RES-9777 Adopting Mitigation Monitoring Program Fieldstone CommunitiesRESOLUTION NO. 9777
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF ORANGE ADOPTING MITIGATION MONITORING
PROGRAM AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING
CONSIDERATIONS PERTAINING TO FIELDSTONE
COMMUNITIES DEVELOPMENT CONSISTING OF
APPROXIMATELY 110 ACRES OF LOW DENSITY
RESIDENTIAL HOUSING, OPEN SPACE, MULTI-
USE TRAILS AND PUBLIC PARK (GENERAL
PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 1-01, TENTATIVE TRACT
MAP
NO.15750).APPLICANT: FIELDSTONE
COMMUNITIES, INC.WHEREAS, Fieldstone Communities filed an application with the City
to develop approximately 110 acres of property generally consisting of 44 acres of open
space, including multi-use trails and a six acre public park and 66 acres for low
density residential housing hereaft,~
r, the Project),WHEREAS, the Project applications include General Plan
Amendment 1-01, Zone Change 1208-00 and
Tentative Map No. 15750; and WHEREAS, the City Council held three duly advertised
public hearings on July 22,2003, August 12, 2003, and September 9, 2003, for the
purpose
of considering the Project;and WHEREAS, in compliance with the
California Environmental Quality Act evaluate the potential adverse environmental
effects of the Project; and WHEREAS, by Resolution No, 9776,
the City Council certified Final Environmental Impact Report No. 1647-00 at
a legally noticed public hearing; and WHEREAS, Section 21081 ofCEQA and
Section 15091 of the CEQA Guidelines require that the City Council make one or more of
the following findings prior to approval of a project for which an ErR has been prepared
identifYing one or more significant effects of the project, together with a statement of
facts in support of each finding:1) Changes or alterations have been
required in, or incorporated into, the project which mitigate or
avoid
the significant effects on the environment.2) Those changes or
alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another public agency and
have been, or can and should
3) Specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other
considerations, make infeasible the mitigation measures or
alternatives identified in the environmental impact report.
WHEREAS, Section 15093(a) of the State CEQA Guidelines requires the City Council
to balance the benefits of a proposed project against its unavoidable environmental risks in
deternlining whether to approve the project and requires that where the occurrence of significant
effects are identified in an EIR, but are not reduced to a level of insignificance, the City Council
must state in writing the reasons to support its action based on the FEIR or other information in
the record; and
WHEREAS, in connection with the certification of the FEIR, the City Council reviewed
Findings and Facts in Support of Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations"
hereafter, "Statement of Overriding Considerations") (Exhibit A); and
WHEREAS, Section 21091.6 of CEQA requires that where an EIR has been prepared
for a project for which mitigation measures are adopted, that a mitigation monitoring program
be adopted; and
WHEREAS, in connection with the certification of the FEIR, the City Council reviewed
the Mitigation Monitoring Program, dated August 12,2003 (Exhibit B).
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Orange
makes the following findings:
That the FEIR was considered prior to approval of the Project and determined
to adequately address all potentia] adverse environmental impacts of the
proposed project and meets all CEQA and City requirements.
2. That the FEIR was certified by the City Council by Resolution No. 9776.
3, That findings have been adopted as set forth in Section 2]081 ofCEQA and
Section 15091 of the CEQA Guidelines with respect to each significant
environmental effect identified in the FEIR and each alternative considered in
the FEIR and the explanation of the City Council's reasoning with respect to
each such finding is set forth in the Statement of Overriding Considerations
and incorporated herein by reference as though full set forth herein.
4. That it adopts the Statement of Overriding Considerations that the unavoidable
significant environmental effects of the Project will be substantially lessened
in their severity by the imposition of the mitigation measures identified in the
FEIR and that the remaining unavoidable significant impacts are clearly
outweighed by the economic, social, and other benefits of the Project,
including, but not limited to, the creation of:
2
I) approximately 38 acres of open space and multi-use trails; (2) a
six-acre public park with potential funding for $2.1 million in
park improvements: (3) a two-acre equestrian facility; and (4)
other dedications and improvements on or near the site as more fully set forth in
the attached Statement of
Overriding Considerations.5. That it adopts the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
attached hereto as Exhibit B, finding that it establishes a mechanism and
procedures for implementing and verifying the implementation of and compliance
with the Project Design Features, Standard Conditions and Mitigation
Measures pursuant to Public Resources Code Section
21081.6,6. That its decision to approve the Project is based upon the record
of proceedings,the custodian of which is the City Clerk of the City of Orange, 300
East Chapman Avenue,
Orange, CA.ADOPTED this 14th day of
October, 2003.l!ily~,~
C;
ry
ATTEST:Ad Cassandra J. Cat , City Clerk, City
of Orange I, CASSANDRA J. CATHCART, City Clerk of the City of Orange,
California, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly adopted by
the City Council of the City of Orange at a regular meeting thereof held on the 14th day
of October,2003, by the
following
vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:ABSTAIN:COUNCILMEMBERS: Alvarez,
Murphy, Coontz COUNCILMEMBERS:
Ambriz, Cavecche
COUNCILMEMBERS: None
COUNCILMEMBERS: None Cassandra J. Cathc , City Clerk, City
of
FINDINGS AND FACTS IN SUPPORT OF FINDINGS AND
STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS FOR
SULLY-MILLER/FIELDSTONE
COMMUNITIES FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
REPORT ORANGE,
CALIFORNIA STATE CLEARINGHOUSE NO,
99101125 I.
INTRODUCTION.The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), Public Resources Code
Section 21081, and the State CEQA Guidelines, 14 CaL Code of Regs. Section 15091 requires that
a public agency consider the environmental impacts of a project before a project is approved
and make specific findings, CEQA Guidelines Section 15091
provides:a) No public agency shall approve or carry out a project for which an EIR
has been certified which identifies one or more significant environmental
effects of the project unless the public agency makes one or more written findings
for each of those significant effects, accompanied by a brief explanation of
the rationale for each finding. The possible findings
are: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.2. Such changes or alterations are within the responsibility
and jurisdiction of another public agency and not the
agency making the finding. Such changes have been adopted
by such other agency or can or should be, adopted by such
other
agency.3, Specific economic, legal, social, technological, or
other considerations, including provision of
employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make infeasible
the mitigation measures or alternatives identified in the
final
EIR.b) The findings required by subsection (a) shall be supported by
substantial evidence in the
record,c) The finding in subsection (a)(2) shall not be made if the agency making
the finding has concurrent jurisdiction with another agency to deal
with identified feasible mitigation measures or alternatives, The finding
in subsection (a)(3) shall describe the specific reasons for rejecting
identified mitigation measures and project
alternatives.EXHIBIT "
A"August 12,
2003 revised 9/23/
d) When making the findings required in subsection (a)(1), the agency shall
also adopt a program for reporting on or monitoring the changes which it
has either required in the project or made a condition of approval to avoid or
substantially lessen significant environmental effects. These measures must
be fully enforceable through permit conditions, agreements, or other
measures,
e) The public agency shall specify the location and custodian of the documents
or other materials which constitute the record of the proceedings upon which
its decision is based.
f) A statement made pursuant to Section 15093 does not substitute for the
findings required by this section.
CEQA Guidelines Section 15093 further provides:
a) CEQA requires the decision-making agency to balance, as applicable,
the economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits of a
proposed project against its unavoidable environmental risks in determining
whether to approve the project. If the specific economic, legal, social,
technological,or other benefits of a proposal project outweigh the unavoidable
adverse environmental effects, the adverse environmental effects may be
considered
acceptable".b) Where the lead agency approves a project which will result in
the occurrence of significant effects which are identified in the final EIR but
are not avoided or substantially lessened, the agency shall state in writing
the specific reasons to support its action based on the final EIR and/or
other information in the record. This statement of overriding considerations
shall be supported by substantial evidence in the
record,c) If an agency makes a statement of overriding considerations, the
statement should be included in the record of the project approval and should
be mentioned in the notice of determination. This statement does not
substitute for, and shall be in addition to, findings required pursuant to Section
15091.Having received, reviewed and considered theSully-Miller/
Fieldstone Communities Final Environmental hnpact Report, SCH No. 99101125 (FEIR), which includes but
is not limited to the Draft Environmental hnpact Report (DEIR), Responses to Comments
on the DEIR, the Additional Analysis, dated March 3, 2003, Responses to Comments received
on the Additional Analysis, and all other information in the record of proceedings on this
matter, the following Findings and Facts in Support of Findings (Findings) and Statement
of Overriding Conside:rations (SOOC) are hereby adopted by the City of Orange (City) in its capacity
as the CEQA
Lead Agency.These Findings set forth the environmental basis for current discretionary actions
to be undertaken by the City for the implementation ofthe Sully-
Miller/Fieldstone Communities 2
August 12, 2003 revised
Project that includes a 2-acre private equestrian facility. These actions include approval
of General Plan Amendment No. 1-01; Zone Change No. 1208-00; Tentative
Tract Map 15750;Amendments to the Orange Park Acres Plan, and East Orange General Plan;
Minor Site Plan Review No, 249-02; and Variance 2113-02, These actions are
collectively referred to herein as the Project, and are described in more
detail in Section
II, below.A. Document Format These Findings have been
organized into the following sections:I . Section I provides
an introduction to these Findings.2. Section II provides a summary of the
Project and overview of the discretionary actions required for approval of
the Project, and a statement
of the Project's objectives.3. Section III provides a summary
the public participation in the
environmental review for the Project.4. Section IV sets forth
findings regarding those environmental impacts which were determined as a result of
the Initial Study, Notice of Preparation (NOP) and consideration
of comments received during the NOP comment period either not to be relevant
to the Project or which were determined to clearly not manifest at levels
which were deemed to be significant for consideration at
the Proj ect -specific level.5, Section V sets forth
findings regarding significant or potentially significant environmental impacts identified in
the FEIR which the City hasdetermined are either not signit'icant or can
feasibly be mitigated to a less than significant level through
the imposition of project design features, standard conditions, and/or
mitigation measures. In order to ensure compliance and implementation, all
of these measures will be included in the Mitigation
Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP)for the Project. Where potentially significant
impacts can be reduced to less than significant levels through
adherence to project design features and standard conditions, these findings
specifY how those impacts were reduced to an acceptable level. Section
5 also includes findings regarding those significant
or potentially significant environmental impacts identified in the FEIR which will or which may
result from the Project and which the City has determined Calmot feasibly be
mitigated to
a less than significant level.6. Section VI sets forth findings
regarding
alternatives to the proposed
Project.3 August 12.
7. Section VII consists of a Statement of Overriding Considerations which
sets forth the City's reasons for finding that specific economic, legal,
social, technological, and other considerations associated with the Project
outweigh the Project's potential unavoidable environmental effects,
H. 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 Orange, Planning Department, 300
East Chapman Avenue, Orange, California 92666-1591. The City Planning Department is
the custodian of the administrative record for the
Project.II. PROJECT
SUMMARY A. Project
Location The Project site is located in the City of Orange:, between Santiago Canyon Road to
the south arid Mabury Avenue to the north. The Mabury Ranch community is located north of
the Project site, and the Orange Park Acres community lies to the south of the Project site.
The former Villa Park Landfill and Cannon Street lie on the west side of the Project site
and residential uses and Santiago Oaks Regional Park (a County park) lie to the east of the
Project site. The Project site is approximately 110 acres. Santiago Creek flows east-west
through the Project site. The Project site has historically been used for the mining of sand and gravel
and/or processing aggregate for approximately 50 years by the Sully-Miller
Companies, and its successors. Current uses on the Project site include a concrete recycling
operation, an industrial equipmt:nt yard
and agricultural production.
B. Project History In 1999, Fieldstone Communities submitted to the City of Orange
its application to develop the Project site with a residential community consisting of a maximum
of 189 single family homes on lots ranging from 8,000 to 22,000 square feet in
size. Fieldstone Communities proposed the development of 171 homes south of Santiago Creek, and 18
single family homes with minimum lot areas of 8,000 square feet north of the Creek. Of the homes
proposed to be constructed south of Santiago Creek, 158 would be constructed on lots with a
minimum lot area of 8,000 square feet, and 13 were proposed on lots with a minimum lot area of
20,000 square feet. These 13 lots are located in the southeastern portion of the Project site
adjacent to the existing residential development known as The Reserve. The application
submitted in 1999 proposed the dedication of an approximately 4 acre park site in the southwestern
comer of the Project site, and trails extending along Santiago Canyon Road, and the south
side of Santiago Creek along the length of
the Project site.As a result of comments received during the Planning
Commission hearing process,Fieldstone Communities revised its application and submitted a revised project
application to the City on January 2, 20m. A description of the revised project is set forth in Section
II,C., below.4
August 12, 2003 revised
C. Project Description
Fieldstone Communities originally proposed to develop the Project site with a residential
community of a maximum of 189 single family homes on lots ranging from 6,000 to 20,000
square f(,et in size (the "Original Project"). The Original Project was subsequently revised to
provide for the development of a residential community of a maximum of 180 single family
homes on lots ranging from 6,000 to 20,000 square feet in size (the "Revised Project").
Concum:nt with its resubmittal of the Revised Project, Fieldstone Communities also submitted
an Altemative to the Revised Project that included development of a 2-acre private
equestrian facility within the Project site ("Stable
Alternative").After consideration of both the Revised Project and the Stable Alternative, the City
has determined that the Stable Alternative should be approved. The Stable Alternative,
hereinafter referred to in these Findings as the "Project," proposed the development of 183 single
family homes on lots ranging from 6,000 to 8,000 square feet in size. Within the Project, 166 homes
are proposedl south of Santiago Creek, and 17 single family homes with minimum lot areas of 8,
000 square ~eet are proposed north of the Creek. After consideration of public testimony
and evaluation of all evidence before it in the administrative record, and in order to
minimize aesthetic impacts and to increase the separation between the proposed Project and the
existing Mabury residential community, the City Council requested and the Fieldstone consented not
to develop residences on Lots 1-5 of Tentative Tract Map No. 15750. Single
family residences were proposed to be constructed on these five lots which are located adjacent to
Mabury Avenue,As revised, the Project now allows only 12 single family homes with a minimum lot
area of 8,000 square feet on the area north of the Creek, These homes will also be limited
to one-
story in elevation.The City Council also determined that it could not make findings
to authorize the granting of a variance (Variance 2113-02) to approve a substandard lot in that it
did not find any special circumstances existing on the property such as size,
shape, topography, location, etc.which would deprive the property of privileges enjoyed by others in
the vicinity and under identical zoning classification. With the decision to deny the variance,
the Project as approved consists of 177
single family residential lots.Of the homes proposed to be constructed south of Santiago
Creek, 72 would be constructed on lots with a minimunl lot area of 6,000 square feet, 93
would be constructed on lots with a minimum lot area of 8,000 square feet. A 2-acre
private equestrian facility would be develop(:d in the southeast comer of the site adjacent
to the existing residential development known as The Reserve for use by project residents to be operated
and maintained by the Project Homeowners Association. The facility could accommodate up
to approximately 40 horses and would conceptually include 40 horse stalls, parking area for trailer
storage and RV storage, and ancillary facilities such as turn-out rings, a hot walker,
wash racks, manure and hay storage structures, maintenance sheds and restrooms. Access to the
homes south of Santiago Creek will be provided from a single private street ingress/egress
along Santiago Canyon Road within the Orange County Flood Control District Handy Creek Easement
which is in line with Portsmouth Circle on the
south side of Santiago
Canyon Road.
The proposed Project also includes private internal streets, open space and recreation
areas, and riding and hiking trail linkages along Santiago Canyon Road and Santiago Creek, The
Project proposes the dedication of 6 acres in the southwestern comer of the Project site to the
City for local park use, and the funding of park improvements through a community facilities
district. The Project provides for construction of almost 2 miles of new public recreational trails,
One trail will run from the eastern Project boundary along the length of the Project site parallel
to Santiago Canyon Road, and will extend from Santiago Canyon Road between the landfill and
the proposed 6 acre park site to the multi-purpose recreational trail proposed along the south
side of Santiago Creek. This trail is proposed to be a multi-purpose trail for use by
hikers, mountain bikers and equestrians, and would be approximately 2, I 00 feet in length, The second trail
is a multi-purpose recreational trail that will run north-south through the
Project site over the Santiago Creek linking the trail along Santiago Canyon Road to the existing
trail that runs along MabUlY Avenue, A third multi-purpose recreational trail is proposed
on the south side of Santiago Creek, north of the future residential lots, A fourth trail
is proposed for bicycles, and will be a paved surface trail that would be designed for future
extension into the Santiago Oaks Regional Park to the east, and would be constructed to connect from
the west boundary of the Project site, over the closed Villa Park Landfill to the existing bicycle
trail
at the Cannon Street Bridge,The Project also proposes to construct a permanent
bridge structure approximately 12 feet wide to accommodate a multi-purpose trail crossing over Santiago
Creek to provide a north south trail link between the recreational trails south of the creek
and the existing trail along Mabury Avenue consistent with the
City's Master Plan of Trails.The Project also proposes the dedicationto the City of a 0.
4 acre area located in the southeast comer of the project site to permit the future
construction by others of the Santiago Canyon Road equestrian underpass or overpass currently reflected in
the
City's Master Plan of Trails,The Project also proposes to undertake bank
stabilization along Santiago Creek through a system of subsurface structures that provide "hard"
protection, and replacement of the existing riprap along Santiago Creek in the northeast comer of
the Project site. The subsurface revetment would prevent erosion from occurring beyond a specific distance
from the Creek and would be placed along the entire length of the north and south banks of the
Creek, and into a portion of County-owned property along
the eastern edge of the Project site.The Project site is currently designated R-A (
Resource Area) in the City's General Plan.The area south of the Creek is zoned S-G (Sand and
Gravel) and the area north of the Creek is zoned R-I-8, single family residential/minimum
lot area of 8,000 square feet. A portion of the Project site is within the East
Orange General Plan (August 1975) which is a community or area plan that the City prepared
for the East Orange area. The East Orange General Plan designates the portion of the Project site within
its coverage as a regional park known as the Santiago Creek Greenbdt. The remaining portion
of the Project site is contained within the boundaries of the Orange Park Acres Plan (September 1973) which
is also regarded by the City as an area plan or community plan. The portion of
the Project site within the Orange Park Acres Plan falls within Sector J
of the Plan and
is designatedopen space/
n. Discretionary Actions
The Project proponent, Fieldstone Communities, has filed applications with the City for
the following discretionary approvals:
Amendment No. 1-01 to the City's General Plan to redesignate a portion of
the property from R-A (Resource Area) to Low Density Residential (
LDR), 2-6 dwelling units per acre, Open Space (OS) and Open
Space, Park (OS-P);Amendments to the Orange Park Acres Plan and East
Orange General Plan to remove the Project site
from these two plans;Zone Change No. 1208-00 from S-G (Sand
and Gravel Extraction) to R-I-6 and R-I-8 (Single Family Residential)
with lot sizes ranging from 6,000 to 8,000 square feet
and to Recreational Open Space (R-O) along Santiago
Creek, the proposed park site, and
the 2 acre equestrian facility;Approval
of Tentative Tract Map 15750;Minor Site Plan Review
No. 249-02;Variance 2113-02 to reduce lot
depth of one parcel;Other
development permits, including Grading Permits, Tree Removal Permits,Haul Permit and Building Permits.As
noted above, the City Council determined that the evidence before it did
not support the
granting of Variance 2113-02, and therefore, the City Council
denied the requested Variance.In addition to the discretionary actions described above,
Fieldstone Communities
must also obtain discretionary approvals and permits from other
state and local agencies, including
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permits from the Regional
Water Quality Control Board;Mine Closure Report approval (State Department of Mines
and Geology);Encroachment permits or easements from the County of Orange for access across the
closed Villa Park Landfill for the multi-purpose trail, and to address
an area of existing encroachment in
the Santiago Oaks Regional Park and to extend the subsurface
revetment wall onto County
property;1603 Streambed Alteration Agreement from the:
California Department of Fish
and Game (CDFG); and
Eo Statement of Project Objectives
A number of Project-specific objectives have been formulated for the Project.
These objectiv'~s include, but are not limited to, the
following:1. Develop a high-quality residential community that is compatible
with the surrounding residential uses and which provides a mix of residential lot
sizes that provide a transition from half-acre lots (in the adjacent
Reserve development) to 6,000 square foot lots
within the Project.2. Redevelop the Project site with uses mor~: compatible
with
surrounding residential uses.3. Construct improvements outside of Santiago Creek to provide
flood protection of the site in accordance with the standards of the Orange
County
Flood Control District.4. Provide for recreational and flood protection improvements
along Santiago Creek in a manner that protects and enhances the existing biological,
open space, and visual characteristics of
the Creek area.Expand recreational opportunities by extending the
eXlstmg trail network,completing segments of the City of Orange Master Plan
of Bikeways and Recreational Trails Master Plan, providing land for the
master planned future equestrian crossing of Santiago Canyon Road, and providing an
area sufficient for
active park uses.6. Provide for the transfer of privately-owned open space
into
public ownership and use.7, Construct or contribute to circulation improvements as part
of the Project's development to provide increased traffic capacity
along segments of Santiago Canyon
Road and Cannon Street.8, Install as part of Project development a traffic signal at
the Project entry on Santiago Canyon Road to provide safe access to residents
and safer access to Santiago Canyon Road for vehicles using side street such
as Jamestown Way and property south
of Santiago Canyon Road.9. Provide for new equestrian facilities to help preserve
and enhance the traditional rural neighborhood characteristics
of Orange Park Acres,
8 August 12, 2003
III. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW AND PUBLIC PARTICIPATION
The environmental review process for the Sully-MillerlFieldstone Communities Project
is summarized as
follows:In accordance with CEQA requirements, the City prepared an Initial Study
and published a Notice of Preparation (NOP) of a Draft Environmental hnpact
Report DEIR). The NOP was filed with the State Clearinghouse on October 22,
1999,The State Clearinghouse assigned State Clearinghouse Number 99101125 for
the
document.The NOP and Initial Study were distributed to all responsible and trustee
agencies and other interested parties on October 22, 1999, for a 30-day public
review. The n:view period ended on November
24, 1999.Subsequent to publication of the October 22,1999, Notice of
Preparation, changes were made to the proposed Project, including reducing the maximum
number of dwelling units to 189, and elimination of development south of
Santiago Canyon Road, A revisedInitial Study/Notice of Preparation was published
on September
15,2000.The revised NOP and Initial Study were distributed to all responsible
and trustee agencies and other interested parties on for a 30-day public
review beginning on September 18, 2000 and ending
October 18, 2000.The Notice of Preparation, Revised Notice of Preparation,
Mailing Lists, and Comments Received on both the 1999 and 2000 Notices
of Preparation are included in the Project DEIR
at Appendix A.The City prepared a Notice of Completion dated
August 30, 2001.The DEIR was distributed to agencies, interested.
organizations, and individuals by the City. A forty-five (45) day public review period
for the DEIR was established pursuant to CEQA which commenced on
September 4, 2001 and ended
on October 19, 2001.Comments received during the public review period for the
DEIR were responded to as part of the Draft Final EIR,
dated September 9,2002.The Draft Final EIR, dated September 9, 2002, was prepared
for the Original Project and included responses to comments received on the
DEIR
and additional technical appendices,The Draft Final EIR was distributed to
responsible agencies, agencies submitting comments
on September 9, 2002.
9 August 12,
As a result of comments made at the Planning Commission hearings and by City staff, the
Proj'lct was revised as set forth above. The revised Project was evaluated against the Final
EIR in the Additional Analysis Final Environmental hnpact Report, dated March 5, 2003,
and responses to comments received on the Additional Analysis document were prepared in a
document dated April 29, 2003.
The following components comprise the Final EIR for the Sully-
MillerlFieldstone Communities
Project:a) Draft EIR, and Appendix Volume I and Volume II, dated August
28,
2001;b) Comments received on the Draft EIR and responses to those
comments,published in Draft Final EIR Volumes I and II, dated September 9,
2002;c) Draft Additional Analysis Final Environmental hnpact Report
Volume III, dated March 5,
2003;d) Responses to Comments included in th(~ Final EIR, dated April 29,
2003;
and e) All analysis, attachments, incorporations, and references to
the documents delineated in items a.-d., above., and submitted to the City
as part of the EIR
process.In addition to the Final EIR on the Sully-Miller/Fieldstone Communities Project,
the City has also prepared and considered a Draft Mitigation Monitoring Program, dated July
22, 2003,that has been prepared in accordance withSection2108\.6 of CEQA which requires
a public agency when making these findings to "adopt a reporting or monitoring program for
the changes made to the project or conditions of project approval adopted in order to mitigate
or avoid signific,mt effects on
the environment."The City Planning Commission considered the Final EIR on
the Sully-MillerlFieldstone Communities Project at its hearings on October
7, 2002,October 21,2002, December 2,2002, May 5, 2003, and June
2, 2003.The City Council considered the Final EIR Final EIR for
the Sully-MillerlFieldstone Communities Project at its hearings on July 22,
2003, August 12,2003, and September
9, 2003.IV. ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS WHICH WERE DETERMINED NOT
TO BE POTENTIALLY AFFECTED BY THE
PROPOSED PROJECT As a result of the Notices of Preparation circulated by the City on October 20,
1999, and September 15, 2000, the City determined, based upon the threshold criteria for
significance, that the Project would have no impact on the following potential environmental
effects, and 10 August
12, 2003 revised
therefore, determined that the these potential environmental effects would not be addressed in the
DEIR. Based upon the environmental analysis presented in the Final EIR, and the comments
received from the public on the DEIR, no substantial evidence has been submitted to or
identified by the City which indicates that the Project would have an impact on the following
environmental areas:
1. Agricultural Resources: The proposed Project does not convert land that is
designate:d as Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance
Farmland") as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring
Program of the California Resources Agency to non-agricultural use, nor does it conflict
with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract. The Initial Study
also concluded that the Project would not involve changes in the existing environment that
could result in the conversion of Farmland to non-
agricultural uses.2. Geology and Soils: Because the proposed Project does not propose the
use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems, the EIR does not address
whether the soils are capable of supporting septic tanks, and the Project has no impact on the
adequacy of soils to support the use of
septic tanks.3. Hazards and Hazardous Materials: The Project site is not located
within an airport l:md use plan, within two miles of a public airport, or within the vicinity of
a private airstrip, would not result in any safety hazard for people residing or working on the
Project site.4. Land Use and Planning: The Project site: is not located in an area
of existing residential uses, and therefore would not physically divide an
established community,5. Mineral Resources: The Project would not have any impact on the
loss of availability of a known resource of regional value, or the loss of availability of
a locally important mineral resource recovery site delineated on
local plans,6. Noise: Because the Project site is not within an airport land use plan,
within two miles of a public airport, or within the vicinity of a private airstrip, the Project would
not expose people residing or working on the Project site to excessive
noise levels,7, Population and Housing: As the Project site is vacant, the Project
does not displace substantial number of existing housing or people necessitating the
construction of replacement
housing elsewhere.8. Transportation and Traffic: The Project has no impact on air
traffic patterns.9, Utilities and Service Systems: The Project complies with federal, state
and local statutes related to
solid waste.11 August
12, 2003 revised
V. FINDINGS REGARDING POTENTIALLY SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL
EFFECTS
The following potentially significant environmental impacts were analyzed in the Final
EIR. Wb.ere as a result of the environmental analysis of the Project and the identification of
proj ect design features, compliance with existing laws, codes and statutes, and the identification
of feasible mitigation measures, the following potentially significant impacts have been
determined by the City to be reduced to a level of less than significant, the City has found in
accordance with CEQA Section 21081(a)(I) and CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a) (I) that
Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project which mitigate or
avoid th(: significant effects on the environment," which is referred to herein as "Finding I."
Where the potential impact can be reduced to less than significant solely through adherence to
and implementation of project design features or standard conditions, these measures are
considered "incorporated into the project" which mitigate or avoid the potentially significant
effect, and in these situations, the City also will make "'Finding I" even though no mitigation
measures are required, but will find that the potential impact has been reduced to Less Than
Significant through either project design features incorporated into the Project or adherence to
standard conditions.
Where the City has determined pursuant to CEQA Section 21081((a)(2) and CEQA
Guidelines Section 15091(a)(2) that "Those changes or alterations are within the responsibility
and jurisdiction of another public agency and have been, or can and should be, adopted by that
other agency, the City's findings is referred to herein as "Finding 2."
Where, as a result of the environmental analysis of the Project, the City has determined
that either (I) even with the identification of project design features, compliance with existing
laws, codes and statutes, and/or the identification of feasible mitigation measures, potentially
significant impacts cannot be reduced to a level of less than significant, or (2) no feasible
mitigation measures or alternatives are available to mitigate the potentially significant impact,
the City has found in accordance CEQA Section 21081(a)(3) and CEQA Guidelines Section
15091(a)(3) that "Specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations,
including considerations for the provision of employment opportunities for highly trained
workers, make infeasible the mitigation measures or alternatives identified in the environmental
impact neport," referred to herein as "Finding 3."
A. Aesthetics
Potential Impact: Adverse Effects on a Scenic Vista. The proposed Project
has a Less Than Significant impact on Aesthetics as it pertains to whether the
Project would have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista,
Finding: The City hereby makes Finding I and determines that this potentially
significant impact is Less Than Significant by the implementation of project
design features that are incorporated into the proposed Project. No mitigation
measures were required or recommended.
12 August 12, 2003
revised 9/23/03)
Facts in Support of Finding: The proposed Project was analyzed to determine if
it would have a significant adverse effect on a scenic vista, Scenic vistas within
the Project site are generally considered to. be greater than I mile from a receptor,
and include the EI Modena area to the south, the easterly portion of the Santiago
Oaks Regional Park, and the Serrano Heights residential development north of the
Project site, Although the site will be significantly re-graded, the proposed
Project is not anticipated to involve substantial visual alterations of natural
landforms because the final site elevation and landforms would be similar to what
exists today, In fact, import of fill to the area north of Santiago Creek has
been eliminated so that the elevation of this area will remain at approximately
existing grade. A landscaped area will be planted between Mabury Avenue and the
edge of the residential lots on the Project site north of Santiago Creek. In addition
to the originally proposed 30-50 feet landscaped area, the Project has been
revised to eliminate residential development on Lots 1-5 of Tentative Tract
Map No. 15750 which are located adjacent to Mabury Avenue, and to condition
the Project such that this area will be maintained by the homeowners' association
as a landscaped area to provide additional "greenspace" between the proposed
Project and the existing residences in the Mabury community. The remaining
twelve (12) homes that will be built north of Santiago Creek will also be limited
to
one-story in elevation.South of Santiago Creek, the ongoing concrete
recycling operations which have visually degraded the site will be eliminated
through Project development. The natural open space along the Santiago Creek channel
throughout the Project site would be preserved and extensive
landscaping surrounding the proposed residential developments would be provided. Approximately
40% of the Project site would remain in permanent open space or be included
in parks, trails, creek channel and landscaped areas. These aspects minimize
any adverse impact on area viewsheds that could result from the development of
the site and are consistent with the policies and objective:s of the
Open Space and Conservation Elements of the General Plan, Therefore, the City concludes that
the Project has a Less Than Significant impact on Aesthetics as it pertains to
adverse effects
on a Scenic Vista.Potential Impact: Potential to Damage a
Scenic Resource. The proposed Project has a Less Than Significant impact on Aesthetics as
it pertains to whether the Project would damage a scenic resource, including but
not limited to trees,rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within
a state scenic highway,Finding: The City hereby makes Finding I and
determines that this potentially significant impact is Less Than Significant by
the implementation of project design features that are incorporated into the
proposed Project. No mitigation measures
were required or recommended.Facts in Support of Finding: The proposed Project was
analyzed to determine if it would have a significant adverse effect on a scenic
resource. There are no
13 August 12, 2003
designated scenic resources on the Project site and there are no scenic highways
in the vicinity of the proposed Project. While the Santiago Creek, associated
riparian areas and tree rows on-site, can be considered to be visually
aesthetic areas, no residential development will occur within 100 feet of Santiago
Creek and only limited native vegetation in riparian areas (approximately 0.56
acres)will be removed. Mitigation measures have been required which provide
for replacement of all riparian vegetation removed at a ratio of 1: L A bridge
is proposed to be built over Santiago Creek for the multi-purpose
recreational trail.The visual character of the bridge could be described as rustic and
therefore in character with the surrounding development and similar facilities in
the general vicinity. Other vegetation and the exiting tree rows to be removed
would be replaced by ornamental landscaping. The tree specimens to be removed
are not visually scenic. Most of the vegetation is introduced and non-
native. Native trees in the southeast comer of the site would remain and 40% of the
site will remain undeveloped or will be included in park, trails, creek
channel, and landscaped areas. The balance of the site is visually degraded due to
the existing operations and large stockpiles of and equipment storage associated with
the on-site uses.Potential Impact: Potential to Degrade the
Existing Visual Character or Quality of the Site. The proposed Project has the potential
to have a Significant impact on Aesthetics as it pertains to existing residents
along the eastern boundary of the Project. The proposed Project otherwise has
a Less Than Significant impact on Aesthetics as it pertains to whether the
Project would cause a substantial degradation of the existing visual character or quality of
the
site and its surroundings.Finding: The City hereby makes Finding 1 that 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 proposed Project was
analyzed to determine if it would cause a substantial degradation of the existing
visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings, Implementation of the Project
would result in the elimination oftheexisting visually de!,'1'aded conditions
on the site. No development is proposed within a lOa-foot
setback area along Santiago Creek,except for construction of the subsurface revetments.
In order to minimize visual intrusion and habitat impacts, the
proposed erosion protection improvements will be subsurface. In the event that the buried protection is
exposed as a result of flooding or erosion, portions of the revetment wall would
be visible, but would be similar in appearance to the riprap that currently exists at
the eastern end of the Project site along Santiago Creek. The
proposed Project also includes the dedication of an approximately 6 acre park site
which would enhance visual open space. Approximately 40% of the site would remain
in permanent open space or be included within park, trails, creek
channel and landscaped areas. Residential development on lots 1-5 of Tentative Tract
Map No, 15750 would not be permitted, and the area would be landscaped,
This landscaped area is
in addition14 August
to the landscaped setback from Mabury Avenue which will be approximately 30-
50 feet and the perimeter wall which will be located at the base of the slope
adjacent to the new homes, Additionally, the twelve homes north of Santiago
Creek would be limited to one-story in height. The proposed Project will alter
the visual character of the southern portion of the site but this alteration is
considered to be an improvement over the existing conditions on-site.
