2000-090 -Recommending Certification Of The Final EIR Report And Adoption Of General Plan 2000(.
RESOLUTION 2000 - 90
RESOLUTION OF THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF LOS GATOS
RECOMMENDING CERTIFICATION OF THE FINAL .ENVIRONMENTAL
.IMPACT REPORT AND ADOPTION OF GENERAL PLAN 2000..
WHEREAS, the Town of Los Gatos has prepared the General .Plan .2000 to
.replace the outdated 1985 General Plan, along with anEnvironmental Impact Report
(EIR); and
WHEREAS, the implementation of the General .Plan 2000 is .intended to
preserve the small town character of Los Gatos, establish a community vision and
support a sustainable community.; and
WHEREAS, the General Plan 2000 establishes goals, policies and
implementing .strategies to maintain and .achieve these desirable attributes; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Government Code section 65351, numerous
opportunities were provided for the involvement of citizens, public agencies, public
utilities, and various :civic groups through, .among other things,, the meetings of two
General Plan Taslc Forces and the General Plan Committee over atwo-year period;
and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Government Code section 65352, the Draft General
Plan 2000 and the Draft ETR were circulated to all necessary pub is agencies and
interested civic groups; and
WHEREAS, under the provisions of the Government Code :and the California
Environmental Quality Act, the Planning Commission conducted duly noticed
public hearings about certification of the EIR and adoption of the General Plan on
June 3, 7, and 12, 2000, and adopted Resolution 2000-2 on June 14, 2000,
.recommending that the Town Council certify the EIR and adopt General .Plan 2000;
and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission recommended adoption of the General
Plan .2000, and the Town Council considered all recommendations set forth in
Planning Commission Resolution No. 2000-2; and
WHEREAS, the Town Council conducted duly noticed public hearings and
received public testimony about General Plan 2000 and the Environmental Impact
Report (EIR) on June 26 :and July 10, 2000; and
WHEREAS, the Town Council found that the Final EIR for the General Plan
.2000 as recommended for certification by the Planning. Commission on .June 14,
2000, was prepared in compliance with the California. Environmental Quality Act
and guidelines and is complete;
THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: The Town Council certifies the .Final
Environmental hnpact Report (EIR) subject to the Findings and Statement of
Overriding Considerations in Exhibit A, attached hereto;
FURTHER RESOLVED: The Town Council adopts the General Plan 2000
Mitigation .Monitoring and Reporting Program dated July 2000 (Attachment A of
Exhibit A);
FURTHERRESOLVED: The Town Council finds that the updated General Plan
2000 is consistent with the goals of the community and that all proceedings have
been conducted in compliance with the provisions of Government Code Section
6.5.350 et seq.
FURTfIER RESOLVED: The Town Council adopts General Plan 2000 dated
July 2000.
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a .regular meeting of the Town Council of the
Town of Los Gatos, California, held on the 17t" day of July, 2000 by the following
vote:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
AYES: Randy Attaway, Jan Hutchins, Linda Lubeck, Joe Przynski,
Mayor .Steven Blanton
NAYS : None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
SIGNED
MA~%OR
LOS GA
ATTEST:
~~~ ,~
CLERK OF TIME TOWN LOS GATOS
LOS GATOS, CALIFORNIA
GATOS
Exhibit A
TABLE OF CONTENTS
SECTION I. CEQA TOWN OF LOS GATOS GENERAL PLAN 2000 EIR .STATEMENT OF
FINDINGS AND FACTS
1.0 Introduction ............................... ................... I-I
2:0 Description of the Proposed General Plan 2000 . ............................ I-3
3.0 Certification of Final Environmental Impact Report .and .Adoption of Findings ........ , I-3
4.0 Effects .Determined to be Not Significant or Mitigated to aLess-Than-Significant Level .. I-7
5:0 Significant Environmental Effects Which Cannot Be Fuliy Avoided if the General Plan
2000 Is Implemented ... . .. . ........ . ....................... , :.... I-39
6.0 Alternatives to the .Proposed General Plan 2000 ........................... I-40
7.0 Findings Regarding Other CEQA Considerations ........................... I-45
SECTION'II. TOWN OF LOS GATOS GENERAL PLAN 2000 STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING
CONSIDERATIONS
1.0 Statement of Overriding Considerations .................................. II-1
ATTACHMENT A. TOWN OF LOS GATOS GENERAL PLAN 2000 MITIGATION
MONITORING .AND REPORTING PROGRAM
i
SECTION I
THE TOWN OF LOS GATOS GENERAL PLAN 2000 EIR
STATEMENT OF' FINDINGS AND FACTS
1.0 INTRODUCTION
Section 1.2 of this document provides a description of CEQA Statue as they relate to Findings. Section
1.3 provides a description of the public review process that has lead decision makers to their conclusions
regarding this proposed General Plan 2000.. A Project Description is provided to familiarize the reader
with the General Plan 2000, and provide the context. upon which these Findings are based. Section 3 of
this document presents the substantiation. for certification of the Finale EIR. The Findings in Section 4 relate
to those impacts that have been determined to be not significant. or have been mitigated to a less-than-
significant level. Section 5 contains Findings. for impacts that are considered significant and unavoidable.
Section 6 contains. the Findings for the alternatives to the proposed General Plan 2000, Section Z contains
Findings for other CEQA considerations. The Statement. of Overriding Considerations in contained in
Section. II of this document. The Mitigation Monitoring.. and Reporting Program is found as. Attachment
A to this document.
1.1 Description of CEOA Findings
1,2 California Environmental Quality Act.
The California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") (Public Resources Code Sections 21000-21177) and
the State CEQA Guidelines (Cal. Code of Regulations, Title 14, .Sections:. 15000-15387} require that
specific findings be made if a lead agency decides to approve a project which will have. significant impacts.
Section 21081 of the California Public Resources Code states:
[N]o public agency shall approve or carry out. a project for which an Environmental Impact Report
has been certified which identifies one or more significant effects on the environment. that would
occur if the project is approved or carried out unless both of the following occur:
(a) The public agency makes one,. or more, of the following findings with respect. to each
significant effect:
(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 be, adopted by that other
agency.
(3) 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.
RBF Consulting Town. of Los Gatos General Plan 2000'
N:\DEV\5UZANNE\GENPLAN\REPORTS\FINDINGS I-1 Statement of Findings and Facts
(b) With respect to significant effects which were subject to a finding. under paragraph (3) of
subdivision (a), the public agency finds that specific overriding economic., legal, social,
technological, or other benefits of the project outweigh the significant effects on the
environment. "
The Environmental Impact Report {"EIR") for the Town of Los Gatos. General Plan 2000 (State
Clearinghouse No. 1999122070) identifies .significant or potentially significant environmental impacts
which, prior to .mitigation as well as after mitigation implementation, may occur as a result of
implementation of the Town of Los Gatos General Plan .2000 ("Plan"). Thus, in accordance with the
provisions of CEQA Statute and the .State CEQA Guidelines, the Community .Development Department
of .the Town of Los Gatos hereby adopts 'these Findings.
1.3 Environmental Review Process
In conformance with CEQA Statute and the State CEQA Guidelines, the Community :Development
Department of the Town of Los Gatos conducted an environmental review of the proposed General :Plan
2000. The environmental review process'has :included the following:
•A Initial :Study/Scoping Process:
The Community Development Department of the Town of Los Gatos prepared a Notice
of Preparation (NOP) :and Initial Study for the proposed CEQA Project. The NOP was
distributed for public review on December 17, .1999. All comments received in response
to the NOP have been addressed in the Draft EIR,
Pursuant to Section 15060(C) of the CEQA Guidelines, :and Section 21083.8 of the State
CEQA .Statute:, the Community Development Department of the Town of Los Gatos
proceeded with preparation of an EIR. The Draft EI'R addressed environmental. impacts
in the following resource categories: Geology- .and Soils; :Surface Water
Hydrology/Drainage; Land Use Compatibility, Applicable Plans and Policies:;
Transportation/Crculaton/ Air Quality;. Noise; and Public Services, Facilities, and
Utilities. However, during the Initial :Study and scoping process, several impact. areas
were eliminated from the analysis in the EIR in each .resource category.
• . Preparation of a Draft EIR by the Community Development Department of the Town
of Los Gatos:.
The Draft EIR was distributed to Responsible Agencies, other affected agencies, .and
interested parties. The Notice of Availability of the Draft EIR was distributed as required
by CEQA, including publication in the local newspaper. The notice of availability
commenced a 45-day public review period on April 19, 2000 and concluded June 2, 2000.
Public hearings were :held by the 'Town of Los Gatos Planning Commission on June 3,
2000 and at two different times (afternoon and evening)on June 7, 2000 regarding the
Draft EIR. During the public review period, the Draft EIR, :including appendices, was
available for review at the Town of Los Gatos Planning Department, 110 East Main Street,
Los Gatos, California 95030..
RBF Consulting Town of Los Gatos General Plan 2000
N:\DEV\SUZANNE\GENPLAN\REPORTS\FINDINGS I-2 Statement of Findings and Facts
d• Preparation. of'the Final EIR:
The Final EIR. contains the following: written comments on the Draft EIR;. responses to
those comments; testimony presented to the Planning Commission and responses thereto;
and refinements and clarifications. to the Draft. EIR.
• Public Hearings on the proposed. General Plan 2000:
Public hearings were held by the Town of Los Gatos Planning Commission on June 3,
2000 and at two different times (afternoon and' evening)on June 7, 2000 regarding the
Draft EIR. All questions submitted verbally or in writing were responded toin the Final
EIR and subsequent memorandums.
2.0 DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED GENERAL PLAN 2000
Thee Plan evaluated in this EIR consists of a comprehensive update to the 1985 Town of Los Gatos General
Plan.. Based on an evaluation of the current General Plan's comprehensiveness, internal consistency, long
term nature, statement of development policies and diagrams, and format, the. General. Plan is proposed
to be updated to incorporate several recommendations, which are described in the paragraphs below.
Based on the outcome of the GPTF and Generale Plan Committee review of the preparation of the proposed
General Plan 2000, the intent of the proposed General. Plan 2000 is to develop policies and implementation
strategies to protect the quality of life, including.. the Town's environmental, physical, and economic
resources,. and to develop a sustainable community. The: proposed General Plan 2000 explains how the
Town's natural resources and physical features are to be maintained and enhanced,. and directs how the
Town will incorporate these resources. and. features into the Town's community investments, new projects,
and in-fill development.. Therefore, it is the intent. of the proposed' General' Plan 2000 to increase protection
of the Town's resources..
It should be noted. that. the proposed. General' Plan 2000 proposes no changes to existing .land use
designations, as specified in the 1985 Town of Los Gatos General Plan and subsequent amendments
thereto. The proposed General Plan 2000 goals,. policies, and implementation strategies address buildout
conditions in the Town. There are approximately 31,600 residents currently located within the Town of
Los Gatos, including: the Town's Sphere. of Influence. According to the Association of Bay Area
Governments (ABAG); an additional' 2,100 residents are anticipated in the Town and its Sphere of
Influence under buildout. conditions (ABAG Projections 96).
3.0 CERTIFICATION OF FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT AND ADOPTION
OF FINDINGS
On ,the Community Development Department of the Town of Los Gatos certified the Finale
Environmental Impact.Report (SCH No. 1999122070) (the "Final EIR") for the General Plan 2000 ("'Plan")
(Resolution #_). Based upon the substantial evidence in the record, the Community Development
Department of the Town of Los Gatos. finds and declares as stated herein.
RBF Consulting Town of Los. Gatos. General Plan 2000
N:\DEd\SUZANNE\GENPLAN\REPORTS\FINDINGS I-3 Staternent of Findings and Faets
3.1 The Community Development Department of the Town of Los Gatos is the "dead agency" for the
Plan evaluated in the Final .EIR. The :Los Gatos Town Council concurs with the Planning
Conunission Resolution #_ and supports the findings by the Community Development
Department of the Town of .Los Gatos that the Final EIR has been prepared in compliance with
CEQA Statute and the State CEQA Guidelines..
3.2 The Final EIR evaluates the following environmental issues: Geology and Soils; Surface Water
Hydrology/Drainage; Land Use Compatibility, Applicable Plans and .Policies;.
Transportation/Circulation/ Air Quality; Noise.; and Public Services, Facilities, and Utilities. The
Final EIR considered the significant and unavoidable environmental effects, if any, in each of these
environmental issue areas in .Section 4 and in Section 6 of Volume I of the Final `EIR.
Additionally, he Pnal EIR considered' in separate sections, the following issues: Cumulative
Impacts; .Significant Environmental.Effects Which Cannot be Avoided if the Proposed General Plan
2000 is Implemented; Alternatives to the Proposed General .Plan 2000; Growth-Inducing Effects
of the Proposed General Plan 2000.; and Significant Irreversible Environmental Effects Which
Would be Involved in the Proposed Action .Should it be Implemented.
The cumulative impacts of the General Plan 2000 and other past, ,present, and reasonably
foreseeable future projects were considered in the Final EIR as .required by CEQA (Public
Resources Code Section 21083) and the State CEQA Guidelines (Cal. Code of Regulations., Title
14, Section 15:1.30) . The cumulative analysis in Section 5 of the Final EIR :includes an analysis of
future environmental conditions in the Town of Los Gatos .and surrounding areas to the extent
required in order todetermine the significance of the Plan's incremental contribution to cumulative
- ..impacts.
_. The cumulative impacts analysis in Section 5 of .the Final EIR concluded that all cumulative
impacts resulting from the implementation of the proposed Plan would either 'be less~athan
significant or mitigable o a ess than significant level. These impacts are analyzed in Section 5.3
of the Final EIR, and in Section 5.1 of this document:
3.3 The Los Gatos Town Council finds that the Final EIR provides :objective :information to assist the
Town's decision-makers and the public-at-large in their consideration of the environmental
consequences of the proposed General Plan 2000. The public reviewperiodprovided all interested
jurisdictions., agencies, .private organizations, and individuals the opportunity to submit comments
regarding the Draft EIR. The Final EIR was prepared after the review period and responds to
comments made during the public review period (April 19, 2000 through June 2, 2000), as well
as those made at, or prior to the noticed public meetings and/or public hearings on the issues
relevant to the Draft EIR. The Final EIR also includes a summary of the oral and written
comments made prior to the Planning Commission Public Hearing and responses to those
comments.
The Los Gatos Town Council finds that the Community Development Department of the Town of
Los Gatos :evaluated comments on environmental issues received from. persons who reviewed the
Draft EIR. In accordance with CEQA Statute, the Community Development Department of the
Town of Los Gatos prepared written responses describing the disposition of significant
environmental issues raised {e.g., revisions to' the proposed General Plan 2000 to reduce
anticipated impacts or objections). The Final EIR provides :adequate., good faith, and reasoned
responses to the comments received by the Community Development Department of the Town of
.Los Gatos.. The Community Development Department ofthe Town of Los Gatos has reviewed the
comments received and responses thereto and has determined that neither the comments received
RBF Consulting Town of Los Gatos General Plan 2000
N:\DEV\SUZANNE\GENPLAN\REPORTS\FINDINGS I-4 Statementof'Findingsand.Facts
nor the responses to such. comments add significant new information regarding environmental
impacts. to the Draft EIR. The Community Development Department of the Town. of Los Gatos'
decision-makers have based their recommendation on full appraisal. of all viewpoints, including all
comments received up to the date of adoption of these Findings, concerning the environmental
impacts identified and analyzed in the Final. EI'R.
3.4 These Findings reflect the Los Gatos Town .Council"s final recommendation regarding the
significance of impacts of the proposed General'' Plan 2000 as approved by the Los Gatos Town.
Council.
3.5 The Los Gatos Town Council certifies that it has independently reviewed and analyzed the Draft
EIR and that the Community Development Department of the Town of Los Gatos circulated a
Draft EIR which reflected. its independent judgement.
3.6 The Los Gatos Town Council certifies that the Final. EIR reflects the- independent judgement of the
lead agency, identified as the: Community Development Department of the Town of Los. Gatos, as
well as the Los Gatos Town Council.
3.7 Changes or alterations have been required' in, or incorporated into; the Plan which mitigate or
avoid the significant. environmental effects: as identified in thee. Final. EIR and in Section 4.0 of these
Findings.
3.8 . Thee significant impacts of the Plan have been. mitigated to the extent feasible, Specific economic,
legal, social, technological, or other considerations including provision of employment
opportunities for highly trained workers, make infeasible. the mitigation. measures or Plan
alternatives.,. as identified in the Final EIR and. Section 5.0 of these Findings.
3.9 CEQA requires the lead agency approving a project to adopt a Mitigation. Monitoring and'
Reporting. Program for the project which it has. adopted or made a condition of the project approval
in order to ensure compliance with project implementation.. The Mitigation Monitoring. and.
Reporting Program,. a separate document,. included herein as Attachment A as certified by the Los
Gatos Town Council,. serves that, function for the Final EIR.
The monitoring and reporting program. designates responsibility and anticipated timing for the
implementation. of mitigation measures. Although the Mitigation Monitoring. and Reporting.
provisions of CEQA. apply only to impacts which. would be significant if not mitigated, the
program has been developed to address all' proposed mitigation measures. The primary objectives
of the monitoring. program are: (i) to establish a framework for the manner in which each measure
will be monitored, and (ii) to establish a reporting process to inform decision-makers of the status
of the overall program..
The numerical references to mitigation. measures in these Findings correspond to the identifying
numbers used in the Mitigation. Monitoring and Reporting. Program. The specific timing of each
mitigation. measure is described in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.
3.10 CEQA defines the term "project" as the whole of an action or "activity which. is being. approved
and which may be subject to several' discretionary approvals by governmental agencies. "
Accordingly, the Community Development Department of the Town of Los Gatos has: certified a
Final. EIR for,. and the Lose Gatos Town Council' is approving and adopting. Findings for,. the
entirety of the actions described in these Findings and' in the Final'- EIR. as comprising the Project.
RBF Consulting Town of Los Gatos General Plan 2000
N:\DEV\SUZANNE\GENPLAN\REPORTS\FINDINGS I-5 Statement of Findings and Facts
It is contemplated that there may be a variety of discretionary actions undertaken by other state and
local agencies (who might be referred to as "responsible agencies" under CEQA), concerning the
Project, including without limitation:
• California Department of Fish and Game (CD,FG)
• California Environmental Protection Agency (Cal EPA)
•3 Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA)
d• State of California Office of Planning and Research (OPR)
• State Department of Health.,. Toxic Substances Control Division (DISC)
•,• California Department of Transportation (Caltrans)
+:• California Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB)
•S Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD)
• U,S. Army Corps of Engineers (ALOE)
• Pacific Gas and .Electric Company (PG&E)
:• U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS)
Other agencies., organizations and/or special interest groups not formally identified as a responsible
agency, but otherwise anticipated to be participants in the local .review process for the General Plan
2000 include:
+.• :Santa Clara Valley. Water District
:• Valley'Transportation Authority
_, ._ • City of San Jose
• City of Saratoga _r
• City of Campbell
•3 City of Monte Sereno
__ Because the Community Development .Department of the Town of Los Gatos is the lead agency
for the: Plan, the Final EIR which the Community Development .Department of the Town of .Los
Gatos .has .prepared is :intended to be the basis for compliance with CEQA for each of the possible
discretionary actions by .other state and ocal agencies to carry .out .the Plan.
3.11 This Final EIR is a Program EIR for purposes of environmental. analysis of the proposed General
.Plan 2000. While the proposed General Plan 2000 is considered a "project", the Program level
of analysis is appropriate, As described in State CEQA Guidelines § 15168, "A program EIR is
an EIR which may be prepared on a series of actions that can be characterized as one large .project
and are related either: (1) Geographically, (2) As ogical parts in the chain of contemplated actions,
(3) In connection with issuance of rules, regulations, plans, or other general criteria to govern the
conduct of a .continuing program, or (4) As individual activities carried .out under the same
authorizing statutory or regulatory authority and having generally similar environmental effects
which can be mitigated in similarways." Program EIRs generally analyze the broad environmental
effects of a project, while acknowledging that site-specific environmental :review may be required
for portions of the ;project area when those areas are proposed for program .implementation. This
EIR serves as the primary environmental .compliance document for entitlement decisions regarding
the components of the proposed Plan by the Community Development Department of the Town
of Los Gatos .and the other .regulatory agencies with jurisdictional .authority over components of
the proposed Plan.
