'1
~ 0
'-' '\-
>- rr
\- r
o C
ORIGINAl
Feasibility of Project Alternatives
Gosford ViI/age Shopping Center
CEQA Findings of Fact
and Statement of Overriding Considerations
emissions; maximizing employment; and maximizing sales tax which would assist the City in
obtaining fiscal balance.
The City of Bakersfield fmds that all potential significant environmental impacts of the project will be
mitigated by the inclusion of design features and incorporation of all feasible mitigation measures as
set forth in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, except the cumulative 2030 impacts to
10 city roadway segments, 11 city intersections, and two SR-99 freeway segments, a short term 2003
violation of the applicable air quality standard for PM 1 0 and PM2.5 which occurred in 2003 when
previous grading occurred, and project-specific and cumulative 2030 noise impacts. The City of
Bakersfield finds that, although the No Project Alternative would not contribute traffic to cumulative
significant and unavoidable adverse traffic impacts; would substantially lessen the short-term
significant unavoidable adverse project-specific air quality impact; and substantially lessen the
project-specific and cumulative noise impacts, the No Project Alternative is infeasible because it
would not attain any ofthe project objectives and would not provide the City of Bakersfield with any
of the benefits of the proposed project described above and in the Statement of Overriding
Considerations. Therefore, for the potential significant impacts which cannot be mitigated to a level
below significance, the City of Bakersfield adopts the Statement of Overriding Considerations located
in Appendix A of this document pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15093.
4.2 - NO PROJECT/DEVELOPMENT IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE GENERAL
PLAN ALTERNATIVE
The No Project/Development in Accordance with the General Plan Alternative (General Plan
Alternative) would result in the project site being developed under the current General Plan land use
designations of SI. Specifically, this Alternative would result in the 73.53 acres of industrial uses
with a maximum of 1.28 million square feet based on a 0.4 floor area ratio. The General Plan
Alternative was selected because it is reasonably foreseeable that disapproval of the project could
lead to development of the site under its existing General Plan designations.
The City of Bakersfield finds that the General Plan Alternative would generate less traffic trips
compared to the proposed project, and would substantially lessen traffic and transportation impacts.
Although, while fewer trips would be generated, this Alternative would not reduce the significant and
unavoidable traffic impacts to eight of the 10 city roadway segments, eight city intersections, and two
SR-99 freeway segments, to a level below significance. The General Plan Alternative would result
in a substantially greater impact related to this alternative's contribution to the cumulative emission of
non-attainment criteria pollutants. The General Plan Alternative would not avoid the short-term
significant unavoidable adverse project-specific air quality impact because this Alternative includes
116
Michael Brandman Associates
S:IGVICCI02160039 ]indings_11-14-07.doc
~Mt:1
~ ~
>- ~
l- n
__ r
o (J
ORIGIMAI
Gosford Village Shopping Center
CEQA Findings of Fact
and Statement of Overriding Considerations
Feasibility of Project Alternatives
grading of the entire project site and would result in the same temporary emissions that occurred in
2003 during grading activities. Furthermore, the General Plan Alternative would generate long-term
criteria pollutants for which a basin is in non-attainment and contribute to a significant cumulative air
quality impact. Finally, the General Plan Alternative would avoid the significant and unavoidable
adverse project-specific and cumulative noise impacts along the roadway segments ofthe proposed
project.
However, the General Plan Alternative would not meet the project objectives, including but not
limited to, creating a commercial center that will enhance the economic growth of the City of
Bakersfield; maximizing development intensity on the site to reduce traffic congestion and air
emissions; maximizing employment; and maximizing sales tax which would assist the City in
obtaining fiscal balance.
The City of Bakersfield finds that all potential significant environmental impacts of the project will be
mitigated by the inclusion of design features and incorporation of all feasible mitigation measures as
set forth in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program. except the cumulative 2030 impacts to
10 city roadway segments, and 11 city intersections, and two SR-99 freeway segments, a short term
2003 violation of the applicable air quality standard for PMI0 and PM2.5 which occurred in 2003
when previous grading occurred, and project-specific, 2008 and 2012 noise impacts, and cumulative
2030 noise impacts. The City of Bakersfield finds that, although the General Plan Alternative would
contribute less traffic to cumulative significant and unavoidable adverse traffic impacts compared to
the project and avoid significant and unavoidable traffic impacts at three City intersections and two
City roadway segments, avoid project-specific 2008 and 2012 and cumulative 2030 noise impacts, not
avoid the short-term significant unavoidable adverse project-specific air quality impacts that have
already occurred in 2003 on residences adjacent to the project site, and contribute to a long-term
significant and unavoidable air quality impact, the General Plan Alternative is infeasible because it
would not attain the project objectives and would not provide the City of Bakersfield with the benefits
of the proposed project described above and in the Statement of Overriding Considerations.
Therefore, for the potential significant impacts which cannot be mitigated to a level below
significance, the City of Bakersfield adopts the Statement of Overriding Considerations located in
Appendix A of this document pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15093.
4.3 - REDUCED INTENSITY ALTERNATIVE
A Reduced Intensity Alternative is evaluated regarding its potential to reduce a long-term significant
unavoidable impact that would occur with project implementation. There are two long-term
Michael Brandman Associates
S:\GV\CCI02160039 ]indings_11-14-07.doc
117
~ M t:"
~ 0,
>- r
I- r
-0 C:J
ORIGINAl
Feasibility of Project Alternatives
Gosford Village Shopping Center
CEQA Findings of Fact
and Statement of Overriding Considerations
significant unavoidable impacts associated with the proposed project: cumulative transportation and
traffic impacts in the 2030 horizon year scenario, and project and cumulative noise impacts.
This evaluation is focused on the cumulative traffic impacts because although the project and
cumulative noise impacts are considered significant under the City's incremental contribution
threshold, the noise levels at the sensitive receptors will nevertheless not exceed the City's overall
exterior noise level standard. This evaluation examines the following 11 city intersections, 10 city
roadway segments, and two SR-99 freeway segments that will experience significant unavoidable
impacts as a result of the project plus cumulative development in the year 2030:
City Intersections
. Buena Vista Road and Panama Lane
. Coffee Road and Stockdale Highway Road
. Old River Road and Ming Avenue
. Gosford Road and Ming Avenue
. Gosford Road and White
. Stine Road and White Lane
. Wible Road and White Lane
. Ashe Road and Panama Lane
. Old River Road and White Lane
. Wible Road and Panama Lane
. Gosford Road and District Boulevard
City Roadway Segments
. Gosford Road: Stockdale Highway - Ming Avenue
. Gosford Road: Ming Avenue - North Laurelglen Boulevard
. Gosford Road: White Lane - Pacheco Road
. Gosford Road: Pacheco Road - Panama Lane
. Ming Avenue: Old River Road - Gosford Road
. Ming Avenue: Gosford Road - EI Portal Drive
. White Lane: Gosford Road - Ashe Road
. White Lane: Ashe Road - Stine Road
. White Lane: Stine Road - Wible Road
. Panama Lane: Wible Road - SR 99
City Roadway Segments
. SR 99: Ming Avenue - White Lane
. SR 99: Panama Lane - Taft Highway
118
Michael Brandman Associates
S:IGVICCI02160039 ]indings_11-14-07.doc
'6M~1>
.:) '< u>
"'\'\
m
r-
.) <::>
'lRIGINAL
Gosford Village Shopping Center
CEQA Findings of Fact
and Statement of Overriding Considerations
Feasibility of Project Alternatives
As discussed above in Section 4.1, No Project/No Development Alternative, there are eight city
intersections, eight city roadway segments, and two SR-99 freeway segments, that would continue to
operate at deficient levels of service (Le., LOS D or worse) at the 2030 time horizon even if all of the
identified RTIF and local improvements were put into place at 2030 or prior to that time and even if
no development occurred on the site. As discussed previously, and in Chapter 1 of the Final EIR,
under the No Project/No Development Alternative, only the following three intersections during the
Saturday peak hour and two roadway segments would operate at acceptable levels of service at the
2030 timeline.
City Intersections
· Wible Road and White Lane (LOS C)
· Gosford Road and White Lane (LOS C)
· Gosford Road and District Boulevard (LOS C)
City Roadway Segments
· Gosford Road: Ming Avenue - North Laurelglen Boulevard (LOS C)
· Gosford Road: Pacheco Road - Panama Lane (LOS C)
An evaluation of the above traffic facilities was conducted to determine the amount of project peak
hour traffic that would need to be reduced to achieve LOS C at these facilities. The evaluation
determined that the reduction required at the intersections so that all three intersection would achieve
an LOS C is 1,229 Saturday peak hour trips which equates to a 44 percent reduction of the proposed
project's square footage on the project site. With the reduction, one of the two roadway segments
would achieve LOS C. An evaluation was conducted to determine the average daily trip reduction for
both of the roadway segments to achieve LOS C. This required a reduction of 17,818 average daily
trips which equates to a 70 percent reduction of the proposed project's square footage on the project
site. Because such a drastic reduction would make the reduced density alternative infeasible in its
face, the reduced density alternative has been defined based on the reduction required to improve all
three intersections and one roadway segment (rather than improving both of the roadway segments).
Based on the above evaluation, the Reduced Intensity Alternative was determined to be 44 percent
reduction of square footage on the project site to achieve LOS C at the three intersections and one
roadway segment. The Reduced Intensity Alternative is defined as the development of approximately
392,000 sq ft of retail commercial shopping center on the entire project site. This Alternative
includes smaller retail stores compared to the proposed project; however, the entire site would be
graded and the retail stores would be constructed throughout the proj ect site.
Michael Brandman Associates
S:IGV\CCI02160039 ]indings_11-14-07.doc
~M~1>
~ ~
119 >- m
l- T-
O C)
ORIGINAL
Feasibility of Project Alternatives
Gosford Village Shopping Center
CEQA Findings of Fact
and Statement of Overriding Considerations
The City of Bakersfield fmds that the Reduced Intensity Alternative would generate less traffic trips
compared to the project, and would substantially lessen traffic and transportation impacts. Although,
while fewer trips would be generated, this Alternative would not reduce the significant and
unavoidable traffic impacts to eight of the 10 City roadway segments, eight City intersections, and
two SR-99 freeway segments to a level below significance. The Reduced Intensity Alternative would
not avoid the short-term significant unavoidable adverse project-specific air quality impact because
this Alternative includes grading of the entire project site and is expected to result in the same
temporary emissions that occurred in 2003 during grading activities. In addition, the Reduced
Intensity Alternative would generate long-term criteria pollutants for which a basin is in non-
attainment and contribute to a significant cumulative air quality impact. Furthermore, this Altemative
would avoid the cumulative 2030 significant and unavoidable adverse noise impact, but would not
avoid the project-specific 2008 and 2012 significant and unavoidable adverse noise impact.
While this Alternative could meet a few of the project objectives, it would not meet most of the basic
project objectives. The Reduced Alternative would not maximize development intensity on the site to
reduce traffic congestion, and air emissions; maximize employment opportunities,; and maximize
sales tax which would assist the City in obtaining fiscal balance.
The City of Bakersfield fmds that all potential significant environmental impacts of the project will be
mitigated by the inclusion of design features and incorporation of all feasible mitigation measures as
set forth in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, except the cumulative 2030 impacts to
11 city intersections, 10 city roadway segments, and two SR-99 freeway segments, a short term 2003
violation ofthe applicable air quality standard for PMI0 and PM2.5 which occurred in 2003 when
previous grading occurred, and project-specific 2008 and 2012 noise impacts and cumulative 2030
noise impacts. The City of Bakersfield finds that, although the Reduced Development Alternative
would contribute less traffic to cumulative significant and unavoidable adverse traffic impacts
compared to the project and avoid significant and unavoidable traffic impacts at three City
intersections and one City roadway segment, avoid a cumulative 2030 significant and unavoidable
noise impact but not avoid project-specific 2008 and 2012 significant and unavoidable noise impacts,
not avoid the short-term significant unavoidable adverse project-specific air quality impacts that have
already occurred in 2003 on residences adjacent to the project site, and contribute to a long-term
significant and unavoidable air quality impact, the Reduced Intensity Alternative is infeasible
because it would not attain the project objectives and would not provide the City of Bakersfield with
the benefits of the proposed project described above and in the Statement of Overriding
Considerations. Therefore, for the potential significant impacts which cannot be mitigated to a level
below significance, the City of Bakersfield adopts the Statement of Overriding Considerations located
in Appendix A of this document pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15093.
120
Michael Brandman Associates
S:IGVICCI02160039 ]indings_11-14-07.doc
~M~1>
~ 0'1
-'(I
>- -
r- m
__ f-
;.) C)
ORIGINAL
Gosford Village Shopping Center
CEQA Findings of Fact
and Statement of Overriding Considerations
Feasibility of Project Alternatives
4.4 - PANAMAlGOSFORD ALTERNATIVE SITE
An alternative site was selected that could meet the project objectives. The Panama/Gosford
Alternative Site would result in the development ofthe proposed project at the southwest comer of
Panama Lane and Gosford Road, approximately a half mile south from the project site. As with the
proposed project, this alternative considers development ofthe alternative site at the maximum
density of 700,000 square feet. Tenants and the proposed square footages would remain the same;
however, the configuration of the proposed uses may be altered to meet characteristics of the
proposed Alternative site. The Alternative site is 156.1 acres and as with the proposed project, site
development would occupy a maximum of73.53 acres; therefore 82.57 acres of the Alternative site
would remain undeveloped. The project applicant does not own this alternative site.
The City of Bakersfield finds that the Panama/Gosford Alternative would generate the same level of
traffic generation compared to the project, and would result in the same significant and unavoidable
adverse impacts to City intersections, City roadway segments, and SR-99 freeway segments as the
proposed project. This Alternative would avoid the short-term significant unavoidable adverse
project-specific air quality impact on residences adjacent to the Panama/Gosford Alternative site;
however, this Alternative would not avoid the short-term significant unavoidable adverse project-
specific air quality impacts that have already occurred in 2003 on the residences adjacent tot he
project site. In addition, this Alternative would generate long-term criteria pollutants for which a
basin is in non-attainment and contribute to a significant cumulative air quality impact. Furthermore,
this Alternative would not avoid the project-specific 2008 and 2012 and cumulative 2030 significant
and unavoidable adverse noise impacts.
Because this alternative is in close proximity to the project site and has the same development as the
proposed project, this Alternative could meet the project objectives.
The City of Bakersfield finds that all potential significant environmental impacts of the project will be
mitigated by the inclusion of design features and incorporation of all feasible mitigation measures as
set forth in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, except the cumulative 2030 impacts to
11 City intersections, 10 City roadway segments, and two SR-99 freeway segments, a short-term
2003 violation of the applicable air quality standard for PMI0 and PM2.5 which occurred in 2003
when previous grading occurred, and project-specific 2008 and 2012 and cumulative 2030 noise
impacts.
Michael Brandman Associates
S:IGV\CCI02160039 ]indings_11-14-07.doc
~M~'9
~ ~\
121 >-
r::. [2:1
:.J C
ORIGINAL
Feasibility of Project Alternatives
Gosford Village Shopping Center
CEQA Findings of Fact
and Statement of Overriding Considerations
The City of Bakersfield fmds that, although the Panama/Gosford Alternative would not avoid
cumulative significant and unavoidable adverse traffic impacts at 11 City intersections, 10 City
roadway segments, and two SR-99 freeway segments, not avoid project-specific 2008 and 2012 and
cumulative 2030 significant and unavoidable noise impacts, not avoid the short-term significant
unavoidable adverse project-specific air quality impacts that have already occurred in 2003 on
residences adjacent to the project site, and contribute to a long-term significant and unavoidable air
quality impact, the Panama/Gosford Alternative could meet the objectives and the benefits of the
proposed project described above and in the Statement of Overriding Considerations. Because the
Panama/Gosford Alternative would not avoid the traffic, noise, and air quality significant and
unavoidable impacts of the project, this Alternative is infeasible. In addition, as stated above, the
project applicant does not own the site. Therefore, for the potential significant impacts which cannot
be mitigated to a level below significance, the City of Bakersfield adopts the Statement of Overriding
Considerations located in Appendix A of this document pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15093.
122
Michael Brandman Associates
S:IGV\CCI02160039 ]indings_11-14-07.doc
, 'OMt:'1>
cS ~
m
- r-
-) C)
"lRIGINAl
Gosford Village Shopping Center
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations
Appendix A: Statement of Overriding Considerations
Michael Brandman Associates
S:IGV\CCI02160039 ]indings_11-14-07.doc
<< ~p.,Kt:'1>
o ~
>- -
:: J!!
'J C)
I')RIGINAL
Gosford Village Shopping Center
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations
Appendix A
STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires the lead agency to balance the benefits of
a proposed project against its unavoidable environmental risks in determining whether to approve the
project. The City of Bakersfield proposes to approve the Gosford Village Shopping Center although
significant and unavoidable adverse traffic, air quality, and noise impacts have been identified in the
EIR. Specifically, there are no feasible mitigation measures, changes or alterations that are available
to reduce the project's significant cumulative impacts to less than significant to the following
roadway segments and intersections:
City Intersections
· Buena Vista Road and Panama Lane (evening peak hour LOS D);
· Coffee Road and Stockdale Highway (morning peak hour LOS F and evening peak hour
LOS F )
· Old River Road and Ming Avenue (morning peak hour LOS F, evening peak hour LOS D and
Saturday peak hour LOS F);
· Gosford Road and Ming Avenue (morning peak hour LOS E and evening peak hour LOS F);
· Old River Road and White Lane (morning peak hour LOS D);
· Gosford Road and White Lane (morning peak hour LOS D, evening peak hour LOS E and
Saturday peak hour LOS D);
· Stine Road and White Lane (evening peak hour LOS D);
· Wible Road and White Lane (evening peak hour LOS D and Saturday peak hour LOS D);
· Wible Road and Panama Lane (morning peak hour LOS E and Saturday peak hour LOS F);
· Ashe Road and Panama Lane (evening peak hour LOS D); and
· Gosford Road and District Boulevard (Saturday peak hour LOS D).
City Roadway Segments
· Gosford Road - Stockdale Highway to Ming Avenue (LOS F);
· Gosford Road - Ming Avenue to North Laurelglen (LOS D);
· Gosford Road - White Lane and Pacheco Road (LOS F);
· Gosford Road - Pacheco Road to Panama Lane (LOS D);
· Ming Avenue - Old River Road to Gosford Road (LOS E);
· Ming Avenue - Gosford Road to EI Portal Drive (LOS D);
· White Lane - Gosford Road to Ashe Road (LOS F);
Michael Brandman Associates
S:IGV\CCI02160039 ]indings_11-14-07.doc
A-1
<<. ~~1\t:1
o ~\
>- -
r- ::::
-0 t:
ORIGINAl
Attachment A
Gosford Village Shopping Center
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations
. White Lane - Ashe Road to Stine Road (LOS D);
. White Lane - Stine Road to Wible Road (LOS D); and
. Panama Lane - Wible Road to SR 99 (LOS E);
SR-99 Freeway Segments
. SR 99 - Ming Avenue to White Lane (LOS F); and
. SR 99 - Panama Lane to Taft Highway (LOS F).
Changes and alterations are required in or incorporated into the project to reduce project impacts to
the maximum extent feasible. No further additional roadway improvements beyond those identified
are recommended because further improvements would create negative impacts across a broad
segment of environmental, economic, legal, and social areas that would create other more significant
collateral traffic impacts.
Additionally, no feasible mitigation measures, changes, or alterations are available to reduce the short
term air quality violation that occurred in 2003 as a result ofthe previous grading of the project site
("2003 Short Term Air Quality Impact"). Changes and alterations are required in or incorporated into
the project to reduce project impacts to the maximum extent possible.
Furthermore, no feasible mitigation measures, changes, or alterations are available to reduce the
significant and unavoidable project-specific and cumulative noise impacts due to two roadway
segments that would experience significant and unavoidable traffic noise increases. The roadway
segment of Harris Road between Old River Road and Progress Road would experience a substantial
project- specific noise increase to the noise environment for the years 2008 and 2012. In addition, the
roadway segments of Harris Road between Old River Road and Progress Road, and Gosford Road
between Pacheco Road and Panama Lane would experience substantial project-generated noise
increases to the cumulative noise environment in the year 2030. Modification ofthe existing
residential block walls to lower the increase in project generated noise is not feasible because block
walls are typically designed for the height that they are built at. It is also infeasible for the Lead
Agency to demolish the existing walls on private property and build new ones of increased height so
that noise level increases are lowered even though the overall noise level does not exceed the City's
exterior noise level for residences. Therefore, this potentially significant noise impact cannot be
feasibly mitigated.
Even though these adverse impacts are not reduced to a level considered less than significant, the
Bakersfield City Council finds, after balancing these impacts with the benefits of the project, that
those impacts are outweighed by the benefits of the project. Further, the alternatives which were
A-2
Michael Brandman Associates
S:IGVICCI02160039 ]indings_11-14-07.doc
'QMt:1>
~ ~
>- iT,
r- T-
.;' C)
o OfW~INA\
Gosford Village Shopping Center
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations
Appendix A
identified in the Final EIR would not meet either in part or in whole to the same extent as the
proposed project, the project objectives, and/or would not substantially lessen or avoid identified
environmental impacts.
Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21081(b) and the Guidelines Section 15093, the City has
balanced the benefits of the proposed Project against the following unavoidable adverse impacts
associated with the proposed Project and has adopted all feasible mitigation measures with respect to
the cumulative traffic impact, 2003 short-term air quality impact, and project-specific and cumulative
noise impacts.
The City also has examined alternatives to the proposed project, none of which both meet the project
objectives and is environmentally preferable to the proposed project. The City, after balancing the
specific economic, legal, social, technological, and other benefits of the proposed project, has
determined that the unavoidable adverse environmental impacts identified above may be considered
"acceptable" due to the following specific considerations which outweigh the unavoidable, adverse
environmental impacts of the proposed project. Each of the separate benefits of the proposed project,
as stated herein, is determined to be, unto itself and independent of the other proj ect benefits, a basis
for overriding all unavoidable adverse environmental impacts identified in these Findings. The City
Council and City Planning Staff have independently verified the existence of all facts stated below to
justify the State of Overriding Considerations. Project benefits include:
1. The Proposed Project Will Provide Sales Tax Revenue to Provide Funding for Needed
City Services: The project is anticipated to provide approximately $2.4 million dollars in
sales tax revenue to the City of Bakersfield per year. (Source: Generally applicable sales
tax rate as applied to the estimated taxable sales to be generated by the project as estimated
by the CBRE Urban Decay Study; page 3-24 in Chapter 1 of the Final EIR.) The provision
of sales tax revenue to the City will provide funding for needed City services such as police
and fire.