Nonetheless, because there is the potential for aesthetic impacts to adjacent homes at the
terminus of E" street in the proposed Project and residences in the
adjacent Reserve neighborhood from development of a private stable, Mitigation Measure5,1.
3 has been proposed to provide additional screening measures to
avoid aesthetic impacts of the proposed stable on
adjacent homes,5.1-3 The project proponent shall prepare a landscape plan and a
lighting plan to be approved for the equestrian facility prior to the issuance
of any building permit for the equestrian facility. The lighting plan
shall control light spillage within the site for the stable and limit lighting
to that necessary for security purposes only. The landscape plan
shall provide enhanced screening along all edges of
the stable facility.Potential Impact: Creation of a New Source of Light or
Glare. The proposed Project has the potential to have a Significant impact on Aesthetics
as it pertains to whether the Project would create a new source of light or
glare since new sources of nighttime lighting would be associated with the
development of the site, The development of the park site also has the potential
for creating new sources of light but no plans for the park improvements have
been developed by the City and any lighting impacts would be speculative at the
present time, Future park plans will be the subject of separate environmental
review. The private equestrian facility also has the potential for creating new
sources of light.Finding: The City hereby makes Finding 1 that 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 Project includes the use
oflow intensity street lighting similar to surrounding residential areas.
Also pedestrian-scaled street lighting, setbacks and landscaping within the
proposed development would reduce the potential impacts on surrounding areas. Nonetheless,
because there is the potential for spillage from new lightsources, Mitigation Measure
5.3-7 has been proposed to control spillage from new
light sources, In addition, Mitigation Measure 5.1-3, above, requires preparation and approval
of a lighting plan for the private equestrian facility to
address light spillage from that facility,5.3-7: The project proponent shall ensure that
all exterior lighting on the site in public areas (such
as street lighting, pedestrian lighting, and security lighting) is
directed downward and away
from Santiago Creek.15
Potential Impact: Construction-related Aesthetic Impacts.
Construction activities on the Project site could impact receptors with foreground views of
the site and those who travel through the area by automobile along Santiago
Canyon Road. Construction activities would also be visible from residential areas
located north and east of the Project site. Receptors could be exposed to light and
glare from construction
activities.Finding: The City hereby makes Finding 1 that changes or alterations have
been required in, or incorporated into, the Proj ect which avoid or substantially
lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the final
EIR.Facts in Support of Finding: Because light and glare from construction
lighting may affect residents of adjacent residential communities, Mitigation Measure 5.
I-I has been identified to require the use of non-glare directional
lighting when lights are required for safety and security in construction
areas. Because construction activities will be highly visible to motorists traveling
on surrounding streets, such as Mabury Road, Mitigation Measure 5.1-2 requires
the screening of the Project site to minimize impacts from ground floor levels
of residences along the property line of the Project adjacent
to Mabury Avenue.5.1-1 Construction contractors shall use
non-glare, directional lighting to minimize potential light and glare impacts
when lights are necessary for night-time safety
and security in the construction area 5.1-2 Construction areas
immediately adjacent to residential uses along the Mabury Avenue Project edge
shall be temporarily screened by green mesh fencing in order to
minimize impacts from ground floor levels of residences along
this property line, Temporary fencing/screening should be removed only
upon completion
of construction in adjacent areas.B.AirOualitv Potential
Impact: Construction Related Air Quality Impacts. Construction-related activities have the potential to generate
a variety of air emission from the use of heavy equipment for
grading and site preparation, vehicle emissions from workers traveling to and from the
Project site, diesel fuel exhaust, painting and coating operations, and fugitive
dust created by
grading activities and transport over unpaved surfaces,Finding: The City hereby makes Finding
1 that 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, However, the City has determined that
while the above-described impact can be partially mitigated by the
mitigation measure identified below, this impact cannot be mitigated to a less than
significant level. There are no other feasible mitigation measures or alternatives that
would reduce this impact
to an acceptable level.
Therefore, the City hereby also makes Finding 3 which would require the
adoption of a Statement of Overriding Considerations as a condition of Project
approval.
Facts in Support of Finding: Grading lmd construction activities would cause
combustion emissions from utility engines, heavy-duty construction vehicles,
haul trucks and vehicles transporting the construction crew, Based on
the methodology outlined in the South Coast Air Quality Management
District SCAQMD) CEQA Air Quality Handbook, construction emissions
associated with grading of the Project, will exceed the SCAQMD daily thresholds for
the criteria pollutants of Nitrogen Dioxide (NOx), Reactive Organic Gases (
ROG),and Particulate Matter (
PMlO),Emissions of other criteria pollutants would be below the
standards,Although the Project proposes implementation of the following
standard conditions and mitigation measures, these measures are not sufficient to
reduce the emissions to below a level of significance. There are no feasible
alternatives or other feasible mitigation measures that could reduce these impacts to a level
of less than
significant.5.2-1 Prior to the issuance of any grading permits, the Applicant shall
prepare a Fugitive Dust Emission Control Plan in compliance with
SCAQMD Rule 403. The Plan shall identify methods to control fugitive
dust through implementation of reasonable available control measures
in sufficient frequencies and quantities to prevent visible emissions from
crossing the property line of the proposed facility. Provisions of the plan
shall include the stipulation that all active areas of active grading shall be
watered at least twice daily and that no more than 20 acres will
undergo active grading at anyone time. (Note that this does not preclude the
use of additional area for dewatering operations which, due to the
high water content of the material and lack of physical disturbance, would
not be expected to contribute measurably to the daily PMIO loading,)
The plan shall also stipulate that disturbed areas at the construction site
shall be treated with dust suppressants when activities have ceased for 30
days as well as two or more of the control techniques
identified below:I. Application of chemical stabilizers to unpaved roads
and vehicle
parking areas;2. Application of sufficient water prior to initiating
any
earth movement;3. Sweeping and/or cleaning streets where vehicles
exit
construction sites;4. Installation of wheel washe:rs where vehicles exit
disturbed surface areas onto
paved roads;5. Paving of construction acce:
ss roads;17 August
12,2003 revised 9/
6, Paving of all roads on a construction site once final elevations have
been reached or at the earliest feasible time;
7. All stockpiles for material export shall be watered twice daily.
Stockpiles that may be used for long-term on-site soil
storage shall be planted and watered twice daily until such plants take
root; and 8. Any other measures as approved the Public Works
Department and as required by the City's
Grading Ordinance.5.2-2 All heavy equipment shall be maintained in a proper state of
tune as per the
manufacturer's specifications,5.2-3 Heavy equipment shaH not be allowed to remain idling
for more
than five minutes duration,5.2-4 Trucks equipment shall not be allowed to remain
idling for
more than two minutes duration.5.2-5 Electric power shall be used to
the exclusion of
gasoline or diesel generators whenever feasible.5.2-6 The Applicant shall specify
that the contractor use only paints and coatings low in Reactive Organic
Gas (ROG) content in
order to minimize such emissions and vapors.5.2-7 All paints and coatings
shall be applied either using high volume, low pressure (HVLP) spray
equipment or by hand application in
order to minimize dispersion of vapors and spray.5.2-8 All
known and observed hazardous materials will be remediated in accordance with
the recommendations included in Section 5,6 of this document. If
locations where spillage of fluids from prior activities
or hazardous materials are discovered during construction activities, these construction activities
shall be curtailed until the area affected is evaluated and
remediated as determined appropriate by all the assigned
regulatory agencies. Removal of petroleum hydrocarbon contamination will also alleviate the
generation of hydrogen sulfide and its attendant odor. These activities would fall
under the direction of both local and State agencies that
would "sign off' on the remediation effort upon
completion,Potential Impact: Operational Air Quality Impacts. After Project construction, air
emissions would be generated by the Project from Project-related vehicles, i,e.,
vehicular emissions from trips made by Project residents, and from the use of natural gas
for space and water heating, the use of gasoline for landscape
maintenance, and the off-site generation of electricity for on-site use,The
stable portion of the Project has
the potential to generate
Significant impacts with respect
Finding: The City hereby makes Finding I that 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 Findings: Based upon calculations prepared for mobile
source emissions (vehicle trips) and stationary source emissions, none of the
projected operational emissions would exceed the SCAQMD daily thresholds.
Because there is the potential for impacts due to vector and odor control,
Mitigation Measures 5.2.9 and 5.2,10 have: been proposed to control spillage from
new light sources.
5.2.9 A Vector Control Plan shall be prepared for the equestrian facility, and
shall be approved and incorporated into the CCR's as a component of the
operations plan prior to the issuance of any building permits for the
equestrian facility. The plan shall include measures to minimize the
potential for roof rats and flies to be attracted to the facility. Measures to
minimize roof rat presence shall include keeping grain supplements in
airtight, metal containers; and keeping vegetables and fruits (such as
carrots and apples) in metal wire mesh containers lined with a flexible
wire impregnated fabric. The wire mesh shall be suspende:d from a wall or
ceiling to avoid contact with the ground, The plan shall also require
regular inspections and maintenance of the stable facility to seal all
possible access points (i.e., holes no cracks greater than 2 inches), and
repair of leaky faucets and irrigation lines to minimize the presence of
standing water. Fly suppression measures to be included in the vector
control plan shall include employing commercial fly spray systems for
stables, utilization of natural predators such as wasps, and removal of
manure from stables daily, and removal of manure from storage facilities a
minimwn of once a week.
5.2.10 An Odor Control Plan shall be prepared for the equestrian facility and
shall be approved and incorporated into the CCR's as a component of an
operations plan prior to the issuance of any building permits for the
equestrian facility. The odor control plan shall, at a minimum include
daily cleaning of stalls to remove soiled hay and manure, and emptying of
manure storage facilities and other wastes collected at the stable facility a
minimum of once a week, or more frequently as necessary to maintain a
sanitary condition.
Potential Impact: Microscale Air Quality Impacts. Areas of vehicle
congestion have the potential to create pockets of carbon monoxide emissions,
also known as "hot spots." This impact could be potentially significant if the
emissions add measurably to emissions' levels that would exceed State or federal
air quality standards,
19 August 12,2003
revised 9/23/03)
Finding: The City determined that this impact was Less Than Significant, and
that no mitigation measures were required or recommended.
Facts in Support of Finding: The analysis of CO hot spots was measured
against State and federal I-hour and 8-hour standards. A CO
analysis was performed at four intersections that are projected to exceed Levels of
Service C and which represent the worst of the four corners for the busiest of the p.
m. peak hour period, Based upon the calculations performed, the Project does
not exceed State or federal standards at three of the four intersections. At
the fourth intersection, Santiago Canyon Road and Cannon Street, the Project's
8-hour CO calculation exceeded the State standard of 9 ppm.
Additional modeling indicated that because the Project adds less than 0.1 ppm to the 8
hour concentration as compared to the no project condition, the Project does
not contribute measurably to the exceedance condition and therefore does not represent
a significant impact.This impact, therefore, was determined to be Less Than
Significant, and no mitigation
measures are necessary,Potential Impact: Project Consistency With the
Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP). A project is potentially significant if it is not
consistent
with the AQMP,Finding: The City determined that this impact was Less
Than Significant, and that no mitigation measures were
required or recommended.Facts in Support of Findings: There ar(: two key indicators
of consistency with the AQMP. The first is whether the Project would result in an
increase in the frequency or severity ofexisting air qual:ity violations or cause
or contribute to new violations. As demonstrated by the CO "hot spot" analysis,
the Project does not add measurably to any significant CO impacts and does not
add to any violations of the air quality standards, The second measure is
whether the Project would exceed the assumptions in the AQlVlP in 2010 or
phased increments based on the year of Project build-out. The Project is considered
to be consistent with the overall goals of the AQMP because it does
not produce significant long-term emissions, and adds needed housing in anarea that is
jobs rich/housing poor, The Project's construction air quality impacts are
significant, but these impacts are only short-term. For these reasons, the Project
is considered to be consistent with the overall goals of the AQMP and has
a Less Than Significant impact with respect to
its consistency with
the adopted AQMP.c.Bioloeical Resources Potential Impact: Create a Substantial
Adverse Effect on a Sensitive or Special Status Species. Species
identified as candidate, sensitive or special status species that occur on the Project site
could be subject to impacts from development of the Project, including a
potential increase in the population of brown-headed
cowbirds (Molothrus anther) and
cowbird nest parasitism.20
Finding: The City hereby makes Finding 1 that project design features and
changes or alterations have been required in, or incOl]lorated into, the Proj ect
which avoid or substantially lessen the signi ficant environmental effect as
identified in the final EIR.
Facts
in Support of Finding: The EIR identified the following candidate,sensitive,
and special status species that occur on the Project site: black walnut,southern
spikeweed, California homed lark, yellow warbler and yellow-breasted
chat. Removal of black walnuts during Project construction would be considered
significant unless mitigated. Mitigation Measure 5.3-1 requires the
Project proponent to retain as many black walnuts as possible, and to replace any
walnuts or oak trees that are removed at a ratio of 3: 1, Compliance with this measure
will reduce this impact to Less Than Signific.ant. In addition, the fi)llowing
species have a low potential for occurrence on the site: water hemlock, burhead,
arroyo southwestern toad, western spadefoot toad, loggerhead shrike, two-
striped garter snake and coast homed lizard, In the event water hemlock or burhead
are present on the site, they would be located within riparian habitat. Because
the Project minimizes impacts to riparian habitat and mitigates any loss of
riparian habitat through compliance with Mitigation Measure 5,3-7, impacts to
these species are considered Less Than Significant. No significant impacts are expected
to the two toad species, pond turtle, yellow warbler and yellow-
breasted chat because they have not been observed on the Project site, and even if
present, would be present only within Santiago Creek and the Project involves very
limited impacts to the Creek. Habitat on the Project site for the coast homed lizard
is of such low quality that it is not expected to occur on site, No Project impacts
to any of the riparian habitat that could support the garter snake
are proposed, and therefore,impacts are considered Less Than Significant.
Cooper's hawk, sharp-shinned hawk, white-tailed kite, merlin, and the peregrine
falcon are expected at best to forage occasionally on the site, but since they do not
breed on the Project site, no significant impacts to these species would
occur. The Project site does not support the least Bell's
vireo, southwestern willow flycatcher, coastal California gnatcatcher, or burrowing owl and implementation
of the Project would not affect these species. Indirect impacts of
development could affect sensitive species that utilize the Santiago Creek, such as
the yellow warbler and yellow-breasted chat.Finally, the population of brown-
headed cowbirds in the project area would likely substantially increase because of
the location of the stable within the Project.This increase could result in
a significant adverse effect on the breeding success of sensitive and other birds
nesting in the riparian habitat of Santiago Creek.Compliance with the
mitigation measures set forth below
would reduce these impacts to Less Than Significant.5.3-1 The project proponent shall
attempt to retain the site's black walnut and oak trees to the extent
feasible; any black walnut or oak trees that are removed or damaged during
projeet construction shall be replaced on a 3:1 basis with
specimens of the minimum of fifteen gallon size, Twenty-five percent (25%)
shall be twenty-four
inch box (24") in
shall be accomplished as part of an on-site oak woodland
restoration program that meets the plan requirements specified
below:Restoration Specialist: The restoration specialist shall be selected by
the applicant and approved by the City, The restoration specialist shall
have demonstrated experience in the successful oak woodland restoration
in Southern
California.Site Selection: The restoration specialist shall select a revegetation
site within project boundaries, in areas designated on the project site as
open space. The site shall be located in non-native habitat to ensure
that no native habitat is removed and shall be close to Santiago
Creek. In addition, the site shall not be located within 100 feet of
existing or proposed residential lots or other areas landscaped
with non-native vegetation to minimize the potential for
encroachment of non-native understory plants and the potential for over-
watering. To ensure that the restoration site is not later subject to fuel
modification actions, a map of the proposed restoration shall be submitted to
the City Fire Chief for approval as part
of the site selection process.Selection of Plant Palettes: The plant
palette shall include coastal live oaks (asdescribed by Mitigation Measure 5.3-
1) as well as understory and early-successional species
appropriate for an oak tree replacement area.Only native plant species occurring on
the project site or at Santiago Oaks Regional
Park shall be used in these plans.
Quantities, Container Sizes, Planting Patterns, Origins: Seed quantities, plant container sizes,
and planting patterns shall be specified, as appropriate. To the extent
feasible, plants and seeds used in the restoration plans shall be collected
from the project site or elsewhere in northern/central Orange County, as near to
the site as possible, The use of locally native propagules
will increase the chances of success and maintain
the genetic integrity of the local ecosystem.Timing: Seeding and planting should
take place after the onset of the rainy season and prior to March
31. Seeding and planting of oak habitats outside of this window
generally stands a high probability of failure.Mycorrhizal Fungi: In order
to improve the ability of the planted material to
compete with non-native forbs and grasses, mycorrhizal inoculum shall be specified
for all container
plants known to benefit from this symbiotic association.Site Preparation:
Includes consideration of soil requirements (e.g., soil type, compaction, etc,)
and weed (;Ontrol prior
to planting (if
Seeding and Planting Techniques: Includes specifications for hand
seeding, hydro seeding, etc., and planting methods.
Irrigation: The restoration site shall be irrigated through at least the first
year following planting (e.g., twice each month in the absence of natural
precipitation). It is anticipated that drip irrigation shall be utilized. After
the first year, further irrigation would occur according to the
recommendations of the site monitor.
Maintenance: Maintenance of all plantings will be the applicant's
responsibility, and shall include any activities required to meet the
performance standards set for the restoration program. A minimum of five
years or maintenance shall be required unless the plan's long-
term performance standards are satisfied in less than five
years.Monitoring: The project proponent shall be responsible for
monitoring the restoration site for a minimum of five years, or until all of the project'
s long term performance standards are met. The site monitor shall be
a biologist, native landscape horticulturist or other professional qualified
to I) assess the performance of the planting effort, 2) recommend
corrective measures, if needed, and 3) document wildlife use of planting areas
over time. The site monitor shall be selected by the applicant and approved
by the
City,Performance Standards: Short-term (e.g., 90 and 180 days)
and long-term (e,g., three-year and five-year) performance standards
shall be set for the restoration plan, consistent with the
goal of establishing self-supporting native woodlands that provide high
quality habitat for native plant and wildlife species. The plan
shall specify appropriate corrective actions to be taken if the site monitor determines
that any restoration area is not meeting the performance standards
set for the plan.If the performance standards cannot be achieved due
to adverse soil or other unmanageable site conditions, an
alternative or auxiliary mitigation plan may be
submitted to the City.Documentation: The monitoring results shall
be reported at least
annually to the City.5.3-2 If possible, construction of the access
road adjacent to Santiago Creek shall be conducted during the non-
breeding season for birds (August I through February 28) to avoid
indirect impacts on sensitive bird species nesting and foraging in Santiago
Creek. Whether or not construction of the access road, or any
other construction activities, occur during the breeding season (approximately March I
through July 31), all grading and construction activities within 100
feet of identified wetlands or riparian habitat shall be monitored by a
qualified biologist to ensure that these activities avoid additional impacts on sensitive
areas and that they
do not
adversely affect sensitive species nesting and foraging within Santiago
Creek
5.3-3 All grading and construction activities within 100 feet of
identified wetlands or riparian habitat shall be monitored by a qualified biologist
to ensure that these activities avoid sensitive
areas,5.3-4 Residential structures shall be set back a minimum of 100 feet
from the edge of CDFG jurisdictional riparian habitat in order to
minimize project impacts
on wildlife.5.3-5 The project proponent shall be require to comply
with National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) standards to
mitigate erosion and siltation impacts to Santiago Creek due to project
construction
or project operation.5.3-6 If any activities including vegetation removal
such as grubbing, grading,tree trimming and/or removal are to occur during
the breeding season of native birds (approximately March I through
July 31) the project proponent shall retain the services of a qualified
ornithologist to conduct a survey of the construction zone. The ornithological
survey shall occur not more than two days prior to the initiation
of any construction activities,The purpose of the survey would be to identify any
nesting areas of any native birds within the project site. If the
ornithologist's survey detects any occupied nests of native birds within the
construction zone the project applicant shall flag off the area(s) supporting bird
nests under the direction of the ornithologist, providing a minimum buffer of
100 feet between the nest and limits of construction. The construction
crew will be instructed to avoid any activities in this zone until those native
bird nests found on-site are no longer occupied, based on the
subsequent survey by the qualified ornithologist which shall be submitted to
the City
of Orange Planning Department.5.3-7 The project proponent shall ensure that all exterior
lighting on the site in public areas (such as street
lighting, pedestrian lighting, and security lighting) is directed downward
and away from Santiago Creek,5.3-14 In order to minimize adverse effects
of the two-acre stable on sensitive bird species nesting in Santiago Creek
due to the potential increase in the local population of brown-headed cowbirds
as a result of the stable's
role as an inadvertent "food source" for cowbirds:The stable
operator (i,e., the Homeowners Association) shall retain the services of
a wildlife biologist with experience in building and operating traps
for brown-headed cowbirds as long as the stable boards horses.
One trap shall be operated during
each spring/summer breeding
season for the brown-
Manure shall be removed from the site at least once daily
Monday-
Friday);All horse feed shall be securely covered, and any spilled feed
will be removed from the stable at least once daily (
Monday-Friday).Potential Impact: Create a Substantial Adverse Effect on
a Riparian Habitat. The Project site contains riparian habitat associated with
a streamcourse that is subject to the jurisdiction of the California Department of Fish
and Game pursuant to Section 1603 of the Fish and Game Code. Because of
the riparian habitat is considered a sensitive habitat, :impacts to approximately 0.56
acres of riparian habitat during Project construction and implementation would
be a potential
significant impact.Finding: The City hereby makes Finding I that project design
features and 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 Project has been designed to
incorporate a 100- foot setback for residential structures from riparian areas in order
to avoid direct impacts and minimize indirect impacts to Santiago Creek and
its associated riparian habitat. The Project has also avoided to the extent feasible
impacts to riparian habitat considered jurisdictional under Section 1603 of the
Fish and Game Code; however, construction of the subsurface revetment wall
to avoid Creek erosion impacts would result in impacts to approximately 0.56
acres of riparian habitat as a result of excavation in areas adjacent to the
Creek. In addition, indirect impacts could occur to riparian habitat from noise,
dust or runoff during construction. Mitigation measures 5.3-1 through
5.3-6 would substantially reduce both construction and operational
impacts on the riparian habitat areas. Direct impacts to riparian
habitat resulting from construction activities would be mitigated through compliancewith
Mitigation Measure 5.3-7 that requires that the Project proponent
obtain a Section 1603 Streambed Alteration Agreement from the Department of Fish
and Game, prepare a riparian restoration plan, and replace all impacted riparian vegetation at
a ratio of I: I.Implementation of this measure would reduce impacts
to riparian
habitat to Less Than Significant.5.3-8 The Project proponent shall replace
the loss of any riparian habitat.Riparian habitats within Santiago Creek
portion of the project site include black willow riparian
forest, cottonwood willow riparian forest, southern willow scrub and mulefat scrub;
riparian habitat outside Santiago Creek on the project site is limited to
southern willow scrub, The project currently proposes to remove only 0.56
acre of riparian vegetation within Santiago Creek and 1.81 acres of southern willow
scrub outside of the creek; the project proponent shall replace th(:se riparian habitats at
a ratio of 1: I, per the measures outlined below.
In addition, because riparian
habitats fall 25 August
under the jurisdiction of Section 1603 of the California Fish and Game
Code, the project proponent shall obtain a Section 1603 Streambed
Agreement from the CDFG prior to removal of any CDFG jurisdictional
habitat. The Streambed Alternation Agreement will further specify the
measures below to ensure successful replacement of riparian habitat. The
Streambed Alteration Agreement will also include a provision that
construction of any portion of the trail adjacent to or across Santiago
Creek be conducted during the non-breeding season to minimize
direct and indirect impacts of construction on birds nesting in the riparian
habitat of Santiago Creek. Finally, although all project components
currently avoid "Waters of the United States" and "wetlands" as defined by
section 404 of the Clean Water Act (CWA), the boundary of jurisdictional areas
is very close in some locations to flood control structures. Thus, the
project proponent shall ensure that the project also complies as necessary
with Section 404 of the CWA through the U,S. Army Corps of
Engineers,Restoration Specialist: The restoration specialist shall be selected by
the applicant and approved by the City and the California Department of
fish and Game (CDFG), The restoration specialist shall have
demonstrated experience in the successful restoration of riparian habitat in
southern California. Because an element of the restoration program could
include arundo eradication, the restoration specialist shall demonstrate
experience in arundo
removal.Site Selection: Riparian restoration could occur on-site, or
off-site within the Santiago Creek watershed, such as the Santiago
Oaks Regional Park,in an area to be identified by the restoration specialist
in consultation with the City and CDFG. Riparian n:storation could include
as an element,eradication of exotic vegetation within the Santiago
Creek watershed, such as the Santiago Oak Regional Park, and restoration of
the eradicated areas to native vegetation under a plan approved by the City
and CDFG, any other appropriate agencies or landowners, such as the
County of Orange.Preference shall be given to eradication of exotic species (a)
on the project site, and (b) in off-site areas where the
potential for future infestation mainly from
upstream sources) is low.Selection of Plant Palettes: The plant
palette shall include appropriate trees, understory, and early-successional
species native to the Santiago Creek watershed (
in the area being restored).Quantities, Container
Sizes, Planting Patterns, Origins: Seed quantities, plant container sizes, arid planting
patterns shall be specified, as appropriate. To the extent feasible, plants and
seeds used in the restoration plans shall be collected from the project
site or elsewhere in the northern/central Orange County, as near to the site
as possible. The use of locally native propagules will increase
the chances of success and maintain the genetic
integrity of the local
ecosystem.26 August 12,
Exotic Species to be Eradicated: It is anticipated that the main species to
be eradicated will be giant reed (Arundo donax), but additional species
may also be removed, such as pampas grass (Cortaderia spp.), pepper tress
Schinus spp.) castor bean (Ricninus communis), and Washington fan
palm (Washingtonia filifera), The exact species to be targeted shall be
determined at the time final plans are developed,
Methods/Timing for Eradication: The exotic species eradication
specialist shall determine the methods to be used, including timing of
eradication, in consultation with CDFG,
Timing for Planting: For best results, seeding and planting should take
place after the onset of the rainy season and prior to March 3 I. Riparian
woodlands may achieve good results with installation at other times of the
year,
Mycorrhizal Fungi: In order to improve the ability of the planted
material to compete with non-native forbs and grasses,
mycorrhizal inoculum shall be specified for all container plants known to benefit
from this symbiotic
association.Site Preparation: Includes consideration of soil requirements (e,g.,
soil type, compaction) and weed control prior to planting (if
needed).Seeding and Planting Techniques: Includes specifications for
hand seeding, hydro seeding, etc., and planting
methods.Irrigation: The restoration specialist shall determine the need
for irrigation of riparian restoration
sites.Maintenance: Maintenance of all plantings, and actions required to
effect complete eradication of exotic species, will be the applicant'
s responsibility, and shall include any activities required to meet
the performance standards set for the restoration program. A minimum of
five years of maintenance shall be required unless the plan's
long-term standards are satisfied in less than
five years.Monitoring: The project proponent shall be responsible
for monitoring the restoration site for a minimum of five years, or until all of the
project's long term performance standards are met. The site monitor shall
be a biologist, native landscape horticulturist or other professional
qualified to I) assess the performance of the planting effort, 2)
recommend corrective measures, if needed, and 3) document wildlife use of planting
areas over time. The site monitor shall be selected by the applicant and
approved by the City
and CDFG.27 August
12, 2003 revised 9/
Performance Standards: Short-term (e.g" 90 and 180 days) and
long-term (e.g., three-year and five-year) performance standards shall
be set for the restoration plan, consistent with the goal
of establishing self-supporting native woodlands that provide high quality
habitat for native plant and wildlife species. The plan shall
specifY appropriate corrective actions to be taken if the site monitor determines that
any restoration area is not meeting the performance st,mdards set
for the plan.If the performance standards cannot be achieved due to
adverse soil or other unmanageable site conditions, an alternative
or auxiliary mitigation plan may be submitted to the
City and CDFG.Documentation: The monitoring results shall be reported
at least annually to the
City and CDFG.Potential Impact: Create a Substantial Adverse Effect on
Wetlands. Atotal of 3.44 acres of jurisdictional wetlands regulated under Section 404
of the federal Clean Water Act is present on the project site within the
Santiago Creek. Impacts to these jurisdictional wetlands have been avoided by the
project, but if inadvertent impacts were to occur during grading and
construction activities, the project could have a potentially significant
impact on wetlands.Finding: The City hereby makes Finding 1 that project
design features and 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: As noted previously, the project
does not propose any activities in waters of the U.S. or wetlands that
would directly affect wetlands. However, since grading and construction activities will
occur in close proximity to the wetlands, inadvertent damage could occur
if not carefully monitored. Monitoring during construction would prevent
such damage from occurring, and would reduce this impact to less than
significant. Compliance withMitigation Measures 5.3-3 and 5.3-8 would reduce
this impact to Less Than Significant. Compliance with applicabk NPDES
water quality and water runoff requirements, asrequired by Mitigation Measure 5.3-
5, will reduce any impacts to wetlands from uncontrolled runoff
and siUation to Less Than Significant.Potential Impact:
Interfere Substantially with Wildlife Corridors. Santiago Creek provides a potential movement cOlTidor
for resident wildlife or fish species.Increased human activity associated with
construction and operation of the project could impact
wildlife movement within the project site.Finding: The City hereby makes Finding
1 that project design features and 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.28 August
Facts in Support of Finding: The project provides a 100 foot setback between
residential structures and the riparian areas associated with Santiago Creek. This
setback would minimize indirect impacts of human activity associated with
residential uses on the project site to wildlife species that may use the Creek as a
wildlife corridor. Compliance with Mitigation Measure 5.3-4 and the
project design feature of a 100 foot setback will reduce this potential impact to Less
Than
Significant.Potential Impact: Conflict with Local Policies or Ordinances
Protecting Biological Resources. The City of Orange requires that prior to removal of
each tree subject to City of Orange Municipal Code Chapter12.32, Tree
Preservation,a permit is obtained. The Project proposes the removal of eight native
trees:seven coastal live oaks and one western
sycamore.Finding: The City hereby makes Finding I that through compliance
with standard conditions and as a result of changes or alterations which have
been required in, or incorporated into the Proj ect, which avoid or substantially
lessen the significant environmental effect, that this impact is Less Than
Significant.Facts in Support of Finding: A tree inventory report has been prepared for
the proposed Project and included in the Technical Appendices to the EIR. A total
of 1,053 trees measuring 10,5 inches in circumference at a height of 24 inches
above the ground were identified on the Project site. Of these trees, only 30 trees
are California native species; the rest being exotic species. The proposed Project
will require the removal of 8 California native species trees: seven coastal live
oaks and one western sycamore. The Project will comply with the requirements
of Section12.32.11 0 of the City of Orange Municipal Code which requires that
upon approval of the final grading plan, a separate permit be obtained for the
removal of each tree subject to Chapter12.32, Tree Preservation of the Municipal
Code.The Project does not conflict with a local ordinance or policy
protecting biological resources as it will comply with the City's Municipal Code
provisions for Tree
Preservation.Potential Impact: Conflict with an Adopted Habitat Conservation Plan
or Natural Community Conservation Plan. The County of Orange has adopted
a NCCP, of which the City is a participant. Agricultural operations on the
Project site have historically encroached onto areas that are part of the County's
NCCP Reserve Area, The Santiago Oaks Regional Park, located upstream of the
Project site, is also part of the NCCP Reserve. Implementation of the Project could
affect these NCCP Reserve
Areas.Finding: The City hereby makes Finding I that 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.29 August 12,
2003 revised 9/23/
Facts in Support of Finding: In order to ensure that the Project does not conflict
with the County's NCCP and Reserve Areas, a landscape/urban edge treatment
plan is required pursuant to Mitigation Measures 5.3-9 through5.3-
13, In addition, the proposed Project will revegetate the area of encroachment
into the County's NCCP Reserve impacted by past agricultural
activities. Compliance with these mitigation measures and the proposed revegetation efforts
will ensure consistency with the County'
s NCCP,5.3-9 To ensure compliance with the proVISIOns
ofthe Central-Coastal NCCP/HCP and Implementation Agreement, City
of Orange shall transmit all site plans, area plans,
subdivision maps, fuel modification plans/landscape improvement plans, utility
plans, flood control facility plans or any other improvement plans that
may potentially affect the Reserve System to the Executive Director,
Nature Reserve of Orange County for review and comment prior to any
City administrative or formal action
to approve such plans.5.3-10 A landscaping/urban edge treatment plan shall be
required by the City of Orange, in consultation with
the Manager, Orange CountyPublic Facilities and Resources
Department/Harbors, Beaches and Parks-Program Management & Coordination, prior
to approval of grading permits. The landscaping/urban edge treatment
plan shall address and screen the interface between the Santiago
Oaks
regional park and the proposed development.5.3-11 The encroachment area shall be
restored by the applicant, pursuant to a landscape/restoration
plan approved by the Manager, Orange County,Public Facilities
and Resources Department/Harbors, Beaches and Parks-Program
Management &
Coordination, prior to approval of building permits.5.3-12 The seed output of
the mature southern spikeweed plants on the Project site shall be
collected by a botanist familiar with spikeweed identification and seeding when
plants are producing seed during late summer and spread in disturbed soil at
the margins of this riparian restoration site after the site is planted,
Maintenance personnel shall be trained to identify this species, to help ensure that
it will not be removed as a weed.5.3-13 In order to
minimize the cumulative impacts on bats that could be potentially
significant, inspections for roosting bats by a biologist trained in the study of bats will
occur prior to removal of oaks. Oak tree removal during
September and October, when bats may be reproducing or hibernating, should
be avoided. Any oak trees with diameter at breast height (dbh) greater
than 8 inches should be inspected for this species before removaL If bats
are present in the trees, the biologist will remove and release the bats just
prior to tree removal
to avoid any bat
n. Cultural Resources
Potential Impact: Cause a Substantial Adverse Change in the Significance of
a Historical Resource. The Project would have a significant impact if it resulted
in a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as
defined in Section 15064.5 of the CEQA Guidelines.
Finding: The City determined that this impact was Less Than Significant, and
that no mitigation measures were required or recommended,
Facts in Snpport of Finding: A review of the National Register of Historic
Places, the California State Historic Resources Inventory, the California
Historical Landmarks and the Califomia Points of Historical Interest was
conducted to determine if any historical resources were present on the Project site.