RBF Consulting Town of Los Gatos General Plan 2000
N:\DEV\SUZANNE\GENPLAN\REPORTS\FINDINGS I-6 Statement of Findings :and Facts
3.12 Thee Los Gatos Town Council believes that its decision. on the Plan is one. which must be made after
a hearing required by law at which evidence is required and discretion in the determination of facts
is vested in the Community Development Department of the Town of Los Gatos, As a result, any
judicial review of this decision would be governed' by Public Resources Code §21168 and Code
of Civil Procedure §1094,5, Regardless of the standard of review which is applicable, the Los
Gatos Town Council has considered evidence and arguments presented to the Planning Commission
and Community Development Department of the Town of Lose Gatos prior to or at the public
hearings on this matter. In determining whether the Plan has a significant impact on the.
environment, and in adopting Findings pursuant to Public Resources Code §21081., the Community
Development Department of the Town has cornplied with Public Resources Codes §21082.2 and
§2.1081.5,
3.13 The Los Gatos Town Council finds and declares that the General Plan 2000' is expected. to have
a "lifetime." of approximately 10 years, beginning when the Plan is implemented and. running to
the year 2010.
3.14 The Lose Gatos Town Council finds and declares that the Final EIR analyzes the Plan in its full. size
and extent..
3.15 The Final' EIR analyzed' all reasonably foreseeable extensions, expansions or alterations of the
Plan. The Final EIR analyzed, to the extent feasible at this time,.. the environmental effects. of
implementation of the General' Plan 2000. The impacts of this Plan. have been analyzed to the
extent feasible at the time the Final. EIR was certified. The Los Gatos Town CouneiT hereby finds
and declares that at this time there are no reasonably foreseeable extensions, expansions or
alterations of the Plan which are not described in the Final EIR, based on the administrative record
before the Los Gatos Town Council' at the time of its final' decision. on the Plan.
3.16 Having. received, reviewed. and considered the above. described information, as well.. as all other
information. and documents in the record, the Los Gatos Town Council' hereby conditions the Plan
and finds as stated in these Findings.
4.0 EFFECTS DETERMINED TO BE NOT' SIGNIFICANT OR MITIGATED TO A LESS-
THAN-SIGNIFICANT' LEVEL
4.1 Geolog ay nd Soils
4.1.1 Potential Significant Impacts
Thee potential' impacts associated' with implementation of the Project related! to geology and soils that can
be mitigated' to a Tess than. significant level,. or are otherwise not significant are discussed in Section 4.1
of the Final EIR. Implementation of the proposed General. Plan 2000 would not directly result in future
development which results. in geology and soils. impacts,. as no existing. land use designations are proposed'
to be modified'. as part of the proposed. General Plan 2000.. However,. implementation of future projects.
under General. Plan 2000 buildout would result in potentially significant. impacts related to fault rupture,
seismic shaking, seismically induced ground failure (including liquefaction),. land' sliding and slope
instability,. erosion, and' expansive soils. Seismic ground shaking could occur at the Project site during the
next major earthquake on a regional fault system,: causing severe damage to or collapse of buildings or
other Towm facilities, and may result in significant economic. loss and/or endanger the health and' welfare
RBF Consulting. Town of Los Gatos General' Plan 2000
N;\DEV\5UZANNE\GENPLAN\REPORTS\FINDINGS I-7 Statement of Findings and Facts
ofpersons.. Faultrupture can lead to ground surface rupture of a fault, .and occurs during seismic shaking.
:Seismically induced ground failure is caused by seismic shaking as a secondary seismic effect related to
soil, bedrock, and groundwater conditions.. Erosion ypically occurs on sites with .granular soils situated
on slopes that are subject to concentrated water flow or sites that contain non-vegetated areas. Expansive
and low strength soils may present .hazards which could ..result in impacts to buildings and ppaved areas, as
these soil may settle under building loads. Landslide and debris :flows can occur in areas of almost any
earth material where there are moderate o steep slopes present. Landslides .and debris flows are typically
instigated by saturation of the soil .and/or bedrock during heavy rains. .All of these impacts are less than
significant, or can be mitigated to .less than significant levels.
4.1.2 Findings
Changes or .alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Plan which mitigate or .avoid the
significant environmental effects associated with geology and soils, as identified in the Final EIR.
4.1.3 Facts in Support of Findings
.Fault Rupture
Nearly all fault traces are oriented parallel to the trends of known active faults and therefore are in a
position to move sympathetically with movements on adjacent faults, even where the faults themselves are
not likely to produce earthquakes. The .areas with the highest ground rupture hazard are known surface
traces of potentially active faults. There are no potentially active faults in Los Gatos identified by the
Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act. However, significant fault zones occur within the Los Gatos
Planning Area including the Shannon Fault and .Monte Vista fault. Minor faults existing in the Los Gatos
vicinity include the Limekiln, Rincon, and Soda Springs faults.. Fault-produced ground surface rupture can
occur where faults in the Town .move during earthquakes., whether that movement is directly involved in
producing the earthquake or whether the fault moves sympathetically due to an earthquake on another fault.
Where ground surface rupture occurs under buildings or other facilities, there is a potential for injury to
persons and substantial economic loss due to structural damage within the'Town. As a result, without the
following mitigation .measures, the potential impact of ground surface rupture due to faulting would be
considered potentially significant unless .mitigation is incorporated.
:Mitigation Measure 4.1-a -'Ground Surface Rupture Due to Faulting: Implementation of the
following proposed General Plan 2000 policies and implementing strategies will reduce .impacts
related to ground surface .rupture due to faulting to a less than significant level:
• Ensure that reliable evaluations are made of the geologic conditions existing at all sites
proposed for development, especially where conditions indicate the possibility of weak
supporting soils or geologic structures. (Safety Element Policy S.P. 1. l)
• Restrict new development and redevelopment based on the levels of acceptable risk and
potential severity of ,hazards.. (Safety Element Policy S.P.'1.2)
• Preserve as open space that property which is unbuildable due to geologic conditions.
(Safety Element Policy S.P.1.3)
• ' Buildings. and ..structures required for emergency services. shall have sufficient resistance
to withstand a major earthquake. (Safety Element Policy S.P.1.4)
RBF Consulting Town of Los Gatos `General Plan 2(X10
N:\DEV\SUZANNE\GENPLAN\REPORTS\FINDINGS I-8 Statement of Findings and Facts
• Geologic reports: Require geologic investigations for any development or project, when
warranted'.. (Safety Element Implementing Strategy S,L.1.1)
• Geologic map: The Town shall develop a geological map delineating.. known geological.
hazards and faults in the Town (refer to Exhibits 4,1-1, 4,1-2, and' 4.1-3; full-sized
geologic hazard maps are available- for review at the Town of Los Gatos Community
Development Department).. (Safety Element Implementing.. Strategy S.I.1.2)
• Bridges:. The Town shall identify those bridges whose destruction.. would' cause serious
access problems after an earthquake. (Safety Element. Implementing Strategy S.L 1.3)
~.• Essential buildings: The Town shall identify and evaluate buildings in the Town whose
use and function are essential in response to a major earthquake. (Safety Element.
Implementing Strategy S.L 1.4)
• Geologic Hazards Check List: As part of development review, the developer shall fill out
the Geologic Hazards Check. List as adopted by Che Town and show that proposed
structures including earth fills wi1T resist potential earthquake effects. (Safety Element
Implementing Strategy S,L 1.5)
In addition, the following.. mitigation measures shall. be implemented. to further reduce. less than
significant impacts. related. to ground. surface rupture due to faulting:.
:• Geoteehnical reports shall be prepared for projects on property located along known
earthquake faults. All' recommendations included in the report shall be incorporated. into
the project.
• Geologic investigations. shall be required prior to issuance of building. permits in areas of
high ground' rupture potential for new construction of, or substantial alterations. to; critical
and sensitive facilities, including all public or private buildings essential. to the health and
safety of the general' public, such. as hospitals; fire and. police stations,. public. works
centers, high occupancy structures, schools,. or sites containing or storing hazardous
materials. All critical. and sensitive facilities shall. be setback from areas. of recognized
ground. rupture hazard. All technical reports shall be prepared in compliance with the
most current guidelines. published by the California Division. of Mines and'. Geology for
evaluation of seismic and geologic hazards.
By implementing these mitigation measures,. the Town. of Los Gatos will be at no higher risk of
potentially significant impacts due to ground surface rupture resulting. from. faulting than any other
similarly situated area. Therefore, less than significant impacts would result.
Seismic Shaking
Seismic shaking in the Town of Los Gatos during. the next major earthquake on the San Andreas, Hayward,
Calaveras, Monte Vista or other regional fault system is likely to be intense. Alt of these faults are
considered capable of M=6.5t or larger earthquakes, The principal' factors which affect the. severity of
seismic shaking at a given location are the size of the earthquake and the. distance from the earthquake
source to the location of interest. Consequently,. the San Andreas fault, which is associated with the largest.
tThe letter M indicates. the Richter magnitude associated. with the earthquake.
RBF Consulting Town of Los Gatos General Plan 2000
N:\DEV\SUZANNE\GENPLAN\REPORTS\FINDINGS I-9 Statement. of Findings and Facts.
potential earthquake (M =7.9),-and the Shannon and Monte Vista faults, which trend directly through a
.portion of the Town, are the most. substantial potential sources of strong seismic shaking. Scientists and
engineers have recognized .that areas within a few kilometers of he source of an earthquake are subject to
particularly strong ground shaking effects (Petersen et al., 1998). These effects, termed "near source"
effects, .can lead to increased building damage. The most recent version of the Uniform Building Code
(ICBO, 1997) .includes a "near source" factor to account for the increased baking intensities. The entire
Town is 'located within the near .source zone of the San Andreas and Monte Vista-Shannon faults.
Strong ground shaking may occur in the Town of Los Gatos .during a major earthquake on a regional fault
system. Such .shaking. can cause severe damage to, or collapse of buildings or other facilities and may
result in substantial .economic oss and/or endanger the health and welfare of persons in the Town, creating
a potentially significant impact unless mitigation is incorporated.
Without mitigation, strong seismic shaking would produce serious damaging effects in the Town. Many
buildings in the Town of Los Gatos were built before modern seismic safety provisions were incorporated
.into the California building codes, .and therefore do not comply with current local building codes..
Mitigation Measure 4.1-b -Seismic Shalung: Implementation of the following proposed General
Plan 2000 policies and implementing strategies will reduce impacts related to seismic shaking to
a less than significant level:
• Refer to the Policies and Implementing Strategies described in Mitigation 4.1-a.
In addition, the following mitigation measures shall be undertaken to further reduce Mess than°
significant .impacts related to .seismic shaking:
~- :• The effects of ground shaking on future .planned structures and other :improvements shall-
~~ be reduced by earthquake-resistant design in accordance with the latest editions of the
Uniform Building Code and the California Building Code. The Town shall require that
the potential effects of .ground shaking on existing structures be evaluated by engineering
studies on asite-specific basis. Where studies .indicate that buildings may be subject to
substantial damage during earthquakes, the structures shall be designed and/or retrofitted
for seismic resistance incompliance with all relevant recommendations for seismic design
and seismic safety in the most recent editions of the Uniform Building. Code and the
California Building Code..
• Damage due to high intensity shaking may be reduced by careful placement, design, and
building of the .structure. Past experience has shown that the quality of design and
construction is far more .important than the precise evaluation of ground emotion
parameters. 'The Town shall evaluate proposed projects to ensure that the .design of
structures incorporates earthquake-resistant placement, design and building techniques,
•3 The Town of .Los Gatos shall rely on maps prepared by the County of Santa Clara and the
State Office of Mines and Geology to determine where geologic .zones are located.
• The Town of Los Gatos shall establish specific development and design .requirements for
critical and sensitive facilities for each seismic hazard zone. Critical and sensitive
buildings include all public or private buildings essential to the .health and safety of the
general public such as: hospitals, .fire and police stations, public works centers, high
occupancy structures, schools, or sites containing or storing hazardous .materials.
RBF Consulting Town of Los Gatos General Plan 2000
N:\DEV\SUZANNE\GENPLAN\REPORTS\FINDINGS I-10 Statement of Findings and Facts
~ The Town of Los Gatos shall use the seismic shaking amplification and probabilistic
seismic shaking intensity map as a general guideline for evaluating potential seismic
shaking hazards {refer to Exhibit 4,1-1; full-sized seismic hazard maps are available for
review at the Town of Los Gatos Community Development Department).
• The Town of Los Gatos shall requiregeotechnical and.geologic reports (i.e., structural and
non-structural geologic reports) with site-specific evaluations of seismic shaking. hazard in
areas of expected high seismic shaking amplitude, as shown on Exhibit. 4.1-1. All
technical reports shall be prepared in compliance with the most. current guidelines
published by the .California Division of Mines and Geology for evaluation. of seismic and
geologic hazards..
By implementing. these mitigation measures, the Town of Los Gatos will. be at no higher risk of
potentially significant impacts due to seismic shaking than any other similarly situated at~ea.
Therefore,. less than significant impacts would. result.
Seismically Induced Ground Deformation. Including Liquefaction
Ground deformation associated with strong seismic shaking may manifest in several' ways including:
seismically induced differential settlement,. off-fault. co-seismic ground cracking, seismically induced
landsliding, and liquefaction..
Differential settlement may occur anywfiere that soils are in a loose state.. In the Town of Los Gatos, soils
subject to this hazard. will most likely be limited to areas. of improperly compacted artificial fill or areas
of the most recently deposited' sediments in. Los Gatos Creek. Areas of loose soil' that could. be subject to
seismically induced differential settlement in the study area are of limited extent.
In the Town, off-fault,.. co-seismic ground cracking may be substantial at ridge.-top sites in areas of steep
topography (> 50 % gradient slopes). Experience during. the 1989` Loma Prieta earthquake (Ponti and
We11s, 1990; Harp: and Spittler, 1990; Technical Advisory Group, 1991;. Nolan and Weber., 1998) showed
that ridge top ground cracking- can be a substantial seismic hazard' in the Santa Cruz Mountains. During
this earthquake, numerous ground. cracks opened' up along the- crests and flanks of ridges. The ground
cracks ranged from. fractions of an inch to many feet wide and up to one-quarter mile long. Where the
ground cracks crossed' under buildings,. severe. damage often occurred.
Seismically-induced landsliding results when earthquake shaking adds extra stress to an already marginally
stable slope. Landsliding that occurred in the Santa Cruz Mountains as a .result. of the 1989 Loma Prieta
earthquake included: 1) reactivationof existing landslides; including reactivation of several'verylarge older
landslide complexes that had' previously beenthought to be stable; 2) shallow slumps, calving, and toppling
of natural cliffs and stream banks; and 3) slumping. of steep cut slopes and embankments associated with
grading. for roads. and development.
The large, older landslides that were reactivated during the 1989 earthquake involved incremental
movements on the order of a few inches to a few feet. These landslides tended. to move while the strong
shaking was occurring,. and then come to rest as soon as the shaking subsided. Because of the size and
limited displacement of these landslides, damage. to homes sited on the landslides was often remarkably
lights except where the homes spanned cracks around. the landslide margins. In terms of hazard zoning,
landslide hazard's associated with seismic shaking are similar to those occurring under static (non-seismic)
conditions.
RBF Consulting Town of Los Gatos General Plarr2000
N:\DEV\SUZANNE\GENPLAN\REPORTS\FINDINGS I-11 Statement of Findings and Facts
Liquefaction and accompanying ground effects such as .lurch cracking and ateral spreading occur in loose,
.cohesionless materials that are saturated with groundwater. There are four factors which help geologists
.and engineers predict how susceptible a certain area will be to the risk of .liquefaction: 1) age of the
underlying geologic materials, 2) type of .geologic deposit, 3) depth to ground water, and 4) potential
:intensity of seismic shaking.
Liquefaction-related ground deformation :includes lurch :cracking and .lateral spreading. Lurch cracking
occurs where a liquefied layer at depth is :overlain by a surficial 'layer of relatively brittle, non liquefied
soil. In this situation, the surface layer may crack into individual blocks that can tip or rotate relative to
each other. The resulting surface deformation can damage or destroy overlying buildings. Lateral
.spreading occurs most often on level terraces or :flood plains .next to a stream or river .channel. When the
sediments adjacent to .the river .liquefy, they flow out of the bank forming the side of the river channel .into
the river 'bed.
Seismically induced ground failures are secondary seismic effects related to soil, bedrock and groundwater
conditions. and may occur in the Town of Los Gatos. Where these failures occur near buildings or other
facilities, there is a potential for injury to persons and substantial economic loss due to structural damage.
This would be considered a potentially significant impact unless mitigation is incorporated.
Mitigation Measure 4.1-c ,Seismically Induced Ground Failure: Implementation of the
following proposed General Plan .2000 policies and implementing strategies will reduce impacts
related to seismically induced .ground failure to a .less than significant level:
+.• Refer to the Policies :and Implementing Strategies described in :Mitigation 4.1-a.
In addition, the following mitigation measures shall be implemented to further reduce less than
significant .impacts resulting from seismically induced .ground failure in the Town of Los Gatos:
• The Town of Los Gatos shall require that-development in moderate or higher liquefaction
hazard zones be guided by :geotechnical investigations performed prior to issuance of
building permits. The .geotechnical analyses shall be required to include an evaluation of
iquefaction susceptibility appropriate for the prospective site. In very high hazard zones,
development, if permitted, shall be limited to non-critical or low intensity uses and be
subject to strict project review. These hazards shall be mitigated on asite-specific basis
though over-excavation and recompaction of foundation soils, densfication of site soils,
or providing a mat or other type of reinforced foundation in .order to compensate for
existing weak soils as recommended by a Geotechnical Engineer licensed in the State of
California and as proposed recommendations .are approved by the Town.
•3 Maps showing hazard zones associated with seismically induced .ground failure, based on
review of he most recent geologic and seismic investigations, shall 'be made available by
the Town of Los Gatos (refer to `Exhibit 4.1-2 :full-sized geologic hazard maps are
available for review at the Town of Los Gatos Community Development Department)..
By implementing these mitigation measures, the Town of Los Gatos will be at no higher risk of
potentially significant ;impacts due to seismically-induced :ground failure resulting from seismic
shaking. than any other similarly situated area. Therefore, less than significant impacts would
res>xlt.
RBF Consulting Town of Los Gatos General Plan 2000
N:\DEV\SUZANNE\GENPLAN\REPORTS\FINDINGS I-12 Statement of Findings and Facts
Landsliding. and Slope InstabilitX
Hazards and impacts associated with landsliding and slope instability are highly variable across the Town
of Los Gatos. The hazard' associated with the northern-most portion of the Town that is underlain by gently
sloping alluvial fan deposits is low to very low. Landslide hazards in the mountainous southwestern portion
of the Town are moderate to high.
Broadly defined',. landsliding includes any movement of earth materials outward. or downward on a slope.
The hazards posed' by landsliding. depend, to some extent,. on the type of landsliding involved. There are
several ways to classify landslides, all based.. generally on bhe type of movement,, type of materials. involved
in landsliding, and' less often, the rate of movement.
Slides can present a great hazard to development. Slides involve movement of a mass of soil' or rock, down
a slope by movement along. a well defined slip or slide surface along the base of the mass. The slide mass
tends to stay together as a more or less cohesive unit. Slides can measure a few feet to many thousands
of feet in size and' may move a few inches to Hundreds of feet out of slope. Movement can be rapid or
slow..
Spreads. occur where movement takes place not on awell-defined slip surface, but on a layer or zone that
has. been. weakened in some fashion.. The most commonly noted type of spread is a lateral spread, where
movement takes: place on a layer that has been liquefied by earthquake shaking;. as, described in the section
on seismically induced ground. failure, .above... Spread's may be up to a few thousand feet in maximum.
dimension, although spreads. measuring a few tens to a few hundreds of feet. in dimension. are more
common..
Flows,, particularly debris or mud. flows, are the types oflandslides that typically cause the most damage
and/or injury to persons.. Flows involve the movement of mixtures of soil. and water that behave more like
a fluid than a solid mass, These landslides, although small. in dimension,. can be very fast. moving. They
give little or no warning and can flow for hundreds or thousands of feet beyond. the point of origin before
coming to rest.
Debris flows are most. often associated with highly saturated. colluvial soils and require a channel or
drainage course to contain. the flow. Once the. flow leaves the confining channel, it spreads out, slows
down, and eventually comes to rest,.
Landsliding on slopes presents a clear hazard to structures and may be responsible for serious injury to
persons. It is therefore a potentially significant impact in areas of steep slope .gradients or previous
landsliding within the Town of Los Gatos. In addition. to the potential landsliding impact, structures located
on moderate slopes may be subject to damage due to soil creep. This would be considered a potentially
significant impact unless mitigation is incorporated. (refer to Mitigation Measure: 4.1-d).
Mitigation Measure 4.1-d -Landsliding and Slope Instability: Implementation of the following
proposed General Plan.. 2000 policies and' implementing strategies will reduce impacts related to
landsliding. and slope instability to a less than significant level:
:• Refer to the Policies. and Implementing Strategies described. in Mitigation 4.1-a.
In addition, the following mitigation measures shall. be undertaken to further reduce less than
significant impacts related to landsliding and slope instability:
RBF Consulting Town of Los Gatos General Plan 2000
N:\DEV\SUZANNE\GENPLAN\REPORTS\FINDINGS I-I3 Statement of Findings and' Facts
•S The Town of Los Gatos shall require geotechnical .reports by a :registered geologist for
development on slopes with low or greater slope instability hazard (greater than 30
.gradient), and both geologic and geotechnical reports {i.e., structural and non-structural
.geologic reports) for sites .located in moderate or higher slope instability hazard zones.