2. The Proposed Project Will Provide for the Redevelopment of an Existing,
Underutilized In-fill Parcel That is Adjacent to Existing Infrastructure: The project site
ceased to be used for cattle feeding operations in the 1970's and ceased to be used for
farming in the 1990' s. Prior to and concurrent with the cessation of agricultural uses on the
project site, residential, commercial and industrial development occurred to the north, east
and west ofthe project site and the project site is now nearly fully surrounded by urbanized
uses. The City's General Plan contains numerous policies encouraging the development of
infill parcels ofland. For example, General Plan Land Use Element Policies 78 and 79 set
forth City policies of accommodating new infill and urban development so that continuity of
Michael Brandman Associates
S:IGV\CCI02160039 ]indings_11-14-07.doc
~~Kt:L>
<< . '<y
A-30 "1",
>- ~
l- rr
_ t"-
O ()
ORIGINAl
Attachment A
Gosford Village Shopping Center
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations
existing development is maintained and so that incremental expansion of infrastructure and
public services can occur. In addition, providing retail shopping opportunities to places in
the City that are underserved by retail will reduce vehicle trip lengths and incrementally
reduce traffic congestion, air emissions, and energy consumption. It is a social, legal and
economic prerogative of the City to develop infill sites, such as the project site, with uses
that are compatible to adjacent development and serve the surrounding neighborhood and
area.
3. The Proposed Project Will Implement the City's General Plan: The City's General Plan
contains numerous goals and policies with which the project is consistent and which the
project implements. Many ofthese goals and policies are contained and discussed
throughout the EIR. For example, Goal No.1 of the Land Use Element contains the goal of
accommodating new development which captures the economic demands generated by the
marketplace and establishes Bakersfield's role as the capital of the southern San Joaquin
Valley. The proposed project implements this goal as it provides sales tax revenue to the
City and also provides high quality retail shopping opportunities to residents who live in the
southern part of the City. Similarly, Goal No.2 identifies a City goal of accommodating
new development which provides a full mix of uses to support the population. The proposed
project is consistent with and implements this Goal as well insofar as the proposed project
provides high quality retail and home improvement shopping opportunities to the residents
of southwest Bakersfield. Policy 76 suggests the accommodation of development that
provides employment opportunities and provides land uses that meet the needs of residences
of the City. The project is consistent with and implements this Policy.
4. The Proposed Project Will Bring High Quality Retail Shopping Opportunities to
Southwest Bakersfield: The proposed project will provide high quality retail shopping
opportunities to southwest Bakersfield. The Wal-Mart Supercenter and Sam's Club will
provide a convenient location for residents and businesses to shop for a variety of retail
goods and groceries. In addition, the Kohl's will provide shopping opportunities for a
variety of clothing goods. Finally, the other in line retailers will also provide high quality
retail shopping opportunities to the residents of southwest Bakersfield. As set forth in the
CBRE Urban Decay Study, the southwest area of the City is underserved with respect to
high quality retail shopping opportunities with many residents of the southwest having to
shop in the northwest and northeast sections of the City. The proposed project will provide
such high quality retail shopping opportunities to the residents of the southwest and will
reduce vehicle trips from the southwest to other areas of the City.
5. The Proposed Project Will Provide Needed Jobs to Southwest Bakersfield: The
proposed project will provide approximately 1,593 permanent jobs, including approximately
83 management positions. These jobs will provide a strong mix of fIrst time, working-
A-4
Michael Brandman Associates
S:IGVICCI02160039 ]indings_11-14-07.doc
~Mi::'i
~ 0"
>- Ii
\::; r
o c:-
ORIGINP'
Gosford Village Shopping Center
CEQA Findings of Fact and
Statement of Overriding Considerations
Appendix A
family and management opportunities to residents of southwest Bakersfield. Historically,
southwest Bakersfield has suffered from a lack of wide scale retail shopping and
employment opportunities. The jobs provided at the Gosford Village shopping center will
provide employment opportunities to the residents of southwest Bakersfield.
Therefore, the Bakersfield City Council, having reviewed and considered the information contained
in the Final EIR and the public record makes and adopts this Statement of Overriding Considerations
by which the Bakersfield City Council, after balancing the economic, legal, social, technological and
other benefits ofthe project, against the significant and unavoidable adverse impacts of the project,
states the specific reasons to support its approval of the project notwithstanding the existence of the
significant and unavoidable adverse cumulative traffic, project-specific short-term air quality, and
project-specific and cumulative noise impacts.
Michael Brandman Associates
S:IGV\CCI02160039 ]indings_11-14-07.doc
A-5
~M(1'
~ \J
"'{
>- ff
\::;: r--
o t!
ORIGINAl
EXHIBIT "5"
Gosford Village Shopping Center
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan
Prepared for:
City of Bakersfield
Development Services Department
1715 Chester Avenue
Bakersfield, CA 93301
661.326.3043
Contact: Ms. Jennie Eng, Principal Planner
Prepared by:
Michael Brandman Associates
220 Commerce, Suite 200
Irvine, CA 92602
714.508.4100
Contact: Michael E. Houlihan, AICP, Project Director
....
....
\i':(\:,,:;,:; i\\ ,,;;Yi,";' \ ,,;:,.
November 14, 2007
~M~?-
~ 0"
>- n
\::;: r-
o C)
ORIGINAl
This Page Left
Intentionally Blank
I. ~Mt:'".
:<. 'v
<J __,
>- r
l- r-
o c::-
()RI()!NAI
Gosford Village Shopping Center
MItigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
SECTION 1:
INTRODUCTION
In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines, Section 15097, public
agencies that make fmdings under paragraph (1) of subdivision (a) of Section 15091 ofthe CEQA
Guidelines relative to an EIR in conjunction with approving a project are required to prepare a mitigation
monitoring and reporting program (MMRP). The City of Bakersfield has made findings under paragraph
(1) of subdivision (a) of Section 15091 of the CEQA Guidelines for the Gosford Village Shopping Center.
Therefore a MMRP is required for the Gosford Village Shopping Center. The purpose ofthe MMRP is to
ensure compliance with those mitigation measures adopted as conditions of approval in order to mitigate or
avoid significant environmental effects as identified in the Final EIR. Following is a MMRP that
incorporates the mitigation measures set forth in the Final EIR. The City of Bakersfield City Council will
deliberate on the adoption of this MMRP at the time of certification of the Final EIR for the Gosford
Village Shopping Center.
The following MMRP identifies the City department that is responsible for verifying that the mitigation
measures for the Gosford Village Shopping Center are performed. The City departments will also be
responsible for providing a date that each mitigation measure is verified as completed. In addition, the
MMRP provides a comment column for the City departments to provide notes and remarks. The timing of
implementing the mitigation measures in the MMRP is identified in each measure.
Except for the following seven mitigation measures, the performance of the mitigation measures is the
responsibility of the project applicant. The project applicant is responsible to provide evidence to the City
departments that the mitigation measures are performed and completed. The City will be responsible for
ensuring that implementation of all mitigation measures occurs in accordance with this program.
Mitigation Measure 5.6.A.l - The project applicant is responsible to pay its fair share for local
improvements as outlined in Table 5.6-15 in the Draft EIR; however, the City of Bakersfield Public
Work Department is responsible to construct the improvements outlined in Table 5.6-15 of the
Draft EIR at the point in time necessary to avoid identified significant impacts on traffic.
Mitigation Measure 5.6.A.2 - The project applicant is responsible to pay its fair share for regional
improvements as outlined in Table 5.6-15 in the Draft EIR; however, the City of Bakersfield Public
Work Department is responsible to construct the improvements outlined in Table 5.6-15 of the
Draft EIR at the point in time necessary to avoid identified significant impacts on traffic.
Mitigation Measure 5.6.A.3 - The City of Bakersfield Public Works Department is responsible to
coordinate with Caltrans and KernCOG to develop a study to identify fair share contribution
funding sources attributable to and paid from private and public development to supplement other
regional and State funding sources necessary to implement the regional and state improvements
identified by Caltrans in its SR -99 Business Plan.
Michael Brandman Associates
S:\GV\CCl02160039 _MMRP Gosfordl1-14-07.doc
2
~M~-s>
~ ~
>- IT>
\::;: T-
O ~
ORIGIN!\!
Gosford Village Shopping Center
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Mitigation Measure 5.6.A.4 - The project applicant is responsible to pay its fair share contribution
to its cumulative impacts to the identified segments ofSR-99, and the City of Bakersfield Public
Works Department is responsible to coordinate with Caltrans and KernCOG in implementing the
improvements. In addition, the applicant is responsible to provide an irrevocable offer of
dedication to Caltrans for approximately 1,000 linear feet of right-of-way along the western
property line.
Mitigation Measure 5.7.A.9 - The project applicant is required to identify off-site emission
reduction mitigation programs to reduce the project's net impact on air quality. The San Joaquin
Valley Air Pollution Control District is responsible to review and approve the off-site emission
reduction mitigation programs.
Mitigation Measure 5.6.C.1 - The project applicant is responsible to provide funding to the City to
complete the improvements (i.e., markings). The City of Bakersfield Public Works Department is
responsible to place clearly identified markings on the eastbound and westbound lanes immediately
adjacent to the existing railroad crossings at Pacheco Road and Panama Lane.
Mitigation Measure 5.8.C.l - The project applicant is responsible to fund the construction of a new
8-foot high wall adjacent to existing residences that are along the west side of Gosford Road
between White Lane and Pacheco Road. The City of Bakersfield Public Works Department is
responsible to review and approve the fmal cost of the new wall as well as determine and approve
the method of installing the new wall.
Michael Brandman Associates
S:\GYlCCl02160039_MMRP GosfordI1-14-07.doc
'OMt:'.-)>
~ ~
3 >- iii
- t-
'0 C)
ORIC;INAL
!
c:
~
01
-&
g;
.c:
CI)
&
::!!
s
j
e
~
~
01
~
1
It:
'tJ
fa
01
-e
i
c:
i
c:
i
III
~
i
::E
~
C)
o
0::
Q..
C)
Z
~
o
Q..
W
NO::
zc
oz
i=c(
oc)
wz
U)-
0::
o
!::
z
o
::E
z
o
~
C)
E
::E
.....
>. >.
,r, ,r,
-0 -0
., ~ ., ~
e
Q. ~
- ~ = Ei:: 8
p.. 0
tn
W
(J
0::
::>>
o
tn
W
0::
....I
c(
(J
(;
o
....I
o
iii
~
.s 0 +:l
8u ..9
do~~ ....
0:lQ)...+:lQ)=
.p .= 0 ..... -<:I ~
~0.';::0+:ll=<
::> lS.. <<I 0-0 Q)
~ ~ :~8 !a ~
O+:l'""'oOQ) <<I
Q) ."""r--O....
o '8 S v) 0 5
!3 E:.... _ U El
~ Q) 'il = "if Q)
rJ) Q...... 0 Q.bll
.... bll.......;::.... ~
~ ~ ~ ~ .~ ~
<<I<<ItI)~
g ~ Q..;l """
.... -'<::! -0 0
.8 =] ~ 1) .~
p..~rJ)8f.l:l=
~Q.~!3~~~
.00oi:J..liiiil=<U
<1):.=c;<<I..2::r:
~ ~ Q.oE S<f:g
lIiO~~o.s~
Q) Q)
-0 d ~ :'11 .;l =
Q)0:l~""rJ) Q)O
.~ tI) -0 Q) .;l ..= rJ)
-OQ)Q)Sbll 0<<1
~ .;l ~ .50 ~ 0]' g -0
B.....o<<lo....Q)rge
o Q) 0 0 c; rJ) 0....
tI) = fE<..... =.1::.:= 0 50
o Q) Cl Q) Q.'t:l-o Q)
~ .'=.!:l O:l p.. rJ) 0 d ...
+:l~::ltl)uQ)E-<O:lQ)
18 [~::r:~~;;j 8~
p..,....,... ....0..;::<<1..
p.. ... 0\ ..s :.;;!..;:: ~.;l"if
u..s~rJ)Q) 0J:lrJ);>
::r:rg::,~.;l~e.rg~~
~.g ~ ~.~] ~ ? ~ ~
Q).g~ ~:a"O=.[El"O
E9 Q)~ Q)'g = ~ bll= rg
~ ~.~ J .s 'g ]'.~ .g :~
~ 8 0".... ~ g ~ 0.: "8
~ B ~ ~ r? 1) ~ ::z.:= 0
ltl..........<<I_"'....<.;:ol:lo
.8
~~
J!'7
8=
:g]
o:d
I~,
c:11:
e~
~ III 8 t:'1>tfl
'-J .c::> "0
>- ~o --
l::: ~;;; l!2
(.) ()
ORIr,INAI
e
t
a:
{
~
'tI
lii
01
.~
i
i
c::
~
III
~
i
i
c::
~
OJ
t
g;
.c:
U)
&
.l!
~
j
II)
>> >>
,D ,D
.( "'0 "'0
~ .( ~
e e
0.. 0..
- ~ = - ~ =
~ 0 ~ 0
I
tl
10.;
~
~
I:
.~
.,
~
I:
.~
~
g I:
~ .~
a ~
~.s
d:;~
ll) 0 '+-< '+-< ll) "'0
"" .~ ~ = 0..... ;9 "" .~
>> ~"'O""fIi "'0 =:0
~....o~ oS~~ll) ~ = ll)s~ta
,-., -~ (,)$:l'P~ ::l tI)
o ""::;;:j ll).~.g 0'~'1;] "'O.s 0.;3 e ll)
e.~ .Q "'0;:; = ll)'p = ~ B la'~'s ~ .;3
~.~ "" .9 0 8.;3 ~ 0 S .!:l -g = 0" tI) 'E
~'p>>~ll)ll)O ....=(,)..c:lOell)
"'0 (,) ll)~.... ~,D .... ~ 5 0 "'0 ""'p -<::l =
~ bIl ... .... .;;;l (,) Cl.... o:l ll)" 0
o bIl ..sa ~:::l.g..P e >> = ::is .= .;3 00 '.g
.es .~$ ~.s ~..Cl 0.. B 0.. 1) ~ ~ ~.;3 ~ ~
"" ... ,D "" "" "" ll) t;j.;;;l ll) $:l'~ ~ 0
~ ~-g5~~~,D~~ll)8~tI)~^
.s.~ ~!E 8 !>: "'0 "'0 .9 G) ~,D bIl = ~ .... 0'\
t ~ ~ ~ 5 ~ 6' ~ -g !3 .$ ~ .$ ~ ~ oS ~
.... = $:l ::J <h M 0 s 5l "'O..c:l ~...... "l-
~ ::l 0 0" e 11 '-' ~ ll) 'll) ta "" 0 ~ $:l '-'
oe~~o..o~""ll),D ~~o.$~~
Z OIle >>"'O~' O"'O-.c=<+=i (,):B~~
.. >>0..,D 8 "" ~ ~]<<lla ~"'O ~ =.....
'<<i' la ~ "'g Cl <: ~,p !ll "" '(,)s = &3 la "'0 ll)~ ~
'-' ~~'.::I (,)""tI) O"'OtI)ll)
N .9 bIl ll) Cl G:i g ~ ~ 0.... ~ ~ s .S
~5~~8ie"loS~&]oS~~8&
M..... ~ !:l ll) ... 0 $:l .... tI) _ (,) .... tI) ... ll) ~
~a~8.;3sEl8:.iil~~~:.iil~8~~
"'0
"" ll)
>>f.l:: ll) Cl
~ ........ ll) t;j 0 "'0 ll)
"'0 0] .;3 "'0 (,)'p ll).;3
$'.~ 0" 5 'E ta ~ g ~ E
'-'..... ~;o II") .... .... 1) :i "'0
~.~ 0 tar-: 5.9.... ~e
f.l:: ~~13'<t" ~.~.9 0 ~
:>> o'a Cl ll) bIl ll) tI) 0
t: S (,) E:.9 ~..sa.;:1 ~ (,)
oS~' ~ ~ n <:.9 = ~ ~
~ ..c:l-tI)=,Do.....,~
"".... 0.... "'0.....
~ t g..9'~ !!! ~ >>
...."0 0..0_.....;:3 ~,D=
!1l..sa as 5.9 8-g ~
_::lll) bIl~ El<<l- > I=l
~e.8~~~~~e~
OIl _O"Q.....o8:!l:l
^>>~]~.El8:~ ~ lil
ela ~....5~~:.iil~:E~
C'! .9 bIl.~ El u -8 t:.... u
<: .... ~ 0 3 :I: .~ ~ ll).~ :I:
~.g ~] ~ ~ e 8 e ~ ~
II") 0.. 5b,D ~ ::E 0.. ~ 0....... ::E
.8
C/)r-'
a~
.!! "7
g~
=~
oq:t3
lii~
i~,
C::~
~~t:
lC;o 1-
o CD () <.J.
.! u ~,
~ ~~ iT,
'_ :I,;; r-
:.J lJ
I)RIGINAL
e
~
~
0>
~
l
It:
'tl
~
~
'1::
:@
c:
i
c:
i
III
,
:I
!
a
0>
t
~
ti
&
,!
~
I
>-
,r;
'0
. bSli ~
8
Q..
ii: ~
=
o
t;j Q) '"
~ ~.~ B oS
~13~~~:S:O
-"" =CI)~O
tr) .Q) ~ ~ ~ ..s ...
~.+:2 +> - _ oJ p.,
Q) .~ t) ] .s ;.g :0 ~
,e; t) S "" Fl .... ~
-~='013~[{i
ebSloij~o~;9
o .8 ~ ~.~..e -='~ ~
~ of 1l .~ ~ >- ~ 8 ~
.s-51 "" ~ 0 ij ~'+:2 0
",;0 8..~ ! ~ ~ ~ a
~'O 0 "" ""-+> 8..d
~ ~ ~ ~ .~ 8 B 0 ~
00Q)~_:>-~0Q)
Z Sl '0 S .2 .':l .~.8 :s
.. >-Q)CI),r; 8 "" 9 '"
~ij;9~~]~ 8 =]
N 0 bSl ~ ll:i Q) '0 '" ....
. - 8 <il ]..... '+t 0 0 00
< ""'8 0'" ~ 0
M .8 "i S 0';0 ~ ~ '0
.,; Q..Slrzl ~ e,Q'O ~
10
>- >-
,r; ,r;
'J '0 'J '0
~ ~
8 8
Q.. Q..
- ~ 8 ii: ~ 8
p..
-
.8.s .
~",'OQ)8
~ 0 e !3'+:2
"" 0 "" ~
-Q)-=>
'<t '+:2'a Q) ~
:::..~ 0 B ~
='+:2 e "" Q)
~~]~a
1i bSl _ '0 '0
..s '18] ~ B
J "",~ 13
o '1::
.;e 5 Q) Q..
b~'O 2]
't;j = Fl 0....
-=~-g.
Z ~:$Cg
~ Q) 0
~ ~~ ~ ~
~ ~ .~ ~ ~
'0'OQ);e
<"1'1:: ~:: a
tr) Q.. 5h ~ '0
"" rzl '0
>-bSl.... ~ Q)",
~ 8 0 0 oil Q) ~ Q) .!:l ~
"" :.0 "" ::: .8 .~ ~ ..9 & =
:s .a'Gf8 is"i o~ B ~oS eel
.8 .;e t;j lEo:El Sl ~15 ur CI) >-] Q)
~~Cl 23~~Cd~~,r;=;9
~ ~ ~ ] ;;: .~ .~ ~ ..s ~ :s 1l .8
~ a CI) .S 0:13 ~ Cl 'rl ~ ~ : ~
Q)OIlbSlbSlbSl u"><;'O~Q)Q)
~ ~~ ~:~ 1 ~ "0 ~ ij]]'~
~....e.s~~::s:$~~~..s
.soc::> =Q)Q)>~ -.-
= '-'.a.... '0 Q..'+:2 Q) Cl :$ Cl ;.g
E 0 bSl'+:2 CI) '0 ,Q S t;j u ~ ~ Fl
~ .~ ~ :$ ~.~ ~ is g:= ~ ! ~
'+:2f'! \:l.,-Q)",,- ~ClO.
Zo.= 5h ~ CI) B Cl e e ~ g ..e ~
.= ..d ~ 0 ~ Q.. 0 ,r; _ 1:: 0
.. Q) 13 "" '0 :$ ~Q) e -';J e s ~ Q
'Q)';9 "" b = =. '0 Q. ~ 0 CI) ~,r;
(::l 0 Q) Q.. Cd Q) e ~ - bSl.
<( -::: :~ ~ ~ ~.:g ~ ~ -= ~ ~ ;..... ~
M .0'+:2 > ~ tl:: g; ~ ~ ~ e Q) ~
.,; R~-8u-8< O'B ~ 3~ B ~
~
1/)"':
a~
.!!I'
~=
1/)1!
I/)~
ctt3
~~
~~,
C:~
i~
~ ~t0>~
>- i~ m
\::;: t-
o C)
ORIGINAL
E
t
a:
f
&
~
I:
ClI
~
't:
i
I:
i
I:
~
&
I
i
I:
~
~
.i
~
.c::
II)
3,
,!!
~
I
>. >. >.
,rJ ,rJ ,rJ
'0 .( '0 .( '0
.( ~ ~ ~
e e e
Q.. Q.. Q..
- ~ 8 - ~ 8 p:: ~ =
I:l-. I:l-. 0
~
I
tl
...
;
~
&:
.~
iii
.,
~
&:
.~
\,l
~ .~
&: \,l
a ::t
~ ,
(~
tIS.... 135 5= .
.;l ,o....o_.;l,oa,oQ;jo~
.~ = ~ Q) 0 = ~ !!:l ~,g 0 '0 - .Q
~ ~ = - = 0 ~~~~ = Q) - Q)
'0 -= ell -8 ~.!2'+:2 - po _ Q).....;l S,rJ
!aQ) Q)~tIS""U1;:jQ)tlSe- ~:i,€
~ .~ ~ eEl ~.~ 5 s 'I'~'~ ~:8 ~ eEl
r- = 0 .- Q.. ~ c.,=o .~ :.sol .;:l 5 Q.._
...to =;g];:s'O'O -8u.:aQ..>'~
U 0 "" Q) tlSO/) - v,
.~ ] '0'-8 ~] -0 ~ ~ '0 < J:l :.= ~ ~ ~
~ p.; ~ ~] "" ~ g 'g i i .eo ~ 0/) :g i
~ u 1;l ~ '-::'~ ~.~ e tIS 13.$ >.'s ~ g
... ::r:] ~ a.. _ ~ .... Q) '0 0 Q..,rJ !:i !3 ~
- .El eEl 00 U ~ 1:l-.,rJ Q) '0 >''0 '0' Q..