The review indicated that no significant historical resources are located on the
Project site or within the Project vicinity. Therefore the Project's impact on
historical resources is considered Less Th,m Significant.
Potential Impact: Cause a Substantial Adverse Change in the Significance of
an Archaeological Resource. One prehistoric archaeological site, ORA-
369,was identified as being within the northern portion of the Project site, north
of Santiago Creek and south of the Mabury Ranch residential
development.Development of the area in which this site is located may result in a
substantial adverse impact to this archaeological
resource.Finding: The City hereby makes Finding I that changes or alterations have
been required in, or incorporated into, the Proj ect which avoid or substantially
lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the final
EIR Facts in Support of Finding: ORA-369 was originally described as a
shell lithic scatter covering approximately 90,000 square meters. Some
surface materials have been recovered and limited subsurface testing has
been conducted.Additional materials may be present on site. Although no evidence
of ORA-369 was identified during the recent site survey conducted as
part of this environmental review, there may be fill soils covering
evidence of prehistoric materials and which may be uncovered during
grading activities. Therefore,mitigation measures have been identified which would
require a certified archaeologist to attend pre-grade meetings and monitor
grading activities. In the event cultural resources are discovered during grading,
the archaeologist has the authority to halt work in the immediate area of the find,
and to conduct additional investigations, if determined necessary, so that impacts
to any significant cultural resources can be avoided and mitigated. With
implementation of these measures set forth below, this impact is determined to
be Less Than Significant.
31 August 12, 2003
5.4-1 An Orange County certified archeologist shall be retained to attend
pre-grade meetings and to monitor earthmoving activities, including
clearing,grubbing and grading of the
site.5.4-2 If previously unidentified archeological resources are
uncovered during site preparation, grading, or excavation, the archeological
monitor shall have the authority to temporarily halt or divert grading in
the immediate area of the discovery and to evaluate the resources. If
the archeologist determines that they are unique archeological resources as
defined by Section 21083.2 of CEQA, then the archeologist shall
conduct additional excavations to avoid impacts to these resources by the
development. If they are not "unique," then no further mitigation would
be required,Unique cultural resources shall be determined based on the
criteria set forth in Section 21083.
2 ofCEQA Potential Impact: Directly or Indirectly Destroy a
Unique Paleontological Resource or Site or Unique Geologic Feature. A review
of geological landforms and the potential for paleontologic resources indicates
that fossil remains could be present on the proposed Project site. There is a
possibility that the fill of Handy Creek has also buried evidence of prehistoric use of
the site which may be uncovered
during grading.Finding: The City hereby makes Finding I that 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: Because of the potential
for paleontologic resources that may be present on the site, a mitigation measure has
been identified which would reduce potential impacts to these resources to Less
Than Significant by authorizing the archaeological monitor to temporarily halt or divert
grading in the area of the discovery until the resources can be studied to determine
if they constitute unique paleontologic resources. This measure will be
implemented in addition to MitigationMeasure 5.4-1 and would reduce
potential impacts to paleontological resources to
LessThan Significant.5.4-3 If previously unidentified paleontological
resources are uncovered during site preparation, grading, or excavation,
a paleontological monitor shall have the authority to temporarily halt or divert
grading in the immediate area of the discovery and to evaluate the
resources. If the paleontologist determines that they are unique paleontological
resources as defined by Section 21083.2 ofCEQA, then the
paleontologist shall conduct additional excavations to avoid impacts to these resources
by the development. If they are not "unique," then no further
mitigation would be required.Unique cultural resources shall be determined based
on the criteria set forth in
Section 21083.2 ofCEQA,
32 August 12, 2003
Potential Impact: Disturbance to Human Remains. There is a possibility that
the "fill" of Handy Creek has buried evidence of prehistoric use of the area which
could include prehistoric human remains that might be uncovered during grading
and site preparation activities.
Finding: The City hereby makes Finding I that 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: Mitigation Measure 5.4-1 requires that
an archaeological monitor be present on site to monitor all grading, and to have
the authority to temporarily halt or divert grading activities in the
event archaeological or paleontological resources are uncovered by grading
activities.Monitoring during grading will ensure that if human remains are uncovered,
that the work can be temporarily halted or diverted in the area of the discovery.
The following Mitigation Measure5.4-4 ensures that if such discoveries are
made that the requirements of Section 5097.98 of the Public Resources Code
are complied with to ensure that proper measures are taken to reduce this
potentially significant effect to Less
ThanSignificant.5.4-4 If previous human remains are uncovered during
site preparation, grading,or excavation, the archeologist monitor shall have
the authority to temporarily halt or divert grading in the immediate area
of the discovery,and shall notify the County Coroner within 24 hours of
the discovery. If the Coroner determines that the remains are not recent,
the Coroner shall notify the Native American Heritage Commission.
The Project applicant shall comply with the procedures set forth in Section 5097,
98 of the California Public Resources Code and shall consult with
the most likely descendant designated by the Native American
Heritage Commission to obtain recommendations on the treatment and
disposition with appropriate dignity of the human remains and
associated grave goods.Eo Geolol!
v and Soils Potential Impact: Exposure to Seismic Ground Shaking. The
Project site has the potential to be exposed to ground motion or shaking
produced from seismic waves produced when an earthquake occurs, For the reasons set
forth below, the EIR concludes that the Project has a Less Than Significant impact as
it pertains to exposure to
seismic ground shaking.Finding: The City hereby makes Finding I and determines
that this potentially significant impact is Less Than Significant by
compliance with standard conditions. No mitigation measures were
required or recommended.Facts in Support of Findings: Like most of Southern California,
the Project site will be exposed to seismic ground shaking. Consequently, there
is no realistic way in which this potential impact can be avoided; however, the
effects of seismic 33
August 12,2003 revised
ground shaking on structures can be reduced through compliance with the
Uniform Building Code and the City of Orange Grading Code. The proposed
bridge/sewer line crossing Santiago Creek will be designed to meet all applicable
seismic and Building Code requirements. Therefore, as compliance with both
codes are standard conditions of approval for all new development in the City,
and compliance with these measures will address this impact, this impact is
considered Less Than Significant, and no mitigation measures are required.
Potential Impact: Exposure to Secondary Effects of Seismic Ground
Shaking. The Project site could be exposed to the secondary effects of seismic
ground shaking such as liquefaction, seismically induced settlement, ground
lurching, tsunami and seiches.
Finding: The City hereby makes Finding I that 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: A portion of the Project site has been identified by
the California Division of Mines and Geology as susceptible to liquefaction due to
the presence of alluvial sediments and possibly shallow groundwater. Areas with
moderate to high liquefaction potential can be densified through excavation and
recompaction of the soils so that the risk of liquefaction is reduced to an
acceptable level. Mitigation Measure 5.5-1 requires that all unsuitable
materials be removed and replaced with engineered fill. Compliance with this measure
will reduce the risk ofliq uefaction to Less Than Significant. The areas of the site
that may contain unconsolidated, poorly packed alluvial deposits may also
be susceptible to seismically induced settlement. Again, compliance with
Mitigation Measure 5.5-1 will reduce this potential impact to Less Than
Significant be providing for the excavation of loose, unconsolidated soils and
recompaction in areas where structures and infrastructure are proposed to be
constructed, Finally,ground lurching can occur under strong seismic ground motion
conditions if loose, cohesionless soils or clay-rich soils with a high
moisture content are present. The removal of unsuitable soil materials
and recompaction required under Mitigation Measure 5.5-1 will reduce this potential
impact
to Less Than Significant.5.5.1 Prior to erecting any structures on the Project
site, all unsuitable materials shall be removed and
replaced with engineered fill.Potential Impact: Exposure to Fault-
induced Ground Rupture. The Project site may be subject to fault-induced ground rupture
if the location of the El Modeno Fault, which is
considered "enigmatic" by Project geologists is determined
to be within the
Project site.34 August
Finding: The City hereby makes Finding I that 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: As a result of the various geotechnical studies
performed for the Project site, the location of the El Modeno Fault is considered
enigmatic." Therefore, specific recommendations were identified by the Project
geologists that should be implemented during site preparation and grading
activities, If faulting of the Holocene age or younger is observed, appropriate
structural setbacks as required by the Alquist-Priolo Act will be
established.5.5-2 In accordance with the recommendations of the
Project geologists,additional observations shall be made during removal
grading operations of noted areas along the Santiago Creek channel to further
assess the possible location and character of the El Modeno Fault. If
evidence of faulting of the Holocene age or younger is observed, the location
of any faults shall be surveyed and plotted in accordance with the
procedures of the City of Orange and accepted geotechnical engineering
practices. In addition, if evidence of active faulting is found,
appropriate structural setbacks and/or other measures to mitigate any potential exposure
to a level accepted by the City of Orange and the State Division of
Mines and Geology shall
be required.Potential Impact: Slope Stability. Unstable earth conditions, such
as unstable slope conditions, could present a potentially
significant impact.Finding: The City hereby makes Finding I that 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: Based upon the results of a slope
stability analysis performed for the Project, the planned slopes within the
development are considered grossly stable and exceed the minimum required factors
of safety.Unstable slope conditions, however, could occur during grading
in exploratory and utility trench walls and in temporary cut slopes. Compliance
with the mitigation measures set forth below will reduce this impact to
Less Than Significant. Additional testing was performed to determine the
location of bedrock in order to install the subsurface revetment walls for
Creek erosion protection. Removals of unsuitable materials and replacement
with compacted fill will be conducted pursuant to the Neblett &
Associates report.5.5-3 Utility trenches excavated during grading, shall be cut,
benched and/or shored in accordance with requirements set
by Cal OSHA.5.5-4 All grading and earthwork shall comply with the
City's Grading Manual.
35 August 12,
Potential Impact: Foundation Stability and Compressible/Collapsible Soils.
Portions of the Project site consist of alluvial terrace deposits underlain by
bedrock that could impact foundation stability and reflect the presence of
compressible/collapsible soils.
Finding: The City hereby makes Finding I that 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: In order to provide for a stable foundation for
construction of the proposed residential units, complete removal of the former
ponds that were filled with clay and silt from the prior sand and gravel operations
would be required, followed by filling the excavated area with engineered fill.
The Project proposes an extensive site preparation process to remove the unstable
soils that may be present in the area of the two former sand and gravel ponds and
to ensure that any unstable soils are replaced with properly engineered fill.
Approximately 400,000 cubic yards of pond deposits could be removed and
replaced as engineered filL In addition, to avoid potential impacts due to Creek
erosion, the Project proposes construction of a subsurface revetment wall to
provide long-term flood protection for the proposed structures and erosion
control for the Santiago Creek. Implementation of Mitigation Measures 5.5-1, 5.5.
2, and 5.5.-4 and implementation of the various Project features such as
the site preparation work, and construction of the subsurface revetment wall
reduces this potential impact to Less
Than Significant.Potential Impact: Expansive Soils. Expansive soils left untreated
can cause damage to structures including cracking, heaving and buckling
of foundations.Because of the variety of soils present on the Project site, there is a
potential for
expansive soils.Finding: The City hereby makes Finding 1 that 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: Testing for expansive soils will
be performed during site-specific geotechnical studies and final recommendations
will be based on testing at finished grades. Measures for treating soils with
low to high expansion potential are described in the EIR and include
presaturation of the building back prior to construction of the foundation, strengthening
the design of the foundation, and placement of highly expansive fill soils in
fills several feet deeper than the bottom of the foundation, Once
constructed, overwatering by residents can result in excessive swelling of soils and too little
water can cause expansive soils to shrink excessively. This impact can
be mitigated through proper design of the foundation in consideration of
the structural elements,Compliance with the mitigation measures below reduce this impact
to
Less Than Significant.36
August 12, 2003 revised
5.5-5 If highly expansive native soils are present in the shallow
subsurface below cut lots or lots with shallow fills, these soils shall be removed
and replaced with soils having a lower expansion potentiaL If it is not
feasible to remove all highly expansive soils from the shallow subsurface at
finish grades, the building pads shall be presaturated to a moisture content
and depth specified by the Project soil engineer, and foundations
strengthened to resist the deformation. Walls, pools, pavements and concrete
flatwork will require similar ground preparation and design, based on
parameters supplied by the soil
engineer.5.5-6 Future homeowners shall be informed and educated
regarding the importance of maintaining a constant level of soil moisture and
shall be made aware of the potential negative consequences of
both excessive watering, as well as allowing expansive soils to become
too dry.Potential Impact: Corrosive Soils. Corrosive soils have
chemical properties that can disintegrate or corrode metal pipes
and concrete.Finding: The City determined that this impact was Less Than
Significant, and that no mitigation measures were required
or recommended,Facts in Support of Finding: Based on testing conducted by the
soil engineer,the results of which are in technical studies included in the Appendix to
the EIR,the sulfate content of native soils onsite is considered suitable for
placement of concrete foundations. Chemical analysis indicated normal pH values
and no abnormal concentrations of metal that could have
corrosive effects.Potential Impact: Land Subsidence. Horizontal and
vertical movements caused by regional subsidence can cause extensive
property damage.Finding: The City determined that this impact was Less Than
Significant, and that no mitigation measures were required
or recommended.Facts in Support of Finding: Subsidence as a result of
groundwater extraction or hydrocompaction has not been documented in the area of the
Project site.Therefore, the hazard posed by land subsidence is considered
Less
Than Significant.Potential Impact: Soil Erosion. Although the erosion potential
of the underlying alluvial deposits is considered slight to moderate,
however, these materials could become exposed and prone to erosion during
the construction phases of the Project and during periods of
heavy rains.37 August
12, 2003 revised 9/
Finding: The City hereby makes Finding 1 and determines that this potentially
significant impact is Less Than Significant by compliance with standard
conditions, No mitigation measures were required or recommended,
Facts in Support of Finding: The City's Grading Code requires temporary
erosion control measures to be provided during the construction phase,
Compliance with these requirements and those of the National Pollutant
Discharge Elimination System permit procedures would avoid any significant
short-term erosion impacts. After development, the potential for erosion
is considered less than significant as a result of the placement of
impervious surfaces or landscaping that provide protection from erosion. The
long-term erosion potential along Santiago Creek was analyzed in a
supplemental floodplain analysis conducted by Tetra Tech, Inc., which was included in the
Final EIR.Although the Tetra Tech report concluded that the Project would not
create a condition that would cause erosion or worsen the existing
conditions, erosion protection improvements will be constructed as part of the Project for
the full length of Santiago Creek through the Project site on both the north
and south banks of the Creek. As a result of these improvements, any erosion
potential from Creek hydraulic activity has been eliminated, Compliance with
these measures will reduce this potential impact to Less
Than Significant.F. Hazards and
Hazardous Materials Potential Impact: Potential Impacts from Previous Uses
and Unknown Buried Hazardous Materials On-Site. A Phase
I Environmental Site Assessment was conducted for the Project site that
identified previous uses conducted on the site. Although extensive site remediation has
been conducted to remedy known areas of environmental concern, there is
the potential for hazardous materials to have been deposited on site without
having been reported.Finding: The City hereby makes Finding 1 that 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 impacts from the
discovery of potential unrecorded areas in which hazardous materials, such as
pesticides, herbicides or other environmental contaminants would manifest itself
during grading and construction activities. Therefore, mitigation measures
have been identified which would require that certain construction specifications be
adhered to such that appropriate health and safety procedures will be required
to be followed during excavation activities to minimize the risk of exposure
to these potential environmental contaminants. Compliance with Mitigation Measures
5.6-1 and 5,6-2 will reduce this potentially significant
impact to Less Than Significant.5.6-1 Prior to issuance of a
grading pennit, construction specifications shall be established describing
appropriate health and safety procedures. Such procedures shall require that work
be stopped when discolored
or odorous 38 August
soil or unknown containers are encountered in the immediate area of the
discovery. Health and safety procedures shall contain, at a minimum,
emergency medical, evacuation, and notification actions, Notification
shall include, but would not limited to, such agencies as: the City of
Orange, CAL-EPA's Department of Toxic Substance Control, the City
of Orange Fire Department, and the Regional Water Quality Control
Board.Additionally, a Phase II ESA for the areas of potential contamination
shall be required to evaluate and determine the type of
contamination encountered and the appropriate remediation procedures to be
utilized.5.6-2 On-site areas that include or previously included agriculture
shall be tested for pesticide and herbicide residue in the soiL The
locations and number of soil samples shall be detenllined by a
California registered civil engineer with methodology acceptable to the
Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB). Any areas of soil contamination
in excess of regulatory levels shall be remediated to the satisfaction
of the RWQCB.Potential Impact: Potential Health and Safety Risks from
Release of Landfill Gases. There is the potential for landfill gas to migrate onto the
Project site due to the proximity of the Project to the closed
Villa Park LandfilL Finding: The City hereby makes Finding I that project
design features and changes or alterations that 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: There are two potential risks from
the release of landfill gases. The first is the potential health risk of exposure
to landfill gases.The second is the potential safety hazard associated with
the potential explosion hazard of landfill gas migration. With respect to potential health
risks, these risks are minimized through the landfill gas collection system that
has been installed around the perimeter of the closed Villa Park Landfill by the
County's Integrated Waste Management Division. Since publication of the Draft EIR,
the County has completed the extension of the landfill gas collection system arOlmd
the north and northeast perimeter and has added a collection and flaring system.
A health risk screening evaluation was conducted to evaluate the possibility
of adverse health effects from exposure to landfill gases. The health risk
assessment concluded that none of the constituents in landfill gas were at levels that could
pose a significant health hazard to future occupants of the Project site or users of the
6-acre park site that will be dedicated as part of the proposed Project,
and therefore the potential health impacts oflandfill gas release is
considered Less Than Significant.With respect to the potential for safety hazards due
to the explosive characteristics of landfill gas, a study performed by Sepich
Associates concluded that the proposed Project's soil remediation work which will result
in a recompaction of the soils on the Project site will result in soil that is
less permeable than under
39 August 12,
present conditions and which could cause either a buildup of soil gas pressure or
redistribute methane migration patterns. In order to address the potential issues
associated with landfill gas migration and methane buildup in the engineered
soils, the Project proposes a two-step process to establish the level and nature
of measures that will be installed during Project construction to address this
potential impact. A study area will be established for all Project areas within 1,000 feet
of the landfill boundary. Landfill gas measurements will be obtained before
and after site grading within this study area, and each lot that is developed within
the study area will be tested for a three month period after completion of grading
to assess whether any changes have occurred in landfill gas migration, For
those areas within this 1,000 feet study area in which landfill gas concentrations
exceed Orange County Fire Authority thresholds, the following requirements will
be incorporated into project design and construction: (I) a gas permeable,
synthetic membrane liner will be installed under residential structures; (2) a
subsurface passive ventilation system will be installed to diffuse buildup of combustible
gas beneath residential structures; (3) gas monitoring probes will be installed in
the foundation sand layer to monitor the effectiveness of the passive ventilation
and membrane system; (4) utility trench dams will be installed in key areas within
the mitigation area; (5) electricity utility vaults, pullboxes and transformer pads in
the public rights-of way shall be provided with methane mitigation; and (
6) explosion proof seals will be installed on all electrical conduits. Implementation
of these measures which are set forth in Mitigation Measures 5.6-3 through
5.6-5, will reduce the potentially significant effects associated with the
risk of explosion due to the migration oflandfill gases
to Less Than Significant.5.6-3 Prior to issuance of a building permit
for any residential structure within the 1,000 foot radius study area, a Landfill
Gas Mitigation Plan shall be prepared by a
licensed engineer describing appropriate design specifications and operational procedures
to mitigate the potential effects of landfill gas migration onto the Project site.
The plan shall be reviewed and approved by theOrange
County Health Care Agency/Local Enforcement Agency (LEA), the
SCAQMD and the City Building Official. All the measures identified below
shall be
incorporated into the project design:Gas-impermeable
synthetic membraneliners (i.e., high-density
polyethylene (HDPE)) shall be installed beneath residential structures within 1,000 feet
of the closed Villa Park landfill. The membrane liners
will provide protection to buildings by effectively sealing the
building from subsurface gas infiltration, An alternative to the HDPE
membrane liner is a spray-on membrane application e,g.,
Liquid Boot), The minimum thickness for the membrane systems should be 60
mil for
HDPE membrane, and 100 mil for spray-on membrane,A
subsurface passive ventilation system shall be installed to
diffuse buildup of combustible
gas beneath residential structures
1,000 feet of the closed Villa Park landfill. The passive ventilation
system will consist of a network of perforated PVC pipes installed
within trenches beneath the building floor slab and membrane
system, The trenches shall be backfilled with gravel (or rock) and
provide a relatively porous medium within which subsurface gases
can migrate more readily than through adjacent soils, Gas migration
into the passive ventilation system is ultimately vented to the
atmosphere through vertical risers, located at the ends of horizontal
vent pipes and terminating above the roofline. Turbine ventilators
are typically installed at the terminal end of the vertical risers to
impart a slight negative pressure to subsurface pipes, enhancing the
venting of subsurface combustible gases.
All residential structures within 1.000 feet of the closed Villa Park
landfill shall have gas monitoring probes installed in the foundation
sand layer (above the membrane system) to monitor the
effectiveness of the passive ventilation and membrane systems in
mitigating subsurface combustible gas concentrations. The
sampling ends of the gas monitoring probes are directed toward and
would be installed within vault boxes located within landscaped
areas or sidewalks adj acent the residential structures. The gas
monitoring probes should be monitored for subsurface pressures
and methane by the future homeowners association, Prior to
occupancy of the first home, the project applicant shall incorporate
within the CC&Rs that the homeowners association shall be
responsible for monitoring and maintaining the probes, The
schedule for monitoring and maintaining the probes shall be
reviewed and approved by the Orange County Health Care
AgencylLocal Enforcement Agency (LEA), the SCAQMD, and the
City Building Official.
Utility trench dams shall be installed in key areas within 1,000 feet
of the closed Villa Park landfill. These trench dams consist of
bentonite or a bentonite-concrete mixture installed around
conduits for a specified length of trench (usually three feet). These
trench dams shall be installed at areas to be designated in the Landfill
Gas Mitigation Plan discussed above. However, at a minimum,
the trench dams shall be installed where utilities enter the
development site from the Santiago Canyon Road public
right-of-way.Within 1,000 feet of the closed Villa Park
landfill, electricity utility vaults, pullboxes and transformer pads in
the public rights-of-way shall be provided with methane
mitigation as per the specifications included in
Sepich Associates (December 15,
2000).41August 12,
Explosion-proof seals shall be installed on all electrical
conduits entering any structure within 1,000 feet of the closed Villa
Park
landfilL 5.6-4 Any park areas within the mitigation area shall be provided with
the same level of protection as noted for
other development.5.6-5 Structures, such as restrooms in the park, without "
air conditioned space"i.e., heated or cooled air) shall be constructed
as "open structures"without subslab mitigation which requires at least 25%
of the
perimeter walls open.G. Hvdrolol!V
and Water Quality Potential Impact: Water Quality Impacts from
Increased Surface Runoff and Erosion Associated with Short-
term Construction Activities. During construction, portions of the Project site would be cleared
of vegetation. If not controlled, the transport of loose soil due to potential wind
and water erosion to local waterways could release pollutants attached to
sediment
particles into the waterways.Finding: The City hereby makes Finding 1 and
determines that this potentially significant impact is Less Than Significant
through compliance with standard conditions and existing laws and regulations which are
required to be complied with by the proposed Project. No mitigation
measures
were required or recommended.Facts in Support of Finding: The Project developer is
required to obtain a Construction Activities General Permit from the
Regional Water Quality Control Board prior to construction. This General Permit
requires preparation of a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Program (SWPPP)
that identifies the best management practices (BMPs) that will be utilized at the
Project site to reduce water pollution associated with construction.
Compliance with the General Permit requirements of the Regional Water Quality
Control Board and preparation and approval of the required SWPPP reduces
any potentially significant impacts related to runoff and erosion associated with construction
activities
to Less Than Significant.Potential Impact: Water Quality Impacts
from Increased Surface Runoff Associated with Project Development. Development of
the Project will change the character and quantity of surface runolI from the Project
site that may impact surface waterbodies. In addition, runoff from stable
operations has the potential to create significant
impacts on water quality.Finding: The City hereby makes Finding 1 that
project design features and changes or alterations that have been required in, or
incorporated into, the Project
42 August 12, 2003
which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as
identified in the final EIR.
Facts in Support of Finding: The Project will implement a series of BMPs to
reduce the discharge of pollutants from the Project site to the maximum extent
practicable, Post-construction BMPs for the Project include both structural
as well as non-structural measures. With respect to structural measures,
the Project proposes the construction of a grass swale between the
residential development area and the Santiago Creek that will run the length of the development
area and will capture low flow run-off and allow the low flow to infiltrate
the grass swale,to avoid runoff directly entering Santiago Creek without
prior treatment. In addition, at catch basin inlets, the Project will install trash racks
to reduce intake and transport of debris into the stonn drain system. A
landscape plan consistent with County Water Conservation Resolution or similar City
of Orange guidelines will be implemented, and drainage inlets will be properly
stenciled to discourage the illegal discharge of pollutants into catch basins,
Non-structural BMPs that may be incorporated into the Project include,
regular inspection and maintenance of all drainage structures and BMPs, enforcement
of waste collection and recycling programs, collection programs for
household hazardous wastes, street cleaning programs, litter control, enforcement of
spill prevention and containment programs and establishment and maintenance of
a resident participation program to maintain and improve the quality of the
stormwater through implementation of structural and non-structural BMPs. In
addition, Mitigation Measure 5.7-3 requires the submittal of a Water Quality Management
Plan to the City to ensure that adequate devices and procedures are
in place for long-term maintenance of
the water quality management systems and facilities.With implementation of
these structural and non-structural BMPs, and Mitigation Measures 5.7-3 and 5.7-
4 set forth below, no significant impacts to surface water quality
are anticipated, and this impact is considered Less Than Significant.5.7-
3 A Water Quality Management Plan and Maintenance Procedure shall be submitted
to the City of Orange for approval prior to
issuance of certificates of occupancy. The plan and maintenance procedures shall identify
and ensure that adequate devices and procedures are in
place
for long-term maintenance of the water quality management systems
and facilities.5.7-4 The following non-structural Best
Management Practices shall be incorporated in the Water Quality Management Plan
for the project:Horse waste from deposition in all exterior
areas of
the equestrian facility shall be collected daily and transported to the manure
storage facility,The entry road to the
equestrian facility shall be
swept regularly toremove
Horse stalls shall be cleaned daily to remove bedding material that
contains manure waste and replaced with new bedding materiaL
Woodshavings shall be used for bedding in the stall to absorb
liquid wastes and minimize leaching,
Potential Impact: Alteration of Drainage Patterns, Increase in Surface
Runoff and Stormwater Discharges as a Result of Increases in Impervious
Surfaces. The development of the Project site with paved impervious surfaces
would change absorption rates, drainage patterns, and the rate and amount of
surface water runoff from the site.
Finding: The City hereby makes Finding I and determines that this potentially
significant impact is Less Than Significant by the implementation of project
design features that are incorporated into the proposed Project. No mitigation
measures were required or recommended.
Facts in Support of Finding: The proposed Project includes new storm drain
improvements that will manage and capture stormwater runoff. North of Santiago
Creek, the drainage will surface flow in the streets to a curb inlet which will
ultimately be picked up by a proposed storm drain in the Project area that ties into
an existing storm drain line located west of the Project area just south of Mabury
Avenue, South of Santiago Creek, the development area east of the existing
Handy Creek Channel would surface flow in the streets and will be picked up in
proposed catch basins which will flow into a storm drain system that runs parallel
to the existing Handy Creek Channel and will outlet into Santiago Creek
immediately upstream of the Handy Creek Channel outlet. The residential area
west of Handy Creek Channel will flow into a proposed storm drain line that will
outlet into Santiago Creek. Dry weather low flows will be directed to the grass
swale that will be constructed between the residential area and Santiago Creek for
natural treatment and filtration before being discharged into the existing storm
drain facilities or proposed storm drain facilities, As a result of these facilities
that will be constructed as part of the Project, impacts from the alteration of
drainage patterns and any increase in surface run-off and storm drain
discharges are considered Less Than
Significant.Potential Impact: Flooding Resulting from the Failure of Dam or
Levee.The Project site lies within the inundation area of two dams upstream of
the Project site: the Villa Park Dam and the Santiago Reservoir. Dam failures
have historically been caused by severe floods that overtopped the reservoirs,
and geotechnical flaws not recognized in the feasibility studies, design or
construction phases of the
dam.Finding: The City hereby makes Finding 3 that no feasible mitigation
measures or alternatives are available to mitigate this potentially significant impact and
that 44 August 12,
2003 revised 9/23/
this impact would remain significant and unavoidable. The City is required
pursuant to Finding 3 adopt a Statement of Overriding Considerations as a
condition of Project approval in accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section
15091(a)(3) to identify the "Specific economic, legal, social, technological, or
other considerations, including considerations for the provision of employment
opportunities for highly trained workers, make infeasible the mitigation measures
or alternatives identified in the environmental impact report."
Facts in Support of Finding: With respect to dam construction, the Division of
Dam Safety requires dam owners to prepare and publish failure inundation zones
and to meet certain dam design standards, "The purpose of the establishment of
Dam Inundation Zones pursuant to the California Government Code is to enable
emergency services personnel to identify potential evacuation routes in the event
of a potential dam failure. DIZs are not intended to serve as a land use zoning
vehicle, . . ." (Letter from Ken R. Smith, County of Orange, Public Facilities &
Resources Department to Mr. Ernie Sclmeider, Hunsaker & Associates, dated
April 21, 2003.) In the event of a catastrophic failure of dam safety, the Project
site together with the surrounding residential areas, including portions of Orange
Park Acres, could be subject to flooding hazards from dam failure. Although the
proposed Project incorporates an extensive system of subsurface bank
stabilization structures along Santiago Creek to minimize the effects of flooding
from 100 year storm events, these structures would not protect the Project site in
the event of a seismically induced catastrophic dam failure upstream. There is no
mitigation measures to reduce this impact to less than significant, and the only
alternative that could avoid this impact is the No Project/Continuation of Existing
Uses Alternative which does not meet any of the Project objectives and may not
be feasible given the existing sand and gravel resources and the impacts of
continued industrial activity in an residential area. While certain areas of the
Project site are mapped as outside of the dam inundation areas, these areas are
generally limited to very small areas at higher elevation on slopes on which
sensitive vegetation, such as oak trees are located and which are not suitable for
development. Moreover, it is infeasible to develop only on these limited areas of
the property. Therefore, there are no mitigation measures and this impact would
remain unavoidable and adverse.
Potential Impact: Flood Hazards. Portions of the Project site have been
mapped as subject to potential flooding from Santiago Creek and within the
existing Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) floodplain.
Finding: The City hereby makes Finding l that 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 ErR.
Facts in Support of Finding: As a result of upstream improvements, the amount
of the Project site that would be included in the FEMA floodplain maps has been
significantly reduced. The Project proponent and the City of Orange filed a
45 August 12,2003
revised 9/23/03)
request with FEMA to revise the floodplain maps in light of the upstream flood
control improvements. By letter dated January 24,2003, FEMA notified Mark A.
Murphy, Mayor, City of Orange that the Flood Insurance Rate Map for Orange
has been revised by the Letter of Map Revision, effective May 22, 2003. (See
Appendix to the Additional Analysis, page Y-6.) Per the revised floodplain
maps prepared by FEMA, the Project does not propose any development in the area
that would be mapped as subject to potential flooding under the revised FEMA
Flood Area Insurance Rate Map (FIRM). With implementation of Mitigation
Measure 5.7-1 which addresses the revision of the FEMA maps prior to
any residential development within the currently-mapped floodplain area, this
impact will be reduced to
Less Than Significant.5.7-1 No building permits shall be issued by the City
until FEMA revises its FIRM to remove all proposed residential areas
on-site
from the 100-year Flood Zone.Potential Impact:
Construction and Operational Impacts on Groundwater Levels, Water Quality and Flow Direction.
There is a potential that perched groundwater will be encountered
at
least locally during remedial grading activities.Finding: The City hereby makes Finding
I that compliance with existing laws and 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: Encountered groundwater may require pumping from the construction area into an onsite
sump or vessel while site remediation activities to address the artificial fill in the
former sand and gravel silt ponds occurs as part of the site preparation
process, In addition to compliance with National Pollutant
Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit requirements,Mitigation Measure 5.7-2 requires
installation of a subdrain system to address groundwater flow. Compliance
with existing laws and regulations and this mitigation measure will
reduce this impact to Less Than Significant.5.7-2 A subdrain system
shall be designed and installed to control groundwater flow under and around the
Project site in accordance with specifications of the Project geologists and hydrologists in
order
not to impede the natural flow at
depth.Potential Impact: Groundwater Impacts Resulting from Project Development. The development of the
Project site will result in the increase of impervious surfaces within
areas planned for development
that may reduce the
amount ofgroundwater recharge.
Finding: The City hereby makes Finding 1 and determines that this potentially
significant impact is Less Than Significant by the implementation of Project
design features and compliance with standard conditions and existing laws and
regulations that are incorporated into the proposed Project. No mitigation
measures were required or recommended.
Facts in Support of Finding: The increase in impervious surfaces and the
closure of an active water will onsite will have a negligible effect on groundwater
levels under the Project site. Local recharge may increase from lawn irrigation.
The impacts of site development on groundwater levels is considered Less Than
Significant. Although the quality of groundwater may diminish locally due to the
use of fertilizers and other chemical substances typically utilized in maintained
landscaped areas, the implementation of BMPs to minimize Project impacts on
surface water quality will also reduce potential impacts to groundwater quality to
Less Than Significant.
H. Land Use and Planninl!
Potential Impact: Conflict with Any Applicable Land Use Plans, Policies or
Regulations. The Project would have a significant impact if it conflicts with
applicable land use plans, such as the City's General Plan, or other policies or
regulations, Land uses for the proposed Project site are set forth in the City's
General Plan and two area plans, the East Orange General Plan and the Orange
Park Acres Plan. In addition to the local land use plans, because the Project site
was formerly mined for sand and gravel, redevelopment of the site would have a
significant impact if it conflicts with the requirements of the Surface Mining and
Reclamation Act of 1975 (SMARA), California Public Resources Code Section
2710 et seq.
Finding: The City hereby makes Finding 1 that changes or alterations have been
required in, or incorporated into, the Project through implementation of project
design features and mitigation measures which avoid or substantially lessen the
significant environmental effect as identified in the final EIR.