Any structures situated in :hazard areas classified as 'low or higher shall .incorporate
geotechnical recommendations regarding building foundations derived from aste-specific
geotechnical investigation.
+,+ The Town of Los Gatos shall require. that development of lands with prevailing slopes
.above 30 % include implementation of adequate erosion control .measures. Refer to
Mitigation Measure 4.1-e.
• The Town of Los Gatos shall .rely on maps prepared by the County of Santa Clara and the
State Office of Mines and Geology to determine where slope instability hazards 'are
located.
By implementing these mitigation measures, .the Town of Los Gatos will be at no higher risk of
potentially significant impacts due to landslding and slope :instability resulting. from seismic
shaking than any other similarly situated area. Therefore, Tess than significant impacts would
result.
Erosion
;t
.Erosion may take place due to water .runoff from precipitation or wind :action. Problems with erosion
typically :arise when development disrupts native soil conditions. Common impacts of development such
as .the removal of vegetative cover, reduction of permeable areas, and steepening. of slopes all lead to,
.increased runoff rates .and concentrated .flows which can quickly erode unconsolidated soils. ,,,,
The soil units within the Town of Los Gatos have erosion susceptibilities .ranging from low to severe. In
:general, erosion potential increases with the steepness of slope., but is .also .affected by soil texture..
Development of relatively undisturbed portions of the Town would remove vegetation and disrupt the soil
surface horizon in areas where soils are susceptible o wind and water erosion. Sediment and sand blown
:froth exposed soils could damage structures and existing vegetation and would accumulate in wetlands and
both natural and developed areas. Removal of soils by wind or water can undermine buildings,. roads:, and
other development, resulting in substantial economic loss. This could occur with both short Germ
construction impacts and long term erosion where vegetative cover is not reestablished. This would be
considered a potentially significant :impact unless mitigation is incorporated.
4.1-e Erosion: Implementation of the following proposed General Plan 2000 policies and implementing
strategies will reduce impacts related to erosion to a less than significant level:
•S Promote effective landscape plans in all new developments to prevent soil erosion and
slippage. (Conservation Element Policy C.P.1.1)
+.• Construction plans .shall be reviewed to determine the adequacy of erosion .control plans
during and after construction. (Conservation Element Policy C.P.1.2)
+.• Erosion control plans: All developments in areas subject to soil erosion and slippage shall
furnish effective erosion control plans to minimize soil erosion. The erosion control plans
shall be implemented prior to other construction operations and maintained throughout the
RBF Consulting Town of Los Gatos General Plan 2000
N:\DEV\SUZANNE\GENPLAN\REPORTS\FINDINGS I-14 Statement of Findingsand Facts
construction process and until grading has been stabilized and' landscaping, been
established. Landscaping shall be complete. prior to the occupancy of any new structures
and the landscaping shall be maintained for at least two years or until it is established.
(Conservation Element Implementing Strategy C.L 1.1)
In .addition,. the following.. mitigation. measures shall be implemented to further reduce less than
significant impacts resulting from erosion in the Town of Los Gatos:
•3 The Town shall require developers to prepare and implement erosion control. and
landscape plans for all projects. Each plan shall. be prepared by a registered civil. engineer
or certified professional in the field of erosion. and sediment control and shall be subject
to approval' of the. Town public works director. The erosion. component of the plan. must
at minimum meet the requirements of Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plans. (SWPPPS)
required by the California State Water Resources Control Board and the Town's Best
Management. Practices as a part of the Town's Non-Point Source Permit.
•8 The Town shall require that during. construction of future projects, disturbance of existing.
vegetation shall be kept to the minimum feasible level. This shall be accomplished
primarily by restricting the use of machinery on established vegetation as much as
possible. Specific access routes shall. be approved by the Town at the planning: phase of
future projects. Grading,. limits established prior to development shall. be strictly observed
and enforced. In addition,. mechanical measures shall be required' to reduce. soil
movement. This shall'. be accomplished. by implementing erosion control and. soil
stabilization methods approved'. by the Town.
• After construction of a project is complete, stabilization of loose soils shall be required.
Methods for minimizing soil. movement shall' include immediate. re-vegetation,: and the use
of temporary stabilizing sprays, Biodegradable stabilizing.. sprays. such a Road Oyl, Soil.
Seal, or an approved equivalent, may be used as temporary stabilizers. until erosion-control
vegetation can take root. These sprays may require repeated application and shall be
applied per manufacturer specifications and fiel'd' conditions. In addition, landscaping
regimes which take erosion control into accountmay; with the prior approval of the Town,
be used to mitigate undermining. due to erosion, Components of such regimes include
hedges around' the base of structures, drought resistant ground cover planted. directly
adjacent to paved parking. and drive areas, and vegetation forrring wind' breaks. along the
upwind perimeter of developed areas.
• The Town of Los. Gatos shall continue. to enforce the Uniform Building. Code to minimize
erosion and slope stability problems.
•;• The Town of Los Gatos Department of Parks and Public Works shall evaluate feasible and'
effective erosion control measures for various soil conditions. within. the Town of Los
Gatos, as proposed by project applicants.
• The Town of Los Gatos Department of Parks and Public Works shall evaluate native plant
species, application rates, and planting procedures suitable for erosion control under
various soil, slope, and climatic conditions. which may be encountered within the Town,
- as proposed by project applicants.
RBF Consulting Town of Los Gatos General. Plan 2000'
N;\DEV\SUZANNE\GENPLAN\REPORTS\FINDINGS I-IS Statement of Findings and'. Facts.
Expansive Soils
Many of the soils in the Town have .limitations as substrates for engineering and construction ,purposes.
These limitations are .related to certain soil properties that .result in low soil strength or brink-swell
potential. Soils with shrink-swell .potential have clay minerals which expand when wet, .and shrink when
dried. Shrink-swell can cause seasonal uplifting of foundations and :roads that results in cracking. The
soils in the Town have been ranked according to shrink-swell potential and are depicted on Exhibit 4.1-5.
The :impact of potentially weak soils on development manifests in two primary ways; as ,problems
associated with ow shear strength affecting primary bearing capacity and slope stability, .and as .problems
associated with oss of strength due to cyclic loading during seismic activity, affecting the potential for
liquefaction., ateral spreading and seismically .induced differential settlements. Low strength soils .lack the
cohesive bond supplied by organic or clay materials that enable a soil to support itself when burdened'by
extra weight such as .added water or overlying development. When a load is added to a low .strength soil.,
the additional weight may exceed the cohesive bonds that exist between the soil particles. For this reason,
soils with .low strengths may. fail on steep cut or fill slopes or natural slopes inclined at gradients of 30%
or greater., and they may settle under the weight of new buildings.
The :impacts :associated with low strength soils are best evaluated on asite-specific basis through an
appropriately scoped geotechnical investigation. Expansive soils can cause damage to buildings .and paved
.areas, and would therefore be considered a .potentially significant impact. Near surface soils. that .exhibit
low trength may settle under building loads would also result in potentially significant impacts unless°
mitigation is incorporated..
.Mitigation Measure 4.1-f- Expansive Soils: Soil Property Limitations: Implementation of the
following proposed General Plan 2000 policies and implementing strategies will reduce impacts
- related to landslding .and slope instability to a less than significant level: --
•S .Refer to the Policies and Implementing Strategies described in Mitigation 4.1-a.
In addition, the following mitigation measures shall be implemented to .further :reduce less :than
significant impacts .resulting from expansive soils in the Town of Los Gatos:
•.• Prior to issuance of a grading or building permit, the Town of Los Gatos shall require that
geotechnical reports be prepared for all land development projects that involve substantial
earthwork {e,g., major site grading or .trenching, .etc.).. These geotechnical .reports shall
address soil conditions, including low soil strength and shrink-swell potential. The
expansion potential for any clayey materials encountered shall be determined on a project-
specficbasis per ASTM D- 4829, Standard Test Method for he Expansion Index of Soils.
Numerous measures are available for mitigation of soils with undesirably'high expansion
potential, should they be encountered, such aspre-saturation of soils that support concrete
slabs-on-::grade, removal of fill material in areas proposed to support structures, chelnical
treatment ofsoils (e.g., with lime) to preventsoil expansion and/or implementation of deep
structural foundation systems which penetrate through .clayey soils.
4.2 ;Surface Water H d~gY/Drainag_e
4.2.1 Potential Significant Impacts
The potential impacts associated with the implementation of the Town of Los Gatos. General Plan 2000
RBF Consulting Town of Los Gatos General Plan 2000
N:\DEV\SUZANNE\GENPLAN\REPORTS\FINDINGS I-16 Statement of Findings and Facts
related to surface water hydrology/drainage that can be mitigated to less than significant levels,. or are
otherwise not significant are discussed in Section 4.2 of the Final EIR. Implementation of the proposed'
General Plan 2000 would. not.. directly result in future development which violates water quality standards
or waste discharge requirements,. depletes groundwater,, alters. drainage patterns, results in flood hazards,
affects stormwater drainage system capacity, or degrades water quality, as na existing. land-use designations
are proposed to be modified as part. of the proposed General Plan 2000.. However,..implementation of
future projects under Generale. Plan. 2000 buildout could alter topography and. drainage patterns, deplete
groundwater, expose persons or structures to flood hazards, and/or contribute runoff and wastewater that
could' affect water treatment services, water quality,. stormwater drainage system capacity. All of these
impacts are less than significant, or can be mitigated to less. than significant levels.
4.2.2 Findings
Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Plan which mitigate or avoid the
significant environmental effects associated with. surface water hydrology/drainage, as identified in the
Final EIR.
4.2.3 Facts in Support of Findings.
Violations of Water Quality Standards and Waste Discharge Requirements.
Implementation of the proposed General. Plan 2000 would not directly result in future development which
violates water quality standards or waste discharge requirements, as no existing land use designations are
proposed to be modified' as part of the: proposed. General' Plan 2000. Wastewater from future development
projects under General Plan 2000 buildout. would ultimately discharge into the San Jose/Santa Clara Water
Pollution Control Plant (WPCP). The proposed General Plan 2000 and increase in demand' for treatment
services. anticipated under buildout of the proposed' General Plan 2000 would not. affect the. WPCP's
compliance with any water quality standards established by the RWQCB. Future development projects
under General Plan 2000 buildout could indirectly generate wastewater during construction that would
adversely affect water quality beyond standards specified by the State Water Resources Control Board
(SWRCB). This would be considered a potentially significant impact unless mitigation is incorporated.
Mitigation Measure 4.2-a -...Violations of .Water Quality Standards and Waste Discharge
Requirements:. All future projects. proposed on sites greater than fiver acres, or as acreage limits
are revised by the State Water Resources Control Board' (SWRCB), within the Town shall. obtain
approval' of a Notice of Intent (NOI) to comply with the terms of the General. Permit to Discharge
Storm Water Associated with Construction. Activity from the SWRCB prior to construction.
Applicants for future projects under General. Plan 2000 buildout shall. comply with all applicable
requirements of the Santa Clara Valley Urban Runoff Pollution Prevention Program's
recommended Best Management Practices (BMPs) for construction activities. In addition, the
design of parking areas for commercial land use designations, rehabilitation of existing parking
areas, new residential' subdivisions, and storm drain system. maintenance or replacement shall
comply with. all' applicable requirements of the.Bay .Area Stormwater Management Agencies.
Association and' the Town's Best Management. Practices..
Following implementation of this mitigation measure, impacts related to violations of water quality
standards and waste discharge requirements would be considered less than significant.
RBF Consulting . Town of Los Gatos General Plan 2000
N:\DEV\SUZANNE\GENPLAN\REPORTS\FINDINGS I-17 Statement of Findings and Facts
Groundwater Depletion
Implementation of the proposed General Plan 2000 would not directly result in future development which
would deplete groundwater supplies or interfere with groundwater .recharge, as no existing 'land use
designations are proposed to be modified. as part of the proposed General Plan 2000. Water system
improvements in the Townare implemented by SJWD as needed to accommodate development under Town
General Plan 2000 buildout. Future ..development in :the Town would increase demand :for water and/or
infrastructure, but would not .alter .land use assumptions, densities, or intensities, and/or infrastructure
facilities anticipated under the proposed General .Plan 2000 buildout conditions. Future development on
currently unpaved or partially paved properties could increase the amount of impervious surfaces in the
Town. Increased amounts of impervious surfaces in the Town would .interfere with groundwater recharge,
as the percolation rate of precipitation into groundwater aquifers would be reduced. This. would be
considered an indirect, but nevertheless, potentially significant impact unless mitigation is incorporated.
.Mitigation Measure 4.2-b -Groundwater Depletion: Implementation of the following proposed
General Plan 2000 policies and implementing strategies will reduce impacts related to groundwater
depletion to a .less than significant level:.
• Promote landscaping that is based on principles of water conservation. (Conservation
Element Policy C.P,2:6)
• Limit .land use intensity in areas with :inadequate water supply. (Conservation Element
Policy C,P.2.8)
• Coordination: Planning efforts should be coordinated with the Santa Clara Valley Waters
District. (Conservation 'Element .Implementing Strategy C.L2.3)
• Water conservation: Continue to review all landscape plans as specified by the Town
= Code section on Water Efficient Landscaping. (Conservation Element Implementing
Strategy C.L2.6)
Alteration of Drainage .Patterns.
Implementation of the proposed General Plan 2000 would not directly .result in future. development which
would deplete groundwater supplies or interfere with .groundwater recharge, as no existing wand use
designations. are proposed to be modified. as part of the proposed General Plan 2000.. Site .grading
associated with :future development projects under the proposed General Plan 2000 buildout would alter
surface. topography, -which would :affect drainage patterns, but would not .alter land use assumptions.,
densities, or intensities, and/or infrastructure facilities anticipated under the proposed General Plan 2000
buildout conditions. Altered drainage patterns could result 'in erosion that undermines structures, and/or
siltation that could adversely affect water quality.. This would be considered an indirect, but nevertheless,
potentially significant impact unless mitigation is incorporated.
Mitigation Measure 4.2-c -Alteration of Drainage Patterns and Siltation: Implementation of
the following proposed General Plan 2000policies and implementing strategies will .reduce impacts
related to alteration of drainage patterns and siltation to a less than significant level:
•'r Consider the single and cumulative impacts on water drainage (runoff) and contaminating
. (water quality) in .the environmental review process of development in or adjacent to
hillsides, riparian lands or important undeveloped watershed.areas, (Conservation Element
Policy C.P.2.3)
RBF Consulting Town of Los Gatos General Plan 2000
N:\DEV\SUZANNE\GENPLAN\REPORTS\FINDINGS I-18 Statement of Findings and Facts
•S Promote non-point source pollution. control. programs to reduce and' control the discharge
of non-point source. pollutants. into the storm drain system, (Conservation Element Policy
C,P.2,7)
:• Evaluations: Include. detailed. evaluations of the individual and cumulative impacts on
water drainage and contamination for any development application on riparian lands or
undeveloped watershed areas, (Conservation Element Implementing, Strategy C.L2.1)
• Landscaping: Land surrounding reservoirs and streams should be improved by the
addition of trees and shrubs, especially adjacent to areas where banks or channels have
been modified for flood protection. (Conservation Element Implementing Strategy C , I.2,4)
Refer also to Mitigation Measure 4,1-e (Erosion).
Flood Hazards
Areas in the Town adjacent to Los Gatos Creek which are located immediately downstream of Highway
9 (Saratoga Avenue),.. Blossom Hill'. Road in the vicinity of Garden. Hill Drive,, .and Lark Avenue near
Charter Oaks Drive o~ Oka Lane would be subject to direct flooding during a 100-year storm event. (Mr.
Vincent M. Stephens, Associated Engineer,. Santa Clara Valley Water District, Written Communication,
January 11, 2000). Implementation of the proposed General Plan 2000 would not directly result in future
development which would affect existing drainage patterns or be located in areas of flood. hazard, as no
existing land use designations are proposed to be modified' as part of the proposed. General Plan 2000.
Therefore, flooding impacts would not. occur as a direct result. of implementation of the proposed General
Plan 2000. However, construction of projects under General Plan 2000: buildoub would result in the
alteration of drainage patterns, and may expose. future building occupants to hazards associated with
flooding. This would' be considered a potentially significant impact unless mitigation is incorporated.
Mitigation Measure 4.2-d' -Flood. Hazards: Implementation of the following proposed General
Plan 2000 policies and implementing strategies will reduce impacts .related to water quality
degradation to a less than. significant level':
•S Delineate and' adopt designated' floodways for all major streams utilizing the full flood.
plain concept. as a first priority and the modified flood plain concept as a second priority
-for flood plain development. (Conservation Element Policy C'.P.2.5)
• Flood plain zones: Flood plain zoning shall be adopted to prevent inappropriate
development in areas subject to flooding. (Conservation Element Implementing Strategy
C.I.2.5)
In addition, the following Town Storm Drain Master Plan measures shall be implemented to further
reduce impacts related. to alteration of drainage patterns and flooding to a less than significant
level:
• All habitable structures as well as other non-flood. proof structures shall have 100-year
flood protection..
• ~ For structures within a FEMA floodplain, the elevation of the lowest floor of a building.
shall be at least 1.0 foot. above the 1D0-year flood. water surface elevation.
1tBF Consulting Town of Los Gatos General Plan 2000
N:\DEV\SUZANNE\GENPLAN\REPORTS\FINDINGS I-19 Statement of Findingsand'Facts
• For structures outside the FEMAfloodplain, the elevation ofthe lowest floor of buildings,
including basements or cellars, shall be above the 100-yearflood water-surface elevation.
• Arterial highways shall allow conveyance of the 100-year flood event with a water surface
elevation at least one foot lower than the lowest floor elevation of residential structures..
• One travel lane {minimum 11-ft .lanes) in eachtravel direction shall remain free from flood
inundation during a 10-year flood event.
•.~ In a sump condition, one .travel lane (minimum l l-ft'lane) shall remain free from flood
inundation during a 25-year flood event.
•A Along arterial highways where the roadway is banked and uperelevation occurs, an .inlet
shall be .included to prevent inundation of the .roadway.
• Catch basins at banked .roadways shall be .designed .for a minimum of a 10-year flood
event.
:• Local streets. shall .allow conveyance of ahe 100-year :flood event with a water surface
elevation at least one foot .lower than the .lowest floor elevation of :residential structures.
• Local streets with curb and gutters shall convey ocal runoff :resulting from a 10-year flood
~~~. event with water surface not to exceed the top of the :curb.. -
~: •S Local streets without curb and gutters shall include .roadside .channels to convey`Iocal
.. runoff .resulting from a 10-year flood .event with the water surface elevation 'below the.
subgrade.
•3 Freeboard is defined as the vertical distance from the hydraulic :grade line based on the
design flood. The freeboard distance is measured :from the following reference points: top
of levee, top of channel bank, soffit of,a culvert/bridge, and the low point of a catch basin
inlet. Minimum freeboard for subcritical flow regimes is 0.5 feet, and 1.0 feet for
supercritical flow regimes. Where necessary, an allowance shall be provided for wave
height, superelevation, and .air entrainment.
In addition, projects proposed under General Plan 2000 buildout that are within SO feet of the top
of bank of Los Gatos. Creek, Ross Creek, .East Ross Creek, 'San Tomas Aquino Creek, Smith
Creek, Short Creek, Almendra Creek, or Davies Creek shall apply for an obtain a flood control
permit under Santa Clara Valley Water District Ordinance 83-2. The District permit shall be
.applicable to all .land uses, and shall be required :for residential remodels, new construction, creek
bank erosion :repair, .removal of vegetation,, :grading, landscaping, fencing, and irrigation.
Stormwater Drain System CapacitX
Implementation of the proposed General Plan 2000 would not directly result in .future development which
would contribute runoff water to the stormwater drainage system of the Town, or adjacent municipalities,
as no existing land use designations are proposed to be modified as part of the proposed General Plan 2000.
Buildout of land uses contemplated in the General Plan {and proposed General Plan 2000) 'have :been
anticipated by the SCVWD, which controls the discharge into the major channels such as Los Gatos Creek.
Implementation of measures incorporated into ahe Town Storm Drain Master Plan {e.g., design of storm
drains for buildout, restricting allowable maximum storm drain flow velocity to 20 feet per second, etc.)
RBF Consulting Town of .Los Gatos General Plan 2000
N;\DEV\SUZANNE\GENPLAN\REPORTS\FINDINGS I 20 Statement of Findings and Facts
would ensure that no impacts related to stormwater drainage system capacity would result. In addition,
future projects under General. Plan 2000 buildout that involve discharges into the storm drain. systems. of
an adjacent municipality (e.g., the City of San Jose, etc,) would be required to implement similar measures
in accordance with the requirements of the relevant municipality to ensure that no impacts to the
stormwater drainage system of the municipality would. result. No additional mitigation measures are
required beyond those. identified in the Town of Los Gatos Storm Drain Master Plan.