~ ~ ell sg C'S -8 li ]'~ s ~ !a 13 1 8
~ Q) ~.o ~ a 51 '5h "" B Q) e ~ t; ,g '-8
:3 .;l ~ ~ 0 Q) 'O.Q sg ~.::: 0 U ~ "" ;::s
I:l-. 'Cl 00 ] ~.;l ~ sa Q) ~ ~'s s -8 -8 -5l
;':"'ul>Q)~=O,rJ'Ou""o.E""Q)Q)
;::,..... &: e 0 J:l '0 Q) ---.- e ='-,rJ '0
C"'! .'1:: ell e's '0 ~ Jil .;l C = Q) Q) ~ '0 5
< ~ 0 0 6< ~ '0 ~ ~.f Q) -8,rJ 5'~ ~ '0
l"'i ~ Q) ~ tIS U '0 :i ~ g Q) !a '0'+:2 0 Q)
",;~-s~~.Q!aO"'O';:l.;lu1;:j~~-S
] 'OQ)
Q).;l ~~ 1.8
,rJ'~ "" B 0 Q)
-~Q)tIS_.;l
]S~~'E~
"" '~.- ~ -0 3
~>;gQ)tIS~ .
Q)tlSo>.Q..o"g
'0 ~ =:.;:j e ~ 'C
'ClQ)-~8-aQ)
...._!S!Q)_Q)Q..
o.s.;:l,rJ~Q)=
'-8 ~.~::;;j .: .g
5 u t! ..cl.E 0 u
~$~5~~~
o '0 .- 'O.~ "" 0
.. ..8.'1:: Q) ~ u
'bD.~ :-:= "Cl 13 0 ~
__-E-o=c+:;~
~S'5iu~]0/)
l"'i 8.z:g ~ - .~
.,.; ~ g .s ] .s '0
>.] ~ El
~rIJ ~'"O
.@]~~~~~
....""0Q).:9 .;;
~ .~ -~.;l =].~
]Q)se8Q)Q.
.!:l .;l -d'..g ].;l ~
]...l'e",,_a~o
:st-tuo...........-t
o .9 '0 > jg '0 ;0
c+:; 1;:j ~''5 "" u =
>...., ~ ~
.~ tIS = ~ 0 I:l-.
~ ~ ~ti.;ou
c+:;Q)Q)eell!a::r:
] O/)~ t;r P-< 0 B r:g
. ~t::~tIS::E
tIS Q) ~oUQ)"";
::::'Og:a~~-s8
.. 5 '0 .~ ~ ~ 0 El
;d''OQ)tlSOg-e
(::r'tIS ~<2u-8 Q..
<-8~asS':i1:l-.
...... tIS ~;o Q) ~ ~
<"'l~Q)~ct:l:3e1l
lI"l .;:l,rJ Q) ~ tIS Q.. ~
.....
~
C/l"':
.al~
.!!"7
8~
=~
0(8
II,
1::>:
~ ~ 1!1>o>
.c::~ --{\
>- .!:!o m
\::;: :E~ T-
o C)
ORIGINAL
e
~
t
f
&!
~
c::
"
~
't:
.s
'c:
i
c::
~
"
~
i
i
c::
~
01
l
g;
.c::
II)
&
:I
s
j
110
$' >.
~
.1 '0 '0
~ gp ~
e .~ e
0. 0.
ii:: ~ 8 Iii:: ~ =
0
Q) _.... M
-.;3 .;3.;3 <C. ...... "'" .s ::;;j'O
~ "0 ~ $"~ ~ ~ ] ~ ~ ~ ~ ;g '8 ~ ~
o.Q)~Q)>.'O....~u=~;9~~~ ""~~~
~ ] Q) ~ ~ Q) 0 = 5 lI'l ~ <+=i .... 0;:0 -.::l
50.]~~~]i~;J~]~~]]~~~
~ _ = '0 ~.El "'" 0 > = \.<- "" ~ '0 - ~ _ Q) p... Q) =
r.; 5.g..2 p--;S 0.5 B,Q ~ g,e g,:.12 El ~ ~u g.<c
~ t:: 0'<a;jS0 ""'18 x Q)Q)<Co.] ~o::I:oO
~ ~5~~~~8~~]*rJ~s.g8~~~';
~ '0 18 fr 0 fS '<a 0:S ~ 0 fS "".= ~ 0 ",,:::E . ~
II:: ~ 0 ~.e <c.5 lS. ~ c:l. -a = c <S .s ~ ~ s ~ '0 .~
I::l. o~oo_= El oCl:i ""..;:l=_+>0'O
OJ 5.s'O~ ~"O ~ e~ ~]~ ~]~ s~ S's ~ ~
0' > ~50!aQ)~0::l]00Q)5~Q)-""5
i; ~.s ~ oS ~ ~ ~ -a !5 ~ ~] t ~ [~ ~ ~ ~:o ~
~ 0!3 O!L) := '" = ti 0. ~~ 0.... J:l Q) ~ s ~ ~ 0 u
II:: E-< '0 ~ "" ~ .~ 0 0 ~ a .J:l >. <C "" CI) ..... ;3 ~::l ~
I::l '" o+>"",e"O~a .J:l= ~;:J..!::.'o......~o
Oti 8 ~ ~ El ~ ~ ~ 8 ~ ~.... ~ eEl .~] ~ ~ ~ ~ .s .s
~ C"l<S...rrJ'Oo ~s=o 0:i3Q) ~<+=i<co$;l
i: <] ~-5 ~ ~ ~ ~'s ~ g,~~ ~E;~ a]~~ ~
a ~ "0 .[ ~ 8 ~ ~ iB 8] ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 8.5.s ~~.g
;;:1= 00
~~"""'_.rl
'" 0 o.~ ""'....
""'''''II< 0....
!a ~ 0. "!:; 0.1:: 0
~~S~.;3o.=
.:= Sh] = ~ i ~
:~~o~o-t}o.
o~ > rJ'O'O ~
~~00.Q)0.::l
~.... 0.... 8: - 5 ~
o 0 ~ ~ to:l ~ _ .~
> "'" .~ _ u _ = u
=0 0_"'00
u 4) 0 ;l g.s i) ~
~r~.;3=e]a~
0..... 0 . <C...... 0....
.""", ""CS 5-1 (/.) rJ'} <<j ..... .t;::
0.<c0~Q).J:l!L)18
~~]<sa~~~
:s8:_uoo"",
^~to:l:.l25.;3C3~
~Q)O""~ ~",,+>
C"l!:l_0"",'000
'<=l fr?:><c 0 "'"
<t;u~3~~~0
~ 5 0.=.:= E; ::; ~
lI'l ~ ~.s ~ 0 ~ <+=i
~
j~
-3~
!n
.q:t3
I~]
jj
~ Tf1>(J)
>- ~ ~ '!'.
\::;: :Ii!;;; g:
o C)
ORIGINAL
e
~
a:
01
t
&
i
C\I
~
't:
~
i
c:
~
&
;e
:I!
!
~
01
.&
~
~
&
;!l!
s
j
>.
.rJ
"0
.J ~
~ e
P: ~
~ ]
:::l.2:>bIl
.! ,g .S E
rn 6t "0 O;j
.~ e s .s
-!]Ia:lB
.S ~. .~
CI) CI). U
1'B' ~
la8B~
OIl U CI)';:
~"t:S.-;:: .~
o ~ '" l!J
.s.sa~~
:::;u<=J....
<.S S.s
;..:.:-g.g 0
~"g'B]
< ~ ~ '"
M ~ S ~
Iri:.ae.s
8
>.
.rJ
"0
'1 OIl ~
e
0..
P: ~
]
'"
'"
ca
.~
....
CI)
of! .
02
....
.... '"
0.....
~ U
~.~
U 8
"'~ 0..
bIl~
.g<=J
o =
Z~
;.:..~
~.~
< CI)
.0..
<"1 CI)
on .rJ
~
>.
.rJ
"0
'1 OIl ~
e
0..
P: ~
-8
:El
~
o
"O..c:l
~ ~
3 .S
"0 N
'" a:l .
.... ~ "0
_ = CI)
g.g ~
= U CI)
o;::l.rJ
u.t:l_
'Sl!J]
~o'"
'" U CI)
e bIl~ "0
..... ....
i-I. .s
.. "0 'S
8' i>>-8
~ 1a 8
. '" "0
< ~ CI)
r-i~~
on=.rJ
Q
8
>.
.rJ
"0
'1 OIl ~
e
0..
P: ~
8
CI) ....
CI) ... > ..... ,9 ~
> ... ~ "0 CI)- '"
:€ .0..... a:l c CI) CI) "g 3
l!J~~~] <<Ig .;l",>.
Cl)U<=Jl=lbll","'''O _eelO
'" .g '" ~ ~.2 ~ e ~ fr 'a e
a:l CI) 3 ~ u;::I """ .... S eel
CI) CI) ;>.0..] g,~ B '0< e-CI) 0
:0 u.sa..c:l <<I Vl CI) = CI) .rJ .= ..c:l
;;: 8 o...U >'''0 S CI)'O' = _ CI) ~ .
0-5 bIlCl)CI) ....0- -2
l5..'0 ~ ~ .sa ~ of! ~ o...;:.! ~ CI) ';J
- > = 0 bIl"O oIl oIlS '" ~ ~ =
] a:l.o.S;S 8 ;l .S .S 5 8 B 0.0
","OB=~-5 ~ss.;:u~B
~ fa g.g.s 5.gca~~ ~ ~ 8.g
~.g g ~ ]] 8 e'~.~.g 8 ~ g
~ ~ U ~ .S 0.. 3 fS: ~ "0 .!:l:; 0 U
CI) l.I:: - 0 CI) ~.... a:l c::l - CI)
Cl .;: ca U:iS CI).rJ..... CI) a:l.:g B ca of!
5....eela:lB.!oof!c::l't:lc::l"O
~ "0 .s ~ ~ 8 "'~ l!J B.g ~.$a ;l 8
~.;; !=l !J CI)';:"O.$a !J gU '>, = >.]bIl
. CI) ;j '" - U U.- .rJ.
< .... th.... ~ CI) 0 -6 ~ ~'.6 fa
r-i 8.~ g 8e~ 8 S-g 8~] ~
on '" _ u..:o= 0.. _ u.:= U U '" <<I ..
~
~~
.!! "";'
8::;
=~
"11:8
ij,
C:~
i~~
o I S 19(j)
>-..c:~ '!'.
l- J:!o m
S:a!~ 1;
ORIGINAL
e
t
a:
01
t
I!
i
01
.@
i
c::
i
c::
i
III
,
=ti
!
S
01
t
~
~
GI
fi
;:::
s
j
>.
.CJ
'j 01) 1
8
0..
Ii: ~
€
o
-
=
U 0 ~
.CJ 's (1) ~ _
]=;El1;;(1)g
",.g"'O e ~.!:l
=(.)~(.)5::
.g E ~~ t) S
(.)19..r:l.;j"'05
Eo~....1a:grli
19(')1:<(1)0I)(.)~
o =i g j.a ~..s
(.) u:.5il........
(1) =- as ;> !a O'r;
~O(1)(1)......."'"
.... > "'0 - s.....
. .";:: b"'O 00'J:l 0
i :g $ 1a.S 5 ~
.... 0 (1) OI);>..Iol
Z .El =i .";:: ~ e ::l
.. '..r:l = "'0 0..]
O''3'''(.)u~O:l
N''';:: ~'s.;J +:l .'!l
.....CJ-"":.=~(.)
...... :.E!.(.) 0...CJ ;:J as
~8~(1)~198'
tr) 0.. ;>.s (1) (1).=
>.
.CJ
'j 01) 1
8
0..
Ii: ~
=
o
(1) ~ as (1) =
"'0......>. 01) (.) .... 0 ..r:l
..E! ..CJ O.a 1a;;:l ~ ..s ~ 01)
(.)~"'O =:.o;;:l"'O ~ i:j';i 1il (1) ~ 5
S(1)4)"'O i:j(1) 'o"'~.CJ....
]. == g ~ ~.~ I+::~ ~ '" e 'J:l~ g 8 ~ g .~..s .s
.... "'0 ::s >. - .t:!.... (1) .r= .... ..r:l ..Cl;a = _
.s="'O=;.a ::0"'0;> as'" "'(1)0
: ~ 0 = 0:l:9 0" = "'O~ J!l g.~ 1) ~ .'!l e ~ ~
>. "" (.) 0 0...... as (1) "'....... .(1),l:l "'.CJ (1)
(1)_U(.)- >.~ -o(.)O'S(1) '"
....CJ (1)..... 0 U ........ = (1)
~ 1a - .CJ .8 .~ ~ U !;b ~ € '0' 0.. 5l s.s S ~
"'i]= o...~ (1)"'Ota 0'J:ll:5..~""'" (1):.o~
€ 0 '" ~ ~'J:l g ~:J:l ;: ~.s;;: ~ ~:g ~ s
'n .s ~] ~ ~ "8 .~ ~ .s ~.~ ~ 1a] ~ .E .g
E~sO:l-OI)OOl)O(1)o'3~"'OO:l",j19
19 0 "'.~ c ~ ~ ~ ~ s U 1;; 'f 's' i :8 Eo-< 2
o ~ 8 01) f.a ~.CJ ~ 5 Q)'t) 0 ::s 0 t:: rIi ~
~.CJ~~ '" -_ ~00..801)&~~
e s ~ .~. ;.a ~];:!; .s '" ~ .S O.S 0 . go.
t:l-.c.,::;./:l.CJ "'0(1)"'-01).5 .s0l)~-0..0I)-
~ ~ ~ i ~ I ~ } ~ i 1 :1'; :) j 1 ~ '1 i
~ '" e ~ - .... (1) 0 = .... d (.) (.) 0 (1) '" .... = ::s
~aso..O"~ou~..sooaso(.).se..s.CJ<
CI
,..
si".g ] ~~
(.)0(.) O:l 5'0>.
8 S E .~ "'0 Cl ~ ~ go
",.~ '" ';l (1) ~ .CJ (.)
.~ 0 8~ ~Oo.s 8
'> B (.) 8 U (.) - 0
'J:l =..r:l 8 ~ .....s i>>'"
(.).CJ(.)= (1)0;1"'0
~S5l~<<i"8l:5..2(1)
as c.,::; o,l:l e ::s a.CJ .;
8 = -::: ~ <<I "'0 3 (1)
'J:lOo(1)1)8'€~
~ ~'R 5 ~.g Gl ~.8
0.. '" "'0 '" = ... =..... '"
o 01) !I) e.= ... 0..........
.... .S.!:l 0.. ~ 8 U t) ~
o "'0 ::s (1) +:l (1) - .so....
= U O".s.s.CJ ~ 0 g
.g] ~ (1);.g=O] ~
(.) U "".~.t:! J!l OI).CJ '"
E.s : E! ::0 :.s '3 :s
1901)>,u~>'~I+::"'"
8'~ ~.8'~ ~ ~ ~ --:
::::"'O~.s ~~~ 0";;;
~
~~
.!! "7
8=
lI)t!
lI)~
'11:8
i~,
c::~
- 1{~'9
s 0'
GIG "1",
~~ m
~9 r-
oo:tii C)
ORIGINAl
e
t
a;;
f
~
~
III
~
't:
.s
'il:
i
c:
~
11
;e
~
!
c:
~
ell
i
o
.c::
U)
&
,!!
~
I
.s 8 f!'
on 5... :s
l ~ ] ~ Q) ~~
= 0 '!i ~,Q..:l ~ :e
.0 = Q).a 0 "0 :> a
~ "0 0.-;: = Q)''::: E:
....=to_rilbOOQ) .
- Cd - ''::: ..... "0 to 0.. c:>
~"O e-El ~~3~~
8 .~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 8'~ 8
.~ [] ~~~~!il ~~
rilril,J:lQ)Q) Q,=
- ..... ~ =:-:= Cd Cd
~ 00 .c ril Q) =.~ _ .AI
'0' ~ .;: ~...<:l ~ "0 ::l ......
"" ~''::: +:I::l 0 0 E-<
0.. 00 0 ~ ~ ....... Z ..:l !:%:l
Q)::> ~'B ';3 =a .'!i ~
..:l"OotO"O"O~~Q)
"0 !il'B !il.~ !il ~ 8 ..:l
.~~ ~"O ~ ~.~~~
o0150o'B~]g
o..U O~"O to = ril-;i
fo "0 ~
"OSQ) ~ ~
~ !:l:> I ;>
O-;ie]~~o Q)_
~ ... 0.. Cd 0..... ~ ,0 ~
-8] g.C:>"O~,J:l ~3';3 .
e S Q) ~ = 0..-;:,0 "0 e ::Q
tOQ),J:l~otO;>rilQ)~ij
~ k ~ ~ ~ "0 ~~].~ 5]
o,-"""..:ls~. "O~30
~d=..:ll9o.. SQ)"O':=
,0 S5.,8.I::'..... [Q g..Cl "0 ..2 ~
_CdCdiSQ) :3.;35-+:1
~ ~] 8..:l] ~ '!i .:= :fl ~
bO ~bO e .~ "0' -= a' ~ ~ R
~. ....Q).::s "0-;;,0-
. ~ '313 ~ ~ ..... "0 e
8..... ril Q).!:j to bO C ....
~o "" ~ = d Q) 0~,Q Cd ~
,J:ltOO....,J:l....~O .....
Q) 0..0......] O"~;E"O 0
,J:l..:l . bO. 8 Q) "0 .~ "0
~ Q) -~.s 00 ril''::: Q) ~ g.~
..... "0 ~ ~ ril to,J:l ~ 0 Cd
'0 ..... 0 ~ ... 0]:'= 0 ~
Cd!jl:l=ooO,Q CdO.
:=s~..s::>.geril&El
,..
,..
>.
,0
"0
'ibO ~
e
0..
ii: ~
=
o
"0
>. ~
,0 0-
Q) "0 Q) "" Q)
ril 4) Q)-Q)
.Q8~~~ Q)~ ~M~
g Q) bO'~ <<l E9 0 "0 e >.
.... !a S ~:> . "0 1::Q) 0.. Q)
~ . Q)Q)rilQ) ...._
e ~ ] ..:l "0 ~~ 8.. 0 :B
o...;l 0"O!il r>: 0 cuQ) Q)
~.2 .s. !il13 ~ ~ ~ ~ 13
.... ~ p.. <:g bO,J:l.Q 'E .13
o 0.. U E-< o.S = ril ~ "0
ril:;I:: :>!;:l ::l0..Q)
~"O ~ P=l Cd "0 ~.0'l:J 1::
:> Q) ~ Q) _ ;: ..... 0 .
0'0 Q),J:l.rilc:>e-SfrC:>
o Q) Q)..:l= 6b~ 0.. Cd ...~
.~ 'O..:l ...,g,Q 0 >. El Q) 0
~ a b -8 ril .9 U !il >.~ U
E913]El.g~]"O~]]
~::l"00Q) Q) ril
~'~13 ~U!-S~oo 0 rJi~~OO
< Q) D ~ Q);;:l 5 .~ .....
."O:>_a~ rilo::a
f'l'a 0 e a 0"00 e &.=-200
III :3 0 0.. c:> to::> 0.. FE is ::>
e
~
t
Cll
~
i
It
'tl
c:
III
Cll
.~
i
c:
i
c:
~
III
,
:IE
!
S
Cll
t
~
t5i
&
.l!
s:
j
>.
.r:.
"'d
.II
~ ~
IS
rn
w
o
0::
::J
o
rn
w
0::
...J
~
::J
...
...J
::J
o
"'d Cl) >.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~Cl)> ~ 8 ~ .r:. ~ "....~
r:l = ';:l ~ ~ ....; -.;i ..,,"" "'d u ~ ~ ~-
>'.;;0 O:f 1:::' ..sa' ~......." = Cl) Cl) ~ la
!a > 0 !a .... .... ~ ~ ~ Cl) ~.... 0... Cl) F .... "'d ~
~! ~ ~ l ~ €~ ~ f l~ ~ 11~ ~I ~i.j.~ 1 i ~ ~ ~ ~ i; ~ ~ ~o
Cl) la Cl) <<l ;:l Cl) ... 0 0 <<l - Cl) Cl) = ~. !a U I=l Cl) I=l S Cl) 1:1 u.;;o........ <+=; = .." = a ...
Ijfililll!~IIII!lliiliijl!liljlllt
~ 'B g s ~ oS .... e.~ = "'d e ... ~ Cl) '(;..cl :3 "'d "'d Cl) 2 = $ gf ~ ~ a Sl'= !:l 8 ....: a
oS ~ = 5 ~ = .~ ~ 'O.g e u :S .~ ~ ~ u Q.'3 !a.~ u ~ ="0 ~ .." ~~ e ~ ~ = g =
8 .~ ~ e !a ~ ~ a ~ g ~ ~ ! "'d IS ~ ~ ~ 8 ~ z i ~ 'g -B ~ ~ ~ <<l ~ ~ ~ '8' ~
~i~!'ii~]]~~]~j~~~~~]8~i~~~~1~~~]i~
~ ~ ~ .~ <( ~ ~ ~ ~ 8 ~ ] 13 ';'] ] ~ .~ ~ ~ ~ ~ bO'~'~ ~ ~ ~ a3] 8 ~ i
~ !.H n dl H U I U H d ~ H B j H Ii] I H
C'l
....
~
~~
.!!'"i'
8~
lU
~8
I~,
c:00
ei3
t:.
~.!~ -9~
>- Uo -
_;;:"" m
_ CC/} ,.....
J C)
ORIGINAL
e
t
Il:
~
~
~
It
lJ
c:
ClI
r:ll
-e
~
c:
i
c:
i
ClI
~
i
i
c:
~
r:ll
.!
g;
~
&
,!!
~
j
>.