Facts in Support of Finding: The City's General Plan designates the majority of
the Project site (south of Santiago Creek) Resource Area (RA) in recognition of
the aggregate mining and agricultural uses on the Project site. The area north of
the Creek is designated for residential uses and is zoned R-l-S.
The RA designation was considered a "holding zone" which would be
amended when sand and gravel operations ceased. The City of Orange General Plan
states that the City recognizes that agricultural and mining activity will
not continue indefinitely within the RA designation. The Project proposes a
General Plan amendment to change the RA designation to Residential and
Open Space,Because the proposed Project is consistent with the long range intent
of the General Plan and furthers the City's land use goals (Goal 2, Goal 9 and
Goal 10),the Project's conflict with the current General Plan and zoning designations
is not considered a
significant impact.47 August
12,2003 revised
The two area plans designate the Project site for the Santiago Creek Greenbelt.
The Project proposes that the Project site be removed from both of these area
plans; however, consistent with the goals of the Santiago Creek Greenbelt
designation, the proposed Project preserves Santiago Creek in a natural state as
envisioned by both of these plans and provides for open space and recreational
uses within the approximately 40 acre open space area that is provided by the
Project along the entire length of the Santiago Creek through the Project site. In
addition, the Project proposes residential uses and lot sizes that are compatible
with the residential uses and lot sizes of the surrounding area. The Project,
provides for equestrian facilities immediately adjacent to The Reserve residential
community which furthers the equestrian and rural components of the Orange
Park Acres community. Because the Project helps to carry forth the goals of both
the East Orange General Plan and the Orange Park Acres Plan to provide
development that is comparable in character with the surrounding community,
and which preserves the open space nature of the Creek, the deletion of the
Project site from these two plans will not have an adverse effect and will not
conflict with the achievement of the land use planning goals of the City's General
Plan or community guidance provided by the East Orange General Plan or Orange
Park Acres Plan.
Surface mining operations in the State of California must comply with SMARA.
SMARA requires the Governor's Office of Planning and Research to designate
certain areas of the state as falling within one of three categories: (I) areas
containing little or no mineral deposits; (2) areas containing significant mineral
deposits; and (3) areas containing mineral deposits, the significance of which
requires further evaluation. Areas containing significant mineral deposits are
further classified as areas of statewide or regional significance, The project site is
designated as an "area of regional significance" under SMARA. SMARA
requires that if an area is designated as an area of regional significance, prior to
permitting a use which would threaten the potential to extract minerals in that
area, the City must prepare a statement specifying its reasons for permitting the
proposed use. Based upon information provided to the City by Hanson
Aggregates, mining on the project site ceased because there is nothing left to
mine. The value and quality of any aggregates that may be present on site is not
of sufficient quantity or quality to produce adequate material for the market
region. Therefore, the City's consideration of the current application which
would "threaten the potential to extract minerals in that area" would not result in a
loss of important minerals to their market region as a whole. Action on the
proposed project would not conflict with these provisions of SMARA, and would
not be considered a significant impact.
SMARA also requires that reclamation plans be prepared and approved for areas
on which surface mining operations were conducted after January 1, 1976. (14
CaL Code of Reg. Section 3501.) If surface mining operations were conducted
after January I, 1976, a reclamation plan meeting the requirements of Section
2772 of SMARA must be prepared, If surface mining activities were not
48 August 12, 2003
revised 9/23/03)
conducted on the project site after January I, 1976, SMARA would not apply to
the property and the project poses no conflict with SMARA, Based upon the
information provided to the City by the Department of Conservation in a letter
dated June 18, 2003, the Department of Conservation concluded that surface
mining had ceased prior to January I, 1976. Evidence has been submitted by the
public that conflicts with the Department of Conservation's determination. In the
event the City later determines based upon review of evidence not currently
before it that surface mining did occur after January I, 1976, a mitigation measure
is proposed that would require compliance with SMARA as this would be a
potentially significant conflict with SMARA. This conflict, however, can be
mitigated to less than significant through compliance with State and City
requirements to prepare and submit a reclamation plan.
5.8-4 If surface mining was conducted on the project site after January I,
1976,a reclamation plan and financial assurances for the reclamation shall
be prepared and submitted to the City and the State Department
of Conservation, and shall be approved by the City prior to issuance of
the first grading permit for the project
site.Potential Impact: Conflict with Snrrounding Land Uses. A project
would have a significant land use impact if it conflicted with surrounding land
uses.Land uses adjacent to the Project site include the residential communities
known as The Reserve and Oak Lane to the east, Orange Park Acres to the south,
and Mabury Ranch and Creekside Ranch to the north. The former Villa Park
Landfill is adjacent to the western boundary of the Project
site.Finding: The City hereby makes Finding I and determines that this
potentially significant impact is Less Than Significant by the implementation of
project design features that are incorporated into the proposed Project. No
mitigation measures were required or
recommended,Facts in Support of Finding: With respect to the Villa Park Landfill site,
the measures that will be incorporated into the Project to assure that the landfill
will not have any significant impacts on the developed residential areas
were addressed in the Hazardous Materials section. No adverse land use effects
from the development of the proposed Project adjacent to the closed landfill
are anticipated. In addition, the Project proposes the development of a
community park to provide additional buffering between the landfill and future
residential development. With respect to the surrounding residential areas, the
Project provides for residential uses compatible with those existing
communities,Adjacent to The Reserve, the Project proposes half-acre lots and which
will be zoned R-I-20. In addition, the Project is lower in
elevation than The Reserve thus minimizing impacts of the new development on
The Reserve. Like The Reserve, the lots that will be adjacent to Oak Lane are
designated as half-acre lots,In addition, the Project is separated from Oak Lane
by a heavily wooded slope approximately 60-70 feet in height thus minimizing
land use impacts to less than significant. Although the Project differs
in character and density
from Orange 49 August
Park Acres which lies across Santiago Canyon Road, the Project includes at least
nine lots that would accommodate equestrian uses similar in character to the
Orange Park Acres area, The separation of the Project site from Orange Park
Acres through grade differences, Santiago Canyon Road and no direct access to
Orange Park Acres renders any potential impact Less Than Significant. Finally
the area of the Project site adjacent to Mabury is consistent with the zoning and
land uses of the Mabury development, and the Project site adjacent to Creekside
will be zoned open space such that no significant impacts are anticipated,
Potential Impact: Conflict with an Applicable Habitat Conservation Plan or
Natural Community Conservation Plan (NCCP). The Project site is located
adjacent to a NCCP Reserve area. Since the NCCP Reserve area is intended to
remain natural, the interface between the proposed Project and the Reserve could
result in potential impacts.
Finding: The City hereby makes Finding I that 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: In order to minimize potential conflicts with the
NCCP Reserve, the Project proposes to revegetate an area of prior encroachment
from existing activities on the Project site into the NCCP Reserve. The potential
impacts of the interface between development and the Reserve are addressed
through implementation of the Mitigation Measures set forth below as well as
mitigation measures previously identified in the noise, aesthetics, and biological
resources section.
5.8-1 To ensure compliance with the provisions of the
Central-Coastal NCCPIHCP and Implementation Agreement, City of Orange
shall transmit all site plans, area plans, subdivision maps,
fuel modification plans/landscape improvement plans, utility plans, flood
control facility plans or any other improvement plans that may potentially
affect the Reserve System to the Executive Director, Nature Reserve
of Orange County for review and comment prior to any City administrative
or formal action to approve
such plans.5.8-2 A landscaping/urban edge treatment plan shall be required by
the City of Orange, in consultation with the Manager,
Orange County Public Facilities and Resources DepartmentlHarbors,
Beaches and Parks-Program Management & Coordination, prior to approval
of grading permits. The landscaping/urban edge treatment plan shall
address and screen the interface between the Santiago Oaks regional
park
and the proposed development.5.8-3 The encroachment area shall be restored by
the applicant, pursuant to a landscape/restoration plan approved
by the Manager, Orange County,Public Facilities and
Resources DepartmentlHarbors, Beaches and
Parks-50 August 12,
program Management & Coordination, pnor to approval of building
permits,
Potential
Impact: Removal of Trees on the Project Site. The southeast corner of
the Project site includes a stand of native trees. This area includes 22 of the 30 native
trees identified in surveys (18 coast live oaks, 2 Mexican elderberry trees, I western
sycamore, and I red willow), The trees lie outside of the proposed grading
area,Finding:
The City hereby makes Finding I and determines that this potentially significant
impact is Less Than Significant by the implementation of project design
features that are incorporated into the proposed Project. No mitigation measures
were required or recommended.Facts
in Support of Finding: The most significant occurrence of native trees that
occur on the Project site is located along the sloping land in the southeast corner
of the Project site. This area includes 22 native trees. A separate parcel,Lot
K, has been designated on the Tract Map which encompasses all 22 native trees
such that no native trees will be located within a private lot. Including the trees
within a lettered lot assures that no grading for development of the private lots
will affect the viability of these trees, and provides a better opportunity for uniform
care and management.Potential
Impact: Loss of Open Space. The City's General Plan designates the major
portion of the Project site south of Santiago Creek as RA, Resource Area.In
addition, the East Orange General Plan and the Orange Park Acres Plan designate
portions ofthe site for a Santiago Creek Greenbelt. Development of the project
site south of Santiago Creek for residential purposes would result in a permanent
change in the character of land use from the current sand and gravel operations,
heavy equipment storage and agricultural operations.Finding:
The City hereby makes Finding 1 and determines that this potentially significant
impact is Less Than Significant by the implementation of project design
features that are incorporated into the proposed Project. No mitigation measures
were required or recommended.Facts
in Support of Finding: The only portion of the Project site currently designated
for open space uses by the Land Use Element of the Orange General Plan
is that portion of the Project site along Santiago Creek. This area will be retained
in open space by the Project and improvements, such as trails and a bridge
will be provided by the Project to facilitate public use of and access to, this area
of natural open space. The project proposes dedication of the open space areas
along the Creek to a public agency. Approximately 40% of the project area would
be retained in either manmade or permanent natural open space, Because the
project will not adversely affect the open space area designated on Project site under
the current General Plan and maintains and enhances a greenbelt area along 51
August 12,2003 revised
9/23103)
the Creek that can be used by the public for recreation and habitat projection, the
Project will not result in any loss of open space and the impacts are considered
less than significant.
I. Noise
Potential Impact: Construction Related Noise Impacts. Short-
term construction noise impacts are those associated with site preparation, grading
and construction of the proposed Project. The impact would be significant if
it conflicted with adopted environmental plans and goals of the community where
it is located and exposed persons to or generation of excessive
groundborne
vibrations,Finding: The City hereby makes Finding 1 that 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 proposed hours of operation for
construction activities were described in the EIR and included 7 a.m. to 5 p.m. on
weekdays and 7 a,m. to I p.m. on Saturday for construction activities north of
Santiago Creek, and from 7 a,m. to 11 p.m. on weekdays and 7 a.m. to I p.m. on
Saturdays for activities south of Santiago Creek. Work later than 9 p.m. south of
Santiago Creek will be limited to equipment maintenance activities. The City's
Noise Ordinance (Section 9500.7) limits the hours of construction to between 7 a,m. to
9 p.m. on Monday through Saturday, and not at anytime on Sunday or
federal holidays. The Project proposes additional limitations on construction
operations that are reflected in Mitigation Measure 5.9-4. Sensitive receptors
within the Project area consist primarily of the adjoining single
family residential developments. Construction noise levels at the nearest residences
could range between 64 and 89 dBA for the majority of the heavy equipment that may
be used for development of the Project site. It should be noted that the
existing rock crushing activities may already exceed these noise levels,
however, mitigation measures have been identified to reduce these noise levels to
Less
Than Significant.5.9-1 During all Project site preparation, grading and
construction, the Project contractors shall equip all construction equipment, fixed
or mobile, with properly operating and maintained mufflers
consistent with manufacturer standards. All equipment shall also be maintained in
a
properly tuned condition.5.9-2 The Project contractor shall place all
stationary construction equipment as far as feasible and situated so that emitted noise
is directed away from sensitive receptors to the north and east
of the project site,5.9-3 The construction contractor
shall locate long-term stock-piling and equipment staging areas in a
manner to provide as
much distance between 52
construction-related noise sources and potentially noise sensitive
receptors as feasible during all project site preparation, grading and
construction
activities,5.9-4 All construction hauling shall be limited to weekdays from 7 a.
m. to 5 p.m., and 7 a,m, to I p.m. on Saturday on site areas south
of Santiago Creek. Construction hauling from site areas north of Santiago
Creek shall be limited to weekdays from 9 a.m. to 5 p,m. and Saturdays from 9 a.
m. to 1 p,m. Equipment maintenance activities shall be limited to the
south side of Santiago Creek weekdays from 7 a,m. to 11 p.m. and be limited
from 9 a.m. to 11 p.m. weekdays north of Santiago Creek.
On Saturdays equipment maintenance shall be limited to 9 a.m, to 1 p.m. on
the north side of Santiago Creek and 7 a.m. to 1 p.m. on the south side
of Santiago Creek. No construction related activities shall occur on Sundays
or public holidays. Construction hours will be enforced by the City
of Orange.5.9-5 The haul route from site area located north of Santiago
Creek shall be limited to Yellowstone Boulevard and Serrano Avenue
and under no circumstances shall trucks or any other construction
equipment be allowed to utilize other streets within the Mabury Ranch
neighborhood. From site areas south of Santiago Creek, construction traffic
shall utilize Santiago Canyon Road to the nearest freeway, Violation of
any designated haul route shall be subject to citation by the City of
Orange Police Department.5.9-6 All construction traffic shall be limited to speeds of no
more than 15 miles per hour while traveling on-site.
All heavy construction equipment traffic shall be limited to speeds of no more than
20 miles per hour along Yellowstone Boulevard and Serrano Avenue.
Speed signs shall be posted for construction traffic along these
two routes throughout the entire construction period and will be enforced
by the City of Orange.Potential Impact: Operational Impacts
to Workers from Short-Term On Site Activities. Workers involved with the
proposed Project could be subject to increased noise levels due to their working
in proximity to
various types of equipment and trucks.Finding: The City hereby makes Finding
I and determines that this potentially significant impact is Less Than
Significant by the compliance with standard conditions and existing laws and
regulations that are incolporated into the proposed Project. No
mitigation measures were required or recommended.Facts in Support of Finding: Noise in the
work place is regulated by the Occupational Safety
and Health Administration (OSHA) which establishes,among other things, limitations
on worker exposure to noise. Required compliance with OSHA regulations
would ensure that worker exposure to
excessive noise remains Less
Than Significant.53 August
Potential Impact: Operations Related Noise Impacts. The proposed Project
will generate additional traffic and may alter noise levels in the surrounding areas
that if they exceed the noise thresholds set forth in the EIR by the City may result
in a significant noise impact.
Finding: The City hereby makes Finding I that 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: Based upon the noise thresholds utilized in the
EIR, noise levels greater than 3dBA are identified as significant, while changes
less than I dBA will not be discernible to local residents. In order for the Project
to have a significant impact on traffic noise levels upon sensitive land uses, such
as existing residences, the proposed Project must generate a significant increase in
traffic-related noise, i.e., increase noise levels by at least 3 dBA within a
private living area, and must generate noise that would exceed the noise standard of
65 CNEL for exterior land uses. The future noise increases due solely to the
Project are all less than 3 dBA. Noise increase levels of approximately 0.1 dBA
are projected to occur along Santiago Canyon Road and Orange Park
Boulevard.Since noise increase levels are all less than 3 dBA, operational noise impacts
are considered Less Than Significant. The development north of Santiago
Creek proposes seventeen homes. Traffic volumes on Yellowstone Boulevard
and Mabury Avenue would not be anticipated to generate a significant noise
increase.Therefore, no significant long-term adverse noise impacts are projected
for the
proposed Project.The Project proposes the dedication of a 6 acre park site which is suitable
for a variety of active recreational uses. Although actual development of the
park site would occur at a future time by others and is not a part of the Project,
the potential noise generated by the park site (e,g" noise from sports events at an
active park area) was considered on the proposed Project. Homes proposed to the east
of the park site would be 9-12 feet higher in elevation as compared to
the proposed Park site. In addition, a 6 feet perimeter wall is proposed along
the project boundary between these homes and the proposed park site. The combination of
the 6 feet wall and the 9 feet or more in elevation difference between the park
site and the nearest adjacent homes would provide sufficient attenuation of
noise generated at the park to reduce levels to below the City's Noise
Ordinance requirements. In addition, because the front yards of homes proposed north of
the proposed park site would not have outdoor active use area that would
be considered noise sensitive, no significant noise impacts to these
homes are anticipated.Future noise levels were also analyzed along roadways in the
vicinity of the Project. Future noise levels include both noise generated by the Project
as well as noise increases due to the magnitude of development
approved throughout this area. Areas in the immediate vicinity of Serrano Road,
Cannon Street and Santiago Canyon Road will experience future noise levels in excess
of 70 CNEL,and noise increases are anticipated to be between 0.9 dBA and
3.8 dBA.54
August 12,2003revised
Therefore, this would be a significant impact for those residences along Santiago
Canyon Road that would experience noise levels in excess of 65 CNEL. The
following mitigation measures will ensure that the Project meets all indoor and
outdoor noise standards, and will reduce this potentially significant impact to Less
Than Significant.
5.9-7 Prior to the recordation of a final tract map or the issuance of any
grading permits an Acoustical Analysis Report shall be submitted to the City
of Orange Engineering Department for approval. The Acoustical
Analysis Report shall describe the acoustical design features of the
structures required to satisfY the exterior and interior noise standards. In
addition,the Acoustical Analysis Report shall contain satisfactory
evidence indicating that the sound attenuation measures specified in the
approved acoustical reports in both the Draft and Final EIR documents have
been incorporated into the design of the
Project.5.9-8 Prior to the issuance of any building permits, all
freestanding acoustical barriers that may be required along Santiago Canyon Road and
in areas adjacent to the planned park site must be shown on the Project
plot plan illustrating height, location and construction in a manner
meeting the approval of the City of Orange
Engineering Department.5.9-9 Prior to the issuance of any Certificates of Use
and Occupancy, field testing in accordance with Title 25 regulations shall be
conducted to verify compliance with STC and
lIC design standards.J.
Populations and Housinl!Potential Impact: Induce Substantial
Population Growth, Displace Substantial Numbers of People, or Result in
Substantial Conflicts to Attainment of Regional Planning Policies or Local
Housing Policies. hnpacts are considered significant if the proposed Project
would induce substantial population growth, either indirectly or directly, which is not
already anticipated in planning programs or projections; result in substantial conflict to
the attainment of regional planing policies designed to reduce adverse
impacts to regional environmental quality, or result in subst,mtial conflicts to the
attainment of local
housing policy goals.Finding: The City determined that this impact was Less
Than Significant, and that no mitigation measures were
required or recommended.Facts in Support of Finding: With respect to
inducing substantial population growth, the Project is projected to add 556 persons to the population of
the City of Orange, This growth would not substantially alter local
or subregional population forecasts, and is therefore determined to be Less Than
Significant. With respect to the Project' impact on the attainment of regional planning
policy, the Project would result in the construction of 180 additional residences in
an area considered 55
August 12. 2003 revised
Jobs rich." More housing would contribute to a better balance in the region, and
would support the regional growth objectives of the Southern California
Association of Governments, and the impacts are considered Less Than
Significant. Finally, the City of Orange uses the Regional Housing Need
Assessment to evaluate and plan for existing and future housing needs, The
Project would be credited to the City's RHNA goals, and therefore the potential
effects of the proposed Project on the attainment of housing goals are considered
Less Than Significant.
K. Public Services and Utilities
Potential Impact: Fire Protection Services. The construction and operation of
the proposed Project would increase the overall demand on fire protection
services in the area.
Finding: The City hereby makes Finding I that compliance with standard
conditions and changes or alterations that have been required in, or incorporated
into, the Project avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect
as identified in the final EIR.
Facts in Support of Finding: Construction could affect circulation in the
vicinity of the Proj ect and could result in increased response times for fire and
emergency service vehicles. A mitigation measure has been recommended that
requires the preparation of an emergency access and response plan that identifies
alternative routes for emergency access to the Project site. Operational impacts
would be mitigated by requiring all stmctures to be constmcted to conform to
applicable State and City building codes and Orange Fire Department safety
standards, including fuel modification requirements.
5.11-1 Prior to issuance ofa building permit, the Project applicant shall submit
an emergency access plan to the City of Orange Fire Department for
review and approval. This plan will identify alternate routes for
emergency access during construction
activities,5.11-2 The Project applicant shall pay all applicable fire facility fees
required by the City of Orange
Fire Department.5.11-3 Sufficient accessibility for fire-fighting
equipment shall be provided during all phases of
construction and subsequent operation,5.]] -4 The Orange Fire Department shall review
and approve development plans to ensure adequate access and fire
protection facilities are available.Potential Impact: Police Protection Services. The
development of the Project site will add to the number of service calls requiring
response
from the police department.
56 August 12,
Finding: The City hereby makes Finding 1 that Project design features and
changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Proj ect
which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as
identified in the final EIR.
Facts in Support of Finding: To ensure adequate services are provided and to
minimize the demands on police services, security and design measures that
employ defensible space concepts should be utilized in development and
construction plans. Construction activities could affect circulation in the vicinity
of the Project area and could affect police response times, Therefore, a mitigation
measure has been identified that would require the preparation of an emergency
access plan that will reduce this impact to Less Than Significant.
5.11-5 Prior to issuance of a building permit, the Project applicant shall submit
an emergency access plan to the City of Orange Police Department.
This plan will identify alternate routes for emergency access
during construction, to areas potentially blocked by project-
related
construction activities.Potential Impact: School Services. The proposed Project
would generate approximately 57 new elementary school students, 16 middle school and
18 high school students that would affect existing
school facilities.Finding: The City determined that this impact was Less Than
Significant through compliance with standard conditions, and that no mitigation
measures were required
or recommended,Facts in Support of Finding: New facilities would be required at
all affected schools to accommodate the new students generated by the proposed
Project due to the deficit or near deficit capacities of each school in the area of
the Project.However, these deficiencies are existing deficiencies and not necessarily
a result of the Project. To offset the Project's impacts to school facilities,
the Project would be required to pay the mandated State assessment fee
pursuant to Government Code Section 65995. Compliance with the State law
will reduce impacts to Less
Than Significant.Potential Impact: Park Facility and Recreational Services. An
increase in demand for park facilities and recreational services can result from
increases in the local housing supply, The proposed Project involves the development
of new housing stock and would increase the demand for local and
regional parks,Finding: The City determined that this impact was Less Than
Significant, and that no mitigation measures were required
or recommended.Facts in Support of Finding: A total of 6 acres of land within the Project
site is proposed for dedication and for development by the City of
a public 57 August
12, 2003 revised 9/
neighborhood park. The Project will also construct new trail segments that help
the City complete its bikeways and recreational master plan for trails. Based on
the City's Master Plan for Park Facilities, Recreation and Community Services,
estimated requirements for the proposed Project would be approximately 1.76
acres of parkland. If the Quimby Act is determined to apply to the Project, park
requirements could be satisfied by either land dedication or the payment of in lieu
fees. In light of the Project's dedication of parkland and its provision of new
recreational facilities in the form of bikeways and recreational trails, the Project's
impact on park facilities and recreational services was determined to be Less Than
Significant.
Potential Impact: Library Services. An increase in demand for library services
could result from an increase in the local housing supply, Since the proposed
Project is a new residential development, a slight increase in the demand for
library services could result.
Finding: The City determined that this impact was Less Than Significant, and
that no mitigation measures were required or recommended,
Facts in Snpport of Finding: The level of need for library services and facilities
in the City has increased in recent years. Current sources of revenue utilized by
the City to address this need include the City's General Fund, the Public Library
Foundation Program Fund, Federal/State grant funds and Friends of the Orange
Public Library Fund. The contribution of the proposed Project is not so
substantial as to create an adverse significant impact on the need for library
services.
Potential Impact: Wastewater Services. Wastewater generated by the Project
could have the potential to impact wastewater treatment systems.
Finding: The City determined that this impact was Less Than Significant, and
that no mitigation measures were required or recommended.
Facts in Snpport of Finding: The Project site is served by the Orange County
Sanitation District (OCSD). Development of the Project site will increase the
amount of wastewater that would need to be handled by area wastewater
distribution systems and treatment facilities. The Project is anticipated to
generate approximately 27,000 gallons of wastewater per day, The OCSD has
indicated that the Project is not expected to exceed the capacity of the existing 18-
inch wastewater line that will take wastewater from the development north and
south of Santiago Creek. The 18-inch lim: is scheduled to be upsized to a
24-inch line which will provide
additional capacity.Potential Impact: Storm Water Drainage Facilities. The Project may
have a potentially significant impact if it exceeds the capacity of existing
storm
drain facilities.58 August
12, 2003 revised 9/
Finding: The City hereby makes Finding 1 and determines that this potentially
significant impact is Less Than Significant by the implementation of proj ect
design features that are incorporated into the proposed Project. No mitigation
measures were required or recommended.
Facts in SUppOTt of Finding: The Project necessitates the construction of certain
new storm drain improvements, including two new storm drain outlets from the
area east of the existing Handy Creek Channel and the area west of the Handy
Creek Channel. In addition, the Project will construct a grass swale south of
Santiago Creek to receive and treat dry weather low flows from the developed
area. Measures incorporated into the Project design will control storm drainage in
compliance with all applicable governmental requirements, consequently, impacts
from storm drainage are considered Less Than Significant.
Potential Impact: WateT Services. The Project would have a significant impact
ifthere are insufficient supplies of water to service the Project.
Finding: The City determined that this impact was Less Than Significant through
adherence to standard conditions, and that no mitigation measures were required
or recommended.
Facts in SUppOTt of Finding: The City of Orange is the water service provider
for the Project site. The Project is anticipated to require approximately 136,000
gallons per day for domestic water usage. The City has indicated that it has
sufficient water supplies available to serve the proposed Project. In order to
ensure that all water facilities are constructed in accordance with City standards,
the City Public Works Department will review the site improvement plans. In
addition, the water conservation measures recommended by the State Department
of Water Resources and applicable state laws requiring the use of water-
efficient plumbing fixtures and recommendations for low-water-using
landscaping will be incorporated into the Project. Therefore, this impact is
considered
Less Than Significant.Potential Impact: Solid Waste Services. The Project would
have a significant impact if insufficient capacity exists at landfills to accommodate
the Project's solid
waste disposal needs.Finding: The City determined that this impact was Less
Than Significant, and that no mitigation measures were
required or recommended.Facts in Support of Finding: Solid waste from the proposed
Project would most likely be disposed of at the Olinda Alpha Landfill located in the
City of Brea.The Project is anticipated to generate approximately I J 72 tons per
year of solid waste. Taking into consideration solid waste diversion goals and
programs of the City, the Project would generate an approximate increaseof
approximately 0.4%59
August 12, 2003 revised
of the City's disposal rate over the 1999 estimate. The amount of solid waste
generated by the proposed Proj ect is not considered significant, and thus this
impact is Less Than Significant.
Potential Impact: Electricity, Natural Gas and Telecommunication Services.
The Project would have a significant impact if it requires substantial adverse
physical impacts to maintain acceptable service levels.
Finding: The City determined that this impact was Less Than Significant, and
that no mitigation measures were required or recommended.
Facts in Support of Finding: Southern California Edison will provide electrical
services to the Project and has indicated that it would be able to provide those
services, The Project is estimated to use approximately 1,057,782 KWh per year.
The Southern California Gas Company has facilities in the area where the Project
site is located and has indicated that gas service to the Project could be provided
from existing facilities without any significant impacts to existing systems. The
Project is estimated to require approximately 141,000 therms per year. Pacific
Bell provides telephone and telecommunication services in the City of Orange.
Although expansion of existing facilities would be required to accommodate the
proposed Project, the expansion is considered normal for this type of development
and therefore is not considered a significant impact.
L. Traffic and Circulation
Potential Impact: Traffic Generated by Existing Conditions Plus Other
Approved Projects and the Proposed Project. Project traffic would have a
significant impact on intersections that are within the defined Congestion
Management Plan (CMP) Highway network if it results in an LOS condition
worse than LOS E, or worsens the existing LOS condition, ifit is worse than LOS
E. For base conditions reflecting an LOS worse than E, significant deterioration
in existing LOS is defined as any increase in vlc ration of 3% or more over the
base condition. If traffic generated by the proposed Project increases the vlc ratio
by 3% or more, CMP Level of Service objectives are not met, and mitigation is
required.
Finding: The City hereby makes Finding 1 that 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: Traffic on the roadways near the proposed Project
site were analyzed with the proposed Project trips added to the existing conditions
plus the other approved Projects' traffic volumes. Traffic generated by the
proposed Project would not be enough to lower the LOS on any roadway segment
to an unacceptable level. Roadway segments would operate at LOS C or better
60 August 12,2003
revised 9/23/03)
under near term cumulative conditions. The proposed Project would have a Less
Than Significant impact on the roadway segments within the Project vicinity.
The Project's impact on various intersections in the vicinity of the Project site was
also analyzed. At the intersection of Katella Avenue and Wanda Road, the
Project plus other traffic would increase the existing vlc ratio by 4%. Since an
increase of 3% or more over base conditions is considered significant, the
proposed Project would have a significant effect at this intersection when
considered with the cumulative traffic increases. At the intersection of Santiago
Canyon Road and Cannon, cumulative Project traffic increases the vlc ratio in the
AM hours by 0,19 and 0.30 in the PM hours. This would be a significant impact.
Finally, the Project also contributes to the cumulative significant impact at the
intersection of Santiago Canyon Road and Jamestown Way. In order to mitigate
these impacts, mitigation measures have been identified for the Proj ect.
Implementation of these mitigation measures would reduce Project traffic impacts
to Less Than Significant.
The EIR also analyzed Year 2020 future traffic conditions using the Central
County Traffic Model. The Year 2020 forecast assumed full development of the
East Orange General Plan, and the Project's traffic. In the Year 2020, although
Serrano Avenue will operate at LOS E with or without the Project traffic, the
Project traffic increases the vlc ratio on this road by I % and therefore would have
a Less Than Significant Impact. The segments of Cannon Street north of Santiago
Canyon Road and Santiago Canyon Road will operate at LOS F with or without
the proposed Project in the Year 2020. When improved to their ultimate
classification of a six lane major arterial, both streets will operate at LOS D or
better in the Year 2020 with or without the proposed Project. Therefore, the
Project has a Less Than Significant impact on these roadways segments in future
Year 2020 conditions.
5.12-1 The Project proponent shall contribute a "Fair Share" for the
following improvements to the Katella A venuelW anda Road
intersection:Re-stripe Villa Park Road to add a third westbound
through
lane;and Modify the traffic signal to accommodate the
additional westbound
through lane.5.12-2 The project proponent shall contribute a "Fair Share"
for the following improvements to the Santiago Canyon Road/
Cannon Street intersection:Modify the traffic signal to eliminate the north/
south split phasing;Add a second
eastbound left-turn lane;Add a
second northbound through lane;Convert the second westbound through land
to a shared
second through/right-turn lane;Add a southbound shared
through/second right-turn
lane; and 61 August
Convert the southbound shared left-turn/through lane to a
second left-
turn lane.5.12-3 The project proponent shall construct a traffic signal
at the project driveway located on
Santiago Canyon Road,Potential Impact: Project Access. The Project would have
a significant impact if it substantially increases hazards due to
a design feature,Findings: The City hereby makes Finding 1 that 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 Findings: The proposed Project includes
two access points,one off Mabury Avenue and one off Santiago Canyon Road.
Both access points will act as unrestricted driveways. Traffie: entering and exiting
the Project access off Mabury A venue is minimal and therefore the access point
is expected to operate at an acceptable level of service, The Project access
off Santiago Canyon Road was analyzed as a one-way
stop-controlled intersection, however, the volume exiting the Project during the AM peak hour
is high enough to warrant signalization. The Project proposes a new
signalized intersection at the Project access to Santiago Canyon Road which is
also included as Mitigation Measure 5,12-3. No sight distance
issues were identified. With implementation of Mitigation Measures 5.12-2 and 5.
12-3, all Project impacts related to
access would be reduced to Less Than Significant.Potential Impact:
Inadequate Emergency Access. A project would have a significant impact on traffic
if
it created a situation of inadequate emergency access,Finding: The City hereby
makes Finding 1 and determines that this potentially significant impact is
Less Than Significant by the implementation of project design features that
are incorporated into the proposed
Project. No mitigation measures were required or recommended.Facts in Support of Finding: Two
ingress and egress points are planned to be provided to the
development area south of Santiago Creek. One emergency access point is planned off of
the most southwesterly cuI de sac adjacent to Santiago Canyon Road, and a second
is planned off of the most southeasterly cuI de sac adjacent to Santiago Canyon Road. Both
are planned to be 20 feet in width and would be gated and
improved with turf block. The emergency access points have been planned to comply with
the requirements of the City of Orange Fire Department,. Consequently, the
Project has
a Less Than Significant
impact on emergency access,
Finding: Conflict with Adopted Policies, Plans or Program Supporting
Alternative Transportation. The Project would have a significant impact on
traffic and circulation if it presented a conflict with adopted plans supporting
alternative transportation.
Finding: The City hereby makes Finding 1 and determines that this potentially
significant impact is Less Than Significant by compliance with standard
conditions of approval that are incorporated and made a condition of the Project
No mitigation measures were required or recommended.
Facts in Support of Finding: The Orange County Transit Authority (OCTA)
provides fixed route bus transit service in the vicinity of the Project. Buildout of
the Project may create the need for a bus stop on Santiago Canyon Road near the
Project site. The City and Project proponent will provide the OCTA with
preliminary project design plans, when available, so that OCTA may provide
specific recommendations regarding the location of any bus transit amenities.
Compliance with this standard condition will result in Less Than Significant
impacts on alternative transportation programs.