Water Ouality Degradation
Implementation of the proposed General Plan. 2000 would not directly result in future development that
would degrade water quality, as no existing land use designations are proposed to be modified as part of
the proposed General Plan 2000.. However,. future development projects under the proposed General Plan
2000 buildout could alter the quality of storm runoff from the. site. During.. construction, soil loss could
occur due to sheet erosion of exposed. soils.. Erosion. would. be most pronounced along. freshly-graded.
slopes.. The developed condition pollutant concentration would be expected to be marginally greater for
each pollutant measured as compared to the existing. condition pollutant. concentration. Discharge from
non-point sources in the Town would be conveyed to stormwater facilities. Stormwater quality is affected
by the length of time since last rainfall, rainfall intensity, urban uses of the area,. and' the quantity of
transported sediment. Typical urban water quality pollutants usually result.. from motor vehicle operations,
oil and grease residues, fertilizer/pesticide uses, human/animal littering, careless. material storage and
handling, and/or poor property management: The majority of pollutant loads is usually washed away
during the first flush. of the storm occurring.. after the dry-season period. The. amount of pollutants washed
off the street surface is a function. of the amount of pollutants on street surfaces and the .rainfall amount.
Even though not all rain would appear as runoff, an assumption was made that. all rainfall would run off..
Contaminant removal. is also proportional to runoff rate.
Other activities that may increase pollutants due to future development under General. Plan 2000 buildout
include: motor vehicle operations in the area,. pesticide. uses, human littering,. careless. material storage and
handling, and pavement disintegration, The typical. pollutants include oil' and grease, coliform bacteria,
Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD), Chemical Oxygen Demand (COD),. Total Organic. Carbon. (TOC),
and Total Petroleum Hydrocarbon (TPH), nitrogen, phosphorous, and heavy metals.
This would be considered a potentially significant. impact unless. mitigation is incorporated.
Mitigation Measure 4.2-f -Water Quality Degradation: Implementation of the following
proposed.. General Plan.. 2000 policies and. implementing strategies will reduce impacts related to
water quality degradation to a less than significant level:
:• Prevent surface flow of septic tank seepage by inspection of any suspect septic tank
systems. Require: connection to the sanitary sewer system. when feasible, (Conservation
Element Policy C.P.2.2)
• Establish natural open space and recreation as the priority land use designation for lands
immediately adjacent to reservoirs, and streams.. (Conservation Element Policy C.P.2.4)
• Promote non-point. source pollution control' programs to reduce and control' the discharge
of non-point source pollutants into the storm drain system.(Conservation Element Policy
C.P.2.7)
12BF Consulting Towrr of Los Gatos General PIan2000
N;\DEV\SUZANNE\GENPLAN\12EPORT3\FINDINGS I-21 Statement of Findings and Facts
Dam Failure Hazard
Several properties .adjacent to the Lenihan or Vasona Dam would 'be subject to inundation should :either
of these dams suffer a catastrophic failure. Under such circumstances, debris flow would spread over the
floodplain within the Town. .However, implementation of the pproposed General Plan 2000 would not
directly result in future development which would be exposed to this existing hazard,. as no existing land
use designations are proposed to be modified as .part of the :proposed General Plan 2000. However, future
development projects adjacent to these dams under General Plan 2000 buildout would be exposed to
potential .hazards in the unlikely event of edam failure. This would be considered a potentially significant
impact. unless mitigation is incorporated.
Mitigation Measure 4.2-g -Dam Failure Hazard: Implementation of the following proposed
General Plan 2000 policies and implementing strategies will ,reduce .impacts .related to dam failure
.hazards o a less than significant level:
• Apply land use regulations, scenic easements,. or other appropriate measures to .keep a
maximum of the watershed and .lands immediately contiguous to reservoirs and stream
:channels in an open, natural state. (Conservation Element Policy C.P.2.1)
• Establish natural open space and recreation as the priority land use designations for lands
immediately adjacent to reservoirs and streams. (Conservation Element:Policy C.P.2.4)
.G •3 Neighborhood disaster plans: Provide an outline for encouragement of disastery
.preparedness for neighborhoods (Safety Element Implementing Strategy S.I.6.5) _~
• Emergency road design: Design road systems to provide reliable access to remote areas
both for access by emergency vehicles and egress by residents .fleeing from a disaster, w:..
(Safety Element Implementing Strategy S.L6.7)
4.3 .Land Use Compatibility, Applicable Plans and ,Policies
4.3..1 Potential Significant Impacts
The potential impacts associated with the implementation of the General Plan 2000 .related to land use
compatibility, applicable ,plans and policies. that can be mitigated to a less than significant level, or are
otherwise not significant are discussed in Section 4.3 of the Final EI1Z. Implementation of the proposed
General Plan 2000 would not result in future development which is incompatible .with applicable plans,
policies or regulations, results inthe loss of open space or vacant land, or is incompatible withsurrounding
land uses, as no existing. wand use .designations are proposed to be modified as part of the proposed General
.Plan 2000. In addition, implementation of future projects undertaken in compliance with the eland use
assumptions identified in the proposed General Plan 2000 buildout would .not result in incompatibility with
surrounding land uses.. Future development projects contemplated under General Plan 2000 buildout
.conditions ,could result in the conversion of vacant land as currently vacant, underutilized, :and/oi•
underdeveloped parcels are developed in accordance with the General Plan 2000 land use designations.
However, the conversion of these vacant parcels was anticipated in the 1985 General Plan, :and no existing
land use designations are proposed to be modified in the proposed General Plan 2000.. All of these impacts
.are less than significant.
4.3..2 Findings
Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Plan which mitigate or avoid the
RBF Consulting Town of Los Gatos General Plan 2000
N:\DEV\SUZANNE\GENPLAN\REPORTS\FINDINGS I-22 Statement of Findings-and Facts
significant environmental effects associated with land use compatibility, applicable plans acid policies, as
identified in the Final' EIR.
4.3.3 Facts in Support. of Findings
Compatibility with Applicable Land. Use Plans, Policies, or Re ulations
As stated in the proposed General. Plan 2000 for the Town of Los Gatos, the Land Use Element of the
proposed General Plan 2000 provides the framework for the entire Plan. The goals and policies found in
the Land Use Element set. forth the patterns of development activity and land uses that establish the
foundation upon which. all planning decisions are made for the Town. Additionally, implementation
mechanisms of the proposed General Plan 2000 must also be consistent with the Land' Use Element.
Applicable Town plans, policies,. and regulations include the Zoning Ordinance, the Hillside Specific Plan,
and the Downtown Specific Plan. The Land' Use Element of the proposed General Plan 2000 for the Town.
states, "California State law requires that. all specific plans and zoning regulations be consistent with the
General Plan. The Hillside :Specific Plan, the Downtown Specific Plan, and other plans that. may be
adopted. as deemed necessary from. time to time will be consistent with this General' Plan. " Additionally,
the proposed' General Plan 2000 involves no modifications to the existing land use designations. within the
Town. The proposed' General Plan 2000 would therefore remain consistent with the. Town Zoning.
Ordinance. The goals and policies in the proposed.Generale Plan 2000 weredeveloped to be consistent with
all other applicable Town plans and policies, For example, Noise Element Policy 1.9: "Ensure that land
use patterns and traffic patterns do not exposesensitive land uses or sensitive receptors to unacceptable
noise levels" is consistent with the Town Noise Ordinance limits on construction noise (refer to Section 4.6
of this EIR). In addition,. the goals and policies of the proposed General Plan 2000 are internally consistent
(e.g., Land Use Element policies are consistent with Open Space and Safety Element policies, and vice
versa). For example.,. Transportation Element Policy 1.13: "Make land use decisions. that encourage
walking, bicycling and public transit use'',. is consistent with Community Design Element Policy 3.1:
"Provide for pedestrian circulation over, under, or conveniently around' pedestrian barriers, such as
freeways,. rivers, railroad tracks, etc. " Therefore, the proposed General_Plan 2000 would result in a less
than significant impact; and no mitigation measures would. be required. Refer to Sections 4.1; 4.2, 4,3,
4.4, 4.5, 4.6 and 4.7 for a relevant comparison of policies affecting.: geology and soils;
hydrology/drainage;. land use, applicable plans and.. policies; transportation/crculation; air quality; noise;.
and public services,. facilities, and utilities, respectively.
Loss. of Vacant/Open Space Land
Future development projects contemplated under General Plan 2000 buildout conditions could'. result in the
conversion. of vacant land as currently vaealit, underutilized, and/or underdeveloped parcels are developed
inaceordanee with the General'' Plan 20001and use designations, There are approximately 31,600 residents
currently located within the Town of Los Gatos,. including the Town's Sphere of Influence. According to
the Association of Bay Area. Governments (ABAG), an additona12,100 residents .are anticipated. in -the
Town and' its Sphere of Influence under buildout conditions (ABAG Projections 96): The land use and
growth. policies of the proposed General Plan 2000 would allow this land to eventually be developed with.
urban. uses,. and would allow underdeveloped' land to be reused' with more intensive uses, in accordance
with General Plan. 2000 and zoning designations. However, the conversion of these vacant parcels was
anticipated in the. 198'5 General Plan, and' no existing land use designations are proposed to be modified
in the proposed General' Plan 2000. Therefore, implementation of the proposed General Plan 2000. would
not result in the loss of vacant land' beyond that already considered in the 1985 General. Plan and evaluated
in the 1985 Generale. Plan EIR. This would be considered a less than significant. impact.
RBF Consulting Town of Los Gatos General. Plan 2000
N:\DEV\SU2ANNE\GENPLAN\REPORTS\FINDINGS T-23 Statement of Findings and' Facts
Implementation of the proposed General Plan 2000 for the Town of Los Gatos would .result in no direct
impacts regarding open space within the Town or .its .Sphere of Influence, as the proposed General Plan
2000 would involve no changes to existing .land use designations, and would therefore not result in the
conversion of open space land to-urban uses or increase demand beyond that .anticipated in the current
General Plan {1985). In addition,. the proposed General Plan 2000 .maintains several policies and
implementing strategies that would ..provide protection for open space resources, such as:
:• Promote coordination with all levels of..government in utilizing available resources for the
acquisition .and development of open space to satisfy .recreation needs. (Open Space
Element Policy O.P.1.1)
:• Promote private open space in all planning decisions. (Open Space Element Policy
O.P.5.1)
:• Encourage the use of :innovative, development techniques which will provide open space
within individual developments, :public or private. (Open Space Element Policy O,P.5.5)
Therefore, implementation of the proposed General Plan 2000 would :result inno direct .impacts related to
the loss of open space lands.
.Land Use Compatibility
Implementation of the proposed General Plan 2000 for the Town of Los Gatos would result in no direct`
impacts regarding eland use compatibility within the Town or its Sphere of Influence, as the proposed'
General Plan 2000 would involve no changes to existing land use designations. As described in the 1985~~~
General Plan EIR, land uses anticipated in the current General Plan would be considered compatible..
Since no land use designations would change as a result of the proposed General Plan 2000., land uses in`-
the Town. would remain compatible, Future development projects undertaken in compliance with the .land
use assumptions identified in the proposed General Plan 2000 btaildout would therefore be compatible with
surrounding land uses. No impacts would :result.
4.4 TransQortation/Circulation
4.4.1 Potential Significant Impacts
The transportation/circulation impacts associated with the General Plan 2000 that can be mitigated to a less
than significant level, or are otherwise considered .not significantare addressed in :Section 4.4 of :the Final
EIR. Implementation of the proposed General Plan 2000 would not directly result in future development
which results in transportation and circulation impacts, as no existing. land use designations are proposed
to be modified as part of the proposed General Plan 2000. The proposed General Plan. 2000 goals,
policies, and implementing strategies focus on improvements to the roadway system, which would result
in improved levels of service if implemented. With one exception, all of .these impacts are less than
significant.
Restricting widening .along Highway 17 in accordance with proposed General Plan. 2000 Transportation
Element .Policies T.P.1.14 and T.P.I.15 would result in' a significant, unavoidable .impact. The impact
associated with traffic and circulation that has been identified as significant and unavoidable is described
in Sections 4.4 and 5.1 of the Final EIR, and in Section S of this document.
RBF Consulting Town of Los Gatos General Plan 2000
N:\DEV\SUZANNE\GENPLAN\REPORTS\FINDINGS I-24 Statement of'Findings and .Facts
4.4'.2 Findings
Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into,. the proposed Plan which mitigate or
avoid the significant environmental. effects associated with transportation/circulation, as identified in the
Final EIR.
4.4'.3 Facts in Support of Findings
Pedestrian and Bicycle Facilities
Implementation of the proposed General Plan 2000 for the Town of Los Gatos would result in no direct
impacts regarding pedestrian and bicycle facilities within. the Town or its Sphere of Influence, as the
proposed General Plan 2000 would involve no changes to existing. land use designations. that would result
in increased demand for such facilities, or remove or interfere with such facilities. The proposed General
Plan 2000 Transportation. Element goals, policies, and implementation strategies focus on enhancing the
.existing Town's pedestrian and bicycle facilities. Where circulation enhancements are suggested in the
proposed General Plan 2000, bicycle, lanes and sidewalks are. included.. The Alternatives to Automobile
section of the proposed Generale Plan 2000 Transportation Element focuses on improvements to the existing
bike and trails system to include bike lanes and sidewalks,.. as well as expanding. the trails system to
complete the Town's non-motorized circulation system. Therefore, implementation of the proposed
General. Plan 2000 would result in less. than significant impacts related. to pedestrian .and bicycle facilities.
Transit Service
Implementation of the proposed General Plan 2000' for the Town. of Los Gatos would result in no direct
impacts regarding. transit service within the Town or its Sphere ofTnfluence, as the proposed General Plan
2000 would. involve no changes to existing, land use designations that. would result in increased'. demand for
such service,. or remove or interfere with such service. Thee proposed General. Plan 2000 would. enhance
and promote existing. transit service. through. proposed improvements such as a localized transit center,. bus
only lanes, and' preservation of existing. right-of--way for future rail expansion. If the bus only lanes are
added to the existing. roadway through widening,. which. would accommodate all existing lanes including
parking:. and mixed flow lanes, then. the proposed transit. service improvements would not result in a
significant impact.
V.A, plans. for future expansion of light rail transit service in the Townof Los Gatos .are incorporated into
the proposed' General Plan 2000'. The preservation of the right-of--way in the median of Highway 85 would
accommodate the V.A. plans for the extension of the Vasona Light Rail corridor. Through improvements
to the non-motorized transportation system, including. bike lanes,. trails and sidewalks,, the Town would
enhance the accessibility of the future .light rail' extension project. As described. in Transportation Elelnent
Policy 7.4, the Town plans to develop a combined downtown transit station and bus depot:. to facilitate the
various public transit modes in the downtown. Therefore,. implementation of the proposed. General. Plan
2000 would' result in less than significant impacts related to transit service.
4.5 Air Quality
4.5.1 Potential Significant .Impacts
The potential' impacts associated with air quality that would occur as a result of the implementation of the
General Plan 2000 that can be mitigated to a less. than significant level, or are otherwise considered not
significant, are analyzed' in Section 4.5 of the Final EIR. Implementation of the proposed General Plan
RBF Consulting. Town of Los Gatos Genera4 Plan 2000'
N,\DEV\SUZANNE\GENPLAN\REPORTS\FINDINGS I-25 Statement of Findings and Facts
2000 would not directly result in future development which results in potentially significant .air .quality
.impacts, as no existing .land use designations are .proposed to be modified as part of the proposed General
Plan 2000. However., implementation of future projects under General Flan 2000 buildout could result in
short-term construction air quality emissions. Although individual CEQA analysis should be conducted
for .development projects located near sensitive receptors, build-out of the proposed General Plan 2000 is
not anticipated to result in significant localized air pollutant emissions, since the proposed General Plan
2000 does not involve any changes to existing land. use designations, .and since the proposed General Plan
2000 is consistent with the BAAQMD CAP.. All of .these impacts are less than significant, or can be
:mitigated to less .than significant levels.
4.5.2. Findings
Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the proposed Plan which .mitigate or
avoid the significant environmental effects associated with air quality, as identified in the Final EIR.
4.5.3 .Facts in Support. of Findings
Consistency with .Air Quality 'Management Regional Plans
As noted in the BAAQMD thresholds of significance discussion above, a ,local plan, in this case, the
proposed General Plan 2000 for the Town of Los Gatos, must be .consistent with the most recently adopted
Clean .Air Plan (CAP) in order to claim a less than significant impact on air equality. The Bay Area `97
Clean Air Plan, prepared by BAAQMD and adopted December 17, 1997, is the applicable CAP for this
study.
The following discussion assesses the proposed General Plan 2000 consistency with each of these impact
:.:evaluation criteria in order to determine whether the proposed General Plan 2000 for the Town of Lose
Gatos. is .consistent with the 1997 CAP...
To establish consistency between the ,proposed General Plan 2000 and the 1:997 CAP, it .must be
demonstrated that the General Plan 2000 population growth and VMT growth estimates are consistent with
the 1997 CAP growth assumptions.. This is because the T997 CAP accounts for .incremental growth in the
Town of Los Gatos, based on Association of .Bay Area Governments (ABAG) projections. The proposed
General Plan 2000 for the Town of Los Gatos would not result in .any increase in the population of the
Town. The proposed General Plan 2000 includes no changes to existing landuse designations, as specified
in the 1985 Town of Los Gatos General Plan and subsequent amendments .thereto, There would be no
additional population generated as a result of implementation of the proposed General Plan 2000 beyond
that contemplated by the 1985 General Plan and 1985 General Plan EIR. Consequently, VMT for :the
Town would_not increase due to population ..growth in the Town. Additionally, proposed new or additional
policies, or changes to current General Plan policies., are designed o further increase the efficiency of
vehicular travel in the Town, which would result in decreased VMT. Therefore, CAP estimates for
,population growth and projected VMT increases would not be exceeded.
There are seven applicable Transportation Control Measures (TCMs) in the 1:999 CAP forwhich the Town
of Los Gatos would be an implementing agency. In order to claim a less than significant impact with
regard to air quality, the proposed General Plan .2000 .must be consistent with all of the .relevant TCMs.
.Noncompliance with the provisions of the 1997 TCMs would- result in a potentially significant :impact
unless mitigation is incorporated. As the proposed Plan is consistent with all of the relevant TCMs,. no
impacts would occur in relation to proposed General Plan 2000 consistency with the TCMs identified in
the 1997 CAP.
RBF Consulting Town of Los Gatos General Plan 2000
N:\DEV\SUZANNE\GENPLAN\REPORTS\FINDINGS I-26 Statement of Findings and :Facts
For the proposed General Plan 2000 of the Town of Los Gatos to have a less than. significant. irllpact with
respect to potential odors and/or toxic air contaminants, the BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines recommend that
buffer zones be established around existing and. proposed land uses that would' emit such air pollutants. The
BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines state that if the Town is within. one mile of any of these uses, or within 2
miles of a Petroleum Refinery- local plan policies, 1'and use maps,. and implementing: ordinances should
include buffer zones to avoid odors and toxics impacts.
The only land uses identified by BAAQMD asodor-generating that are found within one mile of, or within,
the Town are the Guadalupe Landfill, and Painting/Coating Operations. The Guadalupe Landfill is located
at 15999 Guadalupe Mines Road', and is located approximately one mile east of the Town's Sphere of
Influence boundaries.. However, as indicated on the proposed General. Plan 2000 Land. Use Designations
Map,. the Town is buffered' from the landfill. by areas. designated' as Open Space.
Painting/Coating Operations. in the form of vehicle body painting are conditionally allowed. uses in the
Restricted' Highway Commercial. (CH) and. Commercial-Industrial (LM) zones. The Town Zoning
Ordinance. identifies the set back requirements for an approved vehicle body paint. shop in a CH zone (refer
to Table 4.5-2).
The Town Zoning Ordinance also identifies the set back requirements for an approved'vehicle body paint
shop in an LM zone (refer to Table 4.5-3).
As a result of Town Zoning. Ordinance requirements for vehicle body painting,. uses,. potential' odors and/or
oxic air contaminants. from. such uses would be buffered from adjacent land uses. No impacts. would. occur
in relation to odors and toxics. as a result of the implementation of the proposed General. Plan 2000.
In conclusion, the proposed General Plan 2000 for the Town of Los. Gatos is consistent with. the 1997 CAP.
As such,: no iirlpacts in regards to' air quality would' occur as a result. of implementation of the proposed.
General. Plan 2000.
Short-Term Construction Im acts
Implementation of the proposed General Plan 2000. would not directly result in future development that
would' involve short-term construction. noise, as no existing land use designations are proposed to be
modified in the proposed General Plan 2000. However,, future. development projects. under General' Plan
2000 buildout would result. in short-term air quality impacts. due to emissions. of nitrogen.. oxides (NOx),
reactive organic compounds (ROG), and particulate matter (PM,o): As currently underutilized or vacant
parcels are developed in accordance with the proposed General Plan 2000, construction-related activities
will generate emissions from construction equipment, grading operations and stationary equipment..