..c
"0
~ = 8 ~
B .s.~ bo
.i ~ ~ ]
~ .s ~ .s
.s s u .ff
~ lil
] .~ = ~
<II ~.s ~ =
E II) U ~ 0 .S
~ ~ '8- ~ i ~
~Q..E-<<II)~
=
.S ~.s
~~-8
~~..e
1:1 "" U
8 II) .S
-;9-
.g,.s ~
8~t::
,::l.,... 0
.s~@'
0= II)
-~.=
t::""E-<
o 0 .
fr...s:l ..2
"" ~ q:: ..
~ ~ 8.r '""'
~~~.sa -
~ ~ @'~
'""' '""'
N l'f'\
t
.~ ~ ~
~ e 8
- II) ',z:
,::l., ;9 ;!l
.~ g E
u ~ .g
B B ..:l
>. >. >.
g. g. ..2
U U ";
tU tU :>-
-8 -8 .S
.".. .:> =
~ 9"
88-
,::l., ,::l., ~
'""' '""'
'<:t tr)
- II)
11)"; ;9..... ~
~ Q)=g~ 11)"0- d=_B
~ 1I)'5iJ !a.o <II "0 .::: II) -d ~ ,S E 0
',z: ;9 .sa "" e of ~;9 fa ~ ] 8 :.= ~ u....
s 8 g t II) 8 g ~ .$a '!i .~ z ~ -= ~~ 8. ~
- E "" tU bIl..c !3 ~:.!:I" ~~II)"; tU jg (l) tU ',z: ..<:l
~""II)...s:l= Ol:l~-_ U -o-~
e3 e:,z: ~.sa fa ~ 0 ""0 ~ .~^ .sa..8 8 g. ~ = ~ 0
.... 0. :> tU U c::;, U .. "'" ~ lI)'a ,.".,..... _
";e~"Og~";bIl="".sa0~(l)""..c~80~Q
= U(l) ....,,~O(l) .....=""_ o.~tUII)
0"."" tU q:: .~.-.;::;' ',z: U II) ~ E-< 0:-' tU ;:l...s:l ..".,
~ ~ ff ~ bIl.~ ~ "0 ~ g ~ Z -d's !i ~ .s..8 8 ~
~ 0'.. g..@ ~ g ~ ~ ~ !a"; ~ 0 ff B Gf l:i ~ II)
:~ .~ ~~ .s .~ .~ ~ ~ ~.i] ~.s ~ 'is] ~.w a ~
U 0 (l) S 0 as U 13 .... s "" I=l "" e (l) -
.~~1I)8~]~~~jl~~i]j~.$a[8
:a .~ B ..;3 s ~ s g ~ as ="; S U -8 .~.s ~]
~ ~'S '~~ ~ j>; s ~ ""~ ~ ~ .g ~ fa ~ .~ ~ ~ q:: ~
bIl '0 Os ~. a.,z: t. II) !a = 11 s . U 1:1 "0 g ~ -8 '0'
~ ~ U ~ g ...~ II) !3 =.- t: 8 ~ ~ _~.:> l:t
' 'fS g ,50 8 8 ~ 8',z:;9 U jg g ~II) 0 II) U 51 0 II)
"" ~ '" II) 11).... = u..... U 0 S ""..<:l '" _ ""..<:l
as "" 0."0 = "0 = tU 0 0 U o.~ as "" o.~
C")
..
~
1IIr-:
.s~
.3~
In
oq:8
I~,
c:'"
)< ~t1>Ul
18 ~
~~ J!!
" ~;;; C::>
'; !GINAl
e
i
Q;
f
~
'tl
i
OJ
.e
~
i
I:
~
III
:8'
i
i
S
OJ
'8.
~
.c:
CI)
&
,!!
~
j
~ = r:l
rI} 0 U U 0 0 "'OCd.s u
~ = .~:s! ~ ~ ..s u ~ u. 8 ~ ~ '/ii ~ ~ ~
~]~~~]] 8..s~~3]~5g~u>>~0~
g g s al.~:;:: al ,.c ] ~ '+-< ~ ~.... ~ ;> '0' ~ g ...,. ~.~
~~u3u~~ al8~0Q.,=~al~~SU~~~
jt~.~~~~il~laBil~!~i~lji~
~ u 8' 0 8 ~ 8!-5 El ~ ~~ ~.g ~]'.~ G)> '+-< ~ ~.~ :3 "'0 .
'p rI} Q., E al .... 0 0 Q., Q., >>.... u.... 0..... C) p C) u -
's 8 ~ sa .~-; .~~.@ <./::l ~,Q ~.D ~ ~ .~.g ~ ~] ~ 0 '3 t.i
u!3 0 ~.!:l rI} ~ ~ 0 ~ O:s!'p "'0 .:g ~ ~ '0 E-< rI}':: = 'd"
.... 0 . C) -.. w, ......p '+-< al al =.. _ u ...... .
.~ :$ -0 ~ ~ .~ ] ~ ....~ ~.g 0 Q.,.~.6 u 0 ~ II a;i:S la 8 ~
... ~ "-' I ~ C) .. ..... U '+-< u..... U.!:l .... -'" C) I:l ~ r:l
8' C) "'0' B B ~ ~ o'......s]:: S ;:: ] 'S ~ ~ ~ ~.s Cd
,,:.= la .......... al > <g S ..... I ] u 'i 0 S .... ., Q., u ..... "'0 -
-,.c _ rI} rI} o.!:j U 00"> U .!:l 8 .... - rI} 3 rI} El .
g. ;l 'U' Q.,'il 'il ~ C)' .!:l.D = rI}" ~ ~.D 0 50 u. .= c.S ~
P-. "-' .. U 'il ".-;:: 0 .... r:l rI} s:l U'a ~ C) 'd"
~ >>,...::.g'So'So s:l ~.~:::: ~ ~ ~ 5 ~ 8.= a :3 s ~.s ~.,.;
.c e.:::: 0 0 0 - U . &.s 0 El :>.. - e 'p U s:l C) rI} = rI}
.S ] C'! S '2 '2 ~ ~ 50 8 "'0 ~ ~.!l al a ~ ~..s.g ~:.: ~ ~
~ .!:l ~. al al'" ::s ~ !:l 'il .s g So Q., C) - C) U ~.El <.s rI}
~ ::s gg ~ ..r:: ..r::;g 8' Cl O'p al '=o.s >> al ~ >>:;::; 'p~;.a . -= al
C) 8' -..r:: C) C) S "'0 0 rI}.::s ~ ~ !:l U..r:: al...<:l'::S 'd" 0 U
~ ~ N rI} !a !a.D al C) e.= 50 Q., 3 <:..9 rI} El ~ = .,.; C) ~
U I:l 0 U ....
..s ... .... = .D "'0 al
i ~"'O 8.0 .....b~u~
't:i 8 -E U '1:: j ~ ~ IS.' ~
rI}!:lo....P-.-<<l U '+-<u
u~ ~ C) ~ --' ~ .g i ..s .s 0.;3
. eeu~ouofj13.g~>>
U 'il 21 ~ 0 C)~ ~ ~ 2l'~ 0 ~
....C)Cd "-'23 C)UUadl
.g '5h "'0 0 = C) u..... t::.-;:: ~ ~
o U .r!3 0 ~al.~ ~ al rI} g
~~~='':::' ~8oQJ~=
'5h g.= S ~ z < ..r::..s ~ 8
] .fi tg ~]] ~ : :::: ~ ]
al !a U ::s e U al'P 0 00 al -
"@ 8:: [~~sz..s.illa]
al .0"] ..s'1:: e al u] 8 .J' ~
] ~ rI} 'Z: ~ '+-< ~ ~:= El la.-;::
f+:: U ~..... 0"'" '1:;:' = ~ rI}
..... al.-;:: U ::I: = ~ ~ ~ 0 ~~ C)
.....~ rI} rI} C) '+-< 0 ;::s "0 ..... f+::
.-: cu:; 01""'4 (J cO t) ......
0" "'0 C) -0 0.-;:::3 C) .... ;::l..... g
u~!3~8~C)..:::3~~~
..s U ~ 13lE ~..s] sa sa.D U
::::..s e ~ 0 :.a'~ rI} 8 8 3 ..s
~
~
C/lr-:
.!~
.3~
=~
oq:;8
Ii,
1:11;
l!!8
!~~
C) 18 ~u>
;:... ~~ '!'.
l-~;;; m
- T-
o C)
ORIGINAl
e
~
l
tII
t
&
'tl
c::
III
tII
.~
~
i:
i
c::
i
III
~
i
!
a
tII
t
~
t3
&
.!!
~
j
ta .~
Q) rJ) Q) '"0
-S Q) :;:: Q)
......<:l"'Q)
0"" Q) =
",'"O-SBo
OJ) ta ........ >
~ 0"": ~2
=.... .... -s ..s
ll:lUB"'"O
Q)Q)=ijQ)
-s-S8u1!
'"Oo=ll:lU
c'::::.9'j:! ~
O:l '" .... OJ)'"O
.... ~ ~....
'~'::l B :; ~
gf=oo....
-..o:s=oS
8 f;J >..B]
~.B~.9i
~ = "if '"0 ....
] ~ ;> .~ .~
~ ~ .~ ~ .B
;:l fr ..s .... ....
0" '"' .s; -8 8
>.
,.0
'"0
. OJ)i ~
e
Co
~ ~
15
'"0 >.
OJ) ...s OJ) ~ OJ) ~.s .9 ~ ~ n Q)
>..s ta E = .!3 ~ ..9 "if '~..s '" ~ .~ . '" 0= Q) . Q) .... la
> 0 E: ~ - .... ij..c.... Q) OJ).... .... Q) = .... '"0
i J ] ~ ~ ~ ~ 'e ~ j l ~ ! 11 ~ ~ .~s~ i :I.~o"" .~ 'J i i ] ~ ~ i I
Q) ~ Q)"if':;1 Q) ... 0 o "if - Q) Q) 8 Q) C U Q) I'< Q) = u.;;j"if - t+:; ::s ~
~ Q) ~ g ~ ';1 ~ ] i "8 II 'tj.~ 0 ~ ": ~o ~ -S ~ ~ s 8.B::;;j'il ~.9 oS ....
---~....Q)O:l!3O:l~"":l~..co "".... O:l<' ,.Cj... '" -
Ii Ii ~U I ;~.~~ (]BH iUUHllf ii
8':;1 ~':;1.B.s oS '" = 0 0 t: c:::..!l::s ~ .... '"0 '"0 "8 ':;1 '60 OJ) ~ .... ., ~
~ ~ ~ ~ E5 = lL~ .~ .~ ] U -S .S> ~ .~ e (:l.. ~ ta.~ ~ ~ ~ ..90 Jl ~ ~ ~ ~fi
"" OJ) 0 Q) 0 .... f! Q) U Q) 'r::'!3 ..s Q) Q) 0 .... O:l Q) O:l Q) '" O:l .. ~
.9.s U e ta OJ) j .a 0 E ~.s ~ '"0 15 ~ -S ~ U rs z 1 = 's II ~ Q)" ~ "if
.8 ] .~ @"5'i ~ ] : .g .~] ~ i ~" ]" ~ ~ ~.~ ~.s:3 ~ ~ ~ ,;1 ~ ~ ~
Po.:a ~]~ S-S] ta =~ ....-. -=-]'"01) Q) taJ-d' ~ ~.g 8 ~ u;;
n U H] H! Hn U H Jj ~ 11 n J! -II I
II)
..
~
III'"
.s;j:
J!'7
8=
tl~
0(8
I!,
c::O-
e~
Ox :t'1>($1
oC::;; --(I
>- .!:!t.:l -
\::;: ~;;; J!2
o C)
ORIGINAl
~
1
~
i
&!
~
li
01
.~
i
c:
i
c:
~
..
,
:iE
i
c:
~
01
l
g;
.c
CI)
j
!S
t
'ilas
~ i ~.g~.s i
C,)~ 'OC,)~Q) ~
:t: Q) '~,g -g 0
5 la t) ~ ~ rIl U B.~
~ s.g, '0 U Q) ~ .~ ~
Q)'S! e ij t) oS 'il rIl ~
~ !:l ~ Q) Q).S...c:l i'S Q)
B e J la'8' ~ t ~ oS
~ I E-< @' ~ 's! 8. oS.S
S ...: t:l..oS l:l e e '0
~ ~==o==Q) Q) ~
Q) ~ '0' ~ ... ~ ~ i ~
soarlltrll ~
.s ~ Q).~ fr]..2 1:a
'OfaoSgfJ...~f.l:l.. s:l ~
ij ~r'O '3 ~ u g.s ~ 'g.
llsi~~~t~ ~E-<
::s 0 t:l.. C,) ~ 1;l 0_
.s e ~ -< rIl ~ @'~ :::' N
10
....
""" 0 s:l-8
... 0 ... 0 0 s:l
g .S Q) Q).~ 0 ~ Q) ::: t) '': U ~ .,8
>. '1il g. .~ oS gf s:l~ a B oS ... "0 ~ .g, a rIl.t:: C,)
~ rIl <V S s:l - Q) rIl C,) rIl C,) 0..... Q) t:l.. ;::l
'0 ~ ~ s:l 0 g U Q) a.2.s 0 Q) ,50 ~ 8 a'= ~ e ~
8 B OIl '0 Q) rIl <V OIl ~ .~ - .Ej <V J... 0 0 Q) = 0 t:l.. !:l
.!2!l ~^ .; r~ ~ e:~"@ ~ ij 8'': "0] ~ ~ ~...c:l "0 oS ~ i'S ~ 8
rIl -- .,'" ..... t:l.. ... <V C,) '"' C,) Q) rIl ~ -"'! .l:l ... """ .t:: ~ OIl
U ] E J... ~ e.,: '0 g i'S is ~ g '0 Q) B -.:;l .bll 5 0 t:l.. C,) .-:...~
~ ~ ii:: .s ~ C'] ~ S .~:~ e.S!,g ~.~ as~ 8' ~ ~ '@ ~:E ~ ij ~
... "" 0 ::s Q) <V J... ~ ";;:l oIl.,: _ t) .a '<=i gf. S t:: t:l.. C,) t:l.. ~ ] _ III r-:
8 OIl U 0 u '" 0':> ;:l.~ C,) ~ ,g rIl e '0 0 0 Q)] <V = t:l.. .2! :j:
~ ~ B ~.g :~ .9 ~ ~.B ~.~ ~ ~ ~ ] ~ e ~ ~ ~.s $' ~.g 1 ~
= 5 >. >. <V .E'a I oS a.~.1;; 8 0 rIl C,) '0 'il oS Q)'s.s as ""' u tI ~
~ ii g. g. ~ ~ ~ ~ 8 ~ B ~ ~bll g ~ a.~.~'~ ~ a t! ,13 e.s ~ 8
<V rIl C,) C,) 0 OIl Q).El... 'a ....... '':=::S '0 '0 B ~ e Q) Q) C' C'! == c: j
s:l Q) <V "':s S 'il J... 0 S! o. <V ~ Q) S.rIl == t:l.. oS C,) e l""l <V ..
.S! ~ -8 -8 >. ~ .~ B . 'ti S13 '0 ~ e ~ ~ :.a ~ d' "0 ~ rIl ~ .;J i I
~ i .~ .~ ~ ~.Q'~'~ ~~ ~ 8 as ~.s ~ oS B i .,8 dB: N g c: ~
!:l e e'il bllgSt)' ~'.gbJ... ",=.~=~Q)g~s:l'~ ~ 1>
-< Q) ~ ~:> ~ ~ :::l .g, Q) ~ 0 ~ ~Q) ~:;:: . j ] ~ ~ u ~ .,8 .bll b< li G (fJ
--- ___ ___ u.= e '0 ~.~ g ...c:l d "8 0 ~ S t:l.. Q) Q) ~..g ~;,l :!;
l""l ",,"10 larllt:l..'Os:l'O::S ~::Sf.l:lt:l..=s:l-..9StIl= .~Gm
v :iE~ C
ORIGINAl
e
~
~
OJ
t
.!
"
c:
III
OJ
.e
;@
c:
i
c:
~
III
,
:IE
i
a
~
I
~
U)
QI
"'
~
j
~ ~cd~_ ~Q) Q)
~ S~=~Q)=.s- ~ ~.;3=
.... 00 ~~0..Q) .,., 0
o <l:lU~Q),QEl 0..0 ~""'.;::l
sb =S~~~~bs~be~Q)~~
~ESQ)]~iS~b~~s~=5~~~
.~ ~ .g -: ~:~ ~ ~ .8.~ ~ .~ 00 s .~o .N.g 1 ~
~ +J ~ Q) 0:= .... 00 - ~.:= ~ = as a...
U 'z::' 00 > <g t:l ~ ~.... as 00 t:l !3 g ~ 0 00 s 00 .
~~ ::> B 8.~ ~ +J -9 !.'~.8 Q)..o s:E u:-E U ~ -;
lI) ~ U Q) .....; +J >. Q) Q)':= .;3 ='- Q) Q) .... '0 ... u
.-:: .~ ~ ~.13::::..o =..0 t:l ~ .....= =.;3"Cl ,..:; = S ..,j.
~~~>.= ~0-Q)aSoe8 ~.~oo=.
]=Q)]g8~a].;3S~~>.]~~;j8~
.6'0 'So oS ~ 0' ~ fr.s ~ d ~ ~ - 6 ~ ~.s Q) ~ ;j
1]~~{~~i~j]lj~~~~]jl~
..0..=. O>.Q):=l-t~o..aS!:a=?tl~Su '<:t
U ~ ... - .;3'= OQ - ~ 0.. .v - ,fl = El >. .
~ 00] .g ] g ~ ~ '['s ~ ~ i ['[.g ~:~ ! ~
.....= Q) as.... ..0 00 = 0 <: 00 = 0 as ~ -; ~ .,
~ 5 S ~ d as 8 ::I ~.... d 8 .;::l u ~ .oo:a ~',S ~
as > <<=< u.2 00 U o~ +J U = U as > +J ..;::l ~ ..,j. = Q)
oOQ)~uC~ ....o-~eQ)....:= .0....
_u..oQ)~=Q) 0_0..Q)...000t:l V"\u",:;
.....
..
Q) .s s = ~ 00 <<i
- .;3 00 S 0 _ Q Q) S .~ 00
.s Q) -E B J::'j ~ ~ So.~ ~ 00 "g g' ~
.~ ~ @ ~ ~ ] .~ ~ ~ * ~ ~ @' ~ .~ .~
S rs~ Q)~ 08 "goo~] Q)~.-=: Q)
lI) ~ c.;3 0 u~ -< ~ 'g.~ 0 0'.;3 00 ~.;3
~ =....'-'~ a~Q) .... ~
~ ] 00 0 = U Q).~ :l:.-=: ~ ~ 0 ;j.;3 d
'1:: Q) ~ 0 as.> Q) as ~ +J ~ 0:::: =
}]~ ~'~!!~1~ !~i~ ~i
g ~ 6).~ ~ e ~.~ ~ --: .g ~ ~ .;3 ~ .;;
~ ,~ ~ as ~ ~o:.= zas ~ .gf C ~ .;3 S = 2
u_-",u IE .;::l=0_000...
!il 'a ~ -"'l.... ~ as Q) Q) Q) ~ U Q Q)..;::l Q)
5b..cl +J ... ~ "Cl..o Q) d Q) = :l: ~..o
"g.;; ~'z::' ~ .... .Q ~::::: S =..0 _ .:= 0
l.l:l Q)::>.... 0] .z::' = ~ - ~ t:l -
;,;j as.-=: Q):I: = ~::> 0 ~ ~ 'oo.g .g 00
::I'~ ~ ~u .... .0 U 00''5 5b ~,Q ~..!:l Q)~
0' 00 U 0 .-E;3 U B ::l.... Q) 0 Q) ......
=!3 '" Q) "" U 0;3./:l ~- Q)"O.....
~ l.l:l 0 0 ~ &.;3::::: '!< '!< ~ .;; ~ ::::: ~ Q)
+JQ)""UQ;;<W. l=ll=l Q)U _
::::.;3e~o:a!i~88S.;3la~>~
~
III'"
.2l~
J!"7
g=
=~
0(13
II,
C:~
f!<~~
o iG S
>- .c:'~ r
'::: ~ 9. t-
V ... '" <::-.
ORIGINAl
e
i
a.:
Cll
~
l
It
'tl
:i
Cll
.@
i
c:
i
c:
i
C\I
~
i
i
S
~
'a,
I
CI)
III
II
~
I
>-
~
't:l
'ibll ~
e
Q..
~ ~
=
o
u ~ ~ ~~ 't:l ~~B ~ 0
(,) oS ~ 'a ~ oS -.;:l ~ 'a -g oS 't:l (,) =
8 ~ ~.s g ~ 'Cl 'Cl .~ 't:l .~ ,;1 := $ j Q.. S '+-< ~ ~ -a 't:l
~ ~f ~ 8 ~ e '? '5 ~ e- ~ ~.g ~ ~ .s ~ 8';1 ~ ~ ~ ~ ] ~ ~ ~ ~
~ :~ ~ ~.~ <<I ~ € ~ ~ ~ ~ ~.fi ~ .~ 8 ~] ~ fr ~ ].s ~ 8.~ 8 ~ .S .~ .~
(,). 0 ;; ~.... <B Q.. B as >- S ~ '0 0" 5 ~ 't:l.s ~ :>.. .... ~ = 't:l ;::J;a
11 g~! ~g~~.H,!I~~~l~J.g g.~] b ~ ~ ~~.8~.Jl~~]J!
e .g.c g'~ 13 ~ '~.g a'~.~:!3 ~ ] ~ 'S B ~ ~ :s ti ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 8 ~ :~ 8'~ 8'
'a (,) .a <<=< 0.;3 ~ "'> ~ t::; 0" - 0 > Q.. ~ = 8 = ~ 15b g Q.. oS ~ (,):-= El (,) ~ ~
.~o ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 1 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .! ~ .~ ] .~ a ~ ~ 8'~'~ j "8] i ~ ~.s ~ .N
= ~o--~ <<I~~=~~><<I't:l~---Q..(,)Q.. -;::J't:l~=
] 8 el ~ ~.g ~ ~ 8" '5 B ~ g's.g ~ ~ r3 ~ !a ~ ~.s .~ -= ~ -= ~ '5 ~ ~ ~ 8
8 bIl 8 ~ Q...~ ~ ~.~ ~.~ !3 rI) B 8 ~'s ~ ~ S ~ ~ '+-< U ~ 1U ~ ~ g e >- ~ ~
~.~.~ 013"8 ~~(,) g,u ~.g.<<I::l o~ el.2 o~ a~B <<I oS <<I .'8''a g~;:::
Q.. 't:l ~ ~!5 ~ ';J as!E -.s ~ 8 g, ~ s ~ ~ ~ ~ 8 !a 5 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Q...~ ~::s 0
:= '2 ~ ~].s ~ ~ 8 'Cl 0 8 ~ ~ (,) .~ ~';J .s.g 8 ti' ~ .Q' 8 .Q' 8 .Q' .s ,Q.~ 8.~
~ ~ ~ oS 0" '+-< ]I '0' 'Cl ~ :::'.;:l ~ Q. bIli as..!l! 't:l .... ~'.;:l Q.. Q.. ~'.;:l ~'.;:l ~ '+-< B ='.;:l 1U
u>~e~--:-="" ,.Cjggb;::J<' (,)"<<I~~egb,Q8~gb~gb~088~=
. 8 '€ ~.... 't:l ~ Q.. ~ ~.=.- ~ ~ oS ~ 0 0'- ~ 0 't:l .... 't:l .... 't:l .'!l ~ ~'.;:l a
~ !3.E ~ ~ J3 8..s.8 8 ~.~ ~ ~ -a'~ .~ ~ ~:S.~ ~ 'Cl $'~ $'~.s ~:a E9 ~ B
Q)
...