Potential Impact: Construction-Related Traffic. Construction related
traffic was assessed to determine if it would have a significant
impact.Finding: The City hereby makes Finding 1 that 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 majority of construction traffic would
access the site primarily from Santiago Canyon Road. Construction traffic
for development of the area north of the Santiago Creek would utilize
Yellowstone Boulevard. The addition of construction traffic during both the grading
operation and the final construction phases would have a Less Than Significant impact
on all roadway segments in the Project vicinity, Construction traffic would have
a potentially significant impact on the Santiago Canyon Road/Cannon
Street intersection in month 36. Although the addition of construction traffic
would account for only 3% to 4% of the increase in AM and PM peak hour
trips,without mitigation this contribution would be considered
significant.Consequently, in order to ensure that the Project mitigates its impact on
this intersection, Mitigation Measures 5.12-1 and 5.12-2 will be
required to be implemented in Month 18 of the proposed Project. With this
timing provision, all impacts related to construction traffic will be
Less Than Significant.Construction activity on the area north of Santiago
Creek would utilize Yellowstone Boulevard to access and exit the site. With the
reduction in soil import for the area north of the Creek, the Proj ect is
expected to generate approximately 347 truck trips over an estimated 4 week period
to construct the erosion protection improvements along the north side of
Santiago Creek. Because Yellowstone Boulevard may not have been constructed
to standards appropriate 63
August 12, 2003 revised
for truck traffic, the construction truck trips may result in the need for street
repairs to Yellowstone, This potential impact can be mitigated to Less Than
Significant with implementation of the following mitigation measure.
5.13-4 The project applicant shall work with the City's Public Works
Department to determine the wear and tear that construction vehicle trips will create
on Yellowstone Boulevard. An amount of money determined by the
Public Works Department shall be deposited with the City in a trust account.
The money will be used to make any necessary repairs to
Yellowstone Boulevard after the project has been constructed and street wear and
tear has been
analyzed,VI. FINDINGS REGARDING
ALTERNATIVES A.
Introduction The Final EIR identified seven alternatives as
follows:I) No Project Alternative: Continuation of Existing
Uses 2) No Project Alternative: Development According to Existing
Plans 3) Elimination of Local Park and Increased Residential
Development 4) Residential Cluster Alternative A: No Development North of
Santiago Creek and Increased Density South of Santiago
Creek 5) Residential Cluster Alternative B: No Development North of
Santiago Creek and Development Relocated to South of Santiago Canyon
Road 6) Enhanced Open Space
Alternative 7) ISO-Lot Alternative with
6-Acre Park S)
Equestrian Stable Alternative The City has determined that the alternatives considered in the Final
EIR constitute a range of reasonable alternatives as required by CEQA (Guidelines Section
15126(d), Other potential alternatives were considered but rejected because they would not
avoid or substantially lessen the significant effects of the Project. As a result of the City Council's
review of the environmental documentation, consideration of public testimony presented at
the public hearings on the Project, and review of all evidence in the administrative record, the
City Council approved the
Equestrian Stable Alternative.64
August 12,2003 revised
B. Findings
The City's findings and facts in support of findings with respect to each of the
alternatives considered are provided below:
Jl. No Proiect Alternative - Continuation or Existinl! Uses,pescription:
This Alternative considered the effects of the Project site remaining in its existing
state with a continuation of current uses, including concrete recycling, heavy equipment storage,
a mulch production and firewood storage area, and limited agricultural activities, (It should
be noted that the City is currently reviewing the concrete recycling operations and the ability
of the operator to continue operation of this facility under current zoning requirements.This
alternative assumes either a continuation of existing uses, or uses which are may be carried out
consistent with the current Sand and Gravel Extraction zoning for the property.)nvironmental
Effects: This Alternative would have less environmental effects as compared
to the Project with respect to Geology, Soils and Traffic. This Alternative would have greater
environmental effects than the Project with respe:ct to Aesthetics, Hazards and Hazardous Materials,
Land Use, and Public Services and Utilities. This Alternative would have effects similar
to the Project with respect to Air Quality and Noise. Both this Alternative and the Project would
have effects on Biological Resources and Cultural Resources, however, the Project provides
for the mitigation of these effects through the monitoring of grading activities to address
the discovery of potential cultural resources and the protection of the riparian corridor and
Creek area through open space dedications and setbacks. This Alternative would not eliminate
any of the significant unavoidable adverse environmental effects of the proposed Project.
bility
to Achieve Proiect Obiectives: This Alternative would not meet any of the Project objectives,
nor would it be consistent with the long-range goals of the City of Orange General
Plan.
Feasibility: This Alternative is considered to be feasible.
Finding: This Alternative fails to achieve any of the Project objectives, In addition, this
alternative would not address the City's General Plan objectives, Moreover, as the area around
the project continues to be developed for residential uses, retaining uses that are consistent with
Sand and Gravel Extraction zoning would not promote land use compatibility as compared to the
proposed Project. Finally, the continuation of existing uses would not provide for greater public
access to the Creek but would allow the property owner to keep the site private. Consequently,
the City considers this Alternative less desirable as compared to the proposed Project even
though feasible. The City finds that the proposed Project is preferred over this Alternative.
2. ;N'o Proiect Alternative - Development in Accordance with Existinl! Plans,Description:
This Alternative considered the development of the Project site in accordance
with the existing General Plan designations for the site. The major portion of the site is
designated RA, Resource Area, in the General Pl,Ul and is zoned S-G, Sand and Gravel
Extraction. The 8.2 acre portion of the site north of S,mtiago Creek along Mabury Avenue is
65 August 12, 2003
revised 9/23/03)
designated LDR, Low Density Residential, in the General Plan and is zoned RI-8. The
General Plan recognizes that resource extraction and agricultural uses are temporary uses that
will eventually be replaced by other uses. Future uses must be compatible with existing and
planned uses in the surrounding area. This Alternative assumes that the concrete recycling activities
and agricultural operations would continue indefinitely on the Project site. The portion of the
Project site north of the Creek was assumed to be developable with 25 residential units, Two area
plans also address the Project site, The East Orange General Plan and the Orange Park Acres
Plan designate the Site as a combination of "open space" and "green belt", including equestrian
and recreational trails, No funding source for the acquisition of the Project site has been
identified and therefore the implementation of the area plans was considered to be infeasible and was
not considered as part of this
Alternative.j~nvironmental Effects: This alternative would result in similar or greater
environmental effects with respect to most of the environmental effects of the proposed Project. Depending
on the degree of development, this Alternative could have greater adverse impacts on
Biological Resources, Cultural Resources, Population and Housing, and Public Services. This
Alternative would not eliminate any of the significant unavoidablt: adverse environmental effects of
the proposed Project. This Alternative would generate many of the same environmental effects
with respect to construction traffic, air quality, noise and aesthetics impacts as the proposed
Project with respect to the development area north of the Santiago Creek. This alternative
would generate incrementally more long-term trips and air ,emissions from the
additional houses proposed north of Santiago Creek as compared to the
proposedProject.A.bilitv to Achieve Proiect Obiectives: This alternative would further some of
the Project Objectives relating to housing by the development of residential units north of
Santiago Creek.The ability to improve Santiago Creek and the enhancement of biological
resources and recreational opportunities afforded by the proposed Project, however, are not likely
to be achieved under this Alternative due to the questionable feasibility of
this Alternative.feasibilitv: The continuation of the existing uses and the residential
development north of Santiago Creek are considered to be feasible. In order to develop the passive
and active recreation areas south of the Creek that are contemplated under the East Orange
General Plan and Orange Park Acres Plan, however, a public agency would have to acquire this portion
of the Project site. No funding source has been identified for such an acquisition and the
feasibility of such an acquisition is considered to
be questionable.Finding: This alternative would accomplish some of the Project Objectives,
but would not avoid or substantially reduce significant Project impacts, as air emission
impactswould contin\ll~ to be generated by the continuation of existing uses and the development of
the area north of Santiago Creek, and both would still permit activity in the vicinity of the Creek
that may contribute to cumulative impacts. The overall opportunity to provide recreation and
open space amenities would also be uncertain given the lack of an identified funding source
for the acquisition of the land and the construction of the improvements. The City, therefore,
finds that the proposed Project is preferred over
this Alternative.66 August
12, 2003 revised 9/
3. Elimination of Local Park and Increased Residential Development
pescription: This Alternative would eliminate the approximately 6-acre local park
site for the Project and increase the nwnber of homes from the Project's 183 proposed homes
to approximately 195
homes,nvironmental Effects: This Alternative would result in negligible differences in
most impacts associated with the proposed Project with the exception ofresulting in greater Land
Use and Public Service impacts, The elimination of the park would not satisfy the goals of
the Orange Master Plan for Park Facilities, Recreation and Community Services and
would exacerbate an existing deficiency in park areas in the City, This alternative would also
have greater impacts on the City's ability to provide recreational services even though the
Project would still be required to pay in lieu fees for park purposes. The amount of permeable
area,however, would be reduced which could result in additional impacts related to surface
drainage,The number of vehicle trips per day would be reduced by 60 trips under this Alternative.
This Alternative would not eliminate any of the significant unavoidable adverse environmental
effects of the proposed
Project.j\bilitv to Achieve Proiect Obiectives: This alternative would fulfill all of the
Project Objectives but would not meet the goals of the City's Master Plan for Park Facilities,
Recreation and Community Services, and would aggravate an existing deficiency in available public
park
space.Feasibilitv: This Alternative is considered to be
feasible,Finding: Because this Alternative would not accomplish the goals of the City's
Master Plan for Park Facilities, Recreation and Community Services, and would aggravate an
existing deficiency in available public park space, and because this Alternative would not reduce
or eliminate any of the environmental effects of the Project, the City finds that the proposed
Project is prefelTed over this
Alternative.4. Residential Cluster Alternative A: No Development North of Santiago
Creek and ID<:reased Density South of Santiago
Creek Description: This Alternative would maintain the 183 dwelling unit total proposed
for the Project, but would increase the amount of open space by clustering development south
of Santiago Creek. The average size of the lots would continue to be a mixture of 6,000 to 8,
000 square feet. No development would occur north of Santiago
Creek.Environmental Effects: This Alternative would have similar environmental effects as
the Project, except that less impacts would occur relative to the Mabury Ranch
neighborhood,although such impacts were not considered to be significant. No grading for development
would occur north of Santiago Creek, although construction of the revetment wall for erosion
control purposes would still be required on the north side of the Creek in order to satisfy
the requirements of the Orange County Flood Control District. The amount of
construction-related traffic accessing the Project site would be limited to just the trucks and equipment
needed to construct the revetment wall and bridge. This Alternative would have similar
landuse compat:ibility impacts as the Project in that it would not provide a transition between
the smaller 67 August
12,2003 trevised 9/
8,000 square foot lots and the adjacent Reserve development and would include 6,000 square
foot lots. This Alternative would not eliminate any of the significant unavoidable adverse
environmental effects of the proposed Proj ect.
I.bilitv to Achieve Proiect Objectives: This Alternative would achieve most Project
Objectives. It would not accomplish the Project Objective of providing a transition from the
adjoining half-acre project and the smaller lots proposed to be developed within the
Project.Feasibilitv: This Alternative is considered to be
feasible.Finding: Because this Alternative would have similar effects to the proposed Project,
but would not reduce any of the unavoidable impacts of the Project and would result in more
intense development south of the Creek and limit the ability of the property owner to develop
property zoned lor residential uses, the City finds that the proposed Project is preferred over
this
Alternative.5. Residential Cluster Alternative B: No Development North of Santiago
Creek and Development Relocated to South of Santiago Cauyon
Road pescription: This Alternative would result in approximately 17 dwelling units
being relocated from the area north of Santiago Creek to the 7.4 acre site south of Santiago
Canyon Road. Density on the7.4 acre site would be approximately2.4 units to the acre. An
existing equestrian facility would be
eliminated,Environmental Effects: This Alternative would result in greater land use
compatibility impacts than the proposed Project because it would eliminate an existing equestrian facility
on the7.4 acre site and replace it with residential units at a greater density than the
surrounding Orange Park Acres community that is generally developed with one acre lots. This
Alternative may have greater Aesthetic impacts because views of the7.4 acre site would change from
the public: vantage points along Santiago Canyon Road. Traffic impacts would also be greater due
to the need for additional ingress and egress along Santiago Canyon Road, but traffic through
the Mabury Ranch neighborhood would be eliminated, This Alternative would not eliminate any
of the significant unavoidable adverse environmental effects of the proposed
Project.Abilitv to Achieve Proiect Objectives: This Alternative would create greater land
use compatibility impacts than the proposed Project. This Alternative would otherwise meet most
of the Project
Objectives.Feasibilitv: This Alternative is considered to be
feasible.Finding: Although this Alternative would meet most of the Project Objectives, it
would not would reduce or eliminate any of the significant unavoidable impacts. Because
this Alternative would cause land use compatibility issues with adjoining residences and
would eliminate an existing equestrian facility, the City finds that the proposed Project is preferred
over this
Alternative.68 August 12,
2003 revised 9/23/
Ii. Enhanced Open Space Alternative
Description: The Original Project proposed a 3.6 acre public park. This Alternative
which was included in the Draft EIR on the Original Project analyzed an alternative that
increased the size of the park to 4 acres. Four residential units would be eliminated. Access to
the new park/recreation site would be from Santiago Canyon Road at the terminus of the cul-
de-sac designated as "E" Street on the proposed tract map. Access for future residents of the
Project would be limited to non-vehicular access from private streets within the
Project. The improvement to the new park/recreation site would be those typically associated
with a neighborhood park. It is assumed that the City would improve the new park/
recreation facility.This Alternative also includes two additional recreational trails crossing Santiago
Creek. One trail would be a bicycle trail along the south side of Santiago Creek and connecting to
the bridge crossing at Cannon Street. The other trail would be a multi-purpose trail
across Santiago Creek connecting with the existing equestrian trail bordering the Creekside development
on the north side 0
f the Creek.After circulation of the Draft EIR, revisions were made to the
Original Project which increased the size of the public park site from 3.6 acres to 6 acres, and also
incorporated a bridge over Santiago Creek in a different location to provide a linkage to the
existing multi-purpose trail on the north side of the Creek. The environmental effects described in
the following section for this Alt,ernative were considered by the City in the Additional Analysis
document and the need for additional mitigation was
incorporated into the Project Environmental Effects: This Alternative would have similar
environmental effects to the Original Project with the exception of Biological Resources, Land
Use and recreational facilities.The potential Biological Resources impact would be greater than the Original
Project in that the proposed trail crossing over the Santiago Creek would result in additional
impacts to the Creek and riparian habitat, and result in greater human activity in the Creek area
as compared to the Original Project. Additional mitigation measures would be required in
order to reduce these impacts to less than significant levels. The larger park site would be consistent
with the City's minimum standard for neighborhood parks. The larger site would
also afford greater flexibility in the range and type of recreational facilities. The additional trails
would also be consistent with the concepts in the City's Bikeways Master Plan and the
Recreational Trails Master Plan.The construction of a trail across Santiago Creek, however, would result
in increased human and animal traffic across the Creek and along the north side of the Creek.
This Alternative would not eliminalte any of the significant unavoidable adverse environmental
effects
of the Original Project.Abilitv to Achieve Proiect Objectives: This Altemative would achieve
most of the Project Objectives. The inclusion of additional trails and recreational facilities
would also further the goals and objectives of the City with respect to the provision of
additional park and recreation facilities and is considered to be the most consistent alternative with respect
to land
use and planning policy.Feasibility: This alternative is considered to be feasible, although
no funding source has been identified for the improvement of the
new park/recreation site.
69 August 12,2003
As noted above, after circulation of the Draft EIR, modifications were made to the
Original Project to increase the size of the park site from 3.6 acres to 6 acres and to include a
trail crossing over Santiago Creek. In addition, the project proponent, Fieldstone Communities,
has agreed to provide funding for the park improvements through a community facilities district
so that the feasibility considerations identified above have been addressed by the Project.
finding: Although this Alternative would meet most of the Project Objectives, the
impacts on Biological Resources associated with this Alternative are greater than the Original
Project. As a result of modifications made by the project proponent to the Original Project, the
features described in this alternative have been incorporated into the Project. The Project now
proposes a larger (6 acre) park site than the Original Project's 3.6 acre site, and also includes a
trail crossing over Santiago Creek. The additional impacts that would result from these
modifications were analyzed in the Additional Analysis document and additional mitigation
measures to reduce these impacts to Less Than Significant have been identified. Because the
Project now includes a larger park site, and greater open space and recreational opportunities,
including trail connections to the existing trail north of the Creek, a loop trail around the park,
and a private equestrian facility, the City finds that the Project is preferred over this Alternative.
7. 180-Lot with 6-Acre
Park Alternative Description: This Alternative would differ from the Project by the elimination of
the 2-acre private equestrian facility in the south east corner of the project site and the
inclusion of nine 20,000 square foot lots along the eastern boundary. The size of these nine lots
would permit the owners of those lots to maintain horses on their property. The total number
of residential units would be 180, The area north of Santiago Creek is proposed for development
of 17 residential units on 8,000 square feet lots. A total of 163 homes are proposed south
ofthe Creek,with 82 units developed to the east of the project entry on 8,000 square foot minimum
lot sizes and 72 units developed west of the project entry on 6,000 square foot minimum lot
sizes. Except for thesl~ changes the components of this alternative would be the same as the
proposed Project.Environmental Effects: This Alternative would result in similar impact to
the proposed Project. Because this alternative does not include a stable, it has the potential to
have less impacts associated with stable operations, such as operational air quality,
biological resources,water quality, noise and traffic. However, this Alternative would still allow nine
homeowners to keep horses on their property. The keeping of horses by private homeowner would
not be managed, nor regulated by the homeowners' association as the private equestrian
facility, and therefore, there would be less ability to address odors, noise associated with the
private stables,and potential water quality impacts from runoff under this Alternative as compared
to the proposed Project. This Alternative would not eliminate any of the
significant unavoidable adverse environmental effects of the
proposed Project.Abilitv to Achieve Proiect Obiectives: This Alternative meets the
Project Objectives.Feasibilitv: This Alternative is considered to
be feasible.Finding: Although this Alternative would meet the Project Objectives, it
would not would reduce or eliminate any of the significant unavoidable impacts. Because
this Alternative 70 August
12, 2003revised 9/
would only allow a maximum of nine homeowners in the proposed development the ability to
stable horses on their property, the City determined that it does not meet the goals of maintaining
and promoting the equestrian nature of the Orange Park Acres community as well as the
proposed Project. The ability for more homeowners, other than the nine who purchase the
20,000 square feet lots, to maintain horses at the private equestrian facility proposed by the
Project was considered more desirable from a land use planning and community compatibility
perspective, Therefore, the City finds that the proposed Project is preferred over this Alternative,
C. Environmentally Snperior Alternative
None of the Alternatives can be considered to be environmentally superior to the
proposed Project. All of the Alternatives considered would have similar or greater
environmental impacts than the Project. None of the Alternatives would eliminate any of the
signific.mt unavoidable adverse environmental effects ofthe proposed Project.
VII. STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
A. Introduction
The City is the Lead Agency under CEQA for preparation, review and certification of the
Final ElR for the Sully Miller Fieldstone Communities Project. As the Lead Agency, the City is
also responsible for determining the potential environmental impacts of the proposed action and
which of those impacts are significant, and which can be mitigated through imposition of
mitigation measures to avoid or minimize those impacts to a level of less than significant.
CEQA then requires the Lead Agency to balance the benefits of a proposed action against its
signific:mt unavoidable adverse environmental impacts in determining whether or not to approve
the proposed Project. In making this determination the City is guided by CEQA Guidelines
Section 15093 which provides as follows:
a) CEQA requires the decision-making agency to balance, as applicable,
the economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits of a
proposed Project against its unavoidable environmental risks when
determining whether to approve the Project. If the specific economic, legal,
social,technological, or other benefits of a proposal (sic) Project outweigh
the unavoidable adverse environmental effects, the adverse
environmental effects may be considered "
acceptable."b) When the lead agency approves a project which will result in
the occurrence of significant effects which are identified in the final EIR
but are not avoided or substantially lessened, the agency shall state in
writing the specific reasons to support its action based on the final EIR and/
or other information in the record. The statement of
overriding considerations shall be supported by substantial evidence in the
record,c) If an agency makes a statement of overriding considerations, the
statement should be included in the record of the project approval and should
be mentioned in the notice of determination. This statement does
not 71 August 12,
2003 revised 9/23/
substitute for, and shall be in addition to, findings required pursuant to
Section 15091.
In addition, Public Resources Code Section 2l08l(b) requires that where a public agency
finds that specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, including
considerations for the provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make
infeasible the mitigation measures or alternatives identified in an EIR and thereby leave
significant unavoidable effects, the public agency must also find that overriding economic, legal,
social, technological, or other benefits of the project outweigh the significant effects of the
projec.t.
Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 2l08l(b) and the State CEQA 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 these 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 for the reasons discussed in the Findings and Facts in Support
of Findings.
The City Council of the City of Orange, acting as Lead Agency, and having reviewed the
Final EIR for the Sully-Miller/Fieldstone Communities project, and reviewed all
written materials within the City's public record and heard all oral testimony presented at
public hearings, adopts this Statement of Overriding Considerations, which has balanced the benefits
of the Project against its significant unavoidable adverse environmental impacts in reaching
its decision to approve the Proj
eel.B. Significant Unavoidable Adverse Environmental
Impacts Although most potential Project impacts have been substantially avoided or mitigated,
as describ,~d in the Findings and Facts in Support of Findings, there remain some Project
impacts for which complete mitigation is not feasible, For some impacts, mitigation measures
were identifi,~d and adopted by the Lead Agency, however, even with implementation of the
measures,the City finds that the impact cannot be reduced to a level of less than significant. For
other impacts, no feasible mitigation measures were identified and no feasible alternatives
were identifi,~d that would avoid or minimize these impacts. The impacts are described below
and were also addressed in the
Findings.The Final EIR identified the following unavoidable adverse impacts of the
proposed
Project:Construction Air Quality Impacts. Implementation of the mitigation
measures identified to address construction air quality impacts can reduce the
potential impacts of PMlO and hazardous materials to less than significant levels. All
other emissions would be reduced to the extent reasonably feasible, but NOx
emissions associated with the use of construction equipment and vehicles as well as
ROGs from the application of surface coatings would be expected to remain
significant during construction, Because there are no feasible means, including
the 72 August 12,
2003 revised 9/23/
consideration of alternatives, to reduce aU air quality impacts generated during
construction to less than significant levels, this impact is anticipated to remain
significant.
Flooding Resulting from the Failure of the Villa Park Dam. In the event of an
earthquake induced dam failure, portions of the Project site are located within the
Villa Park Dam and Santiago Reservoir Dam inundation areas. Although the
Project proposes an extensive system of bank stabilization structures to minimize
the potential for flooding and erosion along the Santiago Creek channel, no
feasible measures have been identified to protect the Proj ect site and significant
portions of the City in the event of a seismically induced catastrophic dam failure
upstream, Because of the lack of feasible mitigation measure and alternatives,
this impacts is anticipated to remain significant.
The Project, when considered together with other related projects (including past, present
and probable future projects) was also determined to have the following significant cumulative
impacts:
Cumulative Impacts Related to Air Quality. Site construction activities, as
discussed previously, will result in significant impacts as a result of NOx and
ROG emissions. These emissions also add to the cumulative air quality impact for
short-term activities. In addition, implementation of the Project together
with other related projects will result in a significant cumulative impact on
long-term air quality which cannot be mitigated to a level of less than significant
even after implementation of all identified
mitigation measures,Cumulative Impacts Related to Biological Resources/Sensitive
Species. The Project may result in indirect impacts due to siltation, runoff, noise
and human disturbance on sensitive species occupying Santiago Creek, such as
the arroyo southwestern toad, western spadefoot toad and southwestern pond turtle,
all of which have a low potential to occur in Santiago Creek, and the
yellow warbler and yellow-breasted chat. Consequently, the Project
contributes incrementally to potentially significant cumulative indirect impacts on sensitive species
on a local and regional basis, Although mitigation measures have been
identified that will assist in mitigating these cumulative impacts to the extent
possible, impacts to sensitive species along the Creek are considered reduced,
but will remain potentially
significant and adverse.
C Overriding Considerations 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.73
August 12, 2003 revised
1. Provision of 40 Acres of Public Open Space. The Project provides
approximately 40 acres of public open space along and adjacent to the alignment of the
Santiago Creek as it flows through the property, With the entire Project site consisting of
approximately 110 acres, the Project proposes to retain over one-third of the Project
site as public open space. The Project is designed to avoid all impacts to the
federal jurisdictional waters of the United States and wetlands within the Creek, and
minimizes impacts to the riparian habitat areas along the Creek. The Project has set aside the
entire Creek alignment as well as open space areas along both sides of the Creek for open
space purposes that will be accessible to the public and used for recreational purposes by
the construction of new trails. This open space area continues the concept of a greenbelt
area along the alignment of the Creek through the Project
site,2, New Trail Alil!nments and Connections. The Project proposes
the construction of four public trails. The Project would extend an existing trail
that currently stops at the boundary of The Reserve along the entire length of the
property along Santiago Canyon Road. When constructed, this trail will provide a
complete loop" system that will run along Santiago Canyon Road, extend into the project
site along the 6-acre park site, connect to the new trail provided by the project along
the south side of Santiago Creek, and then proceed either north over Santiago Creek via
the new bridge (see below) or proceed south through the project back to connect with
the trail along Santiago Canyon Road. The Project also proposes to implement a portion
of the multi-purpose trail segment shown on the City's Recreational Trails
Master Plan by providing a north-south connection between the Santiago Canyon
Road trail, the new r,ecreational trail running along the south side of the Creek, and the
existing trail that runs along Mabury Avenue. The completion of the north-south link
shown in the City's Recreational Trails Master Plan will be accomplished
through the construction of a permanent bridge structure to accommodate a
multi-purpose trail crossing over Santiago Creek. The Project proposes to construct two trails
along the south side of Santiago Creek, a multi-purpose trail that is shown on the
City's Bikeways Master Plan, and a r,ecreational trail that will run along the entire
length of the Creek through the Project.The multi-purpose trail on the south side of the
Creek has also been designed to provide a connection into Santiago Oaks
Regional Park. (The existing trail along Mabury Avenue already provides a connection into Santiago Oaks
Regional
Park on the north side of the Creek.)Additionally, the Project
proposes a new at-grade crossing at Santiago Canyon Road to provide safer access than
what exists today for horses and riders to cross Santiago Canyon Road and
access the new recreational trails on the Projectsite.Finally, the Project proposes to dedicate
a 0.4 acre area located in the southeast corner of the Project site to
permit the future construction by others of
an equestrian undercrossing or overcrossing across Santiago Canyon Road,3. Dedication
of 7.6 acres of Residential-Zoned Property. When the
Project was originally proposed in 1999, Fieldstone Communities proposed development of an approximately 7.6 acre parcel
on the south side
of Santiago Canyon Road
1 acre homes on 4.0 acres of the parcel, and retaining the existing 3,0 acre equestrian
facility on the remainder of the site. This parcel is zoned residential for I acre lots. A
total of seven homes could be constructed on this parceL Since its original submittal, the
Project proponent has offered to dedicate the 7.6 acre to Orange Park Acres so that the
xisting equestrian facility can be retained, and possibly expanded, It is contemplated
that the 7,6 acre parcel will continue to be used by the Orange Park Acres community for
equestrian and community uses.
4. Redevelopment of the Proiect Site and Remediation of a former Sand
and Gravel Extraction Site. The Project will provide for the remediation of a site that
has been historically used for sand and gravel extraction and processing, and
redevelopment of the site with residential and recreational uses that are compatible with
surrounding areas and provide new recreational amenities to City residents. The Project
site was formerly used for sand and gravel mining, including two hot-mix asphalt
plants,and related operations. More recently, the Project site is used for limited
aggregate processing operations, concrete recycling, and other associated industrial uses. Since
the initiation of sand and gravel mining operations over 50 years ago, the areas
surrounding the Proj ect site has been developed primarily for residential uses and the
industrial operations are not compatible with the adjacent residential uses, The sand and
gravel operations were also much more impacting on the Creek habitat as evidenced by
the presence of industrial debris in and along the Creek. The proposed Project will result
in the redevelopment of this former industrial site, restoration of Creek habitat
and dedication of 40 acres including the Creek for public open space purposes,
and development of uses more compatible with and consistent with the surrounding
area.5. Intersection Improvements to Santial!o Canyon Road. The
Project will provide a new traffic signal at Santiago Canyon Road and the Project entry that
will provide circulation benefits to vehicles using side streets such as Jamestown
Way wishing to access Santiago Canyon
Road.6. Santial!o Creek Erosion Protection Improvements. Currently,
the section of the Santiago Creek located on the Project site is within the jurisdiction of
the City of Orange, and under private ownership. hnplementation of the Project will
provide for the future ownership of the Creek by the County of Orange, thus providing
public ownership and control of the Santiago Creek for the entire length from Santiago
Regional Park, through the Project site, to the County-owned facilities west of the Project
site. The Project also provides erosion protection improvements along the entire length
of the Creek that runs through the Project site on both the north and south banks of
the Creek.The Project will remediate and replace the existing rip-rap that was
placed by the developer of the Mabury area but which was never properly engineered
or constructed to City or County standards. In addition, the erosion protection
improvements along the Gorth side of the Creek will provide protection from Creek erosion for
Mabury Road and the
Mabury residential area.7. Six Acre Public Park Dedication and Fundinl!.
The Project will dedicate to the City a 6-acre public park site in the southwest section
of the Project site,
75 August 12,2003
adjacent to Santiago Canyon Road and the closed Villa Park landfill for a park site. The
size and location of this 6-acre site will allow the City, once it completes the design
and entitlement process for the park, to use the site for active park purposes to address
the needs of the City for additional park space to meet existing deficiencies in the City,
The 6-acre park exceeds the amount of parkland required by the City's
development standards by more than four acres. Additionally, the Project will provide funding
through a ommunity facilities district in an amount not to exceed $2.1 million
for
park improvements.76 August
12, 2003 revised 9/
WUBIIB
ERRATA
Revisions to Ihe Mlligalion Monilorlng Program For Ihe Sully-Miller/Fieldstone
Communilles Proleel, Dsled AU9U8112,
2003 The City has determined that a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) will not be needed for the
private equestrian steble to be eSlablished as part of the Sully-Miller/Fieldstone Communities Project
since the approval of the equestrian stable is at the discretion of the City's Community
Development Director.Three mitigation measure have been included in the Project's Mitigation Monnoring
Monitoring Progrem.dated August 12, 2003, that were to be considered as part of a CUP that was going to be
required to develop the equestrian stable. These measures will need to be revised since no CUP will need
to be approved for the project, Therefore, the following changes have been made 10
aesthetic mitigation measure No. 5.1'3, and air quality mitigation measures No, 5.2'9 and No. 5.2-10 in
Ihe Project Mitigalion Monitoring Program to delete the references
to a CUP,The mitigation measures to be revised are listed below, Language in the measures that is
to be removed has a strike mark through the language, Language added to the measure has a
double line placed under
the new langu8ge,Mitigation
No. 5.1-3 ll-Altcrr,at"c 11s 81'I'reveEl, tIhe project proponent shall prepare a landscape plan
and a lighting plan to be approved !9L~~....2LJgJt1~~~.-
5l~aDermit fOrJh~ eQlJestrian 19J.l:",a5iJart of the re~tliredConditional U,e Permit,- The lighting plan shall
control light spillage within the sile for the stable and limit lighting to thatnecessary for eRly-
security purpOses.2D3. The landscape plan B,hall provide enhanced screening along all
edges of the stable
facility.Mitigation No, 5,2-9 If Mcrnati,c q i~-6. Vector Control Plan shall be prepared for
the stable facility, and shall be incorporated tflI&reY~lfle-r"'t~
c Permit as a component of an operations plan ecinr lQ_\Ml'ill!.~Aan~lliJcj~
l~u.gu~!QilnJ~ler tile staele faeililyc-The plan shall include measures to minimize the potential for
rool rats and flies to be attracted to the facility, Measures to minimize
roof rat presence shall include keeping ~supplements in airtight. metal containers: and keeping vegetables and fruits (
such as carrots and apples) in metal wire mesh containers lined with a flexible wire impregnated fabric,
The wire mesh shall be suspended from a wall or ceiling to avoid contact with the ground.
The plan shall also require regular inspections and maintenance 01 the stable facility to seal all possible access points (
i.e., holes, no cracks greater than 2 inches). and repair of leaky faucets and irrigation lines
to minirrize the presence of standing water, Fly suppression moasures to be included in the
vector control plan shall include employing commercial fly spray system for stables. utitization of natural predators
such as wasps. and removal of manure from stables dally. and remove of manure from
storage facilrties a minimum
of once a week,Mitigation No, 5.2-10 ll-Allefflat,ve 1 is approved,
all-MOdor Control Plan shall be pleparedfor the 51a91e-~Mlfacitity,and shall be
inc8,-pa'ated ifl!&-feYiew-~~--BD.AJN.QY;!2raled intg)hJL~~f~~as a componenl
ofanoperat'onsplan ~Vh~ i~uanc~ ol.M'll p.\illi!iP~~bb\!lf~~!r@LtaSiliYl)or the (table
boilit;c-,The GQdor G~ontrol P~lan shall, at a minimum, include daily cleaning of
stalls to remove soiled hay and manure. and emptying of manure storage facilities and other wastes collected at
the stable facility a minimum of once a
week, or more frequently as necessary to maintain
DRAFT
MITIGATiON
MONITORING
PROGRAM FOR:
SULLY-
MILLER/
FIELDSTONE
COMMUNITIES SCH#
99101125 Prepared
lor:CITY OF
ORANGE
Conlact Christopher
Carnes,
AICP Senior
Planner Submitted
by:THE
PLANNING
CENTER
Contact:Raben p,
Rusby Director
01 Environmental
Services ELDSTONE/SULL Y
MILLER Attachment No,
11 MJ igation Measures for FEIR 1647,
00 dated August 12,
300 E. Chapman Avenue
Orange, CA 92866
714.744.7220
1580 Metro Drive
Costa Mesa, CA 92626
Phone: 714,966.9220
DRAFT
MITIGATION
MONITORING
PROGRAM FOR:
SULLY-
MILLER/
FIELDSTONE
COMMUNITIES SCH#
99101125 Prepared
for:CITY OF
ORANGE
Contact Christopher
Carnes,
AICP Senior
Planner Submitted
by:THE
PLANNING
CENTER
Contact:Robert P.
Rusby Director
of EnvlfonmenrnlSeN~
es FLD-
01.0E APRIL
Table of Contents
Section PaQe
1. LEGISLATIVE MANDATE ....................................,...,......................................................1-
1 2. PROGRAM MANAGEMENT ............................................................................................