Emissions generated from such. sources can be considered a nuisance to local residents and. businesses.
Temporary grading., construction. and demolition impacts would include;
• Particulate (fugitive dust) emissions from clearing and grading. activities;
d• Exhaust emissions and potential odors from the construction equipment as well as the vehicles used
to transport materials to and' from development sites;: and exhaust emissions from the. motor
vehicles of construction. crews.
This. would-be considered a potentially significant impact unless mitigation is incorporated.
RBF°Consulting Town of Los Gatos General Plan 2000
N;\DEV\SUZANNE\GENPLAN\REPORTS\FINDINGS I-27 Statement of Findings and Facts
Mitigation Measure 4.5-b -Short-Term Construction Impacts: Future individual development
proposals in the Town would be .required to implement control measures during construction in
order to reduce .the amount of emissions to below the BAAQNID significance thresholds. Such
measures could include basic and/or enhanced control measures, in accordance with Table 2 of the
BAAOMD CEOA Guidelines, April 1996)'; as follows:
Basic Control Measures
• Water all active construction areas at least twice daily.;
+3 Cover all trucks hauling soils, sand, and other loose ..materials or require all trucks to
maintain at'least two feet of freeboard;
• Pave, .apply water three times daily or apply (non-toxic) soil stabilizers on all unpaved
:access roads, parking .areas and staging areas at construction sites;
•A Sweep daily (with water sweepers) all paved access roads, parking areas and staging areas
at 'construction sites; .and
• Sweep streets daily (with water sweepers) if visible soil material is carried onto .adjacent
public streets..
Enhanced Control Measures
• All "Basic" control measures :listed above;
-• •3 Hydroseed or apply (non-toxic) soil stabilizers to inactive construction areas (previously-
- graded areas inactive for ten days or more);
' :• Enclose, cover, water twice daily or apply (non-toxic) soil binders to exposed' stockpiles
.(dirt, sand, etc.).
• Limit traffic speeds on unpaved roads to 15 miles per :hour.;
:• Install sand bags, or other Town approved erosion control measures to prevent silt runoff-•
o public roadways; and
• Replant vegetation in disturbed areas as quickly as possible.
Following implementation ofthismitigation measure, theproposed General Plan 2000 would result
in less than significant impacts related to short-term construction impacts.
Air Quality Impacts on Sensitive Receptors
Future individual developmentproposals under the proposed General Plan 2000 may result in the exposure
of sensitive .receptors (e.g., schools, hospitals, residences, etc) to high concentrations of air pollutants.
.Although .individual CEQA analysis should'be conducted for development projects located near sensitive
receptors, build-out of the proposed General Plan 2000 is not anticipated to result in significant localized
air pollutant emissions, since the,proposed General :Plan 2000 does not involve any changes to existing land
use designations, and since the proposed :General .Plan 2000 is consistent with the BAAQMD CAP.. In
addition, proposed new or additional General Plan 2000 policies, or changes to current General Plan
policies, are designed to enhance the protection of the Town's .quality of wife, :including. the Town's
environmental, physica'1, and economic :resources, and to develop a sustainable community. As a result,
implementation of the proposed General Plan 2000 would result in no additional .impacts beyond those
identified and mitigated in the 1985 General Plan EIR. Therefore, the proposed General Plan 2000 would
result in less than significant air quality impacts on sensitive receptors.
RBF Consulting Town of Los Gatos General Plan 2000
N:\DEV\SUZANNE\GENPLAN\REPORTS\FINDING3 I-28 Statement of Findings and Facts
4.6 Noise
4.6.1 Potential Significant Impacts
The potential impacts associated with the- implementation of the Town of Los Gatos General Plan 2000'
related to noise that can be mitigated to a less. than significant level',. or are otherwise not significant are
analyzed in Section 4.6 of the Final' EIR. Implementation of the proposed Generale Plan 2000 would not
directly result in future development. which results in noise impacts, as no existing land use designations
are proposed to be modified. as part of the proposed General Plan 2000. However, implementation of
future projects under General Plan 2000 buildout would result in potentially significant. impacts related to
noise. The analysis in the Final EIR. separates noise impacts into two categories: short-term, and long-term
impacts. Short-term. impacts. would' occur as a result of construction-related activities from future
development projects temporarily exposing-nearby sensitive receptors to high. noise. levels. These impacts
are mitigable. Long-term noise impacts would'. occur as follows: future development projects would result
in additional. vehicles that would' use the Town. roadway network, the addition of new stationary noise
sources, and exposure. of future project occupants to existing noisy environments. All of these impacts are
considered less than significant, or can be mitigated to a less than significant. level..
4.6.2 Findings
Changes or alterations have been required' in, or incorporated into, the, proposed' Plan which mitigate or
avoid the significant. environmental effects associated with noise, as identified in the Final EIR.
4.6.3 Facts in Support. of Findings
Short-Term Noise Impacts.
Implementation of the proposed General Plan 2000 would not directly result in future development that
would involve short-term construction noise, as no existing: land use designations are proposed to be
modified in the proposed General Plan 2000. However,. future. development projects. under the proposed
General Plan 2000 buildout. could produce: short-term noise during construction. that could. affect adjacent
land' uses. As currently underutilized or vacant parcels are developed in accordance with the proposed
General Plan 2000,.. construction-related activities will generate noise from. construction equipment, grading
operations and stationary equipment. Noise generated from such. sources can be considered. a nuisance to
locale residents and businesses. However, the Town of Los Gatos Noise Ordinance: provides for time limits
on construction, and regulates. peak. noise exposure at adjacent property lines. Thee Noise Ordinance states
that construction activities are restricted to the hours of 8:00' AM to 8:00 PM on weekdays and 9:.00 AM
to 7:00 P1VI on weekends and holidays.. According to the Ordinance,. noise generation must also be limited
to 85 dBA at the property line or 85 dBA at 25 feet from the property line. This would be considered' a
potentially significant impact unless mitigation is incorporated.
Mitigation Measure 4.6-a -Mitigation of Short-Term Impacts: The Town of Los Gatos shall
enforce the Noise Ordinance, which clearly addresses maximum exposure limits and mitigation
requirements to protect people from construction-related noise. This shall include. limitations on
construction hours and the operation of construction. equipment. adjacent to sensitive receptors.
Lona-Term Vehicular Noise Impacts
Because of the circulation system changes and growth in the region, the current traffic noise contours are
somewhat different than those developed for the. 1985 Noise Element. Generally, the opening of State
RBF Consulting. Town of Lose Gatoa General. Plan 2000
N:\DEV\SUZANNE\GENPLAN\REPORTS\FINDINGS I-29 Statement of Findings and Facts
Route 85 reduced local traffic and associated noise impacts on a number of roadways., .including Blossom
Hill Road, :Los Gatos Almaden .Road and Winchester Boulevard. However:, increased traffic on State
Route 17 has resulted in an .increase in noise levels by approximately 5 dBA along this freeway corridor..
Implementation of the proposed General Plan 2000 would result in no direct impacts regarding 'long-.term
noise levels within the Town or its Sphere of Influence, as the proposed General Plan 2000 would involve
no :changes to existing .land use desgnations,_and would therefore .not directly .result in additional noise
sources or increase noise exposure beyond that anticipated in the current General Plan. However, future
development projects undertaken in compliance with the land use assumptions identified in the proposed
General Plan 2000 buildout could result in long-term increases in vehicular noise. This would be
considered a potentially significant impact unless mitigation is incorporated.
Mitigation Measure 4.6-b - .Long-Term Vehicular .Impacts: Implementation of the following.
proposed General Plan 2000 policies and implementing strategies will reduce impacts related to
long-term vehicular :noise sources to a less than significant level:
:• Ensure that roads constructed or improved by the Town of Los. Gatos meet Town of Los
Gatos noise level aspirations or, in some situations, 'the Los Gatos Noise Ordinance, to the
maximum extent feasible. {Noise Element Policy N.P.1.1)
•3 Improve traffic flows without increasing speed levels to reduce high noise levels created
by traffic congestion. (Noise Element Policy N.P.1.4)
• Protect residential areas from noise with attenuation using attenuation technologies, such
as: location and placement of structures, sound walls, and landscaping. (Noise Element
Policy N.P.1.5)
+:• .Employ the Ldn scale for the evaluation of outdoor :noise for residential .land uses and the
Leq scale for .evaluation of outdoor noise for non-residential uses. (Noise Element Policy
N.P.1.6)
• Pursue the following outdoor noise .limits as representing the .long -range community
aspirations and work toward their accomplishment, even .though some may be presently
unattainable {refer to Table 4.6-3). (Noise Element Policy N.P.1.7)
• .Ensure that land use patterns and traffic patterns do .not expose sensitive land uses or
sensitive noise receptors are not exposed to unacceptable noise levels. {Noise Element
Policy N.P.1.9)
:• Pursue reduction of individual auto use by requiring a plan for .alternatives to auto use
whenever the traffic generated by any development would result in an adverse .increase in
air and noise pollution. (Noise Element .Policy N.P.1.10)
:• Noise reduction program: The Town shall establish a measurable program to reduce
noise., including an effective procedure to monitor .noise and enforce .noise reduction.
(Noise .Element Implementing Strategy N.L.1.2)
RBF Consulting Town of Los Gatos General Plan 2000
N:\DEV\SUZANNE\GENPLAN\REPORTS\FINDINGS I-30 Statement of .Findings and Facts
TABLE 4.6-3
GENERAL. PLAN 2000 NOISE STANDARDS BY LAND USE
::::::n ..; .... :: r.
'i~~if~y~ ~,7p~ ~y~ ~j- !~~ y~y~.~ ...4...
iii '.'.'iil.^•.i:.:~:;~;{:;::;: :ii:~/7:iJt•:: {'iii}:i?}~'::~:y
{~ :i ti•:i
:~:. ~..
~~~.~'7f~77~71•ii'i7ti~.~~'::::~::.}~::::.' ,....'R>(l:ii:`~~J:~>:: i::;:: 't.:i~ii>.;'i:" : ~~
::n:..~.vr::.• ::::::::::::::•.v:::::::ii:w:;:}: •. :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::. •::::::::. ~:::::::::::: ..:::::: ............... vii:>.wnw:::::;; •........ .: ..::::::: vw::. ~:::.. .. ,.~.}~.:........
.
..
.
n
: r:
:v:::::
:vi:
v::::
:
:
•
^
•
..;
.....; ........... ................;;
..
.
.
.
:::. w
.v
:r :v :vr
:.v :::::::::::::::::::::::::::: w:
. :::::::::: .
.v:::::::::::::::::::::: x:::::::::.
:::::::::::::::::: r:::::
.v: ......M1ti..
vi:•iiii ~:~h:4:•ii}ii:•i}iiii}iiii;.}}};•i;{.; 4::::n •iiiii:•iii i?.,,.,~,. . ... •.i'::::::::.v::::.v::::. •:::: nvnv: ;4.;; ... w:.; v.; w .:::::::::::. :{:::: ••: •::.: v..: •:.:..; ..............,:.: ii:S:+., ..
. •i''+i:
pp ~~jj ~}~ .}::n ~it~d~. }y............ ..........
.;; ....n•~.i •.; :x::::::: i.
:iiih:•iiiiii:ii:•i}i+:•iiii:•:i~i:~ii< is ~ 53
~:: J:i:: •4.
'yy~...z ~ CGi~$;>:ri;?{:;. iii:>..~•.i:•: i.. r ... r
...::::::::..: rw::::::::::::::::........n.;, ...........
Si:•: f:• ~E~• iiiiiiii:?iii:iii iiiiiii: iiiiiii iii •:
...~.....Y .................. .. ..4i ..~. r.$:~:iiii:::`?:ii ~i iii~.R~tii x7:,v+:~:v+:i:iiii:?~fii: istitiiv::::::+:::::;i:•ii:C•i:•i:,::t•`.•i:?>;i~`•:
2:gii
Residential 55 dB(A) Light. Auto ', Quiet
Traffic (100 Feet)
Commercial 70 dB(A) Freeway Traffic Telephone Use
(50 Feet) Difficult
Industrial. 70 dB(A) Freeway Traffic Telephone Use
- ! (50 Feet) Difficult ,
Open Space
Intensive SS dB(A) Light Auto Quiet
(Developed Park) 'Traffic (100 Feet)
Passive. (Natural 50 dB(A) Light Auto Quiet.
Park) 'Traffic (100 Feet)
Hospital' S5 dB(A) Light Auto Quiet
Traffic {1,00 Feet)
Educational 55 dB(A) Light Auto Quiet
Traffic (100 Feet)
• Soundwalls:. The Town. should identify those areas adjacent to existing or proposed State
Highways that presently need acoustical protection and request. that the State construct
noise attenuation walls as a noise reducing measure... (Noise Element. Implementing
Strategy N.L 1..4')
•:* Noise buffers: The Zoning Ordinance should be amended to require buffers or separation
between. noise generating uses and noise sensitive uses. (Examples of noise sensitive uses
include, but. are. not limited'' to, resid'enees, hospitals,. libraries, and' parks.). (Noise
Element Implerrlenting. Strategy N.L 1.5)
•2• Noise Analysis: The Town as part of the Environmental Review process, shall. require an
acoustical analysis of projects and' all input related to noise levels shall use the adopted
standard of measurement. (Noise Element Implementing Strategies N.L 1.6)
•A Standards for comparison; Any Environmental Review prepared for the Town for a
project that identifies noise factors shall relate the noise data to the Town's noise ordinance
to give. the Planning. Commission and Town Council a standard for comparison.. (Noise
Element Implementing Strategies N'.L 1.11)
• Noise Level: The Town shall require all noise sensitive developments adjacent to, or
. within an area where noise level exceed community aspirations to include an acoustical
analysis and recommendation. for reducing noise impact to acceptable level. (Noise
Element Implementing. Strategy N.L 1.13)
RBF Consulting Town of Los Gatos General Plan.2000
N:\DEV\SUZANNE\GENPLAN\REPORTS\FINDINGS I-31 ~ Statement. of Findings and Facts.
• Noise Ordinance: The Townshall have a noise ordinance and maintain the standards. For
commercial and industrial. developments adjacent to residential neighborhoods .additional
restrictions may be applied to reduce :noise intrusions in residential districts to an
acceptable level. (Noise Element Implementing Strategy N.I.1..14)
.Long-Term Stationary .Noise Impacts
A variety of stationary noise sources .are ..located in the Town, and primarily consist of commercial and
industrial mechanical equipment,. air conditioning units, compressors, and similar .equipment.. This
equipment is typically fitted with noise muffling devices. Implementation of the .proposed General :Plan
2000 would result. in no direct impacts regarding long-term stationary noise .levels within the Town or its
Sphere of Influence, as the proposed General Plan 2000- would involve no changes to existing land use
designations.; and would therefore nat directly result in additional noise sources or increase noise exposure
beyond that anticipated in he current General Plan. However, future development projects undertaken in
compliance with the land use .assumptions identified in the proposed General Plan 2000 buildout could
produce stationary noise that cou d affect adjacent land uses. As part of the Town development review
process for any land use involving stationary noise sources, the Town .requires an acoustic study to
demonstrate that the stationary noise source will not exceed Town Noise Ordinance 'limits at the adjacent
property line.. Nevertheless, this would be considered a potentially significant .impact unless mitigation is
incorporated.
Mitigation Measure 4.6-c -Long-term Stationary Noise Impacts: Refer o Mitigation Measure
4.6-b.
4.7 Public Services, Facilities,. and Utilities
4.7.1 Potential Significant Impacts
The potential impacts associated with the implementation of the General Plan 2000, related to .,public
services, facilities, and Utilities that can be mitigated to a less than significant level, or are otherwise not
significant, are :analyzed in Section 4.7 of the Final EIR. Implementation of the proposed General Plan
2000 would not directly result in future development which results in public services, facilities, and utilities
impacts, as no existing land use .designations are. proposed to be modified as-part of the proposed General
Plan 2000. However, implementation of future projects under General Plan 2000 buildout would result in
potentially significant .impacts related to increased demand for fire service, police service, schools, park
.and .recreation facilities, solid waste facilities, storrrl drain .facilities, water upply wastewater facilities,.
and energy. All of these impacts are'less thansignifcant, or can be mitigated to less thansignificantlevels.
4.7.2 Findings
Changes or alterations have been .required in, or incorporated .into, the proposed Plan which mitigate or
avoid the significant environmental effects associated with public services, facilities, and utilities, as
identified in the Final EIR.
4.7.3 .Facts in Support of Findings
Fire Services
Implementation of the proposed General Plan 2000 for the Town of Los Gatos would result in no direct
impacts regarding :fire service within the Town or its Sphere of Influence, as the proposed General Plan
RBF Consulting Town of Los Gatos General Plan 2000
N:1DEV\SUZANNE\GENPLAN\REPORTS\FINDINGS TT-32 Statement of Findings and'Faets
2000 would. involve no changes to existing land. use designations, and would therefore not result in
increased demand. beyond that anticipated. in the current General Plan for such services due to land. use
changes. However,, future development projects undertaken in compliance with proposed General Plan
2000 could indirectly increase the demand for fire services.. An additiona12,100'residents are anticipated.
in the Town and its Sphere of Influence under buildout conditions (ABAG Projections 96). This would be
considered a potentially significant impact unless mitigation is incorporated.
Mitigation Measure 4.7-a -Fire Service: Implementation of the following proposed Generale Plan
2000 policies ands implementing strategies would reduce potentially significant impacts related to
fire service to a less than significant level:
•3 Provide acceptable means. for emergency access where single access. -roads exist..
Emergency access shall discourage hillside through traffic, (Transportation Element Policy
T.P.3,4)
• Dual' Access: Dual access is required for all zoning. approvals and shall be provided first
by loop roads, then. by through. roads and lastly by long cul=de-sacs with an emergency
access connection. to a public road,. (Transportation Element Implementing Strategy
T.L 3.1)
• Guadalupe College: Private access from the Lexington Reservoir area shall' be provided
from Alrna Bridge RoadlLimekiln Road. for any non-single family use of the Guadalupe
College. property {not through the St. Joseph's Hill Open Space Preserve). The private
access shall. incorporate. provisions for emergency access to Foster Road. (Transportation
Element Implementing Strategy T.L3.2}
• Encourage neighborhood fire emergency planning for isolated areas, (Safety Element
Policy S.P.2.1)
±: Neighborhood Safety Plan: Adopt procedures whereby the public will continually be made
aware of the Town's policies regarding safety hazards and be conveniently supplied with
information to include notification. of residents of fire emergency plans for their area.
(Safety Element Implementing:.. Strategy S.L2.1)
• Site design: In areas identified' as potentially susceptible to fire hazards,.. require special
building.. and' site. design by ordinance. (Safety Element Implementing, Strategy S.L2.2)
• Vegetation: Control excessive buildup of flammable vegetative material. (Safety Element
Implementing Strategy S.L2.3)
• Water storage: Consider carefully the adequacy of water storage for fire protection during
the development review process. (Safety Element Implementing Strategy S'.L2.4)
• Require means of access (hillsides) in accordance with. the Hillside. Specific. Plan. (Safety
Element Policy S.P.6.1)
• Discourage single access roads ofl extended length, and restrict. development along such
roads (Safety Element Policy S.P.6,2)
RB17 Consulting, Towne of Los Gatos General. Plan 2000
N:\DEV\SUZANNE\GENPLAN\REPORTS\FINDINGS I-33' Statement of Findings and. Facts
l
• Steep roads: Establish specific gradient standards and the maximum length of steep roads.
{Safety Element :Implementing Strategy S.I.6.1)
•S Include the Town's Emergency Plan in .this General Plan by reference.. (Safety Element
Implementing Strategy S.L6.6)
:• Emergency road design: :Design road systems to provide .reliable access to remote areas
both for access by emergency vehicles and .egress by .residents fleeing from a disaster.
(Safety Element Implementing Strategy S.I,6.7)
Police Services
Implementation of the proposed General Plan 2000 for he Town of Los Gatos would result in no direct
impacts regarding police service within the Town or its Sphere of Influence, as the proposed General Plan
2000 would involve no changes to existing land use designations., and would therefore not result in
increased demand beyond that anticipated in the current General Plan for such services due to land use
changes.. However, future-.development projects undertaken in compliance with the !land use assumptions
identified in the ,proposed General Plan 2000 .could indirectly increase the demand for fire services. An
additiona12,100 residents are anticipated imthe Town and its Sphere of Influence under buildout conditions
(ABAG Projections 96), This would be considered a potentially significant impact. unless .mitigation is
incorporated.