~
.;~
.!!i"
8=
tli
"11:8
I~J
C:~
~~
~ 'i ~ 11Jl
>- .c ~ ':!
.!:! Cl rr
~:I~ G
ORIGINAl
~
~
Il:
f
II!
'tl
c:
ca
~
'1::
i
c:
i
c:
~
&
~
:II!
!
c:
~
~
.~
~
~
Ql
fi
~
J
8
<
..f
on
'"
~
o:l
~
.~
'<<i
.~
...
~
.s
"1:1
.~~
= .
o~
u"'"
~...
"1:1 ~
B 0
'" o:l <.j:j ......
a)_ ~13"1:1 0;:S
.~ ~ u '<<i c::I 13 ~
.~ ~ ~ ~ s '"
OIl a) ;::J t:: a) ~
~.Q]UO~~
"1:IEl-] fr::2:~
.~ ~]:;;j ~ s .....
OIl,!:! "'..2l a '" 0
.Qo:lB"'~>>-
o ~..-l ~ .~
=...",:;::: ~u
g !a 8 ~ '" a) a)
<a~!3..so:l&l.;l
Po.'~ ~ 13 s a).S
13'~ e ~ '=.;l e;.
S:.s~.gEl~
].~ . ~ ~ 13 :E
0<"1:1 8 ~ d.l t::
.sJl~:;j~~~
.....a)"'''1:IU~.a
......;le!a.gtl~
.,
~
E
"1:1
~
Po.
~
.S]
s=
a).!
iii
-8~~
.~..C::I OIl
~ ~.~
~.....o
.,0-
.....=::8
o 0
l(a .s
> ~ .
a) 0 B
U'~
a) a) '"
.;l"''''
~ u
..s o.~
.e;.~
.-ta)-
,:l ~ a) ..
. u.;l =
..., '" a)
lfi;a~~
~
83...
S a 5
= >- ~
o.p .=
'a a "1:1
o:l a) o:l
~ =.2
u >- 1::
~ !a ~
.... ~ 0
a) 0 0
~ .~.; ..
",a):;:::
......
o a) U =
=.;la);:l
a)..... ~ I
.0 0 ;:l.
] a) '"
u~
'" !a ~ e
~~o!a
~~~j
.
g
~ >-
~ j .~ El ~ @ ~ ~ ~ s .J
U "'.;l .~ < ~ ... 'a 8 b o:l
~ .~ j ~ Z ~ El~ ~ ~ ~ ~
sEl" - .s - " El.ga)~
. B~ .s ... .;l.s~ =!a.;ll!:l
i-8 ~ '" ~ € a) 8 -8 - S ~
;:l"1:l [;l a) = =.0 a) =~<.j:j Ela)
o e U .~ 0 a) 0 "1:1 a) ., ,!:!
~>a)n' !a'_u :'S!~.;la) ~o,o~
_ _ ~'.!:l ;; ';S ..s
.;lo.;l Bu] .=~ "t:;t:;
..... ~.....o -8'1:: '" ~ .!.2 El >- 0 0 ~
o;a a) ",_0 1)'a~o
~no="1:I bel b..8u]c1:l -"'!o:la)~
l!:l la'a !a ~ < S..., :I:.<;:: "1:1 c:l ::] ~ ~
o o:l. ~a) I';N< -80:1 ",a)00
5 'I'~ 13 8'~ 8.s z I!:l =.~ Elo El ~'.g
u '" .!:l o:l a).;l 0 8 a) El a) >
~ ~ g. .s z ~.~ ~ ~ ~ El a) 8 e- ~
f-< e.s e .....] ~ f-< Po. "1:1 -< ~ a).;l ~
..... * * * ~ a)
at
..
e
t
Q;
~
'e
i
It
b
c:
l'lI
Cll
.~
i
c:
i
c:
o
~
&
~
i
~
~
l:
o
~
&
,!
!S
i
8
1;.;
>- ~ .s.~ ~ ~ '" ~ ~ ~
~.g ~SEl::>s~~. '"
.g "'C'S: d (,) 5 3 "l'~ ~ 0 'Q)' .a
..v coo U en ~ "C .."... '-'" 0..-1
'1:: '" "",'~ 0 e ~ 8 4.> ta _ ~ d
g.:!aQ.~ Ifjfr(,)bl)Q. sr--,g
8:.!;:l ~ rJ'.l 0 M'I:: 4.> 8 ~ ::; 0'1 ....
as ~ ~ .g :-E 13 8 ~ ~~ ~ ~ .9
.;; "'" 0 0 ] .~ -< 5b.;;..a Q. g ..2
.~ ~ b'o ~ 8 0 4.>> 13 d .9 8.~ ,.Q~ '!::
::>~4.>4.> .;;. -0 c(,) ...
.... > (,) bl) ::s ~ .!!! C t) O:l 4.> 4.>
O..d ~ !3 .s '" Z 8 'a .~ -e ~ .;!3]
~ 4.> ~ ~ ~:E 4.> rIl 5b~ ~ "'C U (,)
.~ .;; ] ~ O!O ~ ""'.;; ~:a :; :a 8 ::I:: r;
0:>:", O'I~oj>."'C4.>04.>rIl<"'C
~ .~..() ] ~ ~ ~ 3 ta ~ d ~ 8 Z,Q
:a 5b 0 ,.Q 0'1 -.:;J ~,.Q :!a.... d "e !3 4.> 4.>
""'.... ~ ::s SS 4.> ~ e.!;:l g..9 i3 0 ..d ~
0"'C",p.. "-o-Sl""''t;;rIlrllE-<_
4.>"'C;;ll::lQ.(,),.Q4.>
~j.f;ie~..9Fil~
.
bl) d 4.>
.s .~ .;;
] 4.> ~ >-
,+-<,.Q d ,.Q
.~ ~ 4.> d
5",~ "'CEl.~r;
"'C 4.> 4.> El '" !o;
.....liil t'ol 0.... ~
rIlo:j,g "'" 't:; (,) 13 ~ ti
~-Eloo?~~eEl8~
.9 "<I" 4.> ::s 4.> '" ~
d ..;!3 .S.;j "'.;; "'C .g .g
8 ;B ~ ~ :E ~ ta 'S: !il
rIl ::> -.:;J 4.> ~ 0_
.g '$ 0 ~ 'Q)' '9 a 4.>
,.Qg- ""''''''..eo';;
,Q ~.~rIl 4.> 4.> d-O
4.>U~rIl ~>4.>rIl-
~~ 5 ~ .g'~~~j
~z~"'C !il~4.>ufr
El.s 0 ~~ ~ ~.;;~ (,)
4.> (,) ..do....z(,)
E9se E-<"",o '"
>-
,.Q
"'C
. bl)i ~
8
~ d
P:: "" 0
fn
..I
c(
D2
w
~
~
fn
~
o
C
0:::
c(
~
:r:
c
z
c(
fn
C
0:::
~
:r:
>- 13.... 4.>
~ >- ,S 0 ~
4.> ,.Q S"'C (,)
4.> rIl "'C rIl 4.>....
d.;;r;4.>-~i5..
O<:lrll>:(Q.!3-
'p.;;j ~ 0 rIl ".
~134.>8:<Ii:a.s
t3~,.Qas8,Q
~ 4.> ~ 1;.;'E ~ ,S
o 15 ..s::l.... 4.> Q...d .
(,) 0 rIl gfrJ'.l 8 1:: ~
~ rIl >-'0 d Q.<S '"
'1il :-::l 1il 4.> 0 "'C _ _
s::l 0 ~ bl)'~ C 4.>-
o rIl rJ'.l "'" d O:l rIl ~
>-13~0~"'C.r!S0
;j.S la ~ e ~ 5S :g
OSN<:lp..4.> O:l
...., rn as.;;;;I f.t...4........ g.>
~ ~::I:: gf ~ ~'S ~
'1:: O:l (4.> O,.Q 0" ~
p.. ~ "'Ct)-erll
.r; 4.>4.>(;l ....r
:;J:~~ ~a~.s ~
wi'~ 4.>;.::: 4.> '0 ~ 13
wi ~ ~ "'.;; rIl Q.~
2
~
1/1"':
2~
.!~
O'E
~~
i~,
C:~
~~
~ K,
~ ~f~
it;; m
l- r-
- C)
o ORIGINAL
e
t
Q;
t7l
t
&!
i
III
t7l
~
S
'i:
i
c:
~
III
~
i
!
~
t7l
-i
~
.c::
U)
&
,!!
!S
i
>.
~
'0
.f ~
~ e
p: ~
8
>.:::: ~ ~
'O~ =~~Cl Itl~ l\) l\)
l\) 13 ~ rI5 3 l\) '0 .... ::r:: :os 's .;l = ~
~> ~~ = ~~-~~ b El ItlO~ >.l\)o
'0 ~ ~ -a..... '0 <+=i El ~ Itl .
.g 1 ~ 0 :~ ! ~ ~ fr ! .~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ! ] a ] ~ 81] 13 :~
~'O~;l\)l\),fl~ e-~~~=13~l\)l\)~'Jl\)o08_u~~
iJ ta.~ 8 e.~ fr'~ ] ~ ~ ~ ta 'J ~ ~ 2J j .3 ;B .;l ~ U ta ~:os 0 ~
i=l 13 ~'E c.S 8 g ~ ~ = E-< El.;l .f!3 fE = l\) ~ Itl = El '0 l\) u E Itl ~ =
8 -a '0 l\) ~ ~ ~ 06' j B 8 b =.a:a S !:l 0 ] 8..g ~ ofl 8.s ~ .~ .g
.~ ~ ~ t:n :'Sa '0 ~ ~::r:: ...... '0 ';:l 1a 8] ~ l\) .sa ~ .~ ~ ... 0 .9 ';:l ~ E-< '{' .~
8 ~ ~.i] ta~.~ 8 8. .~ 8 ~ ~:; ~ Q.,ob .~ g ] ~ 5 j ~ ] ~ ~ g! 1
>. ~ l\) l\) 0 Itl l\) e c ~ U = l\) ~ ~ .... Itl 0 ~ l\)",.S El O';:l l\) l\)
ta ~.~ ~ Q) ~ ~ ,~ = ~ 8 8 ~ ~ ~ e ~ ~ ~ .u'" ~ ~ fl.e e fE:a.8: 6
0..2l OIl - > := ~ .... l\) a ~ ~ ~ 0 I.J:l ~ 0... l\) ta l\):.a ....
~ Itl = ~ l\) = '0 u ~ ~ :l ] '0] ~;:o ~ .c:: ~ l\).;l..9 ... Itl.<;: tl El Itl ~
~~U~~]a~~31tl~~:ll\)ta~u~ofl=u~~t:n l\)'O~
:F.~1 ~~ ~~c.S ~ Q.,5~ ~c.Sultlofl'O]~].9 b'o.~~.9~.~ 6 ta =0
- ~ i=l ~ l\) ~, Itl - O. a 'n.~ Itl OIl G) ~ ~ ~ '0 ~ ~ - I .... '0 .
. ~ l\) g .;l ~ .... .f!3 Cl El .u -g .... t:n .s 1a Cl .c:: Cl l\)' ~ tri13 ~ = ~ ~ ~
M ';:l U !:l e.... l\) ~.;l 0 ~ lib l\) E-< '0 .... ::r:: Q.,::r:: 1:: !E ~ l\) ~ 0 ~ ~ ...
~ :i ; ~ ~ 11 ~ ~ j ~ J 11 ~ 1 ~ i ~ I !. ~ ! ~ ! ].~ ~:I
....
C'l
>.
~
'0
., l
p: ~
=
o
~ :; Itl 0
o .....cl l\) ~
'Ooltl !:l'O
!a OIl i = '0 .~
!j.!:l U ~ 8 a
.a;a;..::::lltlo]
] ~~] 15.8
.... OIl 0
= .s ~ ~ ~ 'S
l\)!:l~ l\) "'~
:O'O..J'1a~ ~
a g .... '0 OIl
;3 13 '0' 13 ta ~
i ~ ~.~ ~ ~
.... ~ ~ ~ l\).S
.. '-!::l.... .....cl ~
e'QO~l\)~
Q.,l\)=....;l-
:::: !a.sa:; = E
.~O'O U'O
:! .5 E 5 ] .~
lli1a~~8'O"
iii El 8 Itl.= e
~
11)"':
.2l~
.! l'
8=
~!
fi~
~~,
c:~
i~
~ ! ~ 1><J1
>- .!:!g ~
l- ::Ern m
- ,....
o C)
ORIGINAl
e
t
0.;
f
&
't:)
c:
III
Q
-@
fa
c:
i
c:
~
III
,
:Ii!
!
c:
~
Q
,c:
S:
~
CI)
&
,!!
~
I
-
u 0;
.;3~.s ~==~
~_ "~..c:l
~d U u"'o
.; ~ .f ~ 1 ~ ~ .~ 1 i~
.suo~ ~:S"'U'O'"
ob=='O~~ >.~t)!U ~
~o;.s1)og 'O~!3
~:Bu~fl~g1~~
ou.;3~~<<I'O oS
:OS~~fr~!il.sgd
fa >. d ~ Cl .s ~ ~ u.~
u g.,g<+-< u <<I..2lo; d'ii
.-;: ~ <<I O.!:l "';::; ~ ~ .,g :a
'" I-< oc~ 50.._ <<I U
.s ~ !E u c ~ b] .~ 5 ood
<+-<u8u!3..c:l~"'~~~
~~'O.s8E-<d1Sd.;3~
.~ 8 ~ rI5 '0 ~ .,g ~ 8 u u
~ ';J '0.2 fa U.~ !3 ~ ~ -a
o .~ -8 ~ c ~"5l 0 u ~.~
~ e 8 00.... ~.S g po. e u
u Q.. d <<I U ..... ..... 0 .0 Q..,o
.~ 00
.~
u u
u u
.S $ .S >.
~ ~ ,0
'0 '0
~ ~ ~ ~
0 0
! e l:i3 e
Q.. Q..
~ 8 ~ ~ d
0
z
o
~
t:
o
l1.
o
Z
~
~
C
Z
c(
(.)
~
~
.S ~
U'O 0 ]
!fa:8 ..
~:i a ~ ~ u ~ ~
~Q..e ~~,o~E
,o~~'BuuSe:sa
<+-<..c:l u 0 - > ~ Q..'O
o '" u_~ e ~ u....
u_~<+-<L..."'~UO .
ofadO"[..9c..::i>o
5l .~.,g ~.S. ].s ~ ~
~-<<I.au~O'I -.=
.~ 8:.~ '" :.El .. - .s i>> d
u ~ .... .!::l '$ ';j ~ -~ ~ 0
.;30::E~0.;l1O "''''
U U -
.s '0' '0 ~'" ~ ~ ..2 g ~
1-<1-<<<I'O$!3~!3dQ..
.8 e- ~.g, d (g E-< 2' ~u .~
~1:l_0UU<:l"" _
......, ~ S - .;;l .s. d
. ~O:J u]'Oo <<I
~ .~ .5.s e '" .~ E .~ ~
. E: >. Q.. c;;l (g.S is
~ u ~ <<I d.... ::s 0 0 .~
III Q.... Q...::l U 0 0 Q.. '"
.S..2 I=l
u ~ ~ a
'ii .!:l E-< ~ lib
oo.~<!!l .S 1) e
S',p"'uu,oQ.. .
:s a t> .!:l .;3 ~ 8 :sa ~
'!:l Q.. u ;;l - 1.0 c..::i 0 <<I
.E - 'e' 6 .s on u ~ ~
<+-<] Q..", u u.;3 0 d
O"'U<<l"'-O-O
8d.;3$;:J~::~$
!3~~E5E-<5l~~
::l:= Q.. S == .S ~::l u Q..~
~Q.. U<<l'O 0
.... Q.. '0 >..c:l u u .
u<<lfao"'SQ..d-
.;3 '0 ac~'O u fa
.s 's a.~ u 6 ~ .~ ~
5 a 0 0; :> ~ E .S ~
.~ U I-< d ~ ~ (g 1;; ....
~ .;3 ~ .~..9 S 0 .;;l '"
. ~!::l~]!U 0 8,1S
f'!$L...1-< >u ~
1 '8 ~ !U ~ e:: ';j .~
Ie t:: u la 1.0 Q..:-,.;l u
iii 8..;3 ~ on.~ ~ 'ii :sa
~
~
.;~
.!!"";'
g::
~~
I;,
C:o.
~~
-8
~ ~ it:-9~
>- C 00 ___
\::;: ~
o (:)
ORIGINAl
e
t
a.:
i
i
It
"
c:
III
l:>>
.~
~
i:
i
c:
:8
III
,
:I
i
a
l:>>
l
1
CI)
GI
,
~
j
.~ .~
(I) (I)
.~ (I)
$ .S >-
~ ~ ~
] "'0
~ ~ ~
u u
!S 2 !S 2
Q. Q.
~ ~ = ~ ~ =
0 0
'il .....
~ 'O~ ~B g~=_ ~u~ 0
.!= ~ fa 5 $ ~ '0 = .~ (I) .g ] g ,Q l ~ ] (I) (I)
of!:l 'il a '0 .s 0 ~ 0 U '" (I) 1ii <<l (I) =.... O:l .;3 ~
::E .orO g ~ tS ] ~ 'E :-s g ~ >- !a't:i.e-] (I).g.~ (I) ~ ~ (I)
:l '0 '.::1 ~ .... S<..::I E-< .... i{j ~ ~ ~] 1ii,.l:l 0 ",,0 ~ 8 :.El ~.o 5.;3
a !il 5 <<l U ~.s 5 cl ~ ~ (I) = 0 '" 'il 't:l g ~.~ ~ CI) Q. (I) <+=< ~ ~ .S
: ~:'5! 8 ~ ~ B :'5! .s .sa d .;3 .g .~ ~ g 0\ :; la e+;< 'il ,g ~ .~ .~] ~ .s
... a 0 l;;, -=.;3 ~ ~ ~ -a II S u - -.:> .... 0\ = ~ ~ - 0 ~ (I) ll.;3 <<l
.s .tl >. 6 Q. 0 gl t! ~ rOE [~~ ~'O~ ~ ~ a 5 ~ ] u .~ ~.r;: a o'~
<<l'il'O",'O~",-(I) 0(1) ~='O~'Q.a(l)"'~-t:ua~~
.~ u a ~ !il 5 8 ~ .~ g u;> .S '8..... ~ !a B,Q g. [~ 5~ ~..sa d 8 ~ a
.~..d "'... (I) S (I) ;> :l u suo '::l '" (I) _ 0 !:S ~ O:l (I) .... Q.
a:+"<<l'01a(l)=8ltl(l),gg (I),=,g'tl~~u'"" ~~~""ao
~t:~ ]'~'~i8 f3'~J] ~ ~'Ouo B'~ 8.~,g~ ~ ~~::;;j].s~ '3
- (I) = Q. :l .....= I "',0'" a -d' (I) ~ ". u .... <+=< 0 ,.l:l =..... -.:> k
.! ~ ;> .0 a '" 6 C ~.!::I :l 5 e....; = s' g;.::l,.l:l (I) ~ ~ '" 0 0 .S ~
'" (I),g.::l 0 0 '" gCl)~ Q.S (I) <1:1 O:l ",B-~ g~.;3 O:l >-g.g:;: .
a 1 ~ ~ ~ j l8 :~ .g ~ .~ ~ ~ ~.s .~ ~ i ~ ~ '! ] 11'~ .~.~ i
'.::1 v = <1:1 l'l e e - O:l 0" '-" '0 '-" (I) .::1,0 O:l '" 0 !il '""' (I) lib ... '0 (I) 0
rrj ] 8 8.6']'..s ,~ ~.s .s ~] !a : .~ rOE:l ~ .s 8 .~ ;.::l ~ ~ <<l ~.~ ~ a
<ooe(l)=(I)(I)~~-<<l~~,"",N~ ,o<<l~~Q.o ....-s~>-
..c'~ (I) J O:l ;> S (I) 'il ].~ ~ (I) 0- - 8 =.~.~ (I);.::l a 0 ~.s Q. = .;3 '0
iii ...... ~ '" B ,g CI) oS u '" Q. ~ ~ ~ :!:: e 8 <<l Q..s.g 8 ~..!S o.~ 8 0 ~
1ii . (I) ~
't:l g","l
'O_o~~
(I):;;:: N -.:> U
]::<1ago~
'UO\~n=s:!
=O\U:::;_-
8 ~ 'slE :;;:: .....
CI)....~::<CI)
~..... Po. ~o
..ao(l)B5~
~~:!~a~
!:S(I):lo5bo
'""a 0'.::1(1)-
CI) 5b.;3 :l "']
IS ~ .~ E ~ CI)
~'E~g~3
,,!.I:lCl)U .....
(1)'.::1 0 '" 'E 0
"=5~"'u:j=
E-< '0 ~ ~'~.sa
.o'f""l <<S.~ d ~
oot;o.s8,g~
< ~ El Q..... 1l!
. (I) (I) 0 5b
~.s g.~ ! ,g
~
.8
III""
.2l~
J!"7
~=
tli
ctS
I~,
c:'"
l!~
~~.