2-1 2,1 ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES: PROJECT
MANAGER ",,,,,,,,,.,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,.,,,,,,2-1 2,2 MITIGATION MONITORING PLAN
PROGRAM DEFINITIONS""""."""""""".."""".".".2-1
3, ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS ............................. ...........................................................3-1 3.1
DESIGN PHASE/PLAN CHECK """". ,."",,,,,,.,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,.,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,3-
1 3.2 CONSTRUCTION PHASE .."."".,.... ",."."..,.".".."...."."'"."...".""..".".'""...,."..."".",,
3-1 3,3 OPERATIONAL PHASE.. """.".".""... '" """.."...".. .".. ."..."... ."".".". .".."."."." ",,,,,3-1 3.
4 REFINEMENT OR ADDITION OF
MITIGATION MEASURES."",,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,.3-2 4, MITIGATION MONITORING MATRIX ..............................................................................
4-1 5,
ATTACHMENT A: MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM REPORTING AND IMPLEMENTATION FORM .............................................................................................5-1 P\FLD-O! ,FEJRVlddllilill,,1 A'I<,.'J'".\AlfI-,\J"1I }(<l' P'''
Table of ContentJ
This page intentionally left blank.
P'\FU).O/\F!:/RI.A(Id,ll'illa/ AII'llp,,\Alil.,ll'J/! Jin' Pn./td /,mp''';' 042903,d,~-The
Planning Center - Page ii
1. Legislative Mandate
The California Environmental Quality Act requires public agencies to adopt mitigation monitoring or
reporting programs for all projects for which an environmental impact report or mitigated negativedeclarationhasbeenprepared. This is intended to ensure the implementation of all mitigation measures
adopted through the CEQA process.
The following is the full text of the legislation related to mitigation monitoring or reporting:
PRC 921081.6
a 1) The public agency shall adopt a reporting or monitoring program for the changes made to the
project or conditions of project approval, adopted in order to mitigate or avoid significanteffectsontheenvironment. The reporting or monitoring program shall be designed to ensure
compliance during project implementation. For those changes which have been required or
incorporated into the project at the request of a responsible agency or a public agencyhavingjurisdictionbylawovernaturafresourcesaffectedbytheproject, that agency shall, if
so requested by the fead agency or a responsible agency, prepare and submit a proposedreportingormonitoringprogram,
a2) The lead agency shall specify the location and custodian of the documents or other material
which constitute the record of proceedings upon which its decision is based.
b) A public agency shall provide that measures to mitigate or avoid significant effects on the
environment are fully enforceable through permit conditions, agreements, or other measures.
Conditions of project approval may be set forth in referenced documents which address requiredmitigationmeasuresor, in the case of the adoption of a plan, policy, regulation, or other publicproject, by incorporating the mitigation measures into the plan, policy, regulation, or projectdesign.
e) Prior to the close of the public review period for a draft environmental impact report or mitigatednegativedeclaration, a responsible agency, or a public agency having jurisdiction over natural
resources affected by the project, shall either submit to the lead agency complete and detailed
performance objectives for mitigation measures which would address the significant effects ontheenvironmentidentifiedbytheresponsibleagencyoragencyhavingjurisdictionovernatural
resources affected by the project, or refer the lead agency to appropriate, readily available
guidelines or reference documents, Any mitigation measures submitted to a lead agency by a
responsible agency or an agency having jurisdiction over natural resources affected by the
project shall be limited to measures which mitigate impacts to resources which are subject to the
statutory authority of, and definitions applicable to, that agency. Compliance or noncompliancebyaresponsibleagencyoragencyhavingjurisdictionovernaturalresourcesaffectedbya
project with that requirement shall not limit the authority of the responsible agency or agencyhavingjurisdictionovernaturalresourcesaffectedbyaproject. or the authority of the lead
agency, to approve, condition, or deny projects as provided by this division or any other provisionoflaw.
The program defined in this document is intended to satisfy the spirit and letter of this law,
P:\f;LD-OI"FI:'IR'y'lddlll"'I''/ .'iJl",\,,,',JlJII.Jlj,,,, Rev PP'I,..11i:ml!/"lt 042903../"The Plannt'ng Center. Page]-]
1. Legislati've ll,1andate
This page intentionally left blank.
The Planning Genter. Page]-2P__\FLD_(j1 \FElk'v1ddili'.'IIJ! ,1",'lJ'"_\i\11/_AI",, I\w p",;,,, l"'mpfaI~ ()4290J_J"
2. Program Management
The mitigation monitoring plan (MMP) for the Sully,Miller/Fieldstone Communities project will be in place
through all phases of the project. including design, construction, and operation. Enforcement of the
MMP will be the responsibility of a Project Manager from the City of Orange, under the direction of the
City of Orange's Director of Community Development.
2.1 ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES: PROJECT MANAGER
The designated Project Manager (PM) for the Lead Agency will be assigned to supervise the design,
construction, and operation of the project and is responsible for overall management of the MMP. The
PM is thoroughly familiar with the project and qualified to determine if an adopted measure is being
properly implemented or may draw upon other experts as needed. The PM oversees the MMP and
reviews the Reporting and Implementation (R & I) forms to ensure they are filled out correctly and proper
action is being taken on each measure. The PM and/or an assignee will also be responsible for the
filling and updating of the R & I forms during all phases of the project. The PM will determine the need
for a measure to be modified and ensure the use of a mitigation specialist if technical expertise beyond
the PM's is required. If it is found that an adopted mitigation measure is not being properly implemented,
the PM will require corrective actions to ensure adequate implementation. The responsibilities of the PM
include the following:
1. An MMP reporting form will be prepared for each potential significant impact and its
corresponding mitigation identified in the list of mitigation measures attached hereto,
2,Appropriate specialists will be retained, as needed, to monitor specific mitigation activities and
provide appropriate written approvals to the PM,
3.The PM and/or an assignee will approve, by signature and date, the completion of each action
item identified on the MMP reporting form,
4, All MMP reporting forms for an impact issue requiring no further monitoring will be signed off as
completed by the PM and/or an assignee at the bottom of the MMP reporting form,
5. Unanticipated circumstances may arise requiring the refinement or addition of mitigation
measures. The PM is responsible for approving any such refinements or additions. An MMP
reporting form will be completed by the PM and/or an assignee. The completed form will be
provided to the appropriate design. construction, or operational personnel.
6, The PM has the authority to stop the work of construction contractors if any aspect of the MMP is
not in compliance.
2.2 MITIGATION MONITORING PLAN PROGRAM DEFINITIONS
The MMP consists of key program elements. The definitions of these elements are summarized below,
Mitigation Monitoring Plan Files
Files are established to document and retain records of the MMP. The file organization is established by
the PM according to mitigation measures and project phases,
P.-\fLV-IJ!\fFIf{'.;I,MlIl",!,,1 Autdl"/I\Mih'\JIIII R",PI'IIWI Trmfrl,;Jc 1}.:j.!L)IJ; ./'.Tbe Planning Center- . Page 2-
2. Program Management
Reporting and Implementation Forms
R & I forms are designed to record the monitoring activity in a consistent manner with appropriate
approvals, The R & I form is placed in the MMP files. A copy of the form is included herein as
Attac:hmentA
Environmental Compliance Verification
At the completion of construction contracts that are part of the overall development of the project, a
verification of environmental compliance is executed by the PM, The verification concludes the
construction monitoring process for the contract.
P:\FLD-OIV-EJJ<\/ldd/ll"llu! A,,,,I)"I.\MJ/-/Il,,,, R.v Pru;.,[ 'li:mpfal< 04290J_dl~The Planning Center - Page 2~2
3. MitigationMonitoring Program Procedures
The policies and procedures for the Mitigation Monitoring Plan (MMP) described herein are intended to
provide focused, yet flexible, guidelines for monitoring the implementation of the mitigation measures
adopted by the City of Orange. The Mitigation Monitoring Matrix lists each mitigation measure adopted
for the proposed project, and each measure in the attachment is numbered. The matrix correlates each
measure, by its assigned number, to the specific phase of the project to which the measure applies. The
matrix also provides the Project Manager (PM) a verification of compliance for each mnigation measure
during each applicable phase of the project. The three project phases include design, construction, and
operation. A Reporting and Implementation (R & I) form (see Attachment A) is prepared for each
potential significant impact and its corresponding mitigation measure. After each measure is verified for
compliance during each phase, no further action is required for the specific phase. The PM shall initial
and date the measure on the Mitigation Monitoring Matrix,
It is recognized that the mitigation measures contained in this MMP may be modified through future
environmental review. Future environmental review after selection of a project site and completion of site
plans may necessitate such changes.
3.1 DESIGN PHASE/PLAN CHECK
The design/plan check phase includes preparation of engineering design, architectural design, and
construction drawings by project design engineers and architects.
During the design/plan check phase activities (e.g" final site engineering, street improvement design),
the measure(s) applicable to each design/plan check phase activity is identified by the PM and reviewed
with the design engineer, architect, or other responsible parties. The PM reviews design and
construction drawings and specifications to ensure all applicable adopted mnigation measures have
been incorporated into the project design. Review of specifications is particularly important to clarify
contractor responsibilities during construction. Comments on design documents are provided by the
PM to design engineers and architects, Upon completion, the activity is reviewed by the PM to
determine if the applicable mitigation(s) has been implemented. In the event the PM determines that
them is noncompliance with any of the mitigation measures to be implemented during the design/plan
check phase, corrective actions are required, and a follow. up review is conducted after the design
documents are modified in response to the PM's comments. The R & I forms are completed after each
activity.
3.2 CONSTRUCTION PHASE
Construction activities are monitored as often as conditions dictate, to ensure that required mitigation
measures are implemented, Construction mitigation activities are monitored by the PM, or an assignee.
The PM and construction contractors will meet monthly to identify mitigation measures that would be
applicable to construction activities scheduled for the month, and to review the monitoring activities of
the previous month. The PM coordinates with affected local' agencies to ensure applicable mitigation
measures are implemented.
3.3 OPERATIONAL PHASE
Once the project is completed and operating, the PM continues to monitor the facility to verify that the
adopted operational mitigation measures are implemented, The frequency of the monitoring is
determined by the PM, but monitoring and reporting shall occur at least annually. The PM is responsible
for ensuring correction of noncompliance situations throughout the operational phase of the project.
P\FLD-U/\FfJR\.AdJ;I;mu.:! AII"ly,i\\M11-.\I'lll RH' P"'I"/l",,pf,'/r 042903.dfiC The Planning Center - Page 3-]
3. MitigationMonitoring Program Procedures
3.4 REFINEMENT OR ADDITION OF MITIGATION MEASURES
During each phase, unanticipated circumstances may arise requiring the refinement or addition of
mijigation measures. The PM is responsible for recommending changes to the mitigation measures, if
needed. If mitigation measures are refined, the PM and/or assignee will complete an R & I form
documenting the change and will notify the construction contractor about the refined requirements,
P.-IFLD.lJ]',fI:'/I<\./ldd"""I../ A'"Jfy,i,IMII-,\j'J1lUrv PH!}'./ r~mljlal< 042'JO).d'A The Planning Center. Page 3-
4. Mitigation Monitoring Matrix
This section contains the Mitigation Monitoring Matrix for this project It will be used to maintain records
of compliance with the adopted mitigation.
P. IFI.V-li/\I-f-IRVlddUII!1/"t Auaipi.\/llil.AJt,1I R~v I'l'i"l I,m/,j.", rJ42')(J3.d,.The Planning
4. Mitigation Monitoring Matrix
This page intentionally left blank.
LV-()I\Ff./R\Addili~II"! tl'l<tt]';,IMir-.\j"" !hi' p,')!,-,I 'JrmfJi"l< n4J90j.d'J(The Planning Center - Page 4-2
m ____m
on
cO
z
r~
c
o
6
z
m
m
o
mm_
c,
3'5
o.~
o
g~
o3~~S~~3SSg~~~Qo~~38~g~~~m~:
g~~~~rog~~~~~~~g~~~ro3~3Q 5~~~-mE _~~U~o~ro_!roa~u~-.-Jo~mnz~O;<J~
J~~-3-~~~~
o F~~!2~~5~o~
3~:~n~2~~~r~~o~s g[~~g~~~i!~~:i~
ii~jgi~i:i;:om~_u~~m--~E=
u-C~om~-'m.~S!~8~;~~ilo~~a~!~~
nag3~~mm~J~oSiJ~-_.imQ3-&!
w~'~-J ai~ nB~;o-~n~i~~~~
3mm@-~nR~~i~~~~~~~Jg~~~
o~:~~~~~~~~~g~~mi~~
o~=~e~~~~~~Rmgn~Jci~
g~~o9gig~6~~~~e~~ ~5~.~5~~~~
2J3- --~~~36o~a~ n~Q~_
6 fr @ III g ~ g ~ (0
J ;: <II 3 ,-;:. :: '" ,,-0 ~I ~- [~: m oiii ! O~!!~m_____m_mm 00
c
I
rn J-~~~~ I
mo 'T10GlJJ
ffi~
ffi:
riOM
jc:: ::!
c:IJ}>
G)z
5 t~
5~~m en
i~ gJ)
S Ul ~~
fl m !T1
m o
t:J ~o
o
o
ro
c "3;5
O~e!.o
ll>
c~
ll>~(
On@on~
wnn:
IJ{
J)i-
gi'
1gU*Q-
5:
gg~5.iiig~::l g~~~8~~~~~~~~~0__;
r_"'30!1__<:n_~~cn=.3Q<;;~O!
In!iig=_,;._
lt>lllglt>']lc ~ 3 ~<g
Iii gg ~ 3'$ g ~ g g'
2_.g<f!~~~~!!!",1il=.:g ~s!gs-~!!!.~~i-a~~ ~
3-'6.~,g~~ -;~o~ ~g~It>
6'~<D:T3
6.~;,Q m n-lQa..
g<Dll ",==,'" r.n0'" It> _ It> 0 ;!:
iii- ID 'g. 3J (,.
l g;.g~s1i!~1[ ~_
u;~'~ 0,B ~ ~2_~~; ~,~-g ~
g'2'Q~~ ::ffi~:) ,g E-
n ~~:C~jjl iljjl~
g [}3: ~ID~~~ ji1 ~n (")
ro ro 00:00:S
n ~) n <
0
ii:;!ii;?2
1t z~.0
o'
u___
u_o
0 1D5-
g'~~~g
gg,
g 0 n
8 .n
3 ~r
a
uq:~::
g.'
g ~
g,g,
s:
0
0
2
3
9
T g'~!~
gl~'
0
o'
il o' .
9
3
D :;
a D
k
in "m
c
c :s:
D ~,
0 ~
0;;.
r
m .:;n ~
m ~
D ~.
m '"
i5 ... :
s:
c
5 ... '"0
Z
Z ~.m "
0
n "Z
0 '"
en,
0 "
D
C :s:z
z
m ~DX
x
a:
t
W >!
z z
a:
0
0 z
t () 0
w >!
z z000 <
t w ;::
ii: ;;
Ii:
NW ...
W
jJ ;; ~
0 N
0
W
W
s!::
t:~Oa
2:
C
o
E
E
f
u
c
If
01-':.:: _
f~.
S!~4l~!~
g
g.~ X.EOO""
Wt: ~
o8
i2:
c
o
li
2
c
o
U
E
E
f
u
c
If
f--~- --",,-,---,
g''& 6 jji t:1I_=
g'5i-n
6 g.~
X.Ecn""'
U)I:.!l
oaC---,,----,------
w U
Qi
c
6-
ffi <t; ~.~
E l~ ~ Oi-e
0>2
q;~: ~~
i Iii jl!ci~ ~.~e
a;
g ~ 0 "O;o:g]!o <:~..C2:g<::~.;...OlU i ~.E-5~ Q~:1Q:C~
Ol~lg~ i~11~~iiw 6~ <{
u;:><tnEUlS:v;o
2~~ ~ N M e--- i=---~----, ---
2~o~ii.!l
o Q..o::: Q.EJP~
Ul
c gj
f--
c g'1----- ------,c
ci gz
g
e ~
g
II) ~ <
1\
III Q
S:
0
1'
ii
i 8
Q {i !ii '
0
11 Ol 0 c '"
ffi 1~ >-
g S: '" ~ ::!i C .
C
c;e 2,Q*
r~!i QOe:
O
g>.
s ~ :o..
uWOli7J
iBr _
0 ~illU!!!
ii~;;: g>~
2 g.
9*~Q;
w"'<Il;;:
a.ij~~
o-
O-5 E.::: <
U '" ffi ::
J 2 ~ ~.~-g~E8~
5 ns:
g:Err~gllc.~Jl-:
g tliR
Do;u
i:r 1
I 1I
I
I
n-
t-
L._Ii
i
i
1 , I j-=-;_~i,+_ ~
c ~ . 0 n .
9 '"
g <Il !
g
5 ~* a13 ~~
c ;;: c ;;:
C
Q) C
E 'J1E ~ E -S ~E", : ~ <
II ~ 0
S:01 E -
0"" ..a..:; ~ ~
I~ Q; -0 ffi
0 lij ",0 0-
c:..c C.e ;
1ii 3 2~ ~~ ~~C <11 '" ~ '" ~ 'iii.::'L~
E~~~~~g-o '"IE E E.
2 ~,"cr <
l> " n [J)
9- [J) ~ ~
c g~
c 8.~ Q)
I:;; w~ >-,!:::g~,!:::g gJi:n
I" g-:;; ~ E ~ g~ ~~
s:'~
J~_n 5, ~ ~6 .:: ~ -6 W ~2
a O i~~U 0
I~
1m a Do;u 0 5
m
1-
lij
E -'" I
2:~,~
I
ou
I
0 -<
J "
i:
l
s -
g ~
e<;;5 ~
i:l
c6i
u",;J "'~I m
Lu~u t ~ ~
I~ ~ ~
W IWW i3 3
3 w
w
w a:
U) a:
U)
a:oo
zt- zt-
zt-
Q:i Q~
Q~I-n..
t-IJ.. t-
IJ..i~s ~s ~ s 8~ !
Sg I::~b ~
It) Ilt) It)Do;
au E g
0 o m u
u 2.
r0 ,
w i 5 <
w ,
z' ,
aU
I g:~
z<
1
85 I
I~
I
t
t
i;
2
1'
I
I
It: ~
I i'
o~ _I
x w "
E ~
z _
o
z
00
w"
z
z o
0
t;
i=0"
W i=
0-W
0
W o! .
0c
W
Wi.:
f~~"~~
o
o. ~_ _ ~
0 ~ ~
E ~~~~~~~[~
j~~~~c~5g.~~o.~~.
0 .~~.~.
g'~om~~
z'>
3~
2.~5~~..
g~~~'~~
iw~~
o
0 ~~ ~
n ~ ~ g ~
8 ~
L ~ i m
He z'~.
N~
8."2.8.'~CO 2~~~~mg"~~~!~i5~~
c~~~~~
3 ;;![!:H~~~~~~~:~~:?~~~~~8
O~~~~O~<:'~
H~5g'
d~~
c ~~~~'~~~~~~'.~
a~~"~~~"&
g~
8L~"~~~~~~~~~
E'~.~;;~g . . "- ,,~ '
6 0 , c . · . .
Q. .. _
E _ ;; . . 0 d'."
I. > -" ~
E . 6. ,
0 ~ ~ . . ~ . ~ 0 ~G~
I"~.~'.~~~E~'
j;,,>;:~.
o O~'"<.
EEg~"'~E~..~c.:?z 5~
S[~~~=~
5~~8~~~~~~_
D"'O>
S'-
iiirrE<:
l:;:> ----
0
E <( :
l
0> __2:
o c
o o o
E E
3
a c g o.
O
c"
0
m
is.
o.
y
8
5
m
cp... "''
li
l:
g
0 =
I~~~~
I"'
E
tt~~
iU)
5~
c
o
2 coois.
g'
oS~ ~ fij
III
010
g
i::: ~
uC::
E
3
8.. -
00
iC1l ~01-':-11:.lli o;)::
EUlCI
g~
0O~I 4'05w3
w
go ~ ~g' ~ ~g: ~z<
O~
00 5~ ~+__
I~_
E IT ~
e. ~
o '"
c
o
0 i ~
1r
E
c;
s;
o
o
o
o
w
5w
zti
0<
t3~
g:~z<
o~00
o w5
w
1"
6~0
0,
E
jt:
J:
J
z<I:' -
I
c ..
0 ~ "
1ici " "
z '"
I ,
I
I
I
1
I I
I
I
1>"<:-"<:
0fU.p,.. ~~! ~~~~!.
I~
I;;
I;I!~ .~I ~~IIIJ,Oi-"
cG;:::.!!
I",c#~"'
OQO"
0l<
1l<
II
Ol<
l>'
tl_!
l!J~cS!"'
C\
l..
ot::
iti<
l> ';-;;;
uau8E I!;~
ID~ .~'~~'
I
0c .
2~. ~il. &~"Ob~J o~~I~~
ll~5~~~~
2~~
g~~~E 0 . "~
z ~, E ~ ~; ~ ~ 0 a;
ql 3~~'O~~~~~
i~"!~~~~~
l~ElEE ~
2",,~ g~IIEcc~
8~0i~~~~
G"<:"'_
tl ~ ~~ s ~ ~~ ~
nlE
or,
II:....J:I
8_~~:c_ --
fiE:03'c~0
7Q ....2
u
0
g~~ ~'8
l!!t;-iJ2::::;I>
Ql(lJ
rrnlU)o o
I<(~z=S
zoo
0&w
VJ ~tt~w UJww 5 ~ffi~@ U) ~
6wCl-
o<(~~_
1
i
o
g ~
oiii
I 2
x
ii'
w "
z
z ii'
0
0
z u
0 w "
z
z 00i0
w ;::iL ,.
ii'
w
uw
0
0
w
w
f--- ---,,---,--,c=.!
o/!
E
u
o 0gi
1----
1---------,
2:
I:
ll"c_
5 g.
E ~
g~~-
65 ~-".: ~0
0 2:I
B'i
o
o
u 1----
I
E5
aB
1=
i::
mU
1
c
111_ ..i ~~Sj~
I i u,
e
u u
i
o
I'
g~
t;
1j
1----
1-----
O/!
E
U
o
B o~
in
0
5 ~
2~
2~. ~ :
1~
a
II .iijc.;;;., -;;;:R!
2~.,5<1>~]j5~]!_B
i 61:
i~
s~2~~
j~~~&~~ftE61 E ~~~22l\!_!
illlc:~i5~,~~-g~g~~,g:e ~ ~ ~ ~::g ~ -
8~ E ~ ~-~ ~ :~,~,2]i ~1;i I ~;~~
i~~!ii~~~tiil~~~G~ooli;~=cUQl~.8"'a.3cn3:
0l-c 1-"'t'iUI-<
l1",,,,-:.!~cceC'.:..ooEo-EO g. i;;~~~
wl'
Cc-ti:>c~o...'!!Qg2~-l\i
g.s~R~e~~8gu~!2K~!~~~~~~ua.g> o~ ~-~f.l-~
iti~ojg ~ ~ ~2{!lE~'; Q>_~
rJ S~ lii:O;~ &<5:;'a; ~~ 5]! ~t;~~~::l i~a.
Ql~~~C,~~Ql~QlE-
EQlO~OQl Ql~O~~E~~~o~~~2itiE~"~g i~~Q~~~~~o~~~&-
E~
E~~~o g~o o
iio g'z f ~~::l~ ~~
c<;;._.
Q$
j.-
a.~
a._ <
1><0""<
1)
tiG;
Z;<ll-~
15 f)~i;l::<IlJ'~5~~~>-8_g,5~ Ql~ K~ ~ ~~ "'.e .~s~ S.
Jl8~~ ~~i.@~~~~<:CDrn~f/l "~<II~::> 0\>0;",,1:',50\> ....g',~=: CD:;;=: ~ ~-", OlO",06~~ ~O~~~5l~~lii[%:il~s:; CD "'"'<: ",Ol",-<= ~~3"'.~~~,EO"'.
a.
g.~@.":.~~~~o~ ~~ ~ -- ~il ';' tlll .": :;
0 -
a
8.! ~ ~ 2 ~ ~ ,~ ~ _~,~ ti ~ ~1~~~2.~
tl~1 .~li~~"'~~~",&CDCD~Om"'<ll~'",Eo<:..~ :1l...,;~
a.-gaa.~1!;..
EE2 CL<ll"
5f~
g'K:~2?~~
il~'~~g~";;~::lE 1;l ~':':=: fiii:~
E ~"'.9E€ig
e!;(ij 6.~~~~~~~~ 5a: ~-6.~~
L~ ~ ~~ SE.2 n____n____I I E'r 2
x
ii'
w "z
z ii'
0
0
z 0
w "
z
z 00c "w ;::
1i: ;;
ii:
w
w0
c
w
ci ;;
w
rOl!
J
I c
cE
E
3
c
gt'&
6'
ii
o ~
iii.!!
2 ~.g' ~i~U;OC
E I .
E 3
i
c c
2 !
f c ;;
0
rls:!
cq:'iI!
8.~li:
E~
iijoo
I-,
6Iic
gi i
j!~~
f~
1j~ ~~
g.~
8~~~
B
lij.!~
t~~i-g-
a~
ii iii~'2~
g,i ~~
lii~o~
ig~~~al~~I-_",
U)
O",fl:
s!!
o~
i:!E &go~
i:E:
s.if
1--_ii
c
g>
c
ci
g'
z
cfU '
iii~
E~
g
0
J: -0..
0 '"8~~-
g c - 3: >-.,;;: lJl t.~~;~~~c""
a. "'.0 ",.
0 g~~~~E 2 ~~ ~ ~lijE~
E
8E!!~a~E 9.~
Sf
c j=
c II ~
C ""4l-s,
g 1ii
tl ~:
6o.
f '
0 ~
2 tiil
g8'6-
8!!i.;~
o "c 2:
1Jm.
g 0..""00
g [~~
c: E
rlllg.
g>
fIl.
E31a.
@",]_
Q;:S .
9
c: "" 0 <<
i III
to 'g i~~~~~~
E IUHfhi 5-
a~~Z~;'5 l!.s rn';:' ~ -.~ ~
ii~g~~
8~
i~~ ~ :i:~i~ ~
s~~:~~:sg~i: - E1jl
gg>oEt @ : ~~~-*
1!l c~~'"
15c-g~
E E~ ~m ~-~ ~ ~i~:!~;~~ ii~
E1
g-
2~E<~~-2 .,0 0fl~~~~-:g::: ~.~~~;Q)fij~~o'~;;~~.<:
i:"'c 8~_Ji.g.:
K~~~'= I--. 0:
5 ='i~'6~g:5~
3g~ ~~'<iio=~-OJ
v; :ll ~.;:; ia '0 E
of ..."' _ Oi E~6_o~~,~o~ gn'
o'l~ii~s;_i:1:Oi"'~
1:~ g'jij~",i[" ~ ~ ["~ [" ~,.:: ~-5;-E-1=l
E t o
1'
x
ii:
E ~
z _
a:
g
o z
0
w "
z z
o 0
i=
9 ~
w...
i
a: ...
w"
w
0
a:
0
w
w
a:
I I ' .1
2>5~
I-j
I
o ~ga:
E
2
iii
Oig'
io
I~-.::.:
ii2.~.
g 'i
g ~';"2 t: ~.-= g.Ul g ~0
I E
E
a:E
g
o
1i
2
o
U
g>"
g
ai
tii
Jl::
efJ)Cz:,!o~
G
e.u
u
i
ii:
o
Q>
OJ
g
11
g>-
5i
EE~~
2-
g III "E '" L
5 E"O "'e '"C Ola> ~~o~~E~E ~~~~~~~~,,g~5i~
o.-:;~,,"._~:@-.~e ~
l:l Q; <II t: <l> ""..
c: <!> u 2 <:..c: Ql
0:; 'is FJ::..
8~
2~~r.
l~~i~2 -@~l;.':::EE~~~.D i~~~~21ij~E~~~i~l~i~ ~~ ~g>o; Q
15 ::> '08 (') "'.0IIIQEil..<:o-g~o ~ G Q28.~8.
o::l::::!E(/)
o.6.I
g0:g'
z
1_,_
I
u__ ~ .
hu
h g-
5"'
u~-><~:
ll<
ll~o~:ii0<::"2_ -iJ <II <) '-0; !; CIJ- <
II 0 8:.0 g ~e g.~-g_~
3:15=1i.2~~~~~8J8~r g ~ 6 <DB :?o~ -!
l.~~~ ~15~ ;~~~Q g ~:€ ~~Oil '" Ol"=r.n0'::: "';;; :;:.;::..i~eg>.5~~
sg:llk-:
ilo~g~~cf '" g>~ ~g>~~i3 OJe-5,i5g81!~-5,~~ '"tg~.Eg~~E6~.c8 (I) gEa.-g 0IijQl:5 ii u ~H~~~~~~~H~l <) cOl''''''~ <II:;~ o~E o .!!C';:: ::> 'tl '" SOu,""
0__
2 -
6 ~
s :.._~-==---_1_
2t~
Eg>:~ ~~c:ll l5 ""
1:~ ,,-E.
E > " <
II."'" l!! _
0 <
a [" "'"
E" -
oe.
0" 0 ~o_-'.2 <
v.
c 'Oi~
c.":::UOEe.
u "
0", ~
t
g> _
1: ~
m; ~ ~ ~
2l ~ ~ B ~ i ~8' c in b~~U.
C8.0E' ~~~q 1~
q8J'~~~.~~~o. .'8'B ~8."d~
2~~~~~
l~~.=u .0
H~~~e"l;; ~~~~.~
hl U'~6En~&h;;,;; ~~~
oE ;;~iii
g.~.
o,,~~;:,
z;;..
iU1\n .~"O~~~'''
on~
E~nz
E"~ge.e"
me.~~;_
E.
o~
oo> he
ii.~..
e~..eE15~ '
i'q.
0*,
E <ol~[>
E~g*
e" .:'n,:
0"mm':
i~[~~~
u.. _0-.2 <
II
o I ~l<i<
t~Z ~
0 [rl If-t)ELw~ImILa:
i0:
i"
J2l<t
lCJ > <
I)1.;
J<I)
i=w
8E::OWEL
l)<t~'!!_~_0
l0:1 1 1
x
I-
w "
z
z Co "
0
I-
0
z 0
w "z
z
0 0I-
0 <(w ;::
ii:
I-
W "
w0 0w
ii
i
I
r---.
f--
I ~
Q.
e
5:g-
o. '"o 0
o .
2
1
g ~1----
01--':1;_
E
g
o.~
o~ij
E ~~~c~ilioc
a::.!o8
f--- ---
c:
l:
l
1:
3 'y -
w ~g~ liii
gc: S. :)?:E :~ ~.~
13 0 ;,;~t~
I:T <
1l <
U '" u.2
co
u <!l
5 ~ _~ Q g ~ ~ E c ~-g-~.~1i;
5:_~1!8~~~i~~~
w,E; "" 5: g'i5.
c _ <
tI
isQi ~ _~ _~E CD Q;-~ ~.!"~ 8'~J~~
I---f-----
f--_..__..q o.
o E
o
o U
gL:'
l;_
g~
o ~ .._
E &.!!
l ~
cZi~
1-..IT
o.
a
U o
1--
1----
010::
l:-
jg~
00.=
a.
eUl
Ct:.!og E
o
g i
o
gif
@--
gu -
fi~
f
0
u
ti ~
S-~ "~
C:o_
g-,~_g
HH
HUH!
E <: >, Q) ti
c:
1::1
0
U~,,2~~
o.~U}~~
Q 2::1~Q;::g eEs-5wo!
jo
tiE... u 5: Q. ,.nO";;;
cCl 15 c: 't3o6~ e8..Q f E ~.l;; ~ .~
u c: -: ~ u 2~ ~~1il ~'~3 ~~~~OCll.q~ w:
J=~""V)c:t21l-g~.
s{:'[J:
C1)'E.98
Q0"eOli 0"co
o u Uu u 2 ~I
l-
I-
l-
I-
i'=
z~
i=
z:f
i=
z:f zoo
zou
zou
tJlf ~0& ;:::
t)Ji1
0
E ~~:i W~a: i2~~lto ~ttO ;tljj0
g i ~~~U) ~~~
U) ~~~VJ l-U:!::~ I-
a::t:!:!:! I-
a:!::!:!:!
WUlU <(
wU)u <(WVJ(,)w>
Zw W>Zw W>
Zw crowo.. IrOWo.. a::
owo..c---- O<VlVl
O<VlI/.I O<VlVl f-
0 E ~ " ~Cia '" ~ ~z ~ ~ ~
iij ~
0 1; l' '" ti 0> 0 ..:!! ~E ~
D~>~~
1;
cm~~
g
O>.
x ~<
U ~ :;.'!: lii '5i e 15 a; _
2 ~ ~ g '"
e m~~ugii&
CU~ ~ol~~D~O>Ea.tioi;lg'oti>.<::Qo~g- D
IE<::~3~g~~~~~~2~5~~~~"'~5EE~~~~~O
m"'~0~uu-m~~
m-E",c~-~E= ~C~
o_Ea.~~~eg0ooc2*~Eu~l~
c~~B5~a~~~5~~~
g~gE~
g~
2~~G
0>~~~=16~~~o~~~ti~~mID~~~~
o'"g~~~i~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~!i~~j~]i~i]~i~!
i!~!ili~i~l!ji g0ille ~
c U = S J:: ~ 0. ~ ;- J:: <:'j -;;; .! <:: 0 c15J:: 1 g i~~il~~if~i!j~E~il!t~~i g~~m~~",~gt~~~~~~Eg6~CO~~~0mD~
urr5~omEI~nmDO~U~~C~0o..Q .g,lij'
l5OE:0 u I ~I- ~
I-i=z::!Z ou tlg:gs~~
5lto
U)
t-
a:I:::!:!:!
WUJO
W>
Zw
a:
Ow 0..
U<UJVl
e t-
I
x
I-
W "
z
z 0
I-
0
Z 0W "
z "
0
0I- ;::W ;::ii:
I-
W
W0 Ww
e:
o
o
05:!
x.
gli:
Jli:-
c::
a::.!!
I ~
ol!J
f--~.I---
C:= .!!of!.
E Eo
2 g
i
q
g.~
i5~
E~
OIl
3
Ei ",-
0
E "'::>." '0
e ~ ~~ ~ ~lOllGl.'=
O 2 l; 'E'
1!g>.-;';
E [!! -';:
Eg;~8.
o~~
EJl
2 g>(jj
g'
E i Q.<=,! >-
f'g.:-g~2 (; <
II li: ~0.-" ~ III '"1!~
a-g-g
I--"-~I u'
1 o E
2 o o
U g':
S6-
E :
t-
z' ~
Jli~
U
E
E
a .
u
0
0 ~
g Q
i gl....
c-
e:i.