_: ."' Mitigation Measure 4.7-b -Police Service: Implementation of the. following proposed General
Plan 2000 policies and implementing strategies would reduce potentially significant impacts related
to police service to a less than significant levek:
:• Provide .acceptable means :for emergency access where single access roads exist.--
Emergency access shall discourage hillside through traffic. (Transportation Element Policy
T.P.3.4)
• Dual Access: Dual access is required for all zoning approvals and shall be provided first
by loop roads, .then by through .roads and lastly by long cul-de-sacs with an emergency
access connection to a public road. (Transportation :Element Implementing. Strategy
T.I,3,1)
• Guadalupe College: Private access from the Lexington :Reservoir area shall be provided
from Alma Bridge Road/Limekiln Road for any non-single family use of the Guadalupe
College property (not through the St. Joseph's Hill. Dpen Space Preserve). The private
access shall incorporate provisions for emergency access to Foster Road. (Transportation
Element°Implementing Strategy T.L3.2)
• Pursue crime prevention measures for increased public safety. (Safety Element Policy
S.P.4.1}
•A :Ensure traffic safety, :especially near public buildings and schools. (Safety Element Policy
S.P.4.2)
• - Street standards shall recognize the existing character of the .neighborhood safety and
maintenance. {Safety Element Policy S.P.4.3)
13BF Consulting Town of Los Gatos General Plan 2000
Ni\DEV\SUZANNE\GENPLAN\ItEPORTS\FINDINGS I-34 Statement of Findings and Facts
•3 Crime prevention by design:. Adopt an ordinance that establishes design parameters for
buildings, streetscapes and lighting which help prevent crime.. (Safety Element
Implementing Strategy S.I.4.1)
• Emergency road design: Design road systems to provide reliable access to remote areas
both for access by emergency vehicles and egress by residents fleeing from a disaster.
(Safety Element Implementing Strategy S.L6.7)
Schools
Implementation of the proposed. General Plan. 2000 for the Town. of Los Gatos would result in no direct
impacts regarding. schools within the Town or its Sphere of Influence; as the proposed General Plan 2000
would' involve. no changes to existing land. use designations,. and would. therefore not result in an increased
demand beyond. that anticipated in the current General Plan for school services and facilities due to
increased land' use intensity or population growth. However, future residential development projects
undertaken in corpliance with the land use assumptions identified in the proposed Generals Plan 2000 may
indirectly increase the demand' for school. services and facilities; which could burden existing. facilities
and'!or result in the need for new facilities. An additional 2,100 residents are anticipated in the Town and
its. Sphere. of Influence under buildout conditions (ABAG Projections. 96). Thin would be considered a
potentially significant impact unless mitigation is incorporated.
Mitigation Measure 4.7-c -Schools: Applicants for residential projects undertaken in compliance
with. the land-use .assumptions identified' in the proposed General. Plan 2000 will continue to be
required to pay school fees in the amount per square foot specified in the California Government
Code as mitigation for school facilities impacts. Pursuant to Section 65995 (3)(h) of the. California.
Government Code (Senate Bill' S0, chaptered August 27, 1.998), the payment of statutory fees
($1.93) "..is deemed' to be full and complete mitigation of the impacts of any legislative or
adjudicative act,. or both, involving, but not Timited' to, the planing,: use,. or developed of real
property,.: or any change in governmental organization or reorganization. "' Therefore, subsequent
to payment of statutory fees, school impacts would be considered less. than significant.
Parks and Recreation Facilities
Implementation of the proposed General Plan 2000 for the Town of Los Gatos would result in no direct.
impacts regarding. parks and recreation facilities within the Town.. or its Sphere of Influence, as the
proposed General Plan. 2000 would involve no changes to existing land use designations,.. and' would
therefore not result in increased demand .beyond that anticipated' in the current General Plan for such
services. due to land' use changes, However, future development projects. undertaken in compliance with
the. land use assumptions identified. in the proposed General' Plan 2000 could' indirectly increase the demand
for parks and recreation. facilities and services, An additional. 2,100 residents are anticipated. in the Town
and its Sphere of Influence under buildout conditions (ABAG Projections 96). This would' be considered'
a potentially significant impact. unless mitigation is incorporated.
Mitigation Measure 4.7-d -Parks and Recreation: Implementation of the following proposed
Generale Plan 2000 policies and implementing strategies would reduce potentially significant
impacts related to parks and recreation facilities and' services to a less. than. significant level:
• Promote coordination with. all levels of government in utilizing: available resources. for the
acquisition and development of open space to satisfy recreation needs. (Open Space
Element Policy O.P.1.1)
RBF Consulting Town of Los Gatos General Plan 2000
N;\DEV\SUZANNE\GENPLAN\REPORTS\FINDTNGS I-35 Statement of Findings and Facts
• Promote a system of Town ,parks and trails and. maximize the use of public utility
easements, flood control channels, school grounds, .and other quasi-,public areas for
recreational uses .and playfields. (Open .Space Element Policy O.P.1.5)
•A Promote private .open space in all ,planning. decisions.- {Open Space Element Policy
O.P.5.1)
•3 Encourage the use of innovative, development techniques which will provide.openspace
within individual developments,..public orprivate. (Open Space Element Policy O.P,5.5)
• Trail dedication: Include ..trail dedication as a condition of .approval. for .any development
which includes a section of trail shown on the Trails Plan. {Open Space Element
.Implementing Strategy O.L2.2)
Solid Waste :Facilities
Implementation of the proposed General Plan 2000 for the Town of Los Gatos would result in no direct
impacts regarding solid waste services and facilities within the Town or its Sphere of Influence, as .the
proposed General Plan. 2000 would involve no changes to existing 'land use designations, and would
therefore not result in increased demand beyond that anticipated in the current General Plan for such
services and facilities due to land use changes. Future development projects undertaken in compliance with
the land use assumptions identified in the proposed General Plan'2000 could indirectly increase the demand-
for solid waste disposal facilities and services, :due to construction .and :demolition activities and the'
generation ofnew residents. However, based on the sufficiency of the amount of landfih capacity currentlyR
available at the landfill which ..serves the Town, and the .fact that solid waste. disposal demand under the
proposed General Plan 2000 was anticipated by the Guadalupe Landfill and the County of SantaClara
Integrated Waste :Management Plan, implementation of the proposed General Plan 2000 would result in
aless-than-significant impact on solid waste facilities. Mitigation measures are available to further :reduce
less than significant impacts.
Mitigation Measure 4.7-e -Solid Waste: Implementation of the following proposed General Plan
.2000 policies and .implementing strategies regarding recycling would further reduce .less han
significant impacts related to solid waste:
• Encourage residential and commercial recycling of reusable materials. (Conservation
Element .Policy C.P.6.1)
• ~ Encourage recycling and reuse of building materials from remodeled .and demolished
buildings. (Conservation Element Policy C.P.6.2)
• Cooperate with nearby jurisdictions and regional jurisdictions to design and. implement
coordinated recycling plans. (Conservation Element Policy C.P.6.3)
The following mitigation measure would further reduce less than significant impacts related to solid
waste. Future projects undertaken in compliance with the Iand use assumptions. identified in the
proposed General P1an2000 will continue to be required to comply with all ocal (e.g., County of
Santa Clara Solid Waste Management Plan), estate {e.g., California Integrated Waste Management
AcC) and federal (e.g., Resource Conservation and Recovery Act) statutes and regulations related
to solid waste.
RBF Consulting Town of Los Gatos General Plan 2000
N:\DEV\SUZANNE\GENPLAN\REPORTS\FINDINGS I-36 Statement of Findings and Facts
Storm Drain Facilities
Implementation of the proposed General Plan 2000 for the Town of Los Gatos would result in no direct
impacts regarding storm drain facilities. within the Town or its Sphere of Influence, or adjacent
municipalities,. as the proposed General Plan 2000 would involve no changes to existing land. use
designations,. and would therefore not result in .increased demand beyond that anticipated in the current
General Plan for such services due to land use changes. However, future development projects undertaken
incompliance with the land use assumptions identified' in the proposed' General Plan. 2000 would result in
the need for storm drain facilities. An additional 2,100 residents are anticipated in the Town and its Sphere
of Influence under buildout conditions: (ABAG Projections. 96). This would be considered a potentially
significant impact unless mitigation is incorporated.
Mitigation Measure 4.7-f -Storm Drain. Facilities: The following Town Storm Drain Master
Plan measures shall be implemented to reduce potentially significant impacts related to storm drain
facilities to a less. than significant level:
6• Storm drains with tributaries less than 2,650 acres shall be designed'. for a minimum of 10-
year flood' frequency below the roadway top of curb, using a combined' flow capacity of
street and storm drain,. In sump conditions, the catch basins and the connecting storm
drains shall be designed to a 25-year flood frequency.
•A In undeveloped areas, where. future street alignments and' grades are unknown, storm drain
lines shall' be sized for the 100-.year flow capacity,. based on the grades of the existing,
flowlines. In developed areas, storm drains shall be sized for the 10-year event; curb to
curb shall. be sized to accommodate the 10-year flood. conditions; and the 100-year water
surface shall be below at least. one foot below the lowest floor elevation. of any habitable
structure.
Water Supnly
Implementation of the proposed General' Plan 2000 for the Town. of Los. Gatos. would result in no direct
impacts regarding. water supply within the Town or its Sphere of Influence,. as the proposed Generale Plan
2000 would involve no changes to existing land use designations, and would therefore not result in
increased demand. beyond. that anticipated' in the current General Plan for such. services due to land use
changes. However,. future development projects undertaken in compliance with the land use assumptions
identified in the proposed General Plan 2000 would result in increased demand for water supply. An
additional 2,100 residents are anticipated in the Town under buildout conditions, which would increase
water demand in the Town. beyond the current demand of 3.5 million gallons per day. An additional' 2,1.00
residents are anticipated in the Town -and its Sphere of Influence under buildout conditions (ABAG
Projections 96). This would be considered a potentially significant impact unless mitigation is incorporated.
Mitigation Measure. 4.7-g -Water 5unply: Implementation of the following proposed General
Plan 2000 policies: and implementing strategies regarding water supply would reduce impacts.
related to groundwater depletion to a less than significant level:
• Refer to the Policies and' Implementing Strategies described in Mitigation 4.2-b.
RBF Consulting Town. of Los Gatos. General' Plan 2000
N:\DEV\SUZANNE\GENPLAN\REPORTS\FINDINGS I-37 Statement of Findings. and Facts
Wastewater
The current wastewater flows for .all areas served by the WVSD are 10.5 million gallons per day, Based
on the population of Los Gatos, fihe WVSD estimates .that the Town of Los Gatos .produces approximately
3.5 million gallons of wastewater per day. 'The WVSD does not maintain forecasts for future wastewater
flows. Implementation of the proposed General Plan.2000 for the Town of Los Gatos. would result in no
direct impacts regarding wastewater within the Town or its Sphere of Influence, as the proposed General
Plan 2000 would involve no .changes to existing land use designations, and would therefore not result in
:increased demand beyond that anticipated in the current General Plan for such services due to land use
changes, However, future development projects undertaken in compliance with .the land use assumptions
.identified in the proposed General Plan 2000 would result in the need for wastewater services and facilities.
An additional 2,100 residents are .anticipated in the Town and its Sphere of Influence ~ under buildout
conditions (ABAG Projections 96). This would be considered a potentially significant .impact unless
mitigation is incorporated.
In addition, wastewater from future development projects under the proposed General Plan 2000 would
ultimately discharge into the San Jose/Santa Clara Water Pollution Control Plant (WPCP). The WPCP has
been designed to accommodate peaking factors during normal wet weather conditions. The. Town of Los
Gatos has contracted with the WPCP for sufficient capacity to accommodate proposed General Plan 2000
build-out. Therefore, .treatment demand generated by future development can be accommodated by the
Town's share of treatment capacity of the WPCP.
x, Mitigation 1Vleasure 4:7-h -tiVastewater: Future development projects will be requiredto comply.
with the provisions of all .interim .and future ordinances regarding sewer capacity and systems in
the Town of .Los Gatos. Standard conditions for subdivision maps and discretionary cases shall,:
continue to ensure thatnecessary public and private improvements, :including wastewater collection-
systems will be provided to serve development of land uses anticipated in the proposed General
Plan 2000. All sewer line extensions shall continue to be required to be designed in accordance
with applicable provisions of Town Ordinances and to the satisfaction of the Town Engineer.
Following implementation of this mitigation measure, less than significant :impacts related to
wastewater would occur as a :result of implementation of the proposed General :Plan 2000.
Ener~y
Implementation of the proposed General Plan 2000 for the Town of Los. Gatos would result in no direct
impacts regarding energy usage within the Town or its :Sphere of Influence, as the ,proposed General Plan
2000 would involve no changes to existing land use designations, and would therefore :not result in
increased demand beyond that anticipated in the current General Plan for energy due to land use changes.
However, future development projects undertaken in compliance with the land use assumptions identified
in the proposed General :Plan 2000 would result in increased demand for energy. Based on PG&E
standards, new residential development in the Townwould result in the consumption of approximately 115
kilowatts of energyper day per dwelling unit. Currently developed land uses in the Town contain existing
PG&E electric and gas facilities. Future development projects would .require extensions of existing PG&E
facilities. This would be considered a potentially significant .impact unless mitigation is incorporated.
RBF Consulting Town of Los Gatos General Plan 2000
N:\DEV\SUZANNE\GENPLAN\REPORTS\FINDINGS I-38 Statementof Findings and Facts
l ,~
Mitigation Measure 4.7-i -Energy: Implementation of the following proposed General Plan-2000
policies and implementing strategies regarding. energy efficiency and conservation. would reduce
impacts related to energy to a less. than significant level:
:• Encourage construction and use of technologies that maximized energy conservation
(Conservation Element Policy C.P.7.1)
•S Encourage the use of energy conservation techniques and technology in existing
development to improve energy conservation. (Conservation Element. Policy C.P,7.2)
:• Design structures to maximize natural heating.. and cooling (passive solar heating).
(Conservation Element Policy C.P.7,3)
• Utilize landscaping; for passive cooling and protection from prevailing winds.
(Conservation Element Policy C.P`,7.4)
•5 Protect existing. development from loss of solar access. (Conservation Element Policy
C,P.7.5)
•.~ Continue to pursue energy-efficiency in Town operations. (Conservation Element Policy
C.P.7.6)
• Encourage use of renewable energy sources and' alternative fuels. (Conservation Element
Policy C.P.7.7)
•3 Promote local' employment opportunities to reduce consumption of fuel used for
commuting. (Conservation Element Policy C.P'.7.8)
• Promote higher density. development. in areas served by public transit. (Conservation
Element Policy C.P.7.9)
• Promote the use of public transit, (Conservation Element. Policy C.P,7,10}
• Require higher levels of energy efficiency as house site increases. (Conservation. Element
Policy C.P.7.11)
5.0 SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS WHICH. CANNOT' BE FULLY AVOIDED
IF THE'. PROJECT IS IMPLEMENTED
Section 4 of the Final EIR provides a description. of the potential environmental impacts of the proposed
Project, and' recommends mitigation measures to reduce impacts to less-than-significant levels, where
possible.. After implementation of the. recommended. mitigation measures, one impact area
(i.e,,Transportation/Circulation) has an impact associated. with. the implementation.. of the Town of Los
Gatos Generale Plan 2000 which would remain significant .and' unavoidable.
5.1 Transportation/Circulation
5.1.1 Significant and Unavoidable Impacts
The impact associated with the Town of Los Gatos General Plan 2000 related to transportationfcirculation
RBF Consulting Town of Loa Gatos General Plan 2000
N;\DEV\SUZANNE\GENPLAN\REPORTS\FINDINGS I-39 Statement of Findings and Facts
{
.that is considered significant .and unavoidable is discussed in Section 4.5 of the Final EIR. Restricting
widening along Highway 17 in accordance with proposed General Plan 2000 Transportation Element
Policies T.P.1.14 and T.P.'1.15 would result in a significant, unavoidable impact. Based on right-of--way
constraints and !land use :compatibility issues, no feasible mitigation measures could be implemented that
would reduce the impacts along Highway 17 to a less than significant level.
5.1.2 Findings
Specific economic., legal, social, technological, or other considerations, make infeasible the mitigation
measures or alternatives associated with transportation and circulation, as identified in the Final EIR.
.5.1.3 Facts in .Support of Findings
As described in Section 4.5 of the Final EIR, one transportation circulation impact that would result from
Plan implementation is considered significant and unavoidable.
Restricting widening along Highway 17 in accordance with proposed General .Plan 2000 Transportation
.Element Policies T.P.1.14 and T.P.1.15 would result in a significant, unavoidable impact. The segment
of Highway 17 south of Lark Avenue is currently operating at a deficient LOS in the p. m. peak hour. The
.addition of pass-by trips .and trips resulting from regional ,growth to Highway 17 under regional buildout
conditions would result in a degradation of the segments currently operating at an acceptable LOS and
.further aggravate the existing deficient conditions, which would be considered a potentially significant
impact. By continuing to .allow Highway T7 to operate at a deficient LOS., pass through trips would .
potentially divert from the .highway to local surface streets such as Los Gatos Boulevard and Winchester
:Boulevard. The addition of diverted trips to the local arterial system may also result insignificant .impacts
at signalized .intersections in the Town. Based on right-of-way constraints, aesthetics, and land use
:compatibility issues, no feasible mitigation measures could be implemented that would reduce the impacts
.along .Highway 17 to a .less .than significant level. Implementation of these Policies would protect existing
Town land uses from noise., .air quality, and growth-inducing effects associated with increased traffic
through this portion of the Town. Since .Highway 17 is a .State-.owned and maintained facility, final decisions
:regarding improvements to Highway 17 are the .responsibility of Caltrans. Nevertheless, as these .Policies
would limit the possibility of improving the existing deficiency and would result in the degradation of
segments of the highway currently .operating at an acceptable LOS, significant unavoidable impacts would
result.
6:0 ALTERNATIVES TO TI3E PROPOSED GENERAL PLAN .2000
.Section 7.0 of the Final EIR has evaluated various alternatives to the proposed Project. These alternatives
are .identified as:
• Alternative A: No-Project/Existing Plan (as required by CEQA)
~.• Alternative B; Proposed Plan with Modified Land Use within the North Forty Area
:• .Alternative C; Proposed .Plan with No Change to Existing. Land Use at the .Maxim Site
(Winchester at Knowles), and Increased Density on Oka Road Sites
• Alternative D; Proposed Plan with Modified Land Use within .the North Forty Area, No
Change to Existing Land Use at the Maxim Site (Winchester at Knowles), and Increased
Density on Oka Road Sites
Section 7 of the Final EIR provides descriptions and .analyses of each alternative in adequate detail so as
to render a decision regarding the relative superiority of each alternative as compared to the proposed
RBF Consulting Town of Los Gatos General Plan 2000
N:\DEV\SUZANNE\GENPLAN\REPORTS\FINDINGS I-40 Statement of Findings and Facts
Project. Section Z also includes: an analysis of the environmentally superior alternative. State CEQA
Guidelines §15126 requires that an Environmentally Superior Alternative must be identified in the
Alternatives Analysis Section of the EIR. Section 7 concludes that the No-Project/Existing Plan Alternative
is the environmentally superior alternative, as this Alternative is capable of avoiding. the one significant and
avoidable impact associated with implementation of the. proposed'. General.. Plan 2000, and since this
alternative would not result in additional and/or more substantial impacts when compared to the proposed
General Plan 2000. However, State CEQA Guidelines § 15126(d)(4) provides that "[] the environmentally
superior alternative is the No-Project. alternative, the EIR shall also identify an environmentally superior
alternative among the other alternatives.." Other than the No-Project/Existing Plan Alternative, the
Proposed Plan. would be the environmentally superior alternative,. as none of the other specified alternatives
are capable of avoiding, minimizing, or reducing, the significant and potentially significant impacts
associated with. implementation of the proposed General Plan 2000; and. since the other alternatives would'
result in additional and/or more substantial impacts. when compared to the proposed General Plan 2000.
6.1 Alternative A: No Project/Existing Plan Alternative
6.1..1 Description of Alternative
This Alternative reflects build-out of the Town under the current General Plan.. The many changes. being.
experienced in Los Gatos could' not have been foreseen in the current General Plan, due to its adoption in
1985:. This Alternative assumes that the current General Plan would continue to provide outdated
information regarding. several issues,, such. as Town traffic conditions, community noise levels, special
status species, and. seismic hazards.
6.1.2 Findings
Specific economic,. legal,. social,. technological, or other considerations,. make infeasible. the No-
Project/Existing. Plan. Alternative, as identified in the Final' EIR.