<< u 1n
o oC:s; ~
>- Sg _
l- :I,,;; m
.- t-
o <::-;
ORIGINAl
e
i
Q;
f
&!
'tl
i
~
.e
i
c:
i
c:
~
"
,
~
!
S
~
'i
~
.c:
U)
&
,!
!i
i
8
u u~uu~ "'"' '3 =""
~ 0 "".;3 ~ ::I ~ ;a OIl = 0 0 u.o ~ u - .
~ 13 ~.; ~.;3:~'~ ~ tl .~ ~ j -ci <;;; u - g ~ j :g .~ e ~ I a
~ . ~ ~ u~'~'~:n 8 g. a ~ ~ u.g '0 ~ 8 oS ~ ~ i; ~"" oS .~ rg ~ tIS ~ ~ 0 8 .~
..... !l = "" ::I tIS u>> "C c:l ..... tIS "'"' ..... _ "'"' "'"' tIS ~ ..... ;a.:::I ... u Q.. ""
~ = u u CIl B.... El tIS fi'~ $a "l b ~.S 0 0 "" ~ ~ . ~ 0 0.... 0 0'1 .a ] '0 '0' C as
-~::I ~:'S ~ lib ~ i) fr'~ El - u -ci :; ~ ~ ~ ~ Q)..s ~..s 8'0' ~ ?f. ~! ~ 0;- ='~ u au"8
6h ;a ..... 0 I U U ~ fa >..... . = = u:a "C = :.::l M ~ l"'l ~ ~ U 1:l U U ""
U u.a El a ~ ~ 8 ~ ~ ~"'i' ~ : .S . 8 ~ 6 ~ !:l.~ ~ tf ~ ~ = NO' ] CI) El "'"'0 !3 oS.s !.
"" ",,;:! CI).;3 U "" "" u - !l"::: tIS ::is 6< ~ :+" N.U = oS on <<l "" U Q.. ::I J
$a 13 ~:.::l € !l "C "C as - .S ih.8 [Q "" 11 -9 U Q..:a >>0' \0 00 0 U .!:l oS,Q OIl ~ U $a ~
] i <<l t ! ~ .i ~ ] ~ ~ ~ I ~ ~ f;; ~ ~ ~ ] ~ l i; 1 ~ i .~ -; 1 ~ ~ j '[ ~~ I
''; U U U U 0 0 B :3 "" 0'1 U ::is "" .g, ~ !il = 11 U R "" ~ r:: = 0 ::I 0 - - <i:: 0 U l"'l U
8~ fi ~ ~~ e~.s~~!la 5 ~~iE]r--1l'8 ~]~ ~ ij.~ i ~.s.s ~-:~.g
~ ~ ~ : ~ a$'] ~ .~ ~ ~ .s ~ ~ ~ ~ '~.8 ~ ~] ~ ~ .~ j ''; 5 ~ ~ .~ .g .~ .~ ~ !. ~
::s' = ~.~ U 13 "" 0 = ...:l El !l - :a - - 0>> .J' oS ~ "" $a ti . U 8 'fo ~ !l ~:::: U
] g .~ ] ~ ~ ~.g l; ~ ~ .g 's ~ ~ j 'B ~ 1 ! ~ $' ~ ~ .g ~ ] ~ g 8 :& ~ 8. ~ g
U '.-:l CIl _ ~ ~ <<lu U U e = ~.8 . B'~ ~ u,S c:l U> 13 tIS "" ::I "g 0 tIS~ -~ 12.u U> OIl c:l a
oS""O'Ifr 1:l g""uCI)UI-cuo~~~"l -"'"'fa~~>-l"'l",,~a"l~
~ ~ 0'1 U ~ R d' <t;l ~ Q.. q :'S ~ "2 :.::l ~ l': -... 8 .:El 8 ~ ~ tl''; ~ 0 8 ~ ~c:l ;a 8:.e] "C
> = I =:.a ~ ~ 1:l "l 0..... .n w..... -.(;:j"C Q..0Il~Q..""<<l = Q..l"'l r::~ "l Q..Q..:-" Q..U
~ 8 ~ 8 ~.8 s:: 8 El $a ~ ] '0 ~ ~ ] ~ 8 !il fa"~.s.~ 8 u 8 .~ ~ ..s '0 s:: .S .~] fa' e
~
.8
c/),..:
.2l~
.!! "7
8=
=~
oq:8
II,
c:'"
eM
1Il~
at:
~ !:> 1>tf'l
~o -t'I
- ~~ m
- r-
) C)
'')RI(~INAI
e
t
~
01
~
l
a::
i
1\1
01
.~
~
i
c:
~
1\1
,
:I
i
c:
a
01
'8.
s:
~
411
"'
~
j
>. -
0:" ,l..';::lc _c
_ l-< M C 0 U '" -
Z3~ i M OO~ ~ .~ ~~.~ ~
U Q. .5 0 Q. ~ - ~ ';::l . <=I '0' - tti
~~~ 13"tl'g] ~,Qj g'~'C;8 .,fa~ ~
~ &).c'S ~ a ta c ~.~ t p.. ''2 .~ _ O~"3 ~ ~ oS
. (""J - =..2l 0 O;z; ~ - -= 0 ~ ~ 0 ~.;3..c'~ 'C;
.~ c] .,8 r/.l 'i Clo'~ ~ a egg. g U ~ 0 >. E-< oS ~
+=O\~::l!::::l! c.=..:::l 1'l",1'l~6I'!t<+=<,D .MU
~~~~: ~gE-<B~g.~~~.;l]~]~~g~
~ ...... .... .j:l .. I'l ..... a U ~ !~..2l'~ 0\ ~ ~ ~
r/.l U 0= ~~ 0 ,~ ..!:l t') l-<:> '0 ., .s ~ !:I. ~ a ~ '=0
C+-I ~ .... ~ ... Q) - U ....-4
U 0 ^ U 8. !:I. .;. go ~ ~ ! 0 'S = _ 13 '8 ,D ~ l:l ~ a
Z3 ~ = ~ 0 ~ +.,."= \0 ..... M 0 <IS 1ij '+'< 0 ~ <<I <=I
.... -=.0 '" _ ~........ .,) ~ h Q. Q. U d ~ _.... U ~
o~+=<<I~<+=<Uo -~~o = ~~ .s<=l
g ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .s ~ ~ ] ~ ~ E9 ,Q ~ 'r; ! l g ~ .8 .s
'-E! ~ = r~ ;>,.s ~ e 30\ oS !~ ^~ g.~ <<l 8 <<l O\~ !:I.'a
~~o-~ - ~O\ \0 ~-u",uO\-~
~ ~ ~ ~~ ~.~ S <IS ~ ~ S 8.s ~ 5 ~ 8. .s ~ 5 ~
=.+= l;l lJ _ ~ !r ~ 0 r/.l"tl ~ C'l l-< ~ e.s ~ ~ >. e Q.
~ .8 t3 ~ ~ ~ 13 ! 'i .s ~ ~ ! ~ 'i ~ ~~ ~.~ ~ ~ l
] :i'8 &) -g S ~ <<l ~ go.8.tl ~ j ~ ~]'8 i] go:s
~ <=I ~ 0 '" U <IS U ...:; ~....;.::::l '-' ~ ~ .... E-< '+'< <IS ~.=,D
.~
~
.~ >.
gp ~
~ ~
U
~ ~
~ ~
=
o
~ d'
<IS od'"tl . 9
"tl ~ ~ 'i fa 8 .t= "tl
~ota,g'i 1ij:gfa
>. 5h,D -.... 0 e "tl
= i 'r;] f!] f! ~ i z 13..s Ei
i 1-M ~ ~.8.~ @'- ~ ! ~~
~ 8 ~~ oS tl .~ -B ~ 0 ~.s ~
>. ~ <IS -- ~ ~ <IS 't:i E-< .... gs ~
fa"tl~] S ~ ~p..".....,r/.l U Ood'
:;90=til6O'1.s~~b~~~
~ ~ ~ e 00 "tl .s ~ .~ Z .l:l 'i ..8
-~~"tl~Ei- ~o-=,goS
5 5.- fa 0 0 5 'E ~ 0 ~'a 6
.~ClU ~u..e ~~ ~ 0 ~ l-< ~
~u.s ~~ ~~~,-,<;;;~ gfod'
o ::> 6h ~ Cl ~ lJ <=l '+:l
U p.. Ii'r;] od' ~ 1ij a.:>.s.~ ~
..!:l .9 "tl.~ ~ ~ ~..:::l:a r/.l Q);g
...~ 1ij~ t: 0;0 ~I ~~ Q) 1::
t..i ~ ~ '.g ~ ~ ~~ .~ ] ~ ~ 8
'4:!B:~-8<<l6 8 ~~Q)~
III <IS ~ .... U ~. up..:> E-< ==.;l
II)
C'l
~
J~
.!!"':'
u;::
In
"Itt3
Ii,
c:~
e~
12
ox 1\1 8 1>01
.c: :> -fI
>-.!:!o -
... .,-; ITl
~ Ctfl t-
o C)
ORIGINAL
e
~
~
I:l)
t
&!
i
III
I:l)
.@
i
c:
i
c:
i
III
,
:=IE
o
Q) :!;....
Q) ie <IJ 0
~Q) ~u
fI).o:> -.= <Ii
] ~o 1 e ~ ~ ~ ~ .~
- .... 0 ~ fI) fI);.5il
] N <<l .... ~ bll] 8 la
fI) ,~ ~ ~ ..El E-< = El
.......:.!;l00..c;.5il <<l
:S la:a ~ B ~ ~.s ~
~ p.. .s Q) Q)..d';j ::... Q)
;..::::; ZO ~ ..g .;3 .9 1S .<;:' ~
8: ~80j"'Us:l
<<l ~ ::l 00 ~ .... ~ ~ .~
~oQ)Q)G;js:l.;3-.;lfl)
-~.;3Q..o~ i>>Q)
fI) -g..... g..~ Q) .s 8..;3
.fl...0....00;>... ...l:l
:3 ....fI)<<l<<lo=-.;l
o ~ 8 -B ~ Q..'I:: j .~
oooo<+=i s:l la'" Q..fI)oo
g~!~~~~O]!~
,., ~ Q) s:l <<l 0....
'::l . :> <<l 'T' ......... 0
fI) ';J 00......... Q..iS.. 0
~ -8 .~.S [5 d] i ~
!
c:
~
I:l)
i
~
.c:
II)
i
::::
S
I
.~
Q)
.~ i>>
gp ~
~ ~
o e
~ Q..
E-< ~
s:l
o
~ 00 Q)
'fI) tii ~ ~ .s
<<l Q)~ ~ ~
= Q) ~ Q.. Q) ....
S.;3.sS.s.;3.s~
.S gp 0 'Q) $ "8 8'5
=o......c <<lofl)
j<a~~bltf<./:l.g
:; 8 ~ fI) 1:j S ~.S
Cs:l'-!::lQ);:!fI)Q)bll
~ ~ -g 0 0' ~ 8 .~
:a~a..@~U;,.g
fa' .~ .13 ]] 5.~ ih
.... fI) fI) E-< <<l 00 +J ....
.g, e] . 0 fa.g ~
e b ;:.,.~ ~ i:j Q) ~
Q.. Q..t: fI) :> <<l Q..-.;l
]j &~JQ)].g.s
E-< 0 .= Q....... ~
. it a e i ~ ';J ;..l
N '!:l .... Q.. fI) .... a.... ~
u....~Q)~~.....~~
. ~ o'='.f3 ~ .~....-.I .~
~oe.....oe<<leQ)
III <S Q.. 0 c= Q.. '5J Q...;3
$
00
. blli ~
e
Q..
p:: ~
~
::i
c(
::)
a
0::
<C
o
:El
.s]
00 e!
~e.
<<l 0
..... 0
O.S
Q) Q)
~~
fl)j
fI) fI)
j.f .t
.s 0 s:l
t-l = 0
.8 <S '13
p...s.E
~ nl!l
~.~ 8
r-;Q)~
III Q..-.;l
s:l
o
~
i>> i>>....
.......c~
8. -g ~ ..... .S = ~
e]Q) <<;~ <<li:j
aQ..s- g] aQ)
,~] 8 g '':= Q) .~ 8
'0..... 0 s:l 0 .;3 '0 'S'
.E]~8 .E= .EO'
l!l fI) ... .s l!l <<l l!l ~
oi:j~n o~ 00
o G;j n $ 0 0 0 'S
.....8OO<<l .....- .....fI)
0Q..Q);:S 0;2 OQ)
~ 'g.'~ ~ ~ :a == ~ ~
j Q).S... ~ '5J t"' j..=
Q..s:l<<l!U _;;> Q..fI)
-.~ 8 a <Ii ..... ie 8 ie
<a '0 ~ 0 s:l <a.s '':= <<; .s
bll.E Q) ~.~ bll 0 <<l bll 0
~ l!l'~ ~,~ .~ i 10 ~ i
00<::lS",,02 0
O...""Q)~O..... 0
.
.
.
co
C"4
~
c/),.:
a~
J!"':'
g=
tiC!
~~
;~
~~,
C:~
l!!~
~
~!9 t,
Co) :> ""(,
>- _0 -
t: :=IE~ J!-
o <:)
ORIGINAL
e
t
a;:
{
&!
'tl
c:
"
Cll
.~
:@
c:
i
c:
i
"
,
~
i
c:
~
Cll
-!
~
~
&
,!!
~
I
B "0 e:
~ "0 ~:i~~
~ .~.~.~ .fi ~ ~ ~
_~ g. g .Q CU ~~ -8 bl)..J
Q)CI,lijl.....; ?,>.u5
8 ~~cu~~1}l~'~e
rn "0 u.Q 0.J:l ~.:;: CU Q.
~ ::3.s ~ ~ :.J:l ~ Q) 'g.
e..El ..Cl_g.grn13cu
.~ i ~ ~] ~,; ~ r~
.... ...~~ ,g8Bo~
t+::oeo~....,.....~Q.o
B Q. e- IS.'~ ~ "0 e: Q.
gp a.=:] ~ '.8] ~] ~
:= ..... = Eo-< ~ ~ u e.~ r.E!
"0 ~ cu oS _.~ Q. ~ ~
.... .= u. cu ~ S "0 cu
..2 8.S ~.~ 2 ~ 0 cu..9
.g p... ~ ~ U 'r;) Q) u 8 0
..<:l]!ij8cu~~"8cu"8
~ E-<~~.s ooS co..9 co
.
.
~ E
.S cu ~
o!.El~
:=-6=
.:;: < '0 cu
<I:l ;> e
~ "B it '[
~~:.aQ'S
.9]~~
>. ..9 ~
i3::;l.... ~
O..cl cu
d' rn bl)s -~
om'
.:;: gp ~ .
u .:;: "0 =
;::l <I:l cu .g
.l:l 0:= cu <<:I
~uQ."'u
o"OgoF;l:=
u Cl rn Q.
bl)cocu~go
.~ .~ ~ ~]
OQ.rn.9..El
.
>.
.Q
bl)~
'i a
~ ~
8
.....~ ..... >.
'~.s!il ~ cu ~ ~
Q. rn .S .~ ~ 0 "0
bl)s 8=-;;;~1:)~';~
~ cu i:jq;;; <<:1<'> Cl':;:
~ 0 El .s e g. CU co Cl"8
:-' rn :>. bl)..... =..... = oS co
j ~ !. ~ ] 'Cl ~ .s.;; u
~ :c oS ..2 <.f:: .g .~ g ta ~
o ~.~ ~ = ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
CU eO.... cu 0 ..... ..... .;2
~ 0 IS. -a ~ !Q.. 1:) .S ~ :;;
;;l cfl::: go;> .g. cu Cl Cl
.~ ~ ~.s a a:::o a.g
os..... =<<!cu CUu
..... . rn !il 0.= U -<::l Cl ;> cu .
~ .~ u ..... Cl.9 <'>.S 8 (/) 8
.8 8:a ~.g cu B rg g..S'~
p... ~ Q. 8' ~ ..9..2 Cl.= = t:;
M u::..... ~"O~ cue =.g 0
.;:IuCl",Clu CU<<:l~
-< 13 . CU ;:I !!r co :=..2 e .!:!l
. ~ 0'0 Cd rn Q.Q.bl).....
~ B IS. ~ l3 ~ go.~ ~'s ~
>.
.Q
. bl)i ~
8
Q.
~ ~
Cl
o
cu cu
cu ..9 E9
1\1!il= 'bl)0
l;b'r< 'Eho Cl ~.S ;
cu ~ 0 .El ..... j
.....S rn ... .:;: :a .~ .
. cu"'u-S
- "0 g cu's. rn
] 8. o;l 8.Q "0 .~
rn rn rn 0 d !il cu
.......(UbI.)OI; ......
;j .J:l.S cu 2 ~ g.
uU"O=~~cu
.... ;:1:= 0 cu Q.
_ rn ;:I"'" <<:I
ij:~~ ~"82.s
.do......t"daS.....
g g ~ 1\1 ~ ~ 5
'O'.l:l 0 bl) ~ "0 ~
IS. ~~ u .S CU "S 0
cu ~ -g ~ ,g .!::l
,.Cl. 'fl-CUrn>
Eo-< !il rn.8..9 ~ 5
f'i'13 ~...r 5 <<:I bl)
< rn ~ ~ ~ ~ .S
r--: oS ..9 '0' ~ :a ~
.n 8. !. IS.] ~ ~
'"
C'l
~
~~
.!! "7
~=
::I]
~c3
i~
.g ~,
c:~
!~K~1>
o "13 (Jl
"u .....
>- .c:::;..:.:
t- '::12 9 m
- .. ,.....
o t/} f:J
ORIGINAl
e
~
~
f
&!
i
II
Q
.~
i
c:
i
c:
~
11
~
~
rI) ~ =
~El:; >>.e
~o~';l~
~~-8~dta
~.= iZi e tS~]
. E..,; o~'rI)
U ~ OIl;..::: e '0
oS '0 .S;S ~ =
o 4) '0.... .... tl:l
fa e:s.~ 8 ~
o U,.c >""4)
.....~ Q,)..c:l 0 ~
0Il:e oS :.a ~ rI)
.S 0 0 1-<.9 rLJ
'0.......00....
:=13~<<=<u.9
..6:::l~13=0Il
Q,) ~ 6) 5b e .El
S .s :g ';;j ~Q,) ~ ~
El rI) Q,)' '"
4)....'0 Q.Q.
0,.c8Q,).e-0Il
~ '0 -=,.c 4).S ~
..Iol'3r1)-E~:E
1 ~ oS ~ .~ g ~
i
a
Q
.c:
!
~
II)
&
J!
s:
I
>> .s
,.c
'0 .( '0
.( ~ ~
e e
Q. Q.
- ~ 8 - ~ =
j:l., j:l., 0
rI)
~ ~
~
\0 = ~ 1-<
o >><S
1!l'~ U ...
tl:l S;S 6
c .~
orl Q) 1!l '"
~ a tl:l U
'<t !3 rI).9
~ U "' ....
f'I"l 0':::: 5 .
~ ~ ~ '5 ~
c--f ~';;j ~ .9
_~.9fao~
-= U U
sg<"'1!l1!l
.~ >> 4) tl:l tl:l
:a~1a4)rI)
Q. 0Il::C Q,)
..; ~ ~ ';;j ~
< = 1a';:.9
r-:",0Il"'l3'
iii ~ e.s Q,)
~ 4) OIl OIl
tl 1-< Q. ~ .s .El>> OIl
fa 0 .9 - ~'O ~ "c,El
5 ~ 8 ~ OIl] 0 ~ ~ 0Il'10Il oS'~ ii 13:s
.... .... .~ -8',g rI) V"l rI) Q,).,g .!:l 0" - t.;:: ....
\0 fa 1-<::S ::s {:l .... 8 1-<::s <( =- 4) '" Q,)'I:: ::s
1!l <;;; ~~; El ~~ ~.g Els: ~:€ ;:'~.~ ~~
tl:l.:::l !:l .... 4) El - - <<I El Q,)::::l 'O.s 1-< 1-< Q,)"
~ 0:';' ~ 1-< 0 e 1;j Q.+,! O-<:l ca'O ~<S"c OIl
V"lQ.1-<' OUQ. ~=U,,>"'rI)Q,) =
~ 0.... u Q,) = 1-< 0Il= .
'<t g. 0 >> ~ ~ oS 13 Q,) ~ ~ .9 .S ..s.S Q..S'~ ~
M .9 ~ ~ ~.~ ~ ~ ~ U 13 6<....~ 3 '8 Q,) ~
~].~>~ e ~ 8 .,g eP~ ~''; e ~ P<~ 5..,;
,..... ~ .. Q.I rI) rI) = ~ = ...... rI) Q..!:I = '" ~ rI)
c--f ~ 1:; .S '0 g.. ~ ~ ~ ~.g fa (5 .g .9 U S ~ 8
_~.9 8. g. ~ fa' ~.9'~ a ~ ~ '0 .E! ~ 1.rI) B' ~
.g, ~ ~ ~ ''; = '" 11 S' oS Ef~ oS ~.s ~ Ef~ 0 ~
~ :0 ~ fa.~ S < ~ ~'~'= ~ 18 ~ Q.:O ..,; .0Il1 'fl
S Q,)tI)o~ ."c<S =..c:l 04)
~ 8 g oS ] .~ {:l ~ '5 ~ ~ {:l ~ .~ ~ i ~> f s: i
.:::l Q. oS = '0 ~ ~ U ~ U ~ P = .=.... Q. '0
t-;..a El.t:' 0 c e e a e ~ e.= 0 e ~ s s ~ c
ltl rI) ~ ll' U tl:l Q. Q. Q. Q... Q. 0 j:l., Q..;;l <<=< Q,).. tl:l
~
~
III":
.2!~
.!!"':'
g;;;
~~
I~,
C::li
<<. 7& 8 t:1>o>
O.c::;;: '-(\
>- ~9 m
\:;:. ocrii r-
o C)
ORIGINAl
E
t
a.:
l
i
It
~
c:
III
Cll
.~
~
i
c:
~
i
~
'"
C'I
$' >.
,c
., ] ., '0
~
e e
0.. ~
- ~ 8 p:: 8
~
Q) Q) ~ as "" $' B "" .s
-eo!:! ~ i Q) eo '"'CI) .S
]E!~ o l;;' 4) 'O=~.s"'"
e- '<:) ~ :E la 13 0 '"'
-,.l:l ~~ . Q) CI) Q) Q) "" 0 eo
~""~s.s otao~ Q) Q) U ~ ,c .~ i .g .S .~ ~ g .S '0
,c~8""'Cl .13 'Cl ~ ~ "":E -on j=='O ~.s ~
~~~ Q) .