2~
o~ ..!!
EG>.2l[
jl
o ~=
c.cn
Q
o s: (.)
ga:f----~li
0"
t:05
m o~
w
e
i ~ ~
II
f=
Z <{
zoo
c: ~
0~
2
l3wU;
iii ::
IlLa:
go
VlttD
i ~~~
U)
l-a:!::~i1i~~~
rrQwa.
o <((I) (
fJ o
E ,OJ
ci M
gz U)
i
i~&~
I~
1 ~~II!;~~I,
li~ ~
I~~;
i~j jl~~ ~!
I=!!j
S~
I/l~O~~~OO~~SCi5~"~~-UEal-l~EW~2iw_E"'~20~~~Ooc- - --_I/l-OIl~::>O__G>-oCUOllG> -ruOll__~rnw_OIl uGlu"'oJl~~ ~ ~
5 ~;: ~ ~ -
g ~
e~ ~ ~ -~,g -~~ 5, ~g! ~~ ~ ~3~~ ii ~ ij ~ ~ _~ 53 ~ :;,.~ ~ g>c=2~"''''~wgo~'''2a.~w~--~c.c<(oi<(",5'''0Il~2~ uU~~5-O~~'c ,~
E a. -9-.a '" c ''
1: c. '" ~ 0 tl <: E ., OIl 0 OIl -meEL <: CD Ii}.'-'" .~ u ::) ~ -g ,<:: 2 iJ <II -oS ,,= ;;;'jQl;:-2E- 2~G>I/l~~G>.aEG>EEQ~~,2E-;:Ec~~.ao~",~"u.a~8~~iD~[~&g~&~O~96~!]~~~u~~i8~o~~
8~o~&O~~~ ~~= o~u~-=~~~j~-~W-~~EU~=~-u~&~uc_gj~~~~j~~~~~~~8i~!~~t8~2~i~~I~!~g,~~~U-~t~8~~O~-~E_ ~~~~~~-~ ,~~~u~~E -~E--cv~ ~oco~ c~ooam~v~E~c-~E~!~5!U~~
c-~~~~c~~~~2~11~~I~~li~~~~~~~;i~~8~8~~~~~:~~~B:v~~~~~~~v~~~gg~i~~~f~~~g~i~~~Ev~~€~~~~~~~~~~35~~~E~o,~u~~w=
uO~O&~~D~~~Uw&Ow2v~um9~ucuum~Eoc
a.~~c~j8g::~o g'_~2~~~-~g~:;:0 ~ oc a-Uu a~o cz zo n[rl~alu.oo wr
wz l2::;
w~W>'
oco!!:u.~
MM<IICtl
C <
II
U') U') sg :'
i
2'~ ~S~~~
S g' ~ ~_:> ~
5'
E ,!!!
2u~u :S U') !:':;;;
m
9 '
0
0:
x
I-
w "
z
z e
l-
e
Z e
w "
z
z
e l- e
i=
w ;::
i
ii
I-
W "wij ~ew
w
u a
u
u
o
El~~
O~
ii.!
t.
2'~
i:
f :
E.gif
10:5
Gl
II :
rl;"
E~~ ~:.
g i: ]i ~ E ~ ~ ~ ~
g,
g 5 u
1~~~~~"52~c..~ IG E ..-_S'
o.QlO1n:.c;:J "1J_.
C
rg l5:~~ ~ ~~ ~_~ ~~ ~l:
T .! '" 0l_~....:..'O 8 c
III 'l;
j 0 '"
c:i -g ~ t: ~ iii -~.dJ -g :gj '~c
u.!!!Ill""o.:g<ll~i::il:J~
a.2 :~~~~'ii~;:,g;O:8.~i g~~~~~-~gJ=-g~~
i ~ ~ g-u ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~-.i Bo1.
f.ia(
l!!!-
lii5-SE:
s!iSO~i;.,~~~e-
i5-!'6i~~a:~-OUU-",
Q)~"",U~TI~
o giIi0g'z i
ccti~ ~
t~
16 ~- ~~
li~~!Ejc ~&~
i8~i~~~
i
g
i ~ _~: ~ ~-~g ~ oS ~ g
g ~ * g ~8~:~~~~~~g:~o~
1~~o'l;j~~~~~ow1i~"1J0l~~C~;~2 Dg61;~~~
1~~~c.wE~GlO"
1JIllO-~-mC:-~ooGlU<lli-'"eo;i-g~~~
tiOl~R~"1J~~5",
6~COO~DlJ.OlOU_:
J~"'IllC~Ol~COl~~2 OOlo..~u~
j"~mclll-oGlO<llOlo i6G,6~6~~it~~oR~~
j~gEW-~Gl~E;~~'l;jOlO_~~
i..~50l 0:s!~GlOlO~iS<ll~~Q~wugE2~~!~J~~~i~i~~*~~-g-
g&5~8.g5~8_0l_~~~Gl>~~<
llJOlOlUn"'__J 1 g. .s ~f-- a. g c u g~~~g-
g~~-E:;~~f~
a: ~ 2 g-~ ~Q~~~~
e>
6!! ~.
Q '(;-g'
n;~,~.~~g~~
rJ'Ja.'=",lI)
d1 u~
Cu u . .E",,,,
rJ'
JDl<:
lJ5 '~~g ~ ~8!~
Qj
ci~~~
g'~ ~
i~~~
a ~ &~
IIi:I'
1
1:;<'
i!:
2
8
I-
w "
E ~
z _
e
t:
8 ~
w "
z
z
e
e
9 ~W
I-i
I-
rl 0
If
5
@
W
5 ~
o E
3
r!
5 ~
2~~~
g::= ~
i~:iU)
c:
t:';
j oo
cE 2E
i
g5~
i~
j;
x,=
X.
I~~::
e(l)C:t:~O~ua
I...; -- -go>
u;~
3 :::
l ~ ~~~~
je~
i
E~
8~o5-'!i~~-~
E Qj - !!] .0"5 _.&s2 ~ l'h-~
g'~,s E~~~~8.
eg~a: o~:~~~:;~aiECf---ocu~..>uc>.l!l a[~:~-5-5 ~
2:;~~~~~~e
li ~ ~::: ~:: g ~ ,SOJ
g~15~~i1 l\
l 0- ~_u
c rt~~cB ~ a.'~E~:
Cl.
0=':
1(
1)o.gif
i.
ci g'z
l _ _ ~ ~
ujij.. c ~.
g ~ . <
EE
d~ ~'" ~~~~H~ ~_~~
u
l~
i~~~~~ ~ ~
2i~
h~~
Mi! ~~~ ~~~
g ~
gi
Eg~"~~;';;
6J?~.~~
cE~t~~~ ~iE g~~&W~
Hj h.~~
UO~
E";;'~*.~
q <~8 l!(
ij~-5E.s"'='~lilQ;<11 ..~.E""'
C:8
Cle U
C:-O-<II.o",_
0
Q)
w E ~~ · ,
H
E .0u .. ... ~
H~ i
i ~ ' ~
E . ~ n ~ ~ ,
3~"H1l.;~~ iHB. '<i.'~.~~:
8~~,,~ ~g g~~~:;;~~~ E~2~
6 ~1'in~~ ~;;~~\~~ .~
g
u
n ~
i ~ ~ :
H ~ ~ : ; 5 ..~.. ~ :;;"" ~ ~ . : a ~ E ~ _~ ~_1l~
H~
ii~ ~~h~0 ~~~HH ~~~~18g ~
8.uo.
E'''E..~ =:~~.~ ~~.1~,,-_~.~=----.8.:i ~ :a ~ 1: ~ ~ ~ 2-
E '0 0 _____
f1"'",~i:l.
13~.
c~",,__ _w'!!n:~~I l i j
g.= .!
ii.iO~
1-.--- f------E
E
e
3
o
g'
i
E
o
I--
f---------------------
OI'O::-c:_
e~~i
g ~ &.0
S.l:LE ~
I/l
i2: .E
e
5
0 ~
jj
g
X < i
0
I- U ,
W "
Z
z ---i2' " 0 ~~
l5~
I-0Z ~~~~
0 g ~~&
W "Z z :::EJl:!;
1/l 00I- ;::
0 <( l!;=.!W "
cWO~
ii: , -----I-
W " ,W
0 .uEwa
e
3
l-
s: ~ ~
w . .
0 <
g m :;0"';;;;
c:-
2~g~&~
S.
l:
LE
t.
E~:
EUl l!;~.!!
o~
Xl
gs:mE E
o is.
e
E _
8'
0
u
nc
fi
QI
01"'
0..
c:
c,:Q
iJ
qj $",
a::",2-
g g ~~~
or ",.c
E Iili~
g'
g iJ-
E
J;~*-a 1--- .
E g
i 1--- .-
E g'
z
g
l~
0
o"u .!
ili
e!0
c
i
J;;~
a u ~ _
E ~
j~~
i~il
II> ::
I C :
ii 0 ~ -.
c '" - QI Eg.~:ii g~. Eo E. <! :g~~..S Q os (II _. -
0
E II> II>"U lil
11 ~ ~.~; ~ ~Gi-ga;..a>.'S:eE$:~g ~155 g ~
8"'.~~~'~~
al~
E e'~ -,~ 0:= 0
15 ~.= 0 ~i ~
g Ql :FE '
t: 'to II> 6-'t: ~E
Ci ~ g. ~ 1;l 8. ~ ~ !' 8.,<;,Ql " "'eo> 15 ~ <
ii :ii -g -gg'~l>CEO", "
EE"'
oo~
u-R.9E~~: '~(;E~-~~liiC2 o<=ea.-
g.Q t::~oua.oca
5.g-E~
B!~8.~;;~*~~~~
i2 ~15 ~~ ~ 0.5",,,,,. ~~8:fij e~.2~:ij_.9-gjj::
lt:ll~,~<II.?'E ~iQ% ~~ ~~~E~
f. 5 C ::I.g !:: _~ (; ~ rn '"
3'
E >--S tn g-~ (;
8.~~":1 ~~ E ~ :::; ~feo0'EQl"':2-~~E~2u oQl",
os;;;--<::!!!sala.OO::lO~~E'-~~.
2! ~ g ~31 e E
1_~ E E ~ ~15 8 ~ ~ 1; ~
E E .2!~ ~c -~@ 1:*~
fi~~c g g.,2 8 ,go-
g
OJ ~E~',~ ~
c~~~-~g ~:;; ~.!l! {l
8 ~ 9
i6~-g~~~~~
15~
6-;a g-gtgs~;~~IlQl<llilirnt::
E-o Eg~
E:;~t~~E ~~ ~8..2.~iil5.-r
i It
2
1-
o~
I--
I----~--
e:
E
E
E go
i
o.
o
1-----
f---~--
l;
Il'"
l:_
Eg.2~in
s ~~ &EUl""1Il
I ~:I: ~
ViDe
1----- ---~---
xI-
w"z
Z
o Z0
w "
Z
Z
o 0
I- "i'
J <(
w "
u: 2
ii'wI-
w
260
W
w 2:o
2
o
u
OI-
c:_
ig.
2~
g~!~
5
g-~
X.
EUl"'
U)u
a
u g'o:
Swiii
E ~,
gg
ril:.
i~gjo.
1------
E E
3E
g
i
C:
I=.!
iWOc3
0I,
g::
15 '"
2g
EO."" IG '"
f !:~
t~s <
11 '
t:
0..8-~ ~~
1 l: 2:~ ~ ~ ~f g>~i ~~~ ~~
g.~1:
l __ '"2'
c:i g5:
6~
B~
l~8
E ~ ~ '
E ~9
2;~~J
Q:I.o ~
E C:::
lOlO.
o
E ~ [!1 ~ iil g~~~21l!
i 021- E ~ >.
IJ..5~ES
rn_3(j
8..91u.OJ
S g
r=
8.?;'f'
i;;:!?6 :
A i~ ~ ~i~;,~
E- M G~ ~ ~
g~~jJ 1---- -- ------~-.--.
ici
E>
z i
J
o 2~~~!
i;~gi~~a.~CI:;lc.<
l>_~(
j.
8g EYi&:
l1O~=<:~
dQ)
o~
iiRi~
1igEE:~~&Ol oE-
o..g:C.6Cllti3~cE g-oj:~
0 i'5& :~9
E.2 ~8 ~,;(
j ~ E oa 8o~~~ ~ ~~_~~~~~ 8~g Oi<tiQ-gc-5i~~<lI-g~.,
l 0 IE''''',!'l "'.!!! 0 <
5 _ a: Ill", .,
j5ii:: 01\
E.'" """ a. >- 0.10 !':! :;:E 6
8 !
5,~~~
@~ ~it~-~~ i'i I- a.Z <(::: VI a.:l 0E
L1 Z !" OJ ~li 0"g0
a a O(ijO"iij 0 ~ 0 0:: 0::Uu u
a :
5ua
z
U)
fi]:S
a:l-Il..
g~5~
z !Za:~;::
3z zo ,<(
a: z~::
i:
5 tl 11~
84:ffi~~2tl: ::
lw;!:U)uo
iJ;ttVJi~ ~ ~6:;:!~
4: wOilr g f- UIr >
WVJ z'lw - () I-::
lo::ffi:5~3:~;,,::;;~
w>~!w;!: Z
WZ Z 5~ ~I~ ~ 8 ~
g58 aia;>
M"
lfi i~I
x
I-
w "
z
z 2
0
z 0w "
z
z
0 0I-i 0
w ;::
iii:
I-
W "w0
0w
1- ;;
w
e:
a:~
o~
o.
E o.
EE
E
g
i
6
5ii
i:
a~
g ~~~
I::!;
Jl::
l:lI.I
q o
2
o uf~~~g ~ i"
C
I
g!
i~ ~
ill)""
CI)
a:.!!oo E
E Eg
i l::= .!!
lac.
u
a
I
u
c
o
2
0
c_ ~ _
u~
o~
18 ",~
g,.,
g
c ~G,
f:
O '''''''OJ E~&~ ~l" ~ ~ ~1:
Ed: ~~e ~~~:s ~~!ijO_g-e~_~gj
c",:gl::& ;l;lfije "'"in.iii"'~o,iiiE
g. al ~ _95 ~ al. ~ ~ .g'g ~ ~ ~ _~LQ ~ ~ ~.
t ~ ~0; 8 is ~ ~ :: 1 ~ <tl :5 5 ~ 0- "
@ ~ ~ E '" 8 ;l: ~~~~~-e~gt--:~~!ijg iijfij-~",L2'1ij~uc5
g. o,~cca:"'E~-Ji!:;u"'O\! _E"'~:
Eo~a..""'S g' ~1:8bg~5,g~g>ijl~~~~;.~~~o-
g~::ii-~Qi:~~~a.-nii~--'="!:g~~~a...~:t~
r~-~~~u~~c"''''>~~'''~>g '" g>.. ~ III ~!:' -~ <II "' ~ 8
OJ "' 0 -g Ei:' is -5 ~ ~g~g~~~~~w~&6W~~~ClO~U.Oo..~ Ol-'!! o-_=:!' o~~~~
oC:!D:::E III
l:JJ>; l:- ~i: S:.2~ OOj g~i-n
g>~6 g-~ X. ~
0 i III "" VI ~
Q o.g
e 0 k:gif
0 o
a
z
@s
0-
2Z
i;;: ~:5
ii::::
EQ.85
2 ~
6;
t~
tJ:::~
fi:2~~~ZffiZzQ<CILQ
z
@S ti:~~00-
o-zz
I':';;{~
5
i5:::2Q.
cwoz
Q
8~~
iUf-::
Ja:
J<ll-
wffi~~0<(
0::
0
UIQO
0S'
z ,..,c
I ,
I -J u
0
Jl -Q) '=
0 :;: QI ~ ~;
z :;:
E2~:u_
gOC.
l~
0i
fil-~ ~-
s,'!
1_:~,s
5 _.!!..c: '" <
Il
l)J,~ ;ij QIi_g E
QI.l'! c;!ll..';
l '" _~..c: Q)i,~g'a~.s: ~
2Q:~ ~ ~
alij~~~5"@~~~5a. >. 0: <Il_~ 9 <U '" ~0'
0.0 ,9:; '0 :Ii ::!'~
E
ij1 :Eij1 '
55 _S ~ :g -;, ~E~8~~g.,~~~
g dl ~o o z @~5~
0-2Z 3 r:lI::!=0-IWOZ
I-
UJUO 25:i~
I-
U([>
UI-~
a;
J<
I-
wffi~~
O<
r:a:o
UIOU
l
II
i
I I
I
x
I-
w "
z
z 0
I-
0
Z 0c;
w "
z z0
0 I-
0 <(w ;::
i
I-
w
i ,
0 0
w
w f E
1------
Ili~
g
a.: ~
I)
iI;.!
OO
E
E e
g'
i
1--
1------------
l:.:
c: ..,
o~
q
2
o
u g'~
l: '"
ill!
2:~:::!:
Ul
E
e E
g
i c;;; .!
cio~
1-- -----~~----
2,
s
1! ~ ~
S :ll
g~~s: <(iii::
l<:i~~;~5<l>~~ggJ1 -
gglg~~g::~E.a:il =
0- l" 0 0 :s! 1i --", n ~g g e 1S~~-6,a:t:gOl~"'~~~'i;:-E 8=~
g:;_gt2l~g2~_iii,~1l d~1l:2~
2~1lg:~ij l;; S;;'E>
d'
l,,;l:i:i6~mli:=:Q~:
2 S2g,~~':i~~-5i5i;>>[;}~~c5g:ff Ec",1;jo~a1lri>-3'
Z,sgE:l:~i ~ ~~~~~
jj iil'~:il~l: l" ~:gi i1fjg~~~~~15~~~og~~~!
ii,Q~ijj2Qi1~w u a u
u o
QI-': E: - 2-!1_ '"E ~.
2 ~ CI ~ '"g~
l~ ~~~
i
g !;!
o~ ~ ~
m ~
cij",,(I):ij:g <I)f=:2.. ~-gG
gif i3 <IIf-----z i. ~
6~i=~Zt!386
6<
i!~I-
UO:>i ~~~ffi
ffi~~0<(
0:
0
VIOD ci ~
gz ~i
It
1JC -
id '"
Ol, g --
a,
c fc:~~C<
l>
L<
l> '~
ORgS-
O~<llr~
i~<
l>~:~~~
j~8g;~~~1~~
i~~~5gii~~~~~E!~~1_~~ ~~ ~iU ~,~,~!! g-~~-5o lli:5,5fi~<llLOl>!~
t_OQi~u6~
li;>>ui~"'[
l~=~8-C~~~>2<
l>"'[l~ob ~{Olu
Il>.:g <l>,~= ::Irh ifo~ 0 &01
0i~~~J~~~~:~;!~;~~~~:8 -~~ ~:= ~ I~: ~ g;'~ TI ~
s:E=E~~c~o~OO_;~~D'.W~N i~~~~~~~~~!
zg~~~~~o '
0 OIl ? 2' "' .::~ ~ <U ~ '" <'0 C
W :J C ~ ~ i3 Ollb' !~~mL2_~
w~~g:
J~'00llr: _~ _~ (
0 ~ <
Ii ~ g.~ tV .": ~: - c "'. D '" (f)l~~iE-~~~~~~=~E~~
J;~8g~!~~~a _ <.> "'" La.", _ _ W" L_
0 '" __"'~~ii-o"'Oll"o>0.0 E]
i
o<ii-o;;;
tV,,;:;,o .
0 E~i JO<u
uwwuu
w ~ w ~
I
0
I
0 n_
Ul__Jl_
U)
ZW .....
JZw .....J
t3~~O{)
g~~~8
3 (J)
U ~.....J U)U ~.....
J U <(~~crl<(~g@
a: wa:u..<(
wa:u..<(
l:i!
r!
I
E
x ~
I:: ~
u
I- "
Z
z
i<if' "
0
l-
I::
0
z
0 w "
Z
0
Z
I-
0
0
ul "
ii'
I- - ~
O':;
J "
w
J 0
u
0 .w
a
w ~u
l:
III ~
Q o
D,=
III
I~:i:
gi.t;
w
0 ~gt
o.
i ~b
0"
w'"w
00
E
ici ~
II =z ~
I i
I
b:
t:: II>
oll
In-Q: ~
o ·
3
0
I- ~
II
fli~
o
a.= CIEa;
i:
l!;:
t: .
cWo~
Q:I
o
u .
c QI ..
g 1: <
I>
C C
c 0 ~~~
o;; > '
u~-
2 ,".--.-~ "
0.
1' ~~ ~~
O~. ~8.
0~~<~ ~ ,,~~l'O '0 .
u";' .., .a~'."'" ~~
ao~
c.' >~1"'.
5n .~!' < ~
5 *j~Hf:~~~~;~
g~~ go!'
ii";
P .~~-' ..~~O
s~~*n;~H~ ;~
1~ ~~*
8 ~~
5 ~ i~~~
o l
o~~~_"~.~M[E~
5 .~.~~~~li~.~.~~.f'g"
l~.~
@U~
E"l<,,,,'"U~~-IO:jj~]'QE,"U
g~a~=~~~~
8Ul1'
E~@E<B~~~
ei.~'~~-~~'~*
E
o.,.~OO~'O~O~2aOUOQ,~_
eooo~"'D.-'O t ~ . ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ g ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ <
3 j; ~ ! [~
8 ~ ~ ~ ~ 8.5~gg~"~~g~.;~.~
2@~~.~.
t;
c'
1a~
af~aa~2~~~~~~~
9~~~'*
5~~~"'
1~~ig~~.
I'
oE.!
ao..".u,..e.8"
UO.lc~'~"'~!611"'.
co.~>
0.~
o 0_-.-0.'-o'
2'
1~~."~~~
5,
g~~"~~~~11.'
OO:,~~cE r~.-;;
liu5 _~..,.~~~.,:~_;'-
5';:
Ei5:~"'dg,oHr - ___~:
u~'
HHUU,~_
jlj~
i~z.". ~"
8 " . d_
i~~~!
0 ~o" ~~~0- _
mQl u ~
os ~
m <5~
0
3 o
E g i
U
o
w u o w
w
w--,
w:
J
1-
g90<(
58Z~
0'"
l-
09
zw"
0...0
Vj6
w
0"
w"
zOO
I"I~~~
000
3~
UO~
i~-g~
dE ffituwl-:::
l;
OO:~~
o
uUcD
0=-'
g:.=g ~ ~
0",
1:
iii--
Elij
Ol~..
c
01.
0-""
c . ,
TIS"
c 00=
0ili
0"
u
0
5
ill
o
o
z
2i~z"
og
0"
O~If) ~
oVJC)
o <
I)
tJ~fJl
12~ ~
lti3i g .;,
o ~
w
x
w "
z
z 0
I-
0
Z 0w "
z
z
0 0I-0 w ;::
ii:
I-
W "
wi ,00
w
ii E o.
o
g--"&
5 ..
l!~
a;:
ic%
q
o
2
o u
g'"&
c;;: Q
1:_.
2=
0"
4!~
1~ ~
O Sf:
S
g-~ 8. ~ 0
I ~0 ~ 5
m
Ct:.!O~U E
al .3 5' ..
i
E
g
2'1 ~
0 rS~~
O~<
i..!!!I ~
l.
S!'~o ::
li'
1::
B. "g~
0 w00w
2
0'"
g
w..
i "
0
z
5
w~
g. N
0 ,;,z "
fo~3
g
i
ll="f
0
Om3~~~~~ a ~~
02 ~~
m~~
um~
u _~ ~~ ~
II) <
II -"';;;
IJ..
01- iii <
II - ~
CO," Ol"
O :;: "S'g1': ~l3gO\
li':""Eg>lilOlftl~f?", sa >- <Ii III iilllg>
UlCl<l>~"'O~a.~~cu~ ~g "ii N glllo~og>~l;l~1!:
i o,<Il:t5 It)E ~~ o.;ii~-g Q
s~~-;;~ ~;.o g>~(f)~ '"e EO.,gQ)ULI:m"O",,<
Il~"'<:-O<:: ;::..0",3 o-=~"ii::l~Qlg~u3,~~:~~ -6o"
iii{iIII g ~~~i~15~~%~ffio13~~~~-g~~5~~
a:: <D ......c..O_ _0;.,::'_0 -Oio3:c....g>~
5~~a:~~ ~gt;;E~! g ~~~o€~ ~ig5!!'O~'5
cu~-8~*2~U5:; lil "'2! ~
g~QJg~~~-5~B~al~iii~~~~~:g1~-
g~c:i grn-go<::-uoocgm""'_e::lo"O~-cu~"'
152 uE",icw",::l..OIcCl~-C",g~_~OI <
II E <IIC.r: '" u ::: '" ClU.90- QI ! '" '" IV.P ;:; ,I;; _':?.'"oW<l>Qucffi<
ll,"<I><Il~'"E::
J~R'" '~UE=B~~~~2~g>~&1~ti-
l3g>~~S~!8~~P~&~~~~~~g"'~~~!i~~
ti~<p*~E~",oOg=>-",:;:",
EEo<l>00~n:;:~5Ul~f---Q
Q Q Q Q " 0 " " "
0 "0>'<:; ~O ~O ~O E ~E c ~
0 ~ 0 ~ 0 .
0 5 -5 -5
3 m m
m m f---u
u u I--
w o~z~iDo
u ~0 0 0~
6 iD iD zm ~
Dir.
w t3 >m ~ ~
w
w ~~
UlZ
0 .. ~
t56~
s
s
u..
OUlLU f-- I i
I~ ~~ ~12" '0
I i
jl ,
S ~~f_OI~E
2talrn>- >-><"00 Q;~
I:E2::
j~
5~-g:;:
i!!~I~ill~
i~
8 :~~~~
6~
h
m~c=>",>","'__ CO-
a.011: 5l1!;,a:!; ~g-g1!
3 ~g-1; '" OI,!!"" :ij- ","0"':"
0 '"I ~ ~ :tl 0 . '::
I. iij.o1J ~-.!'2
c -g
e!2'~g'iij~~~;~~J:<::.--Q<::
cnE l5~~~~'~] ~* g>'O ~ '" ~g-
3: ~ ~ O-::.g~ 3'::. ~ %.'E ~HHiHUiHil
u
Co
j-
x
I-
w"
E ~z _
0
1::
o
z
0
w "
z
z o
0
tii
j::o <(
W ;0
2 W
0
o.0
W
W
g,
s ~
iic__
III -
Q;
1:~_:{
l.,g;.~1l ~~~
8-
g~ ~b R~~E~~~;
Z-~~{8~oel_~~~II: 0 u <Il "'.2 III5 "' 0 ()
l; E iii E g'5 :
u " e 'iij ~g 2 u go:!;; E ~,~ ~ ill .9 i ~ ~~~~~~~~~i ~~~EoE~~~'"Q:
o.oi
0,4
g'~
g~
g>~
2
i~ ;
g~u
5!'
GI :
J <1 C l:a.=:a./Il<
ll'"EU) 0 q
o 2
o U go'
g6~co!!; ..Jg
c
0.=
a.
O::
l:
Ecn
0u o.a
uo
g>"g
g.'!1:.!!=.Oi:::.
u
5!'.
c
0.=
a.
O::
l:
E(/)I Z '
n
o~Zw0Z,
W E ~,
I- (f)~3
0"::
0
o 1 w~
0 :;~~
0
f::JIw ,
Q~~N ,WGjii:, ~
I ~g:
ffi5_ - -0 --
z
5~
E
o
g
5~o
iE
ie :
0 go.
iilE
g
iwZ
x
w
o .
iici .;,
g'
Z '"
i
e
r j
I': ;
I~ ..
1 ~
II
II
I~
IMIG ~
I ~. !
t=
gfi~~!!
R.
a ~
2~~
rn~~
8~;:
fu~~&~~~~
g~.
R ~ . 0 .
u" -._';' . ~ > ,; .
w = " " .
0 >
U-<
1-~~~
EiiiiE~~
i~5~
6~]~.8~~
6~'1 5 . ~ 5 ,. .
5" ~"" ~ ~.x" Q 5 ~" . . ! 0
1!
lo~"~.8~gE,;.a~a!
U"!
05.'o.~.t:!185!.
r"]
I~~
oG..:'i~
15 iE~i.~.~.O''I''''.K.
o..
rni~
g~.~.g~~~
O~=~850~~\~5""~.
t'~'
E=.5..<e.'~~'_
8.1.
1~;w~'II~~
II.UI51"!~I~i'2S].c.. ~
o 0-
0 0';:
111'5 ng~ooo3:< ___
Il:~ft~~~Q..E~Z<
ll~_ ___
8 il.c 0.
0
Q O c;r::0 w u j
o _I
t
i:;
0
E
E .
00 ---=--;;.
U ~ -0 ~~~
5~
q~
r---.U .. ~~
Hg~~
n~!i'.
l ,~:
i'~~-dHh~sHS" ~ ~,~~ ~~j~~5g .aOau", ~l~""~iln'~9a_~E~~~€J'
52~~
g':~~~E~'~~~~~1 ~.;~€~E"~:2~~\~c ~~
Q_J~ ~~~Q~ -~WDW~O=OCWWUCW ~~
CD~>ECoo_
ac~C cO~'_
tr_._. -n ~---
U--~.
nE<.n "_~ .U oo~o.
So.
E ~
llH~~~~~~H[
E~~2*
h~e~
n~"'~'i,t~'!~~m~
i~~El'uO...'l~~"cn "b~. ,.o.n,OO".,. "~'UO.".occ-:s.1'
338 ,ffi. '
Q~~~ g~li~~ ~8~~",~
i~
8.
q2~"-~~ E~ g... ~
l ~ S~"_Eoe.c_'2~g~co".:ouOc."uc~.",~.__~~,....=<U ~ 6 ffi "
n cO
6., ~" . < .. 5 <i U "-,1!
C ~ go
00 6 ~ [',"" ~ "'" ,~ E" . . g ~u .
g. 6~n~5E"~"~~_~"~~"..
m.g_'32 uO;'~"~'.e~e""
mE oc~.
ca.
ocu. .:"~<.<.o"
o~_a..'
E.rU.~n._i~~
J~.~lm2~~Si~~
i!~
i!g_~~5,]~
u~ _CU~~0UU~_
C~~ ~~wrnc-w~
3w_i .O-~.Eoo ...o"'.~.."~"-'~a~mu,wco ~E~oaEan~~
8~~~
E~~
Em~w~cr
z (/) OU)
3::::( [tll Co: (/
J<(
II ::2~~
i:5~Oz<( ~=a::J ~ ~ ~III ~~~ wz 8 ~:5
2 ~~~ ~~
J~ :'fw
e :'f~
Iw ~~g~~~ ~~
b
Ii! gj
z
a. ~____,______,_a.CLO:~____---'---
r
I~c~.!
o~e:
o.
Eoog>
l~~
1:._ _ .g ~$1i c:
o.~ 0.al:E1Il
q
x
ffl "
E
0
z "
z
0
w"
z
z 00t; ~
I ;3w;::
E ffi
t;0
5
fa
w
o.E
o
o
I ~~
g~
i:.!!=.g ~~
1i
c:
0.= 0.
al:
E(
I)Q
2~~ ~<
U 9~
i1l
g>~
X. !
i
0
J:EU'/ S
m EE
g e =!
ol!.E 3
tr
g ie:: u S
1lI a..if
Qg . N
0 <
b
g'
z '"
i
c
li
0"
au
g
m
c,u
o j
iliOc
Q
o.
o
E
g
i
01'=
C'"
COoIII1i~
E
x.-F ~2~
l!:
a=.!!ot3
I
E E
I ~
o. ~
E
E 2 ~
x ..
i 0,
I-
0
w "
z
z
I 0 !
01>::
c-l-
eo
0 ..0 Z '
g~"i~0 ~ 8.~~
w " I ~
Jl:E~z z00I-1 0 <(
g.~ .!!
w ;:: V,
iO~I-W "E
w ci ~ .
00 . E ~E
w
o.
U .. ~0
0 .. I 'w
a . ,E 0_
E W . .
E8 u < ~c
E
llE
0 g'"&
ae
1i:
i
E
x.
g~Jfi~
gif
1---_____g i
1--------
E mci
g'
z
i
1! ~
E'
O~~
0i;Z
1>'
iii~,~ ~g'~~ ~~"'~u~
i ~ ~~~I ,~
i~~
li "'
f i! =i~Bi ~,'~iti 1> ll&~~i
31~~~~~~~:_~~i~I,~~g~~g~g~g >WJW ~~nE!~-u wD~8~
u-~DiDCUW~~~!~>w~w~am .i~~Ew~~i~_.~*w~~E ~~o~
wnw~
E~~~~Ju~m>E~
ffi"'~~ ~~~~~~~~~5~~~~1.~~u_WSj~~
j~E.~i~rn~~~.-E~~1J~~lo;~~:~;w <:: o~W-Uu"'
0- ~o~ ~ '"O~~~ -N"W'O'" .'
J",E~~~~E=E~~<::.~~~
jQ~~~~W~
IEi~ero~~S!.~~~E~~~~]&"'~~.DOOU~& 000 5=~~i~~cg~P;&R~!!~i!~~~~;~.ai~~a~j~E.iE~~~:n
E~~~~~~~~~~~~g~~5;~~~~~!g~o2~~~~~~~Q~~t~ii E ~ ~ 2 ~ i,~ _*R~ ~
g ~~ '" ~ g.'1 ~ ;;_'" g i ~ ~ ~1S ~.~ _.~ ~ '" - '= ~ ~ E ;:: <iiE :I '" 0 u i~~~_8~'~~~!~~~~2~~.<.e~~~'~~~~c.~ ~~~~~~i~*~:!I~c~UO~U~~Q~~~~"'.E~E~~~
6"'e~~~=~u~_~~~~~g~8~g2j l
j 1 J
x
I-
w "
z
z it' "
0
I-
0
Z 0w "
z
z
0 0I- ~
0 w ;::
iC
W
I-
wi .
0 o.
0
w w e
1::!
o~
Q:
ji
E
o 3
g
i
g'~
g
it
E
X,-! ~
i$
c!::
t:.!OC!J
o o.E
2
u E
oi
OI....