6.1.3 Facts in Support of Findings
As it is the intent. of the proposed General Plan 2000 to increase protection of Town. resources, the current
General Plan evaluated' under the No-Project/Existing Plan Alternative would result in slightly less.
protection of such. resources when compared to the proposed General Plan 2000. As no land use changes
are proposed' as part. of the General Plan 2000, implementation of this Alternative would not result in
additional environmental impacts, when compared to the proposed General Plan 2000.. In addition,
ilnpl'ementation of the No-Project/Existing Plan Alternative would avoid the one significant and.
unavoidable adverse impact os the proposed General Plan. 2000, since this Alternative would' not involve
a policy which would. restrict the widening of Highway 1? to reduce currently unacceptable LOS conditions
on Highway 17 from Lark Avenue south to the Town boundary. Additionally, the No-Project
Existing, Plan Alternative would not meet any of the following Project Objectives as identified in Section
3.5 of the Final EIR:
• Assess the General' PIan's goals, policies and implementing. actions as they relate to changing
conditions and community needs.
•3 Address new issues and incorporate new policies into the General Plan 2000 in response. to the
assessment of current General Plan goals and policies, based on the General Plan Task Force
process.
RBF'Consulting Town of Los Gatos General Plarr2000
N:\DEV\SUZANNE\GENPLAN\REPORTS\FINDINGS I-41' Statement of Findings and Facts
• Maintain and enhance the Town's natural resources and physical features, and .incorporate these
resources and features .into community investments, new projects, .and in-fill development.
• Comply with all California-State laws governing General Plans, their content, and consistency
between and .among elements.
• Pxovde long-term direction to the. Town of Los Gatos decision-makers with respect to future
development.
Because this alternative does not meet any of the above Project Objectives, implementation of this
alternative is considered infeasible.
6.2 Alternative B: Proposed Plan with Modified Land Use within the North Forty Area.
6.2.1 .Description of Alternative
The North :Forty Area is located west of Los Gatos Boulevard, east of Route 17, north of Lark Avenue,
:and south of Highway 85. The Area consists of approximately 44 acres which are currently predominantly
in :agricultural use. There are pockets of existing residential. use in €he North Forty :Area ,primarily along
Bennett Way, and Burton Road. North Forty Area land uses evaluated under this alternative would expand
the allowed uses o include limited mixed-use commercial/residential [e.g., stacked apartments above
.commercial uses (e.g.,live/work units)]. The .relative sizes of the assumed land uses were developed based
on a:land use mix that could potentially result in a level of service (LOS) D on Los Gatos Boulevard, which
would be considered an acceptable LOS. This mix included the following: 255 residential units, and
approximately 240,000 square feet of retail commercial space.
b.2.2 Findings ..
Specific economic,'legal, social,. technological, or other considerations, make infeasible the Proposed Plan
with Modified Land Use within the North Forty Area Alternative, as identified in the Final EIR.
6.2.3 Facts in Support of Findings
Implementation: of this Alternative would involve a reduction in development :intensity in the North Forty
Area, as compared to the .proposed General Plan 2000, which would involve no changes in land use.
Therefore., implementation of this .Alternative would result in similar but .slightly less substantial impacts
related to soils and geology, hydrology and drainage, transportation and circulation, air quality, and public
service., facilities, :and utilities, when compared to the proposed General Plan 2000.. However,
implementation of this Alternative would result in the potential exposure of future residents ~ o severe .noise
levels in the North .Forty Area, and would result in more substantial noise :impacts, when compared to
implementation of the designated land uses in the current General Plan and proposed General Plan 2000..
To further clarify the type of .mitigation necessary to reduce #hese :impacts to a less than significant level,
the following mitigation measure shall be implemented: Mitigation Measure 7.3-1-Setbacks, noise buffers;
ound insulation, or other noise reduction techniques shall be .implemented to reduce-noise levels at .the
assumed residential land uses to below. Town of .Los Gatos .criteria. Should sound walls be required as
noise barriers to .reduce noise to an acceptable level at the residential uses,. significant. visual impacts could
also result, due to the obstruction of views of the North Forty Area from off-site viewpoints: In addition,
implementation of this Alternative would result in less substantial ..impacts .related to traffic congestion,
when compared to the proposed General Plan 2000, but would not minimize the significant andunavoidable
impacts forecast to the intersection of Highway 17 southbound .ramps/Lark Avenue in .the p. m. peak hour..
RBF Consulting. Town of Los Gatos General Plan 2000
Ni\DEV\SUZANNE\GENPLAN\REPORTS\FINDINGS I-42 Statement of Findings and Facts
l,_.~
6.3 Alternative C: Proposed Plan with No Chan>?e to Existing Land Use at the Maxim Site
Winchester at Knowles), and Increased' Density on Oka Road Sites
6.3.1 Description of Alternative
The existing.. Los Gatos General P1anRoute 85 and. Vasona Light Rail Element Guiding., Principles state that
existing zoning shal'l' be maintained in Sub-Area 3.1 [located east of Winchester Boulevard, north of
Highway 85, and west of Los Gatos Creek (Maxim Site)] until' the Vasona Light Rail Project is planned
and funded. The Vasona Light Rail' Project would extend light rail transit service to Highway 85 and
would allow for a change in land use in this. Sub-Area to high density residential' development. Pursuant
to the existing General Plan Route 85 Element and General. Plan Amendment for Sub-Area 3.1, which
revised the Route 85 Element, the Maxim site (located at the intersection of Highway 85/Winchester
Boulevard) was converted from its existing: zoning designation of Controlled Manufacturing (CM) Co a
neighborhood commercial designation related to the provision of transit.. However,. a Controlled
Manufacturing use (i,e., a nursery) remains on the site.
This alternative assumes that the Maxim Site will remain developed. with Controlled Manufacturing and
that the properties located' on either side of Oka Road, from the Jewish. Community Center (located at
14855 Oka Road) to Highway 85; would be converted from single-family residential (0-5 dwelling
units/acre) to medium density residential (5=12 dwelling units/acre). This alternative would. thus address
the possibility of losing housing opportunities. in one area of the Town while replacing such uses in another
compatible area of the Town.
6.3.2 Findings.
Specific economic,. legal, social', technological, or other considerations, make infeasible the Proposed Plan
with No Change to Existing. Land' Use at the Maxim Site (Winchester at Knowles),. and' Increased Density
on Oka Road' Sites, as identified in the Final EIR.
6.3,3 Facts. in Support of Findings.
Implementation. of this Alternative would involve an increase in residential density on the Oka. Road sites
and a reduction in residential density on the Maxim site, as compared. to the proposed General Plan 2000.
Since. implementation of this. Alternative would result in the transition of residential development potential
from the Maxim. site. to the Oka. Road sites,. but would not. substantially increase. such development
potential, this Alternative would result in similar impacts related' to soils and geology, hydrology and
drainage, noise, air quality, and' public service, facilities, and utilities, when compared to the proposed
General Plan 2000. However, since this Alternative would involve the transfer of residential development
potential to the Oka Road area,. which is characterized. by more severe traffic limitations thane the Maxim
site area; this Alternative would result in slightly more substantial transportation and circulation impacts
when .compared to the proposed General Plan 2000.
6.4 Alternative. D: Proposed Plan with Modified Land Use within the North. Forty Area, No
Change to Existing Land Use at the Maxim Site (Winchester at Knowles),. and Increased
Density on Oka Road Sites
6.4.1 Description of Alternative
Alternative D expands the allowed uses in the North Forty Area to include limited mixed-use.
commercial/residential. (e.g., stacked apartments above commercial uses [e.g., live/work units]),. as
RBF Consulting Towrc of Los Gatos General' Plan 2000
N:\DEV\SUZANNE\GENPLAN\REPORTS\FINDINGS I-43 Statement of Findings and Facts
described under .Alternative B. In addition, Alternative D assumes that the Maxim Site would remain
zoned Controlled .Manufacturing (CIvI) and that properties on either side of Oka Road, -from the Jewish
Community Center (located at 14855 Oka Road) to Highway 85, would be converted from single-family
residential (0-S dwelling units/acre) to medium density residential (5-12 dwelling units/acre).., as :described
under Alternative C.
6.4.2 Findings
Specific economic, legal,. social, technological, or other considerations make infeasible the Proposed .Plan
with No Change to Existing Land Use at the Maxim Site (Winchester at Knowles)., and Increased Density
on Oka :Road 'Sites, as identified in the Final EIR.
6.4.3 Facts in Support of Findings
Implementation of this Alternative would involve a reduction in development intensity in the North Forty
Area, as compared to the proposed General Plan 2000, which would involve no changes in land use. In
.addition, implementation of this Alternative would involve an increase in residential density on the Oka
Road sites and a similar reduction in residential density on .the Maxim site, as compared to the proposed
General Plan 2000.. Therefore, :implementation of this Alternative would result in the transition of
residential development potential from the Maxim site to the Oka Road sites, but would not substantially
.increase such developmentpotential. Asa.result, .implementation ofthis Alternative would result nsimilar
or .slightly less substantial impacts related to soils .and geology., hydrology and drainage, air quality, .and
public service., facilities, :and utilities, when compared to the proposed General Plan 2000. However, since
this Alternative would involve the transfer of residential development potential to the Oka Road area, which
is characterized by more severe traffic limitations than he Maxim site area, this Alternative would result
in slightly more substantial transportation and circulation impacts when compared to the proposed General
.Plan 2000. In addition, implementation of this Alternative would result in the ,potential exposure of future
residents to severe noise levels inthe North Forty Area,. and would result in more substantial noise impacts,
when compared to implementation of the designated land uses in the current General Plan and proposed
General Plan 2000. Implementation of this Alternative would result in less substantial impacts related to
traffic congestion, when compared to the proposed General Plan .2000., but would not minimize the
significant and unavoidable impacts forecast to the intersection of Highway 17 southbound ramps/Lark
Avenue in the p.m. peak hour.
7.0 FINDINGS .REGARDING OTHER CEOA CONSIDERATIONS
7.1 Growth-Inducing.Effects of the Proposed Project
.Section. 8.0 of the Final EIR .analyzes the potential growth-inducing effects of the Town of Los Gatos
General Plan 2000. Section 15126.2(d) of the State CEQA Guidelines states chat a proposed project would
.have a :growth inducing effect if it would:
• foster economic or population growth, or 'the construction of additional housing, either
directly or indirectly, in the surrounding environment;
• remove obstacles of population growth; .
• tax existing community service facilities, requiring construction of new facilities that could
cause significant environmental effects; or
RBF`Consulting Town of Los Gatos General Plan 2000
Ni\DEV\SUZANNE\GENPLAN\REPORTS\FINDINGS I-44 Statement of Findings and Facts
:• encourage and facilitate other activities that could significantly affect the environment,
either individually or cumulatively:
The analysis in the Final EIR. concluded' that,the Town of Los. Gatos General Plan. 2000 would not result
in any significant growth inducing impacts.
Implementation. of the proposed General Plan 2000 for the Town of Los Gatos would not result in any
.growth inducing. impacts,. as the proposed' General.. Plan 2000. would' involve no modifications to existing
land use designations. Therefore, no additional housing or, economic growth>opportunities beyond those
previously identified in the 1985 General. Plan and evaluated in the 1985 General Plan EIR would. occur
in the Town or its Sphere of Influence as a result of implementation. of the proposed General Plan. 2000.
In addition,. the Town is substantially built out and offers limited physical potential for future growth. The
proposed General Plan 2000 would not remove any obstacles to population growth.. As described in
Section 4.7 of this EIR, implementation of the proposed General Plan 2000 for the Town of Los Gatos
would. not result in the burdening of existing community service facilities following implementation of
mitigation. measures; and would therefore not require the construction of new facilities. All' new or
additional policies, or modifications. to existing policies in the proposed Generale Plan. 2000 are designed
to strengthen the protection of the natural and physical resources of the Town. As no modifications are
being made. to the existing.. land use designations, and' the Town is largely built out, implementation of the
proposed. General' Plan 2000 would not encourage or facilitate land use development that could. significantly
affect the environment in a manner not already contemplated in the proposed General Plan 2000.
7.2 Significant Irreversible Environmental Effects Which Would be Involved in the Proposed
General Plan 2000 Should' it be Implemented
The Significant Irreversible Environmental. Effects. Which Would be Involved in the Proposed General Plan
2000 Should it be Implemented, are: discussed in Section 9 of the Final EIR. The environmental' effects
of the proposed Project are discussed in Section 4 of the Final EIR,. and' are summarized in Section 2 of
the Final EIR. As discussed in Section 5.0 of the Final EIR,. all project-related impacts are mitigated to
a less-than-significant level, with. one exception. These impacts are discussed in Section 5 of this
document.
As no land use designations would be modified' under the proposed General Plan 2000; implementation of
the proposed General. Plan 2000 would not result in the commitment of undeveloped or underdeveloped
land' to urban uses beyond that. considered in the 1985 General. Plan and 1985 General Plan EIR. However,
implementation of future. projects under buildout of the proposed General Plan 2000 would require the
long-term commitment of natural resources and land.
Actions related to future development under buildout of the proposed General Plan 2000 would result. in
an irretrievable commitment of nonrenewable resources such as energy supplies and other construction-
related resources.. These energy resource demands would be used for constructign, heating and. cooling
of buildings,. transportation of people and goods to and from the site, heating and refrigeration. for food
preparation and water, as well as lighting and other associated energy needs.
The environmental changes produced by future development projects under buildout of the proposed
General Plan 2000 would occur mainly as a result of the alteration of the physical environment from.
underdeveloped and vaeanC land uses to urban uses (e.g., the North Forty Area). As future projects are.
developed,. -utilities would. be expanded to serve the increase in demand' for the future uses and site
infrastructure, including, parking, circulation and landscaping. improvements. Future project development
is a short-term irreversible commitment. of the land..
RBF Consulting Town of Los Gatos Genera4 Plan 2000
N;\DEV\5UZANNE\GENPLAN\REPORTS\FINDINGS I-43 Statement of Findings and Facts
In as much as .fossil fuels currently are the :principal source of energy, it can be stated that future
development underbuildout of the proposed General Plan 2000 would directly .reduce existing supplies of
fuel, including fuel oil, :natural gas„ and gasoline. This represents along-term commitment to consumption
of an essentially nonrenewable .resource.
Future projects under buildout of the proposed' General Plan .2000 would require .the commitment or
destruction of other nonrenewable and slowly renewable .resources. These resources include, but are not
.limited to, dumber and other forest products; sand and gravel; :asphalt; ...petrochemical construction
materials; steel.; copper; lead and other metals, water; .etc. A marginal increase in the commitment of
social services and public maintenance services{waste disposal and treatment, etc) would also be required.
RBF Consulting Town of Los Gatos General P(an 2000
N:\DEV\SUZANNE\GENPLAN\REPORTS\FINDINGS I-46 Statement of Findings and Facts
SECTION II
THE TOWN OF LOS GATOS GENERAL PLAN EIR
STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
1.0 STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
Based on the evidence presented. in the Final EIR, the following Findings of Fact have been made:
• A Mitigation Monitoring Program has been adopted. to mitigate significant environmental effects identified
in the Environmental' Impact. Report under the following categories; Fire Service, Police service, School's,
Parks & Recreation Facilities, Solid Waste Facilities,. Storm Drain Facilities, Water Supply, Wastewater,
and Energy. All potentially significant impacts can. be mitigated.. to less-than-significant levels by
implementation of the identified mitigation measures.
• Restricting widening. of Highway 17 in accordance with General Plan 2000 Transportation Element Policies
T. P.1.14 and T. P.1.15 would. result in a significant, unavoidable envirotunental impact. However, by
maintaining the highway as it currently exists, Los Gatos'' small town atmosphere and character will be
preserved-and there will not be an aesthetic impact due to removal of the landscaped median. Widening the
highway would also be incompatible with some of the adjacent land uses. The benefits of not. widening the
highway outweigh the impacts that may result by not adding two lanes.
Section. 15093(b) of the State CEQA Guidelines provides that when the decision of the public agency allows the
occurrence of significant impacts that are identified in the EIR but are not at least substantially mitigated, the agency
must state in writing the reasons to support. it's action based on the completed EIR and/or other information in the
record. The Town of Los Gatos has found that the impacts listed in the second finding.. above. are. significant and
unavoidable impacts..
Accordingly, the Town of Los. Gatos adopts. the following Statement of Overriding Considerations based. on
information in the Final EIR and on other information in the record. The Town recognizes that significant and
unavoidable impacts will result from implementation of General Plan 2000. Having (1) adopted all feasible mitigation
measures; (2) rejected the alternatives to the project;. and (3) recognized all significant, unavoidable effects,. the Town
of Los Gatos. hereby finds that the benefits outweigh and override the significant unavoidable effects for the reasons
stated. below..
•S Preserving the Town character
The Town. of Los Gatos is a small community that values and protects its historic resources, the Downtown,.
and the natural' environment while maintaining. it's small town character. Preserving these attributes is the.
intent of the General Plan 2000... New developments are carefully reviewed. to ensure that they fit into the
fabric of the community,.. that they benefit the Town,. and' that. the high quality of life. in Los Gatos is
maintained. Widening. Highway 17 would be counter to the Town's goals and vision. The following. goals
and policies support the Town's position:
L. G.1.1- To preserve,. promote, and' protect the existing: small town character and quality of life within Los
Gatos.
L.G.2.2 - To reduce the visual impact that new construction has on our town and. its neighborhoods.
T.P.1.14 -Highway 17 shall not be widened' to provide additional' travel lanes south of Lark Avenue.
T.P.1.15 -Highway 17 between Los Gatos and Santa Cruz should not be widened to provide additional. travel
Panes or be converted to a freeway.
•A Avoiding aesthetic impacts
If Highway 17 is widened to accommodate two additional lanes between Lark Avenue and Highway 9, it will
have a significant aesthetic impact on the Town. The landscaped. median would be lost, and properties along
the corridor would be affected by construction, noise,. and high speed' traffic. Addition of more pavement
and loss. of vegetation would be a visual'. detraction that would have a negative impact on the appearance and
character of the Town.
H
'w
A 'h
O
z
0
'N_
H
0
Z
N
N
H
O
O
N
N
o~
o~
O\
O
bA
U
e~
0
o ~ c
~ ~ ~
~° ~
~ ~~~~
b o ~~~Ud- b
~ vi ~'r1
~
4a--~ U c~
aRi
~ ,
~
p ' ~ ~ ~"~
'" W °OO
v a~i
a;
o
H ~a
~ ~
o w
.~ o
~v~~ ~o
~ ~ rn
o ~ ° '~
U ~ '~ cd ~
~~.~a°
~ti
N ~ p
U
0
0
0
N
ti
>. `~ o ~ o o ~ .n a , o o ~ F,
° ~ „b ~ 3 a.~ a'~ ~ o
i~ a ,y 3 °~' a ~ U~ °..3 ~ a
c~' ~ b pi ~ ~ ~' ~' cd N h ~ N cd
b~ o ~ a. '~ ~ a o° o 0 0 ~ '~
W ~ O N O N .~, O O p O~ O b
~ ~~'~v~~b~ ~ b~ •~ pp
a ~ ,'~~ 6~i ~ ~ QO b ice.. .~ ~ .~ ~', .~ U ~, o ~ ~ c~
CJ ~ ~ P• ~ o a~ ~ `~ U ~
Z pa.., b .~ o ~ a' ~ S ~ ~ a~i ~ ~ o b ~ N ~~
W Z ~ ~ o o`r'o ~ «~ b ~ b, ~ ~ w a ~, ~; a~ ago °
z ~'
~ ~ ~' ~ eggo a ~ 'p ~ a ~ ~ ~ ,~ ~ a ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ U ~ ~, ~
Z O ~ ~o ~o~~~'Aa'~, o.~' o ~b ~ ate' a~
a a.
~ ~ cr ~'
~ .~ N ,~ .N a on a ~' N chi ~; ~ o N ~ a~ ,~ ~ ~' ~ ~
~ ,7°., ~ ~ ~' N O bq '~ a+ ,-pi ~ ~ N U ~-~" p '~ ~ 'd blip a ~ ~ ~ U
~1' .~ ~ N. U N ~, ~ N. U cd ... O b
~ q a~ a~ •~ ~ ~ a ro a
vs d ~ ~ '~ H ~ a a~i 3 p o a~~i ~ c~ ~ •~ U ° '+ao~+ ~ o ~ p W
o, ~ ~ ~ a ~ ~
~ a b ~ ~ ~
y ~ Pi ~ ai
o v ~ A °' .~ ~ .~' ~ a
4 ++ ~.,
~ q' ,~ ~', ~ H =d W a Z.
d'
U ' W FW H •-~ N cn d' ~1
C
0
U °oo
u. ~~
x.
U
F
a
0
oW
°~
a
a °"
w
~ c?