-N ~b~ e ,d ~ '0 S2i
.9 j :>,~ = _ ~ Q) '0 ~- ;.:=~
"" 0 0 ]- ~~ ~ rL ]'0 "".;l Q.) ] .if .s ~ ~ 6'~'i' .9 .~
Q) - .+= ~ "".... tl .
Q)""o...u "" 0.. ~ '"' "" ~ i 0..Q) l5 Q) Q) a
>..... IS "" '" _ eo CI) ~ .... r:l 'O.S:iS == Q)..... "".S ~ "".~
! 0:iS Q)<+-=i ~~.~ 5 .Sf i- ~- - ~ '" ~.;lo~Sf 'O~
-sQ)Q)"" .....0.. ~~"".a:a : eo r:l .Q) '0 cl ~.~ ~. ~
S S' "" 8 ~.~ ~~'E 8 ,d_OO .... Q) .gu'a Ill'"
CI).s - "" eoj:lE-< '-",c - Q) > '0 .~.9 ~ eo j:l .g .a!~
~ == S' CI) 0.. . = .... ..... =- 1~l5:'='" ~E~
Q.,c u.g -Q)o 0] ~'O'gs5 Q) .... .!! "7
Cll eo"'~Q).;l 0:1 Q) CI) '" u .+= ;.:J ti ta .~ .... '0 g=
'1 -.s'O '"' Q)e~ g"" lZ) o'f""'l ~ eo '5 .s .9 i ~~ u =
~~ ~.9 . '0 '.s~~ eo '-" IE 0 1Il'E
g; g Q).9 tlob-ci ""eo' S Q) "" Q) U 1Il~
8 ~'I ~ as ~ "5'.9U'O el;:l=~ Q).13S .b '0 ........ ~~'OB,d . ..... 5h "(8
=Q)'O~~ :t: . >,,1;
.c: a.S ~ ~ .9tlQ) g~B o.~ ~ ~ Q)~ eo 's ~ O;j I~,
II) 5.9' ~eg eo 0.. 0.. .... e.'l'O
& Cl)eo'"'eo "" Q).s >. '0 .... u~ Q) ~o~]~ Q) ~ j:l
o ~ 0:1 Q) Q..!:l ~ ] 0.... Q) r~,gli ~ !a
:! E-< _ '"' Q.Cl ~ .~ .9 .13 . '_] g a:;.;l N_ 0 ,dUQ) Q) c:'"
~o:I..eO:leo . ]'O~.2 .... - ::l 0 Q) .~ ~ ~ ==Sf I!~
S . Q) CI) I . 0 ~~ :;:l m Q) ~ ~ Q) 0 U ~~:g:Ja) - Q)
I ~ '"' '0 ~,c' ~==~:.= Q).90Q) .;lBo ....~] ~~ ~_""o '"' Q) U = S'l;;
< 0':> Q) < O' ~ 6 ~ 8 ..s..e~ l;;~J!u~ ::5~~ ,E] 1::'
r-:]e8~p:: . <<=i _ .;l Cl""o.. "" ~ .c: ~ -?tJ1
to- Q)'=.
III 0.. _ "" lIi.;l,c~ . . . . . . >- .lio "l'I
r- ~~ 'fii
.- t-
o C:;,
ORIGINAl
~
1
f
II!
i
III
l:ll
.~
.e
'i:
i
I::
~
III
,
::IE
i
a
l:ll
'i
g;
.c:
CI)
CD
I
~
'2
~
=
o
~
0.0
.S
~
....
-
~
o
'I::
B
.S
=
o
'13
l:S
o
>>
e!l
~ .
o,!l
= .D...
~'",
.9&
.
>>_ 0 0 ~
o 's 0 la 0 .;3 0.0 0
la !I) U =.e ~.... ..... El':;l =
Q" ~ 0 Cd O.;l t;] ~ 0 .:>.= 0
B -e la ~ ~ .;<] g] ~'13 .
g ~~] ~ ~ ;].~(U.s~ ~
..... ~ ;3 0 ;> ~ a ~ S'I:: 0 "C la
0c.S"C~] ~ 0 "':cd~-8.la Q
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 'a~ ~ ~ S "S ~ ~
o 0 0 ~..... ~ 0 0 0 = 0 a
t+:: := .;;0:= S! e >..... ~ 0 '" 0]
'.!:l Q" Cl .... .;l ~. 0 ~.... ::s .... Cd
l3 g. Cd ~ 0.0;:!i.8 l:S 0 19 0 ~ '"
o = = <a0 ~::s.;3"'0
..... 0 0 la'~ ~ ;> >>'Cl '" ~ >> '50
o .;3 "C 0 e E=: 0 e!l 0 .S ~ o~ e!l 0
0rA'~1O.... "Co~o.o::so'O
o~ ~o.o 8. ~ .~ ]'~ 5 0 ~ ~ 5 j
. Os::lOO....."'-"I_,'""'o
'" - ~ 0 u::l ;>........= '+" 'S ~ la 0
.~'S ~ s 'S .8 ....0. ~ ~0.0.D ~. '0 ;
~ .D ,El 0 '""' ;>......~ ~ '" =
<=> = :.a "C ~ ~ ~ 0 ::s 0 B ~ .~
5 ~ -=::;;j bOo:.a () 0 ~ O!l-Eh
'1:: 5 '::s..c Cl ~ S ~ .S ~ Q ~:=
p.,<;:;.D"'U_.
.
>> ..... .s
g _0]
Cd 0 ~ '"
g...c:l~i38.u
8 ~ Q,,~ Q,,-
o O';;:l'+" 0:9
.....~;30.0~~
o c.S "C.S ~ 0
B d :~ E ~ ~
~ Cd "C .....c 0
OOd"'ij)..cl
t+:: := .;;0 .=! .... ~
'f 8:la;,:l S rA'
8 Cd = ~ o.o(U
..... ~ o! ='1::
o '+" "C Q"tl:l 0
0rA'~B81O
~ ,ff 8.'~ M S
::s:.a e.<;::] ~
~:SQ"S15tl:l
.... .D o.o..g '0 g
$_.El '" 9 ~
15(U;g=;:l~
'1:: 15'~] .~!::l
p.,<;:;_",_-o
.
>> >>
.D .D
"C "C
., ~ ., ~
e e
Q" Q"
~ g - ~ g
p::: p.,
10 fJ'.l~
"C.;3"O",
o ~ la
.~ E = ~
+>s~o
El '" 0
'8 '~9 .s
00':;: !a
::.;;u..g
]'~ = e
'" 0 8 Os
0.0 10 e
.S b t;] 8
g.g.0"C
~oSBu
]~.s.g~
-~.;;~o
~ ~ .~ ~ ~
~"'~"O
~~]a.s
~ 8 s-~ 5
t-; >> 0 ~0'S:
1Il.D0 _
~ ~
.s t).:a =
.S ~ la'B '~8 ej.g
~ CIl", ~
o .... 0 0.0
= - .s Cl 0 ~ :-E!
o ~ _ .!::l.........
-=.;3 o <a 0":;
] ~.~ ~ ~ g.'"
"'~ 00'';:~
d Q" 'i u .g, o:l
~ g 0 g e b 0
:=.~ S.~ Q" g. b
Q,,03::s0 N
g..g Q::g.;3] 4)
....e<p.,4)Cd=
.g = Cl.!::l ~ g .s
5'.0 0 -< 0'';: 0
~ ~.~ u_
p., .'" ~ ~ $ g ::s
E90 8.,;: = '""' rt,l p.,
0.... ~ Cl s::l
.~::s>u8]
~ ~ ~.~ ~ s ~
~.=!] g'~'!3~
~ ~O'.Qre"Cz
~
~
I~
J!"7
g=
~!
I~,
1::<>-
~~
i~t:'1>
o ~~ ~
>-.!:!o -
l-::IE~ J!]
-0 c::,
ORIGINAL
e
t
a.;
f
r!
'tl
c:
..
tll
'E
i
c:
i
c:
i
..
,
::re
!
a
tll
-8.
f
II)
&
J!
~
J
8
= ~ = ~
o U o.~ U
.~ = ~.!;l c:i.'~ ~ il
u~~=o <( OIlCOEloij ·
-<':l ""... co'r;; U ; t+=l 0 0
-.:l 't:l O..cl ~ =.;l . .~.~ U c.-:o
't:l ~.g, ~ 's .$l '+-< U -;!3 '"a il J:l e
ij=eou~o,c tE:;~u-.:l.a
O'~ Q. ~ 'Q) .~ 'E gj ~ U C' '0 .;I:S co
u .~ .s <( = U e El.s.;l -8.u E! ~ ~
~ ~ u~.s.sQ..tl'+-<'E.a 8'~'3~..
~.~.g~ 8!5 ~ S g.g~~~.~l]
tf) 'f ~.Cl.g'-;;'Q u.~ co;;:; ~ ~ 0 5
u~or-<~l'<.tbO't:l..c 23~OIlEl
.;l 0 ~. ~ ~ -<: ~ !5 ~ = ~ ~.5 u
~ ~ ~ ~.s 0 .~ 0 8.$l 8 ~ ~ '"a
.~.~ ~ ~ .~] n .~ ~ ;] g :a .g ~ .~
aruOllC'~uu1iiu~ 't:l.oc.-:ou
'" :g e .!::l .~ 0Il'0' .0Il.;l !5 S' ~ .s .g ~ ::
tl .s ~ '" ~ ~.E .s'C 0 ~.2 ~ r-< ]
I.~ '1 ~ :; ~ .1 ~ ~ i ~ :~ 1.~ ~ i
~ '"a:~ Q. 6 't:l ~ ~ ~ g g u ~'~'O"O'
-<: ~ s.~ 8 ij . 6' l5.. i:l ~ 'E ~ u ~ ~ .
o -
~'t:l .il u g =
..Ej ij 'O'z::' u 0 il = ~ 0
.s El u .g, ~ ,c u OIl = 8 ~ ~ ~
'a u!a etlgj~~ ~~'t:l ~ 8
E i e-~.~ El~ ~].g'3 Us co
8..;:i ~il ~ 't:l tf) '+-< . U ~ ~
0Il~;;:;.0 0 ijJ:l 0 ~ill::'O't:l
.El .~ ..c c.-:o 0 -.:l ~ ? ~ .... J:l u
:.a ~ ~ c:'t:lt:::: >.=. = ~= 1ii
CO~.<<lUt"',cuou o.
~~ 8.- !a?"(j El '0 El.s 0 e.
co '0' .9 .e- fr = 0 8 ~ .2 ~ 0
'+-< ~ ~ g l5...g 8 5 ~ g..5 't:l g .
o u u = .$ Q. ~ 0 .= 't:l u .;;l c:
uiloo];:IQ. ..cl_U..clU<<l
~'+-< U ~_ ~co 0 o]jr-<::'"a
:; oil ~]~] o~ ~ '$ =ta OIl
~ ~ ~.g ~ 0 <<l U ~ 0 <<l ..cl .5
.~ U '3 co ij U 't:l il <Ii'r;; ~ '"a ~ "g
.s !a] .~ - ~ ~ .s .~ '0 ~ '0 '3 ~
!5 ~ 50] e- > .~ !5:~ 'S ~ ~ ~ ~
;E il] ~ ~ ~ e'& ~ ~ S 8 i ~
....
C")
~.s
'g ~
8 ~<tl
S '+-<0 -<: ~
o co
tf)~~ij~
~ ~ ~.~ ~
~ ~ .~ .g ~
'~.s U .s .~
.S ~ ~ tl U
ss~sQ..
o p .s .90]
u'S e! & ~
~C'uuo
>eg.~E
~~~=~
.,... ~u 0 0
u.... .~u
~~o~.s
.
E
i
a.:
c.
~
i
It
'tl
c:
CI
c.
.c:
~
i
c:
~
&
;e
:I
t
~
c.
'8-
~
.c:
CI)
&
..!!!
s:
I
"'C
8"'C -d",gCl'eJ
=~<<I~8.duQ)
oS~~fr~-B~~
rll ~ 2 a .= ~ ~
"'",- i::3C1)'"
Q)..... ~ Q) C" .....
8<;=: ~ eoSo
.... t-4 lZl ...... 0 .~......
Q.. S . Q)! ~'p ~ :s !S
. '" Q.. El:l Q)'I::'
.~.~ '" '" U ~ ~
';:3;::1 ...... ~....... Q .... u
'eJ aftS ~~ ~~ ~ ~
t-"'C""OMQ..Oe.
tilo'" Q..S'P'"
Q..~8~~g.0-a13
'IJ OP-l 'IJ S"d U bIlo
<l:;u<:<l:;e!g'eJQ)'eJ
.g>,.Iol8."'.....~'"
Cl .... .... '_~ O"d g "'C .s
U~CI)~~UM~<<I
~ .~ oS ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~M"'C~~MO"SlI.l
CI)~ta::I:O~-sl~u
~ ~
.....~.... 0 <J:l
'g "''''C
.S .= ~ ta 'eJ
Q)~e"'C ~
~ 's. j::l., 1) g 'a ..... S .~
'1:: 0 ~ ll:: ..= 8 0 = U
Q..=+>'" ",_",o-<=!
O<<l.....M M....P+>
a ~ 0 ~ 'g 0 ~.{! .~
g. "'C ~ t:l:l .=;g'1:: 0 .
JQ)..... eO:l"'C~8~
.~ '" ti1 0 ~] 8 ~ ta S
:;:L~gC +>0 ....'Ep
= ~ m u .....0 '6'0] .~ 8 .=
_M Q)~-u...
triu oS MM::l.g<<lC"
~ S 8 .~ zi 8..s Q.. Q...s e
'0 bIl "'C lI.l E ..9 ~ .s .s .... :s
.g, l ta ~ El ~ ~ ~ .~ .~ ~
eCclbll-t:!Q) Q)s:s:=e~
j::l., ~] s's Cl 0 ~ ~ j::l., lI.l
lI.lcti1uC"]uo""'Q)~
~.!l Q..~ e E-< ~ tlSoSt:l:l
.s
.
.
= S
.g~ fI} .
.!l~ ~ 'g
';:l U . U -._
.::l......... U Q o'
~ ~ ~ <<I 0:1 M
.!;:l Q).O' ~ lI.l j::l.,
oS~~ ~~oS
lI.lO~.gos
e ~ +> ..... U '"
oQ)El ~E~
e-s.g 'g S 8
8 b"'C U ~ <<I
.S "E! ~ .s 0 ~
:=oo=cno,S
J .S -= J ~ ~
'" '" 0 "'.;; "'C
.... "':';'p '0.... lI.l
~u~ lI.luQ..
.= e! 't: .= Q) Q)
e Q) 0 e'8']I
j::l., ~ ~ j::l., j::l.,:=
Q) ~ a ] Q)'~
t:l 'eJ J:l E-<.s.:l
. .
~
~
~
"'C
~ ~
.~ a.
- 3-
j::l., ....
=
o
bIl'"
= l:l Q)
~ 0 '" .;:l =
"'C.......:.; U l:l
ti1 .~ U 2J .'E.;;l
~.... ~ E ~ B ~ El
",Cl~cE::l ~
Q) ./") 0 ::l .... .S ~ ll::
!3 00 .~ "9 '0 El ~ J
o~- Q)Q).t:l
~ = 5'0 ~'8' ~ ~
~.g~]Q.. ~e
~~'eJ~oSJ~~
<<ICI)Q)oSOM"'CQ)
.~ ~ '8 =Q) ,; ~ ] :g
l:: U <<IQ)Q)....
~ M El'1:: Iot:.!:l 0
..... ~ .<<1 Q) lI.l 011 "J =
'a g. e .!:l ~ !;::::::::
U"dO&=""'<<IJ
~Q) u:5 lI.l 0Il~ ;>; '"
~'aM~"'C-""
('<'\ U <<I. .... bIl ~
1""""'1 tI'J .......a
--i ~ oS ~ 8. g OS '8'
u.<;=:..... 0 ~- 8 Q..
r-:E-<og< ]UlI.l
iii .S ('<'\ .= '" -< oS
~
I~
.!! "7
~~
~~
Ii,
c:~
~~
_N
<<. ;; t:1>(j)
o ~S1 ~
C<I'J -
>- m
r- r-
-' ~
o nRIGINAI
e
t
a;:
tII
t
&!
~
i
r
;@
c:
i
c:
:8
"
~
i
!
c:
~
~
'a,
~
.c:
CI)
CD
tII
..!!
~
I
_ Cl) a:) ...I<:
8 Cl) .r:J 13 u
l+=l ofl8:::Q.)OE
...I<: =!:l] - ~
U Q.)o;j ",19 Q.)~
::s ,l:l ".'" Q.<=l
~ _ ~ !il"bO ~ S 0
"'~l:l::.fJS<<l~-
~ ~ ~ ~ ~.S !a.3
~ ~ ~ a .8 ~ ~ '.8
-;;-;aI-<.ObO'"
~~Q.)..sa)'O!e:l
?"'> -bO
;>; ~ ~ .ff ~ ~ ~
~ I ~....-l....... <<S (1)
'O=~:s!~01-<~ .
I-<,.t:i 'fl-O<<l'O
8. '" 5 ~ ~ "i2i .u -8
u>.Q.)5h<=lQ.)aQ.)
'E'~ ~ .r:J (i) ~ t:: ~ ~
...I<: o'~ j . ii . a ~
~~~~~].~~ ~
~ ~ = ~ .S ~ u],c
Q..i:l <<I > a Q...9 '" 'tl
>. $
.r:J
'0 '0
.( ~ .( ~
8 8
Q. Q.
- ~ 5 - ~ =
j:l.., j:l.., 0
] g
'€ ii'~
~ oS S
Q.) '" =
" I-< - 0
~..s ~.:::
~ ~ Q.) ~
o - bO
.s>~ ~ ;E
~g.ee:l
..9'31-<5
e;- '0 ..s .:::
Q.)'~ I-< -2
.::: 8 ~ 0
a:) Q. 0 Q.
'O]Q.~rIi
~::: gptl~
Cl ]'';:: ~ g;
""" '" =.... ::s
. '" s g. '"
~l~ e:l ~
. 0 g; >.....
~]i;lS:g
,l:l'Oe:l >.-
~ 8 0 .r:J 0
~~a ~~
o Q.) I-< Q.) 0
_ 0 .~ U
gp8>.Q.)Q.)=
.::: <<I.r:J I-< 0
'" ~ '0 - 0':::
~..clS]:::.E!
-g ::.::: : 1rl :0
(d 0 bObO;Q'-
8~~.31il~
9= .'0>.
5 ~ 5 la.~ ~
s>'!3~S-;;
.~ E] ~ e:l ~
t:l bO Q.) Q.l's
~~S~'Oi
Q.)!il,l:lQ.)..g
ffi >'.fJ o.S d .....
U :g lr\ S ~ '.8
. a e:l J'~ '"
r-: ::l 0 ~ ....
If) ",a -.::;0
C")
C")
>.
.r:J
'0
'ibO ~
8
Q.
c: ~
=
o
'" Q.)
] .'3 1-<8t::
_ bO:::..s 0 ............
0:1 ~ 0 l'<' ""' ""'
~ ~ . tl '0 Q.,~.r:J:-' 5
.!:l U '0 = ~ <<I:a -;; ~.:::
_ Q.) Q.) Q.) 060 '" U' U
= <.t:l ~ c:> 't.... a.... ~ E. .g
Q.) o.r:J,-.,I-<.r:J Q..<"l t:l fIl" 0
al-<.!..<"l~ "<<10 .a-I-<
Q. "Q.) ~ 0 :=!.~ Q.) U ~ l:! fIi Q.
.... - <<I U - ~ M -.::l c:l,-.,
g. ~ ~ '-"' a g <<I.fl'~ d.9 ~
o Q.) Q.) 0 I ,l:l.~ s ~ - '"
.r:J Q.) '0 u = u ::s' '" '" <<I.;.;l
~ "i2i "S.... Q.) o;a bO "'.... tl:';::l
.... ;::1"= ~ '" = :> ~ e:l '" Q. t
~sg,g;::l'O~. Q.~o"",
Q.) .::l""O ~ !a,f!i <<I U bO '-"'
c:> g ~ 5 ~ ~ 5 ~.S 8 .~ 'a
i>:>.= CIJ .p "i2i Q.) bO u.fl Q. '" 0
-6 8 ~ a >. i>:> ~ .,~.~'~ ~
Q.O U "'-6 -U-;;::s''=I Q.)
~Q.):'O bO'O'O '" '" S a
~ ::.~ !a .~ !a ~ ~!:o.g ;g
...; 0- bOQ.) ~~:a ~ 0_ 0
u ~ 8 .~ C:>] <<I ~ go ;g g ~
r-: ~lJ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 8 ~ .g
If) <<1<1.; U? ~'O ",'flU Q.la
~
I~
J!'"';'
g;a
~~
Ii,
C:~
<< CD 1t:'1>
o .!U I.P
>- .!:!~ ~
\::;: ~~ J!2
::J (:)
ORIGINAl
e
~
t
f
&
i
"
tll
.e
i
c:
i
c:
~
"
,
:I
Sl
Q)
.~ =
13..c
.~'.6 ~
8=01)
lj 0 Q)
N~;g
08]
U<I>=
.s g 3
~~ Q
Q) ~ ~
tg.d
.s ~ g
... Cl. <I>
Q) <I>
=:s ~
o <1:1.
= ~Cl.~
.~ ~ = 0
..s .= ....
t ~ b .~
E9.s~~
!
~
tll
!
i
&
.I!
~
I
E
"0
'iOl) ~
e
Cl.
p:: ~
a <I> b
.~ ~ ~ ~
O :1. la
<<=l ~~
~ <I:I.S ~
U t:~o
.s ~.~ Sl
<:l '" c;
's Sl <1:1'1::
...... ___ 01) Cl.
]~~~]
; .~ ~"5 ~
;I ~ '5'0 tb Q) .
~gt.....::i
- .~ ~ 0 <<I e
< <.13 ~ ~ 8:
'Q)o;>.Q)Cll
~~~'Q)!3t)
=1 8 ~ ~ '=0Q)
r--:.= .....Q)"-
IIiU_08Cl.
g
;>.