C_
g:
i:~~
g~
i~
g
g.~ ~
E(f)""
wo~
u o.
a il
uo
f~ ~ ~ ~~-~
o~-
g
f ~~
g~
g~",
o8-~-
g'<
UUlii<'
S III OIl co-g,"ujij~a.c.!!1-c-o",
OuilD
E ~~ g8 ~ g-~R2 ~'iij~~ i i~;:,~
o:ij~E~g~3"'1l~iiOi~
o[;'g~i :~~1l1ll2E_~::'iij~:E~",5i~E a ~ ~:
s ~-g ~f ~
E ~~~ ~ ~;., ~ 'E ~1jl.
c ,0", D- 0 '" ., !: 0 to
Ol01.0 eo 'i! .ia g-~e:~~=~~~;g~-2:~~~~flZ~~~~8ggu~
2e~a~~i ~~~K~~~~~~E~
g~~~&j~:g r!~~g!i-B g g.~ X.
I:
U)""Ul
o E g
g.00
z
i
L. ~ "~"
8 ~
o~
g",~ ~ ~
So~
iij
2-?i:
ll~
S~ ~~-~~~~
Ei f& ~~~~~ ~~jD-~~~~gg~
b$E~
o>--
o fU~
E~ ~m i..!~o.~-g=_,_<ai~E~~E~~ _"'urn_", .0 c_u_'E u~
E*8~~<U~~~
i~;~ ~u~~;
gu-
gEf~
E~
E~
Ql~~ ~~~~~~~g Q"'i5~
g'~~
S~~",~ciij~iijoa.>",~~oco~.oue~~"'u~<
UEE~o~o~g",e<UQ.,
u5~~_41~1ila:~ @,~ :6~S a.g! S~
a~ ~_~~~i~~;~~I~;~~i~fi!!'~~2sD-~;~1~8 i~~i~~~~~~~~~~~
Th~~~~~~~~5~_~on~~~~u~I~3uw~~>>~~E~~
I i'i:
x
w "
z
z 0
I-
0
Z 0
w "
z
z
0 0I- ;::
0 <(w ;=
E
I-
W "
w
E ,0o.
0w
w Q:
o.
E
o.
o
g'~
5iD
8.~~
i:~~
CI)
q
o.
o 2
81 I-~~ ;~
5 .~
i]i:
c%
I ______
t
3
E
g
i C~.!!O~
C:z:::..!
ciOco;
E
E
3
g
f-_.------
C:
z:::..!
O~J____
11_ <!
lO'" '"
2~~ :
E~
ll <
iS5}='~-5~
0Ea:
1!2~~
E~:O0<:"'0 W
5-
6~:~~6 ~.~
8,oE~g..~~ol:l~:g aDO ~ .,;f~i:.
g::
c t'iija.~~_~
iiio"':~o.Q:I~~
2g~o gGi g! g-
i .ti~.r:'~~
ijij.~~b)~~8j:!!~f-------2~ <:~
28 -€ 5:g i i ~ ~~
2 't- CeO
ii ~ ~ ~ ~-'IIOIl
c-;::
i %~~@'g
Ul,sffi.,.:
j Ol/
l 0<1)
a::w
ll::w V,
l u.(/)j~;
3 >-Vl...J </
J...J ~U:-' iT:-' :
J I~~ ~ ~ ot wZ
wZ ~5:ij
a s ~~ ffi
t JU ~~ ;I:~__ :!____m ~
b <D a:1<1) "', ~
I I
r ill'
au u
o g1"-
c:-
E:
ilE~
g~
i~a
g.~
8.E
III ""
Ill gif
Q0"
mu
S:~
EO
5Q 0"
muS:
j;O
l 0 5
u u
3
g
I
t-----
I
E
f----- .----- .-------. -- -._---
I
n___ __ _.__ __
I
I
TI ~---
Ql C !'O _..,,=,
1? ~_2> -
g <>
i~~U~
O
c ~~~
2
N ~~ ~~>~~ '
O:
ln~
LO
0 OJ 0 ~5,~~1?~.:Q> ~~~~~~~
OioUQ>..
g~
1~~~c ~
E55}~~~
5~€~:~~,~
8~
ij~
iii c E';::;"<
lJ'E>~:~:~gTI",:il_s:
3'
g _
6~ti
n:l ~ roN!
oJ>
u ~ g o>~g I .;:::- .
91 ~ Z- G> -
l~'C .!E ~ <\
I ti oJ> OJ
Q mD~_O'__~~D~OjG>_U~~~g~~;gU.!
2cg-01ii-g6o.Q2 f G>:lG>~G>~DC:lU~O<\
l
g", o~E~~~~~~~~~G>~~
I) l{) IZ .0 ~ Z .0 IJ.. :!' , <( m ;: !;; E L fi TI Q Q
Q Q0 0 "
0 " 0 " ,0 "1~~0 ~ 0 ~ 0 :2:
0 u
u u
IU 0 " CI "5li: liJ 00 ~Gi l)Zw QJl?~05?~ ~
u..O WO F~:::?;
0-
00 u-<(lJo t-
u:<(
ffiz~1J..J~zl-;-
Q~~
OQ~l-U:u:ow~
oog~::
J I) Xu:
Z-'ffi~
ffiU)tng1
1-50~
Zow 3~~:::8~;:
ffiz iQ
zs'"
o .cr]3g;g
I
O-,wL.l..
F~I;;;:~O5:<(
l=~~~U)
cr:~::
J Zwo<>:00-
1I::::l uO~(
J I oNI
o o
o I~
TI@~N
N'"
i~.
cr,
c o
Z
N
Co
1-
x
z
z
0
I-
o
Z 0
w "
z
z o
0
I- ;::
g"w ;=
i:i: ~
ii:
w
I-
wE (
3
It 0
W
w o
i
o.
o
5:
5 ;;
II!
l
i:
1Ilq
2 2
o U
en>;;
c:-
c:
0
0
01
i"i!
g' ~i~u o.
aQ
o
s
ai
g~;~
6
g-~ ~
lIl""
lIl I
E
2 E
g t: ~
iijoc
s!::t::.!!o~E
f
2
c!::
t::!!
o~
D .2 ~~.!!~<
l>~
6!~
OF!';!
Z~
o'"i.
fJo~>.-
6~:
g~g~~~!
L~~:
g!itl. ija:
5l3g-afa:~ ~c: :
2 l'l <1>
0 tJ e ~ g"
i;
j i2:~~E:::~:il5ia..EE.i2go~,,-oE~~O'E-o~
13,E liii~~.
E i !~~
gsaiii~lIlg>o-~II "" E !2 "" E _0
0 lii -li 0"
Olu i'co 2: 1[if a oc
wZ
0
Go
z~
t;
o.w
ot1ufo 6~
ffi~
f=~~~
go
So: <(
i ~f=~i=I)~~~
ZwO<
C oa-
lI:::
J OOC!
lO g . '"g.~ ~
i
I I
2 f
2"1
I
I
i
l
I
gi!~
1J~:l;~-" ~ -:~"
8i-;-
I>
iiQ"'ffil'l-ECill:t5::
lOlc:
l~
u.
c:
i5 <
ooOOju"''''&
o E~~~~~5iG~<I>!82Q _~~~::
l ~
E~~~~",O 9~~:
g'8~~~~
B<Il
o~ I'~E~~ fil ~ fi{l ffi_~~-guE lii :a ~ ~.,g
E E ~ g"5. (ij ,u ~ c
c :ilJl OIlg.:ii <i <
I> 0.2 &g~~5~~a5rt5~
gEE~'~~8~g~~2~~~&~R ofo~~~Ue&~~~2c:2-5~<I>ao"'5~E~~ge l} ~ g ~ ~Jj ~ E (5 ~.2
ar ~ :?& ~ ~ ~,gj m u iii 8 :;8i~~~E~~~
i!~8IfiE~8eu~e~~~~:~~i c~~~-_~ ~~u~ OCcrn_Qmmc~
rnu~i! u ~ <tI ,_2 ~ c -E ~ S ~ --g !!! ~ <tI = 0; ..,. <tI ...
e.1ii u,g> <II - ~ 1 ~OIE~~<
tI~oo ~~~
m~m~~~E~crnw~
g~;~tI~~~:~u~~~~~~i~iEi~~~c~~QYB g ~ 5i.g ~ ~ ~ ~i ~ -
5 ~ t ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ g.~ g ~.e ~ ~ ~~ ~uz ~,l:; ~.,~_:J_ 0 E<nz ~_~~ < O-O::Eu.. D1L(
J rn:;l OlD 0.. 0 "
0 QO-ij 0 Q 00;c in:
o f---1----------z zw5 w5o.. ~~z~ ~z~QQzzQQzz 5 ~~~5 L ~~~{L
IWOZ
IWOZ
Q ~~~
Q
8~~ ~
8~~
u~_~~ ~!;;:
2ffi
z ii~!;;:~
u..1- <(/)
Z ZwZz
zwZz
Z 0<
0:0
o<~o
L o~~______ ~_~_~__ ___.
o.w
o ~z
3 I
j 00
o.
E
o
I ,
l ~5~
fj --
I .
E
e
3
E
g
i
g''&
5 '
ii
i~l Jli:-
E 3
o. ..0
E
jj ..
2
g x < i
0 I-
0 w "
z
z --0
I~
ii
I-0 Z
0
6 ~E ~w "
z z ~al~
U)
0 I- 0
0 <( "'=..!w ;= ~ot!J
i ii: --
I-
W
w
p i ,0 .
EU o. .0 .. Ew
a
eu ~w . ~0 <
Egi0
noo 1----
l_-ai~<:: ~ .9
i~
w.,~ ~ ~
1~~~~~
Q-~
OoO_~"'~
Io,
OjE
o-
g~~:::E,=,~ e~ ~
g <
l>u2l!
jJ <l>o,(j:::
C u:
i 15 ~ ;.~ ~ ~
81;;i:~~~~~
o!l:s
g~~~~g~~~~i?
01ll_=
iiO<l>(lJE_f~~~:;~~~~e;~~~~~~:'i
O 0..-" n"iiQ a:
al:::E :il f-----~.-
I r!~~
g~i~gg.~ ~l/)..::(
I)
j!a:
5: a
1------
1---------li 0"Qz w5
gzzo 8: ~ ~:3
a:::
E
a..2 :
cwo z
Ii
l::;~~
Q go ~
8~~i
g';;:~
ffi
ffi~!
2
0<(
0:
0
urau
ci {'l E'
Z ~i z
en w<2WU)
l!l S52~!-
o f:
d~!-U):SJ..~
lJ...l!
lU i~i5~:
ilt~~
Izw~
a:-
J-o
1::::
sa:
IO~::E~
5: a:'=(!jZw<
l/)~05:
zWU::E I-
al 'oi3:;:j;~:5 g()~~
55~frl l2g~~~(
I)a:Oa..
oo...z O<CL<
OW I;5.
12 D~~~ glfIC><
DQ/Ia.!!<l>II>
g:::E ~ iil.
8 ...-0.:;; ~II <( --.... ,',' '
tl '" !::K,g~~-'
E~o :;'~Ql ~
a.:
i.a
g-c.~';
c f: ;'_2-6 ~.~ ~~ ~.2
fl~~~~~~
a~~6~;<Ile.s~8~~
l~~8 au'
05 w~f~~lij:
g N 6 0: U)U
o
D
1 J f-----
f------- ----Iij ~-
g '"P>~ _ ~ :5 <<
l ~ m o -
2~-gg
l c,~~"
2:s~~ 'iijj.g€
5Ui<lJ~6->' .~~~
g.
1ti~
E.
g>
c~~ -
l1:5.
g.~_*~g- ~-;~~
5-~~,"n .!:<<lC_l.~~
8~~ ~~~~5j~g~~~u ~~-~~
u",gg-~",~ -=:;",
g~
6--S~n.:l",~ :
5g~;U'"n. :5
a :-2 ~ ~ ~ ~:5 ~ :~~rog~~.~~~Q~
g~~~g.,g1 ~'S.D '
6 0.1;; ~ '" <
1l55--g-;
ij~~6~5ga:::o_~ ~_::. ~._:'
l-_~~~o.0 S
w li o.ou g
0 S W f-------0
u w w
I~0 z 0 w 5 5 w
w
zz 0 0u0
ti~ ......
u
z'
0"
u.
u~
f--.
u d, ~
w
rn
0 !z
t-
x
I-
ffl "
E ~
z _
0
t:
o
z
0
w "
z z
o
0
In ~I !:
2 W
I-
i I-fd 0
o.
0
W
W
u
iO.
2 !,! <
l>
faCo~
o. -'.~ ,~.~o
DQ
g~ ~
2, ~ ~h.
g~~;;"~
o '
6~~~
s o~=.~ U...~
e g
E "~~~~.~ <g'~
2~E.~
S" ~~~.
s6g
U"" '. ,. "." """"'0' "",'
c. ~~c 2_oe~"_ '
Uuu' .
OEO, ~
O-
t,..."<.
O .EU"2~
0",,, "'"'' '"'' .,.," """"'" """
0 ",,' ."...."" """
0. "." """'"" ...,..
g.~~~
q6u88 U~=
8= "
dug ~~
gg.~
E~~~1> ~;;"2E1>0 '..... ..... """.,." "'.:,
0;;2~SS g~.
En
ii-
u.~
e~.~3E" O~O P~
6.
s"ii ,,,,;, .". .""". '"",,,,,,,,.l 'I'"'''''' ",.
0' "".".;"""""",,,,0" .
0........,.,.,.."., -eo,g-
fii~
g'
uge,'
2u'
n~ ,,~~~g~ 'g~.u~~~H..~
E~"~!o"'~~'
j&-E~O
c.cuo_",. u .-u
O'
u_~.~ "
oc~._">. _
i ~ ~.
8
E ;5 ·
2 ~
6 0 - g < E u u ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ " S ;; ~ ~ _ ~ 0 8 "
c ~
I_c. ;;;- ~.
u_ ~..'""
c._a....~ ___h~
j;
5~
q:~
EO
H !~~
g
o:",-~ ~-' -- --- li_8.E~u~~~~~_~~oo",-=-----___ Q O.E'H.~<,_" ___ . ~"If jjo
ro
Om ~Ol'
1
IIIc.u
0
5
ro
I
2
o.
E
t
o
lJl",::o;
S5:.
2-;;
o~ i.
u
1Il
2:
o jj 2
o
u
1
I
El~~
g~~.~D.~ D.o:;>:!:(/)i B o
lJl"";;.::
o;
2i
gt;"
2
D.~
D.
O:;>::
flll
I~I
ol!!
J e
E
g
o3
0_
Ole:;;
c.
i5
0 o~
g j
D go.
w
6
Zw
Z
g
0
tn~
z..
8~
o "
0
dl g'
z
en
I
1- ---I
o
o
o
I~
IZ
@
@
I~
i ~ -
I:
U !____
8~ __________
Lf]I~
I w
ig
10 w5
wZ
0 utn~
f-~
I~ I I
I~rc
x
I-
w "
z
z Co "
0
I-
0
z 0w "
z
z
0 0I- ~0 w ;::
ii'
I-
W "
w0 o.0
w
1- ;;
w
E
o
g
ij E ~
g~
c%
q o.
1l i
o
u
g'
5 :
5
ij
2
8.g~Jl~:u
a I II
01
rl~~
u
a
g-=
8.
l!(
I)""
U)it 21
J!;I:~
o~
i .. .... .. +-I
5
E g
Cll: ~
og 3
g
iI!;=~cfog
g'
I
15", ~
TI~ '
iij
Q ~ ~ ~ <
ll
g'- ~ ~ - '
E
E
l~
l~ 5,III
i-oa:_~~~"'~'6-fii ~i5e.D.s :!2~.2jij2.
Qo:Ig> E."o_g_ ~ceo,
O'l!/ij",ebTIt: c1:iO<l>a5~<Uc'iii~
5"ii<1> ~Cliiii?:'t:c8:l_0"'08<l>o.<ll~c no~';"t<ll';:::<llg>
c;,:2i~ ~G1ij ~ '" g !!.s ~ ~ ~ :; ~ ~ ~:;: 5 lij :12
g ~ e ... ~ ~ ~~ f.;5 ~~~~g.~.!~,l1:,"~ll-gEoc~ og>guua.:-~~iii15>.~l>1ij oO--O.;<ll<llTIiii~:lC.D~ -o~~~!LcOEm~~gO 8~gg>8.f1EE~~>-Sl-
o~:l! g~1;a:~~-~E.~~g~~;~t;
c ~~~~~~~~~~.i~E~E~~ ~~~6~g~"'~~~a.1't5E e '" u E ~! ~ ~ ~ : ri
2 OJ ~ ~o:: -c ~ ~ ~ ~ -5 ~ ~ ,S: -f. ~ ~ (5 ,: -6 ~
B!!i~E:~ig~",iE:~m~ !i~J9~~,Qo~<
llTIQgft~E -- ","'_'OC:l",
g><ll~~e _- --OE<ll:gt5miii-Eij~~[ijl'a"'~~~E~:~~~~~~~~~~~~
l8~~~~~~~TI~~~on. E (ij "' a. 0.
iii ::> <ll C - III0TI0 '0
0 E to c .!!!. III C c q.'~ O::
l (J <
Ii E C
l.~_!~_.~ g ~ ~.,'g ~~ ~_!~!~_ ~~~5~~_~H 0 5>0.wo W~0 610.wo o u
w 0 w s
w
a:
0 5
Si
i=[:'?
w
o
a
z
o
w
5
w
z
o
t
ffi~
I~ ~
w
o
a z
o
w
5
w
z
o
R
w<
o~
2 ,
ro
m
d; " "g'Z " " "iI i f---------:--J
I
i
d
c '
0 <
Ii
II
E .
c'
ii: -~ _
U
0'
EG~ ~ :~(
H~ ~
rn..c:J
n>
n>.'l:
J (;
0 ~
5-
ts~
E::~~~a.~~2 =.!2.
8
i:
rn 0 'ij "' Qj
E~ ~~~ rgtill~cjit:;"'~~~a:E26~~~Gg:~
e~o~~f;
j~
a..~g'
to E
illll}! G g~~ ~~ ~~m 00 g 00 0
I l u::
u::'2 ~[2 I t3 ou ou i
f= ~ ~ ~ >i ~
UJ ~ ffi
i=
WUJ WUJ 0
z0
z 000 00 z ~E ~B l ~}:! ~~
I
5050r..!---f':[
1
g := :::
I
ID ~)
to
o
o o
o f.
c;;:!
o~
m
9: .
3
o.
E ~
g
o. :;
0
rf~~E
8..g' ~3]~c;;: !
O~
C
o.
Q
r.
n'iali!
Cq'?q . :
2.~ 0
S ~
gf 3
Q~~
o. "o
0.<1>
E
E :g1:~
n .2 ggJ = '"
C X . :; u ~
0
I>'
Z cr
0 '" E g
u ~ . "Etii u OC
W " :
g :J :3 0_
w . 0 z z ----
0 .~~
s]!I-
g.~0 z .~~&~
ou 0 .~J'lw " :5 ~~ X. " 0
z ,,~ ~ "
z0 0 I-0 <( c;;: .!
w ;:: ~o~ii' -----
I-W
w
j;
i ~
0 .u
o. .0
o. .wa ~
3
w . .u <E g
i
0g'~
s Oii
i~Ex..g>"
2
i:-
0
ga:
1------ - -
W
0 lL [B
0
u E ~ 5
l: ::d5
g'
@Q
3] ;Q0 WW
35
z~
I~:0
11;i
I t--
t----I
I 1
I 1----
ciji~
g~ ~ ~
i
tl~
g>-g~f-..
Q ~ ~:
il15
9"':'
2~
o_
E~
r.
n~"
O
o1?
i:E~~E~~&~ ~~E
fr~g~:
i:
u~2"O:
il~~~~~O>"O~O"'<I>O''''<
I>~u~'''o.O'K:M ~~e~ ~ e ~'6-~
EO~g.~_Q ~
g.Mg'.iig;6.~ ~g-g g>
1?~y;y~&~~ti~~.~: .o__~wcw~"O~r.n~
w"O o ~ ;; ~ ~ ~ ~ g>~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 8.~5~::>
g<llE~""Eg.Qc8oo>e~f_![J.~~
Ew03wun zEo.!c~~g.9~
Elil~-g,2f2.9~&6 s-t5
t5E~&:1?8..~ ~
a:.~ 6o~o",>.a 0.' a.-gwiii i2f~oS
g'~ '
l';?"O
a.,g -
j2 & -5 ~
IIi:.
o~0-= >
o u 0
a w .~6
o a ~ .o :
Q
Q ~~u" ""0-0
0 ~~i 0 ~w z ~...
0 ~u...
wo w
o..a~
I~ 5 ~
g:??
j<
cW
Qoo..
ia5~
z !::
wo o>w
oz
0 ZO~0<
C ;::
00:
0(
1)00..
0.. Z
IW(
I)
W ::l
l;l~~Q
W~W I<
CI-U ::>
Za:
o..!::I~ ;;)
5 " i=wU"
JDo:iffi '" U"JI::>
Zi3 ><;1-----,
0 lLU) wOo..o 0 z C " "0 "- --z <( ~
I-o co w
I"10~w ou5
W~Oz
00i=u
ww 55 z"
w wu
5OW
oz
zo
i=
cO
w"
w"
W
5~
z2
I-
u_ --
f---
I C
U
o
U
C
0
g' <
i>
8 ~ ~ ~
g~
2j(
j) ~~~
2~ ~
J ~"
O
ES~ ~
I ] ~ ;!~
f~'!~~ ~~
iii
t: ~~~
E& ~
g ~
g ~
2~
fiI1l~~~~ -
i ~~
1~fEgu:~
o~~~
f: :~~~~
i~~~&~~
E~~~~egee 3
0.;:
ii: !'l4l:2Qi ",-<c.!!
1 <c-5
oE-
5
1~g~~
U"J[/j
c;.':!u 5g
00
o u...wu w
o"z"O
0....o..wo
O>W zo~oa:Ow OQ..0..2 tj~~Q
ZIJ:Q..!::
w(/)o U"
JI::>
Z
0
WOo..
o
N
h 1
x
I-
w "
z
z i;" "
0
I-
0
Z 0w "
z
z
0 0I-
0 <(w ;::
i
ir
I-
W "wp ~ ~0o.
0
w1- s:
w
0
o
I
El.~ ~I ~ ~~
8-
EUl'""
Ul
I
1----q
o.E
oU
r--
i
C'
I'="
e-
I.
5Oo..!!
o~
1l 11 l'EII.
2'~OCt.:::: Cl.2~:::EUl
Ic----u
o.a
I I
I
o
g,'=:
c-
5!~
i1i
s
g-!
i ~
iUl""l/)
e ~.!
o~
0 Ii
ot!,g
i
l!!
o~
0
0>-
U
C :
J '"
II
Oll
0 .::. '
l:
u
iij 2 ~ ~ ~ ill C
a:
E "'.. 8:g ~e <u.
2 -g.9 -
ti e ~E "<I> ~,~~s "
tl.!2I .,gc "'0",C" c ~ ..<:.!!
C
Ciu II 6 -
g ~ ~ Qj <l> 0 28
OO)[~,~4il."'53l ~L~
2~~SL2 :;:;2~ ~~(f)g~g"
O~~~~'~~5
g 8]j ~ a~ ~
11 ~ ~1-"'.9
ti
Q I~~
ilg-o ifu o.
I
I r-.
ti-~! -~
T --------
I~ ~
2 ~
g
i-
S ~
13 ~
iij 15 ~ ~
E ~2 :
5 ~; ~
5
g'
i5",tla::~f~~~
J~1- iT---------- -----
I <01_
a~o u
Nc _g~
0 g~
Zl 2
315
ilg o
u
0
l)
r.
i
3lrltl
i@
6~
I-
zIT:
O :
5
on.
a:
w
E@~ ~
a:
o>
w
w Z 20m
0 08g:lr~~ ~
g g;~6 ~:t xl-....
JOa:
oei.woo..
oa. 01-g . I~, ~ '
7 ~ 'I'i~
I~ ~ ~ ~:'E
g i
o _ u
l <:2 E
1ij ~ :l.!,' 8.
1- ,.., ~ <l> 1_
o "i .s..:' ~:g.
g <! 1ii .
8.
z ~
ii
a.iii~..
Q.Ql6.~~::
l<a ij8$",..i<l>-"l)<Il.2..
c:~II -g.9- _ -E 'iii ~ E 'ijj ti;":
g ~ ;]l ~{j ~ .8 ~ 'is- ~3: ~:-
Q'::' a; c.:: a;: 0. toli:o.,
g'l:~~'SE"''gi;jl1E_~o Ql :> C
E tS Qj Q.- rj-
jU ti~:S 5.2$ ~_-?':: ~~1;l iij
B-.';,-~g ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ iij: g ~o..oE.=
qj~~EiD::l:.~,~I>*g~5o:!25~~~:a I-
EuooE5:
3:Ec<(o_c 0:9 5
jJ~o o z ...g5!~
ga w"w"'zz.
o o[ga:uU<(UJtl:;;:~tu i:O~ltg~
tii a.
lta:<(
uJ<(<(
w
Itrwa:
1-
1-
5:<(
N
UJ 5
I---I
I o
oM
u g..
9 go"
O "i:
a:g.:~
Oli I~
I~E.
g>
1!06>
is.
wo
I~
0
I~
t;
5
I
g ~!!!
Q '~:
Ill -
z gffl
I~ 0 Sfi3~
I~ffi
U ~
I-=
a =
al-
sg :is
i3~~
ii3 ~
I I
u
l!:t::f
og
I .E
I .
2: .
i
g
i0
010::
1::-gg.2~
g~i-
E 5
g-~ &l!:
t::f og
q .
E ~
E
g
X .
i
0 I-
U
w "z
z ~-
Co "
0 g,"c-
I- ~
g.5!~0
z g~ i~
0 c to:: -w " ~~i~
z z 0
0
I-0 <( l!:.,.!w ;:: ~og ii: ~-I-W "
w 0
i ~0 .
u o. .0 o. .w
a .
w . .u <ii E
g i0
g)>:c-
i g ~
3,
0
5 g-; &
w
g~ <(
z
1-----
w I-
w
I-Z 0 "
I-ffl
0
w w
E <(ci
z
E'
z
W
i !:;
I <(
2~l> ~[
i5-~~=
3 ~~
E~g~~g>
E<
l>~Ol
g~E~~a.~ ~<
l>.~
i.
gl~..; '"
C
C'
0.<1>,,,,O.~~:~~~~Ct"'U~<l>.R':02u"'<l>
c;8<':ljij~~{j g<
lJ",~'C<l>",<ll"iil
g-[i-
gm8::~~~:f oiii~eg'iij.2~:
g<l>o ti ~
2:~ ~ _~ OJ :3:2 II>u ="" '"
L: o.".:g
5.1ii1:8!g;2~~1;a
O.mo 5 uU wz
w o ...w~ w 50~ "
U 08:Vl O~5~~ ~"w
Owz
o~
u",
s
U"wO
s... ~"
z ....w ...
t:
il-O "'
0 wI~
wu I~O
IW W
M <( ~J: ::>
I- ~ 0 ~w
I
1 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ 0<
1>
II> D~",6
e ~22o ~ <
II c~ _~ L:
u02~~~Q~
1>.
2 Ct
0",="
1
m "" ~
cm ~
1- ~<l>"'~^,~<
l>O<
l>=
u ~$ !'!Ol;:--;_ ~ ~ v_ ~~v Ol u~C<
l>~oL:",E.~T8~~~~;B~~~
c~a~~~u)ij c-"'..o<lle _:
i}Q)<ll"'.I:~_u:
J:;
c"'cuc'"::l88g l>i~<ll~oS..~
SO<l>
E>_II> "'ee~.
R~co-E e5~~~~i;~~~~E~~E~~m~~~m~;~~c~~~gii~c-u=ti~~~gu<l>~",~L~~m.l:<l> c~~~~m~
28~E~!~~~~~~~~E~~gE$~g~~~~~.2 I:~~
uoj~R:E-~~t~J~o~o~O~~"'a&~<l>~
g ~ ~~~1~S~'&"-' E-;; ~uM~ ~~~ fdOi1!~.~~t
rr",cC;~:g~E~ ~~L~gmg~~=g<l>~
U~0 g:;
e-~ ~~-[~.. ~ ~~~lj~~~ ~~~~:; Q;!!-;
r~.~~ ~
c~oe~~~CU~~CtC~
Ct<l>~"'o"Ct~u~~c_-~~o.0_<l>
o.~-
C~~~8Co.c~~"'~ SU~"'-"'~
L 00.. 01-
E ",:2 0.0 _~' ~,,".!'1 ~~_~~__Ol~ E~..o 0.0=
a
O.U Ei:eO 0 I -i i
1
2'
2
x
ffi ~
E (!l
z '"
0
8 ~w "
z
z
o
0
I C3
w ;::E
w "0
j
o.
0
ill
W I
o
o.
o
g'
osi
a.~
E &.
eJl:EU)
q
E
2o
u
go"
g:
5 .!
i
tIl _"'jjj g co.:!:: D.o::
l::
icno~u
g>i E~
g
i
o~U ~ ,
6
5 ~
0 <
D ~ ~
i'!
a
a~<
urnU~~<
UE~EiE8
0_ ~& -<ti'~c:
fi~,~
ol:g 15 Iii ~ u ~ 18 ~ ~ ,~ ~ E
iii TI :.! .
9 5i ",
E~E -ci~a;iiiOjOi'!{
ijB2o:5!'1:l:~E "'2~
E <g:!'~:;:-~c~!:,
q'tlg>o~:;:;202l~~=~~~,,~..~<oE ~~-:;~
g&.ge-~:g-;~g~~rr :
s~"'"' iiiC.90E<:_=>><D,;:;,<:
o:a-g 5 o;_5,~ -;-si:;~8~8~~~TIiio>-8 dloEE <
I>C''''aI'5'''''' ....<
II$
uE"':c
rr ~; ~ ~ ~ g ~ ~ lag -8 _~. 2 ~ &~ E ~ ,,g)
ijl:C..
C'O-
a. 0<:
0;0 "'cl".!!
Cl:TC
E :;<
I>"'_0l.:iiz~o1!Ea;QlS'
iij~B8'E~:ll i6i'!gil~~-E. '" _0 ij-::l...:;: ""-
0...._
u
a u o g c: a.:!:: a.Jl::E(I)r-o1i0zi
I
I
Q
0..
ut00:
E::g~o.
o
o
0
o if
i
oII __
mu ,~
i ~-;-~-" ~
I
I~
l " . ~ .
15 ~ ~ ~
g"" ~ ~ g { ~ ~ ~ ~
I:> ~
V> '" '" ()
t:: '- '- '" _ '
v," '"
TI ~
0 .
K~
t t~
i~~.~$ ~~~
o-<: l8 ~-;;;~~~
li6-:
6"'
g"~:;8~ ~~~8!~~~~
g-
g fru~~~~E~~~~
2~~~~g~~B~~~~~
EE~~~~
g~~E~~~
8~
oo
it3~~;:E~':
S~u Ql :l:; ~ ~..
Qg:g-as~r 0:i
I UC;
jO'o
0-a:g-o W I @0...ou o'w
Ww
m 2D~o ~5~3a:
Or--
a::
lll0Ul
a:!
g~
o
t
t
t-
o.
E
II
w:
E
iE ~
z _z
0
w"
z
z
00 ti
i=
9 ;3
w;::0
6 :
f
0 W
w
Q
Z
1i
cc~ (!
I wiUJI-
a::
z::
l-o..
WI-o ::!;~uz
a::
OCl~;';;ff:~
g~ttua:o c
g~~~z
ii~~~o
o
is "
z:
I ' .
5 ~ _.. ___ ____
1--"'-1 ~ --~-.- -~
0 ~ ~ L 02u .n ~ '=
iil "" >;reiU~ ~'ii:~s~~a:
I
E.!ie.~~-
g~"'"'~"'E u-~~ggp~~Qlg.E.
s~lii,
g!;:-
g:g2<.)~UO~j"OOQ 8 ': ~~:'.~ H~~~~~~
1. c; .!2l: a: :,
E ~
r;-
g ~ a >- E ~ ~ ~ 1.i g~~~:ij~C:g~~inie1ij_~._g.g.
31~~~
OlL oI g'cq;~iii ~t.~t.
EU)
t: ~o~
E
E 3
o
g i
g''&
ij,:
I ~
l}
i
I~
Jl::
EU)
5~
u
o o
E i m"'::
jji 1:00_
l:..!!:;;;
Ci
I;;
c.=
CI.
o;:
l;:EwE.g~
g..E
o 0 g.
zI liitJ
0
u
@ >. ~
1ij ~ -
5..
J: ~.~~'"
E~g'_ ~",N
C _
L., "'~,~
u~;
ng <
l>.8!~
i}~:
Jl:?'3:
g ..
cos
g2"'~iU~q:
li~~
e~ ~~
E iilliiO~~~~~2~E~~"'.n"'E~ ~~-g11 ~ ~ .
1. '" 0 -0 ~~ ~. 2 ~ . ~ g! ...Il"'-:SUE"'''''_
CQl
alL", L
g'Eill
qB;;.
Q""g:~"'~n~ :gc, ~,~~
a. U <
J.<:: ". ~ ~ 2! <u:: i!.: ~
g ~~ !
i!
e ~ u. _.- ii,
O>
e 5:.s 0.. -.
c _ . <E!!.
III:'."~:'
8Iil"~.5'1~~~~~~~~':~,j'~~~~g~8~ ~ ~~ I"OE...
C.I;;
01 e- 5:'_~ ~
I <
II
II>
S ~ :
g
8 ~
0'""2~
s~!'O
m.138rniio .Wo
5. Attachment A
ATTACHMENT A:
MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM REPORTING
AND IMPLEMENTATION FORM
p..'.,rLV-lJl' I"r IUVlddlli,,,;,,1 Alld!pi.'\i~liI-i\JOII Un Prr,/<<I I.m,!,I"". 11_,_ ),)j_,f,~The Planning Cemer .
SULLY-MILLER/FIELDSTONE COMMUNITIES
PROJECT MITIGATION MONITORING
PROGRAM REPORTING AND IMPLEMENTATION
FORM
Mitigation Measure # [SAMPLE FORM]
location On-site
Off-site Project Phase
Design Construction
Impact
Issue I
Operation Description of Activity/Method of
Implementation:
Disposition Mitigation measure for above-noted project phase implemented_ No further
action
is required_Mitigation measure for above-noted project phase not fully
implemented_ Further action required_ (
Please explain below_)Mitigation measure for above-noted project phase not
in compliance_ Further action
required_ (Please
explain below_)Comments/Revisions:
Completed by:
Approved by:
Name Name
Titl" TitleDate Date P.-\FLD-OIIFfJR'vlddirilllla/ AllafJIl,\A111-..\jlJl/ Rn p,',j.,,[ Temp/"I< 1).nY()),d,~The