..c
'iOl) ~
e
Cl.
p:: ~
g
~ 01--lS.....-l Q)
~ If'\ ~ ~] OI)oS
c; c:l ~ 0..... ""S 'e>
ff< ~.S <1:1 .>.- 0 g "0 01)
.~ ~]I ~.! ~ ~j
15000 "O::sgCl.
C,)=~ge~o'~Q)
Q).O ;>. ~ Q) 0 ~ S oS
..c+=<I:I-~~~=
]]~j~e~~l
'" 0 ~ C,)'l::! E-< >. C,) 01)
d ~ ~ !3 ~ J 1:l" 0 .2
~ Q) Q) Cl."OE-<::S"O c:I
:a~~]~~8~-a
go.s e '" -a a e'~ 3
(l.) ..... ,~ d (l.) ~,~ e tl oil
E9 0.... Cll..co.... Cl.~ =
~ ~ ~ Sl - ~ go..s'~
f'i'b.. Cl.(l.)~" (l.) c:I;1
='''0 ~ goQ) (l.) ~"O Cll_
= 0 b = o.~ -a Cl.
r-:::s:OJ~(l.):OO(l.)(l.)
iii & ;IE-< 8.oS;I aoS ~
;>.
..c
"0
. OI)i ~
e
Cl.
p:: ~
"0 oij "0
;I~ (l.)
;>.3 3
5's .s
'()..8 (l.)
IE == ..c
(l.)~
(l.) '"
~ .Ef
B ~
~~
~~
~..s
C,) ~
.S B
~ ~
~ ~
=1 ~
r-: ~
III "0
=
o
la
~
"0
(l.)
C,)
,g
Cl.
(l.)
_ ..c
~ ]
'" <I>
(l.) <I>
> .~ ~
<<I> a ....
o <I>
l:t:: e (l.) "0
~~ ~;I
il~ ~ '"
r.I} '0 t-I ~
C,) (l.) ~ 8
'i'[ ~~
o == ~ b
;:; <1:1 <1:1'"
-<.S r ~
.
~
oS"O'€
~a;lu
<1:1 (l.) '" B rn
.d:1:: (l.) <1:1 U
::;a ~ ~ '~.g
~-tl..ce(l.)
<I> (l.) "0 Cl. C,)
...~ !3 la go e
"l 0 Cl.
(l.)~:gEfOl)
... 0 la"",.S
=="'C,);::Jo
<I:I1~"O;>'
~ ,u (l.) C,)
g ~~~
.~ e~ ~1
(l.) Cl.~ ~
Cl. _ (l.) '"
oEf~la~
~OI);"'" ~ 'i:' ~
. ~ ~ (l.) "0
e ~ ~.~
.
.
~
~
Ill'"'
.s~
.!II'
u=
Q'2
IU
cc8
I~,
c:~
~~
l~Kt:''9
'5~ ~
;:.... i9. -
l- rJl rr,
_ r-
(.) C)
ORIGINAl
e
t
0.:
Ol
~
i
It
"
c:
"
Ol
.~
i
c:
i
c:
i
"
i'
51
i
c:
~
Ol
i
~
.c::
CIl
&
.l!!
~
~
~
$
'C
.1 ~
P: ~
8
W
fn
o
Z
-= 'C 'C u '3 01)
u 81;] &1lii _~ u 01;]]~
~:6>~5"'~&11g.s.s~8:=:s
El"'u..:l&1.sc:l"'I9:.....s'i~r:Q
c.i:l ~ ..s ~ '"S 'C .g '"S o.~.$a ~ ~ ~ ::s!
::::: ~ 01) ~ u u _ Q p::.- C. U ::> 2
~ 8 ~~~oo - ~I+:l
=: :th ~ .~ ::::: r:Q .$a ;; 0 ~] ~ ~ ~
&1 ~ u 5 e'~ ... ~ 8 8. c. =: i- c:l ~
Q 0 !a u '" - u g _ 0 ,~ &1.... u r:Q
;'::::.$a~- ~ c:l~~;E ,fl\O;.a Qu.s.....
~I UO~O...O--;.::::UOllo
- ClO .0 _ 0 u - ~.... c..s S ::>..
~ ~ '" 'C 13 0 \0. C. J! ~.E ~ 0 :- ,~"
Qu8"'~..s-0+>~- -'3u
.~ ~ ~ ~ r:Q 00 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 1 ~ .13 .s
c. '"S '1iJ 'E -d .s ~ >>:.a.R J! e ~..... >>
]c:le.$a~ !3]oe+>c.~.g.o
r-<.g gp ~ p:: -a'~ ~ ~ 8: '"S .s ~ ~ 13 .
. Q .;:: (j 0 ~. "'. ClO '" U .. '" +> .~ 0'"
..-l "'..... 5bc. "'Q_.....u
U .E '--l 0 ~ 0 9< 0 .~ .... !3 ~ 0 a '0
. 19 K U - '0 'v ... _ ~ ::I .= - ~ u
~ 8 ~ ~ ~ -a.g ~ ~ ~.~ ~ 81 ~ i5
'C
:~
;El . u
u c:l a a
.0 0 Ii.il
~ei\O~
~ Ii 'C 'S
"'l"-~'C
Q) . .""",
:~ .s a ~
.;:: ei .,j '"
Q .0\ 0
'" '" c:l -
c:ll"- U ~
o c:l ~ '"
';:: u ,J:; 'C
g~]~
g~11 =
U !:l rJf '" .9
.0>>>>'0
~~~]~
~ 0 ~ '" 0
1Il_~tI:lQ
c:l
o
$
'C
. iOll ~
e
c.
P: ~
c:l
o
::::: b ] ~ '" ~ u 0Il~
.l::' .~ _ 0 u ~ > ,S ::>
::>0 :r=-a;:J.;::Q
01) id' ~ e ~ fr Q ~.~.g.~
.iJ ~ ~ ~ '5 e ~.~ ~ ~ ~
eGju::::au",ou",.o
~ 5 c:l c..::: '" c:l .~ '0 Q
U 01) a ~ 'S .~..cl .... g c:l.~
f'C.g~g'~~~a~8
~ &1 u ';:: gp b ~.g.g ::> '"
'0 '" -;:: Q .::1 '" U 0:1 'C u
c:l Q..:= e 'tiS .... lfl .... - u-
a ~ c.... o;:stl:l 8 c.il
....50 ~c:l.o <.o=ic.t:;
51 c. c. ~ u >> 01) ~ 0 .S 0
.... '" '" .0Il-P c:l uO O'~
.0 '" '" ~ b a.~:;::I N u
j "5 !a .s.~ ~ ~ ~ fii] ~
:: ~ 'i 8' 8 a e xa oS := .S
:;;: i:f'C e.i.g ii ~ ~!i ~
.u~~.g"t:lb~~~]
f"! S l'3 .;:: .~ -8 .~ ;3 13 .s u
~ .S<.9 "1iJ '013 g ~ 'tiS fr.S
~g.u5e:.a>>...g~gp
III u.o '" c.",.o 0_... u
II)
C')
~
i~
.!! "7
8=
~~
I~,
c:~
~~
N
~ ~.
~ .c:: $<?V"'
.20 .-(I
>- :I~ iT
~ G
ORIGINAl
e
t
a.;
Cll
~
i
It
'0
c:
III
Cll
.e
:@
c:
i
c:
~
III
~
i
!
c:
~
Cll
-8.
g;
.c::
U)
3.
,!!
S
i
-= ....
Q)~
El <0 "C El
.S< ~ fa 0
g. . ~~
Q)"'bIl!;Ja.l
bIl 8 .S .... :c
.S 5 , ~ 'r;]
~:g","C~
Q) ~ Q)~ Q) Q,
= .... bIl't;j '"
Q).....<Ou<O
~~.9,9~
",Q)"'Q)S
'S ~ -= ~ fr
=o~~u
"Co~::se
~ ~N .S< ~ Q)
. ::I >
e 0" Q) ',p
<0 Q) !;J....
1~1~~
--jElQ)
Q, ~ !;J'~
],9 ~8
>.
~
"C
.( [
Ii: ~
S Q)
"C "C > "C
~d)..::1 Ij
~.!:l g 'a
;> g.l:l:l E
8.eQ) Q)
-=Q)~ e-
Q)~~Q)~
~~Jl.s?
'g. '" 't;j S ~ ~
oQ)","C-=::I
=.S 8 -3 Q) ~
o 011."...".. El ~
',p 5 i) ~.S< Q)
~4)~ag.13
~"'0>.o8
lfj .~ .b] 0 ::I
0"C= =~
ulS8. i:
:;;! Q).e'~ g
.S ~ 0 ~ fa
f'i '0 0 ~.~ Q)
. ~ '" 0 - >
~bIlQ).s8]
CIC >. > <0
";~]~ElS
8
S
"C
. bIli ~
e
Q,
Ii: ~
Q)
~
=
bIl'~
.~ Q)
"CB
13g
:g ~
]~
:0.0.
g .~ 13
....."'''C
a"~ Q3
.::l Q):.a
>...... '"
c:l 0 ....
~ = 0
. .g "C
"(f' .... -3
~'O::I
. El 0
OC;Q),E
1Il"C'"
8
S
"ibll 1
e
Q,
Ii: ~
Q)
-= :g
~ .~
...Q, 0
"::I =
0"=
Q) Q)
bIl~
.~~
~ 0
=-
Q).E
'7Il'"
Q) Q)
.~ ~
0=
= 'r::'
Jl ::s
:E~
o Q)
:g]
. u
~ ~
'''C
~ fa
co
C')
=
o
Jl Q)
~r9.s
-.;lgJ"CS
bIl 8. -3 ~
.S _''''' 0
lZl r:I.:l ? ~
~Q)8fr
u~ Q,U
g.::l "'~ e
'" '" >-<;;
~.s;8
:.a Q) ....
~~~~
= 0 <0 <0
o - U
',p "C 0 ~
uQ)-O
5'S El ~
lfj O".g~
oe"Co
U Q) c:l =
~ <0 0
\C:=g~
~~~~g
CIC Q) ::I ::I....
.,;.; 888
.8
j~
.!!"7
IF
tli
~c3
I;,
c:ll;
~ *~01
>- ~~-;::
'- .;;"" n
'...- ... Vl t"-
V C:;
ORIGIN~I
e
~
t
f
&
i
C\I
OJ
.~
i
c:
i
c:
~
C\I
~
i
i
S
OJ
.c:
S:
o
.c:
U)
&
,!!
~
'2
~
>-
,&:l
"0
.bOi ~
e
c;:l.
;;: ~
=
o
..2
u:9 ....=
u.~ ~ 30 0
U ...c:lOo ~'<;j'"
oS O"=c;:l. . 05=
..... u"'"O 0:1'" u ;::S;::u
o -.9 .... fa u e gp g .... ~ .~ '"
... ..... .sa ...~ u .;:l..s= 0 ~ u
30Q,'d ,&:l"O&80 ;;
<+=<"0 . Cd _ la _ u 0 .S "0
o u gp]';J:;:: ~ ~ 0 =0"0 J:l
o l.z:l.;:l c;:l. u :l' .... ... cl U 0
V")'<;j...Q."O oCd"O"O'"
~ sa'l:: Cd = ..8 .f!j~ s of: ~ ..E! =
. ... ~ ....J::' ~. =.a '" 0 0
u 0 O:l' _ 0 0 0....
'J::' ,&:l .;:l.U .... .... Q. 0 ~ c;:l.... 0
:l' 0'000 "0 u;::s
",F2~ Q,0~!5< ~~,&:l~
8 :l'"O 0:I.!:l 0 u.... ::l ~ ~
= 0:1 ujH:l'E 0 ",sao' O.
U u.J:I Eo-< 0 0 ... '0 ... B o.f!j
~ la ~ . 0 8 Ef I:l oS 's. 1 'E 5
Bggggu~g....~ =:'S
~ .... .... ........ fao I:l .... ,p 0 ~ 0 ~
...... ...... ............ 0...... - -.......-
r-:OOOO Q.,O....OOtU""
.;::S;::S;::S;::Sof:",;::Suu=o>-
~~~~~~~~~~~~~
. 0 0 0 0:.= 0 0 e:;= .-::: sa !:l
1Il0000....<+=<0...~"'......
$
'ibO l
e
c;:l.
;;: ~
tn
W
(J
~
W
tn
(J
:i
CD
:)
D..
.....
o
u
~ !f:
>- .. u
g. tU .S
= ~.s 5
j~.f!j-.9
'" .f!j '8 ~
.... 0 5 e
~g.c;:l.>,
- = bO \.<'
~ .= ,El 3
u-~.a
"O~:=S
0:>]'"
'5>.3..... ~
"" 0..
c;:l.~u-.9
u ~ ~.~
E9en::;u
. ~ ~ 0
>""l ..Q.... S
. 0:1.....-0
l;"l 0 0 ....
N:=lUO
>""l c;:l. I:l 0
iii ~.,E ~
g
$
"0
.r [
;;: ~
=
o
tn
..J
(5
tn
Q
Z
c(
>-
C)
o
..J
o
W
C)
"Ou "0
~"O u bO
~ ~ 0 '5 'a .=
...u~u bO::> ~
'a a ~.~.~ u 'E
~c.E 8;9 ",-.9 e u
c;:l. ~ U'S t;;.s u ~
bOoS ,&:l ~ 0 .f!j "0 -.9
.S u ~ = s 5 g bO
"0 tU ~ t:: us,::.El
:-g.l:lu.s-.9U'i!;a
,&:l ~.;J'i3 ~.!:l 0 ..E!
0:1 O...::>.J:I g.... 0
..... s 0 .J:I u u.S
OUUUo""..... .
u "0 '0' -.9 :El = € ~ ~
~::;j Q,~ ~.g 0:1 !;l:~
::;.J:IU:l' .O_~I::
",,,,-.9 ~.6:;::~u
.~ fa = 8 g ~ :l' '" jO
u_osoo'gu
oSc;:l."'-oNOCd~
o gp g 5 .g 0 "'"' ::; 0
...- .;;;1 .d c.> = 01""1 r/J t::r~
lS::s!oo",S~oflO
'1:: 'S ;::s 0:I'~,~ S la '"
~ ,&:l ~ .S ~ '" en u 3
""
C')
~
Ill'"
.Jl~
.!! "7
g;a
~j
Ii,
c:~
.~t:
o 'i 8 ~02..
C\I u .,.
>- .c::> ..--,
l- ~o rr.
s:E~ r;
ORIGINAl
EXHIBIT "6;'
ZONE CHANGE LEGACrn::SCRIPTION
P~OPOSED C..2 PCD ZONING (FROM M-2 ZONING)
ALL THAT PORTION OF THE EAST HALF OF SECTION 20, TOWNSHIP 30
SOUTH, RANGE 27. EAST, M:D.M., CITY OF BAKERSFIELD, COUNTY.. OF
KERN, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, BEING DESCRIBED 'AS FOLLOWS: .
BEGINNING AT THE EAST QUARTER CORNER .OF SAID .SECTION 20; .
THENOE S.OQo39'02"W. ALONG THE EAST LINE OF SAID SECTION 20.A
DISTANCE. OF 3.37 FEET; THENCE DEPARTING SAID EAST LINE,
N.89015'OO"W., 1346.56 FEET; THENCE N.Ooo43'OOtOE., 2532.26 FEET;
THENCE S.89009'05"E., .1343.60 FEET TO SAID EAST UNE OF SECTION 20;.
THENCE S.OQo38'57''W. ALONG SAID EAST LINE A DISTANCE OF 2526.59
FEET TO THE pOiNT OF BEGINNING.
EXCEPTING THEREFROM THAT PARCEL <?F LAND .GRANTED TO THE CITY ..
OF BAKERSFIELD PER BOOK 5987, PAGE 1010, .oFFiCIAL "RECORDS OF.
KERNCOUNTV: .
, .
CONTAINING 78.05 ACRES.
.,
6820.20\LEGALS\C2PCDZON;DOC\JFK\JAN. 10, ,2002
~ ~~~~?li!;
>- ~
I- ,.,
.- ,..
v C)
ORIGINAl.
~
~
I
l ~"W~ .....-
~
-
I
!
&
"~
alai
C\J!'\i
I rr:
r<>
C\J
9a.. .
~<t3
... ,.,
~~I-'
w
:le
~C)
...z
oZ2
>-0 .
t::Nfrl
() III
Ii
11
h ..
iE I
. is ..
~wfJ
uld
~l ~~
+
EXHIBIT-~'6"
I ;; _ I
_ ; III B
I. ~~ ~
~ 1I 9 ill
P II I I ! I ~
.~ ;= i ~ ~ I !! i I · ...
Idl~U~i~inllh U! !i nIl::
1.11"'!il!'hIJii':H~ -'I! lil H"'=i I...
I Eh~~~::!i=~ainl~H il~i n~!B..:!
it ililU;::ifrit"= cl"o:H~ ......;jI..I;j~iU'!i...
.~"'~:i"'~~850~O!;j'3:i~a~li&~,,~!...~~tl! 0:1
~~ia~~laJ3a;~S:~io~~oa t:f~i"'~~~:c.:f"'1
l!1!l1!l~l!~~..~S:::I:::.~I~'" w:= ;~Bll5o:!:!:Il~~~d':l
iI Vi iiIii 21 a in w ;'1 il ~ -, S 1ft i I ; Ii W ; fJ c i: S ~ ~ ~ i f 9 CS ~ ~ i
. Ii I! Ii II! ! ::i= ...= . = ~ r u ::; u u ~ ::i 1lI & r :i:i c Ii Ice C ~ t l!i:: II
c
~::: J 9
crt" tit lit ~ _ H
... ieil:..
.. .
<< .
Q d 3 a; ....
:=~~:~~.:B~.tL~'ot:~~.~1
ZONE CHANGE 02-0030
".~ll .." H$
:i
O.
1-0
NO
::EO:
i:!
~
&
AI
"'~1I .. ..
h
';
E:,
~;.
lit
-\
~~I
l~o
I,~&
.~~.
1&':1
I!~
i&l
Iii:!
:.!o
18"
~Ia
~5~
~Ii~
U~~
ils;
+
...
,~
....
:
I
a
!
~
c
..
c
z
f
-11
&1
t
ZONING MAP 123 - 20
r
! 0
~
lillJilJ
~!!;~B~Bg
ilrllli
Ei~~;n~
nJ!UUn
1:~~'2lilI2
~~.;(.....
I;~UU~
:ill!liii!:i .:1
M€
i~ r9tr
-1\
>- m
I;: T-
V t)
ORIGINAl
AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING DOCUMENTS
STATE OF CALIFORNIA)
) ss.
County of Kern )
PAMELA A. McCARTHY, being duly sworn, deposes and says:
That she is the duly appointed, acting and qualified City Clerk of the City of Bakersfield;
and that on the 13th day of DECEMBER, 2007 she posted on the Bulletin Board
at City Hall, a full, true and correct copy of the following: Ordinance No. 4480, passed
by the Bakersfield City Council at a meeting held on the 12th day of December. 2007
and entitled:
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 17.06.020 OF TITLE 17 OF THE
BAKERSFIELD MUNICIPAL CODE CHANGING THE LAND USE
ZONING OF THAT CERTAIN PROPERTY WITHIN THE CITY LOCATED
WEST OF GOSFORD ROAD BETWEEN PACHECO AND HARRIS
ROADS FROM M-2 (GENERAL MANUFACTURING) TO PCD (PLANNED
COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT COMBINING) ON 73.53 ACRES TO
ALLOW DEVELOPMENT OF THE GOSFORD VILLAGE SHOPPING
CENTER (ZC 02-0030).
PAMELA A. McCARTHY
City Clerk and Ex Officio of the
Council of the City of Bakersfield
Byd~~~
DEPUTY City Clerk
S:\DOCUMENT\FORMSIAOP .ORD.wpd
12/17/2007
ORDINANCE NO. ~
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 17.06.020 OF TITLE
SEVENTEEN OF THE BAKERSFIELD MUNICIPAL CODE
CHANGING THE LAND USE ZONING OF THAT CERTAIN
PROPERTY WITHIN THE CITY OF BAKERSFIELD LOCATED
WEST OF GOSFORD ROAD, BETWEEN PACHECO AND
HARRIS ROADS FROM M-2 (GENERAL MANUFACTURING)
ZONE TO P .C.D. (PLANNED COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT
COMBINING) ON 73.53 ACRES, TO ALLOW DEVELOPMENT
OF THE GOSFORD VILLAGE SHOPPING CENTER (ZONE
CHANGE NO. 02-0030).
t'."~"._--"----~~--~.-"i
1 POSTED ON !
! ---~~-J.J S 16, I
by City Clerk's Office
City of
Bakersfield
I by ~ _ co,.
WHEREAS, the Proposed Project includes General Plan Amendment No. 02-
0030 and Concurrent Zone Change No. 02-0030 to allow the development of a retail
commercial center known as the Gosford Village Shopping Center, which includes 700,000
square feet on 73.53 acres of property located west of Gosford Road, between Pacheco and
Harris Roads, in the City of Bakersfield, County of Kern, State of California, as shown in
attached Exhibit "1;" and
WHEREAS, the requested zone change is as follows:
Zone Chanae No. 02-0030:
Castle and Cooke Commercial -CA, Inc. has filed an application for a zone change from
M-2 (General Manufacturing) to a PCD (Planned Commercial Development) on 73.53
acres on property located on the east side of Gosford Road, between Pacheco and
Harris Roads to allow development of a commercial retail shopping center of a
maximum of 7000,000 square feet on 73.53 acres. The project includes the
development 23 pads for tenants that include various major retail, fast food, and
commercial retail uses, as well as a gas station. The project is anticipated to be
anchored by seven major retail tenants, including Sam's Club, Kohl's Department Store,
and a Wal-Mart Supercenter. The four remaining major retail tenants are not known at
this time. The seven major retail tenants will encompass 582,913 sq ft. Eleven
commercial retail pads are proposed to encompass 102,643 sq ft on the site. The
tenants of three of the commercial retail pads include Petco, Walgreen, Starbucks,
Radio Shack, and Panda Express. The tenants of the remaining eight commercial retail
pads are unknown at this time. The project also includes four pads encompassing
13,000 sq ft for fast food restaurants and the tenants of these restaurant pads are also
not known at this time. Lastly, the proposed project includes one 16-stall membership-
only Sam's Club gas station located adjacent to Harris Road on the southern portion of
the project site; and
WHEREAS, the applicant for the Proposed Project is Castle and Cooke
Commercial Inc., ("Applicant"); and