"'
~z
~ ~
o
ro
C7 W
09
.~ z
0
a
0
~~
a
.• ~''
,~: •'•:
."hot; ••,ry.~~,c•:•: ~•••
'''~~
.~:~:•
:.~%.:
jji ' NO.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~' °~
W
~ ~
4~:
,S , o
~~t a~ a~ a~ a~
iYr N '~ ~ > c~ c, '"' a 3 ~ > '" a
W o p p y .n ar .n p o o a~ .o ~
UA~A ~A c~A hUA~A
C~7 ^"
P,
,~e
O ~ ~'o ~ ~is,o `" o
ai o
G ~
3 ~ b ~,
o _
v
a~
a~
p _
C7
a~
tiq
'U
N
_ d•
N
q .~
y
N O
a•+
O ~ O
.q ld
N _ O
a
~ a~ ~
,, ~... ~ b 3 'a:, .b ~ . q
pp
4.i E% > °" ~ '°' ~ tip ~' ~ U' p ~, ~ ~y p ° ~
p p p ~ p p p ~
a tin N U
~;
0
~,
O ~ .~
.~
3 0 o p
b
U cd'
U C: O U
O
w
i-i
N
~' q
N
O (3• c'~
:b d .~
O GL cd •
N
N r
U O N
N
~n bn
id.
H N ~., o 'C
t-. /-. ^ bn ~ O c~c '.
O
G
~, O
U
U N
O
.. U
q
N N
^• U U
'd .
~--~ N
U
c~
a
.~ ~ ~
.o
0
o iw a
~; '" o
.o ,
.. •~.
H ~.
a
3 •a
a w ~ ~ tin
~' o ~ ~
G o, o ~ a
p ~ ~ o a o o '" ,a o '~,
N
.. ,O v
vl cd N
C bn O
h
V ...
`> ., a .-.
a ...
y p o v' ~ O, p o ~ ~ ~, ~ .n ;; a~ .d
p w p '~ >~ c a~ 7 ~
~ v ~ ., v
E N ~ N b'' ~ U
C w
(1, v, O N
O
G O
A
N
U' N
.--i N
N
G
O ' .~ ~ b
ti
y
O ^' +•
~ :~
b
N ~. yr
U ti N
N
b (n ~ cd ~ O
b
N ry y 'b
~j Q ~ ... ~' N, ..ti
q
~" fn N
F-1 Cd 7.. ,-. O - ~. ,G"+ " (r" O N .fi t7..' N. vi r~
a. r, vi a •c U O o ,~ p U o p „a, ~„ O p 'b p U
~~
(~ o ~ v
U
tt~~ N
N a.+ ~
4+
U ~-.
O
O
~-+ bn
--• cC ~ U
O N
N i
O ~
a
a '~
.~ w
b'n b ~ ~
.~
~ ~ x ,~
3
0
0 3 ao
0
o b w p'c~ p ~a
O '^"
rr ~~ O V] c'~ N U W.
q ~, au
V
w
w
U N
bA
N O N
N ,t7
H N tin. ti. U b l". U cd' .^' ~ a~7- •3 :~ N, :~ ~.
I..I •ssr;~;::::.,,+ N' ~ y ~1-,~' ~ p+ •,~~ `H .Cpp p;, , G A A ~, O <y q ~ ~ ~ ~ w
I~' .::;.,::::::: ,' ~ b bA a0i ~ ti G. v w a0i ~ N •~ '~ ° b .v O C, °' O, ti, d ~ .yam
N ~
.:... .
' ~+f ..,~~. , ~ x ,~ ~ o Gn .~ d •o ~ a,b ~ ~ Y u ~ a c ~' abi '~ ~ 'o ~ ~' ~
i.. b .C 4.,, O
:~:~:~:•:;:~::~::~.<,.~>:~>: N O N. N cd '"'. h O. Gi G ~ cd +' J •,=. t-•. eN y N O .~ '.. cd bA ~ 'C ~. q
_ '~,
..~ .-~ c±
O O O
+n 7 '~ 'U
b N G .-.
-.
C7 bA Q b
ti .d
O
'Y
O
.. •~
b Lil p. O
N
O
•y N
N
' C '+~
~ ' ^' 4.
'+'7, a~
on
bq
~ ~
pp 0 tin
bn
w . 'o
U td O
~" ~ yr `'~ 3 cd `~ p . C' ~ a~ 4. ~ Tf G o ,~~• O. cv ~ ~
~•.`•f<~~> T! o .a °~ ~ w p tin; ~, tin. o o' ~ ~ ~
''~t~~r~?'~'•::•::: s:•r: y 'tjn ~ O' cf., .~~ U O •w0 p t~ N ~ GA .r w ~~ ,~.. >
~ 3 ~ _, U ,~ ~ a~
~ o c~ ~i a >
o '~ +~ o 0 0
p w a~
rs;
o ~' ~ sa
"~ ~ . •~
~ ~
U a
~ ~ o a~ a~
~ ~
a~.
'~ ~ ~ .J
~'
U
O O
'G
s: q
c7 ~ •a ~ ~ w t7 .~ ., ~ ~ '~ .a ,~ ~ U ~ ~ C7 ~ ~ a4 G vim.
:::crs:<?> ~3 ~
o. a .•. o. .•e o.
a
eo
"' ~ ,=~
N
C
O O
U o
w
CA >,
C~ ~
O
0
O
N
I~
c
c7
N
0
~v
C7
0
a
~1
r~
~./ O
O
aj N
a~
~a
a~
a
W L7
G4 0
o
~a
O
F F
~ H
~ W
F~
Fy
.~
0
U
.o
ti
;~
0
p y b
`'.
o •~ ~ ~;
0 ~ ~ 'b U b
00o p ~U
o a~i '~ ti ou
U b ~^'~ C ~'
N ~ m y «t y ,
a:~ ou ~ ~ ~
aai'~b~3,~v
~5A ~ ~ ~ ~~
,n
~ ~~~•a~ ~
~ ~ ~ o ~ ~
p _ ~ ~ a ~ a
~ ~
a ~ ~ ~ •~ •
a~
o N
~ ~
~ cn °' y ~ wo
0
U o p :~ ~ ~q o
b ~'.~ ~'~ E 'o
PQ ~ v, y w w. ai
.~ .~ •~ ,~ ^ o ~
~J...~ °v,' a. `' ~ ~ ~ N ~ b :N ~ '.~ `~ `~ cod~ .
a.+ ~ a
b .~ a, o o a~ o a>i o c ~ ~ a ~ ~ ° ~ ~ ti
~ y ~ F, :~ ~ ~ b ,s-, ,~ v ~ ~ cup 3 ~ B
maw ~ ~ °" ~~ ,~~„ a~ A.v•~ °~,' ~~ ~ ~` a
~ bq a~ ~ ~ :~ ~ ~ ~ b a~i ~ o
v~ ~ 'U a',N by }+ '~}'~ .~. ~ rn bA ~ ~ .~ ~ '4" F. b~A cad
,~ ~ ~ 'ti c~ «i O ce '.'' a~ w ~ do ~ . ~ ' d • cv ~ ~ ~•.' ~a
b b ~ °' ~° c ~ o ° ~ b ~ ~ o ° = ' a a aoi ° ~ ~
o ;o ~,
A v°' c a~i a s ~ U N H-~ w U °~° ~ 'a a~ A 'E-+
o• y. .,. ,. .;.
G
N
O
U o
µ, n~
(]a T
~. -~i
I
z
a
a
w
c~
'w
z
a
S
w
9
z
~~~ ~`.
>'~~':<{
5:f;:;;
is is ^';:;.: • ?;:;~: y~y~~i:~::
•:{•• •
S{~{~
,.~.y
~~ .''~i
::iiiiiii:;iiiii: ••
~iiiii iY"K•:;:
W`
N a .~, v~
~,~~
aN~ 3~;;~a
ed ':' H U A ~ A
~~•
a ,
~~
'~ '~ ~ ~ ~ "
'•.`:
O c~ # o~ p' ~ e? C ,, ~
o G a ~
0
0
a ~ ~ a~
w
WW ~ O~C7a~~~~a
~ _ o .n
r~ N N
U N i tr
V .y I.n N ~
~.
O
q b ~, .~
p cd
N
N
~. N
'~
'd'
O
N
N
V1 ^.' '~
u [}'
.f.,"' v~
o a. w ~ a. a .. U o, C7
G . a~ ~ a~ ~
'~ 'y o w ~
0
y ~.
FBI N N:
w. ~ .~ cV U~ w O. bA~ N ... ~n
G
. ~ ~ a
> U ~r . ~~'
~'! N
Fi .. O
O N O b .
,~ ... a~ a~ a 44
i
fly'. ~7' ~N. tr '~ H-I
bq ~ a~... ti dq fy N ,-.~
;~ o o w >, a o b ~ a~
F a~,~; oA O wW ~ >~ o
b '~
3 U .,.
o ~'
~qy ~ ~ ~
b
ai w
w _ b
a~ a.~.~
o fn
a ~ .n qq
a~
,D fr cd U
~,
0 3
O .b U .., b ~ ~ ,~, , _ U .
o w~ ~I
C.,.
v
> o
>,.
a~
w o ~ ~. ~ ~ •~-,
~i c'~
E..i q
0
~~
U
w.
N .O
.
~ ' b N ~ a ~ ~t E'~
ti . a U ~+
G
'" .c a ~ ~.
a~ ~ fn U W ~,
f.i w. G w. ~i N ~ ~ .
U fU .d r. ~ y
-' U a~
W ~ ar 'bA w , :' ~ y a b o y .o ~ .. ~ ~ aai ~ ":
N f.+ cd
~ -~
3 ~
b ^ ~
a~ ~ ~
'on ,
.. U N
O
O U
w.
d,
ti U
O O rn N
fu >
a~
E" ~ oa ~' eA ' ~ ' ao ~ ~ .n b b o eA ~ o ~ b ~, ~; ,~, . ~ v .?;
;::.....~~.,... '.v: ' ;r a w ~ a ~ ~ N '`' uon as ~ ~ c ° ~ a ~ ~ o ~'
yi~~ o::::: .--i .7 N bC .~. ti y. „~ ~O fd N. cd fd N ~ H w. ~'.
~:~:~,f{;:;r`ry:~:{? i ~ ~ ~ .~• ~ fd cd bq O- q., ~~ .- 'G CL `n td N ~
> ~ w b w v, w
U t~
O
N O
.C
O
"~
U
ti ti O
N N
p N 'O w
. ~ cd
~."
f.. Q N U N .D
:•.:::.::: U W ~ •~. ~ O ~ ~-' ~~-) ~ U L U b cd N c~ bq N, N 'tJ N
:.{::`:';>'; 'x ~ >, Ch ;~ o p. 3,3' w ,.o gg o ~ ~ ~, 3 U C •> ,n '~ A
~3. G '~. 'O O, p w, 3. 'd..~ ~ bA
_ N b w y. H N ~, N N> ar b N O.
N N Cn
o " pp
3 > a.
a~
v -~
w 3
~ a~ ~
gg o
o ~
.~ b o ~.
a~
a~
0
i~ a ' ~
,a ~ a G „ re ~ ~ a~
~ ~.
0
3 ~, 04 ~ ~ _.., ~ H c~
>, a•~ a~ aw ~ ~ p ~ oAU
U o q o
~~
a ~ ~
'•:
.~
~:~{:
j,
U o
w
T
(yi ~
~~ ~
h~%~~3':
'r!~kv~7.1;::5
~ .,. •., •~. O O
~ c~ °~ C7
N C ~ ~ ~ q :~
a~ a~
o a~
0
0 0
~>
a'' ~ <' >:: HvAa A H~Q
~ w
w ~ ~~ ~ ~.~
o o a~ ~ ^ oq o o a~ ... q ~ eq
:::>:
O ~ # ou o ~~ o0 0
a G ~
o a.
0
0
:>:_: .,
~ o
a~
a a~
C a~
•:::.
U
w
a
W :#s::::>s:::::>
a o
b
° ~ C yp
b a a~ mob.°r, ~ O ~~, 'o ~
C7 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~,~
b ~ G
~ a~. b u m U ar, w o 0
w • ~ ., :~ a~ ...
b .~ a~ o (7 b ... o ~ ., en w
0
°
a
bD w ~ Py
O`
N. b. U '"" N
~ .o ~.
(3. td
.~
~ ~ ~
N
O
`~ w `.'
ti
N~", >> N
w.
'bA .C N
«+
q
O N
N
ab ~ ~
~ .~ w
~ a.
.S
3
O U ~
3
o a~ .~ '~
a ~
~' ~ o
_ a ~~••
w
U
b b
L, U q
p E q 'b
C7
N
a~
E'~ cV
N
O
pp ~ ~
a
a~
o
a ti
° U
0
FBI Cs. U
bA ..+ ti
•~
F
N cC ~n
.d yN ~' U
O
,p W
bA O
~" y O 4, U ~ N N N vi r-i C
Z U
~, ~ --~ ~.
w o a~ C
.~
~ ~
~~
~ ~ a z o ~ ~ ~ ~ b °
O ~ -~ •~ ° ° a.a
3 U 'w c~
o-" >,~ ~~
a~ ~ o ° «,
~'
EI O N U ~ y U O
+~' N ~n F3 N p N
~, a a~ ~' ..~ ~
a v °
a, en .~ a~ a ~
a >
a~
., w
a~ ~ b
i~ `' o p w a
~ b 'y ~ ~ o o >, ~
w ~ r. y y
Z ~, a~ ~ on ^^ c., ~ a~ a, c w . y . a~ ~
N y O b yry td ° U a+ .~'.• O N ~ .+ N y > "'~ C. C
V Lr T
.~
O ~ ~, O
U O. O
O C
{-'+ w
,C ...
N
O
U w
N N
FBI N N
~, a
0
,-, ~ v
w w a~ U
a~ a~ >
~o on
..:.....
H °~ p a. ~ o o G a~ ~ a~ o a o. ~ 0 3 c
::. ~:. ~:
::. ~::::
:::::::.
:::::::.
:::::::.
:::::::.
:::::::.
:::::::. ~ r. v, '-' G ~ y ~ ~ a~ ~ ~ a~ o ° ce' o .moo ~
:::::::.
:::::::.
S .b o a a~ .C b b~ U o '+~ U ~
::. ~:::.
v a~
~ a~
~ '~ ti ~° 'd cd o. i. t~ r, ~ o ~ p ~ ie O ~. '~ a~ ,.[
~; a~i ~ ?; :3 C7 0 ou ~ :n w `'" C7 . ~ C7 ~ ~ o~ ~ ~ ~ G
~ ~ o o bu ~ ~
~ .~
a~ o ~
a o
a~
' U ti vi h
' ~ ,--.
q b~
GL N b
> a
0
c ~'
a~ ~ ~ >
~`:> ° 0 3
a+vo ~ '~d °. ~.
U O
3 0 0
a~
a
0
~ ~
b o
.n o ~
0
«t ~ C
a bu
w
0
., ~
N ,--~ O O ~ c, t.. N U..~ bA <d O ~ cd N
,O ~ `~
N N
bA b. k, O
u
A
N O N in H NF"~ <d~ tivi~..
C~ it ~ '
N U in y p.
SV '.
"~ ~ ~ ~~ _
w a~ "" n a~ cs, w a~ ~ °
on a
O~ N O w bA cd b0 > cd O O G
U N f-i G". 4.
C ~ N 4. O
GL bA
~ H bq... ti v 4. .~ H~ ~ U .~ U
b c. o ~
.~
oq G
a~
tt~~ N ° :n o ~
"O N `n N
~o a
c~ ~ >
v ~
C
h
C
O
U
u. ,
q T
x
''a'>
:%1 ,:ya:;,~:~
'y}:~{ti ~:ti~
'i;':~:
:,~ ~, r,
(~ }4•.:
~\
:~~{ .
mow.
'
:;:;:4: O O
O ~ Q
/~
V ~ ~
: h ~
w
wU N ~,
q
~
W
?
.~.~,,kk
a~
Q o ~, ~
,
a~
~ , o
q
~ N
a
::.. .::::.::. ~ ~ ~ vq°, 'b
~~~
o q ..
o~~~°
~ :::. .::.:::.
:::: ..::::.,• ~,
E~~Av~i~oa
HUA~
A
U' ^"
:: .....
"~ ~° ~ ~ O q 0 q~ O
~/ is ~j f
~
F
' d 0
ono a~ > ono ° W ~
FBI b
G y :..:
r
::•.:::.
i
•::•:. j •~ ~ ~.. y~ q. ~. ~,
p
~ O ~, td by. O ~ O, O ~ y^ p
~ O ~~, cd ??. q. ti:,
p+. O. ~y pq.
O.
•:>;: •:::r:•:::::
.::~:::.::::..::.:~::
.
. .::
.::.:
::::::::.:::::::::::::::::::.::.::.>:: e
o ::::::::::.::.::.:::.:::.:::.:: ~,
~
~
H ti q ~ sa
o 'o c~
G q q
o ~~ '.~ q
a~ ~ q
•~
q
'
O
#
U.
O
~.
°
b ~ ;~
~
d
w
0
o >, w ~ ~ ~-' ~ aqi 3
,
a
o
i
'~
~.+ O
vi U O
0
,., .
~,:,
o
'>
C --~
~~
~ a~ ~ ,.. a'~, p., ~ ~ I.y.
~
a
~
O
~
>
(~ ~l
w ::::rSi
+
c vi N N. a. ~ O fn
a,• ~ k ~ a a>i
3 ~
~
N
O ,a~ w" .q q tin 'G.: `.3.
° a a~ GG ~ ~ O •~ a
t~ ,~ a q
U ~ o
U N
N
~ cd b
w
a~
w
q
O G+
a~
v~
.
O
: _
h
ti
O
N
~.
"y
>, ..
a
K
,r'
a
~,
+
cV 'r ~/
G
q
~' b
W 4
a
N
O
'~
O ~
~
.+
~
~
d
q
O
'
o
0
on
on
y ~.+ >l
N
N
h
r ~'
.~
1
~ a~
,~ a ~
~/ °
w.
.~ y, b. w ~ N Ir ~..
~ W
.~
~ ,
N
~
3
b
v
U.
O .
~
n
w
q
O
O
w ..
>i
L~
n
q q
b
q
v
.~
N ^
~ a'
N
q
.D
C
q
a~
p
N
~
>
~
[
Cam.
U
q
,~ •
.a
N
U r
w
O,
~
c~
N
'
'1
C7~ .c
q
N O
3
$
~, fr H
Q
bq ~ cd ^
O
H N
yy
C7 O
V
q
G
O
U
3.
.
~
o .
~a
. O
a
.~ ~+
'~
.~
CL
q
~ td~ +"-
?!
f
"
cy m~ N
~
.-r f~
G
O
N ar '~ G ~
D
'
~
N
O
.
O
n
.~
I
/-
Ei
~ ~. y.. h
~
~d ...
v, a~
Y 7
3
Tf ''C
q
O
o v o
w
a>
S
~ O .
4. O N
>>
,~
a ~,
w
V1
U ~ N
'_'
~
o ~
a~
d ro
~, .
'.r~
U .
u~ a+
o
o
ab
~ y
~
3
-i
~
~
~
O
z
~ •~,
•~ q.
c on '~
q
~
°
b
~ ,
~ b
`e~. .. a.~ y w
c~ 'S ~' b a,
'>.
..~
w• ~
'
.~
~
' ~
a ~
~
w
o
3
,
O
'
..M1
• _
0
a
q'
~-. :..:
a
o
~'
U
•3
~
.
~.
a~
o
3 q
U
w
v q'.
O, ti ^'
a
~
~n
.
~
N
N
i-+
H
..
~
''
f?~.~i[3i~:`::'
~,
~
U'
~i
of N :~
~
~ ~
.
°
o
N U
N
,~ d ~
q
U
A
PG '~
~
q
~
3
U
'
~
°
'~. Q~
~T {~~
:5;::i; 'p a
'~ ,q o ~
N y k O U
q
'~ p °'
~
~ ,
a
i o
w O (7. ~+. w q U.
~ o O. •°
q
' a
i
b
:~i:4: y a~
c
y O
N
ti w
~
U
~ N <d~ b
cd
N
3
~ >, w ...
~ N
. ~o
' ~
b
~ ,
:>:~«
~:~:::::. 'b ~ o .o e'"i ~ o : ~ b °'
~ on o ~ o b b a 3
.
~
i to ~ N
'
, ~ '~
:
' ~
~, ~
~
~. a.. O N
f0 oq
O ~ ~ a a
+ .D
U y.
•
~`'z•
:
• ~
° ~ a
:: ;
;
;.
•i: o ~ ,~
.° p ~ ~ >,
' w
y' w "' ~ i N N ~ q
on q O ~ o Ry
O w. q' q N
~ '~, ~
... o0
'
~ ~ ~
~
b ~a ~
.
v~ '
+.~,
w., ,q
c~
a~
q'.
b
o ~
~, q o w ~ ~ on
~d
~i
v
~' w
~
,~
a~
0
U
y
q
«~
w
0
C+.
a~. a>
a
~yy
0 ~ a~
N
q ,~ ~
~
a
W a~
J
q
:. ..
•i
~
•
'1~+ n
O
> '.
cd N O
~
t7 ~n
~ O
~
Cd U
N
d
fn ^-'
O ~ ~.+ ,D N~ bn N ~+
i..
~
O
F
,~ ~
+ q
O
h
.
'
N
~
:f;:;:;1?:;: ~,
,
.
:~;:;
. , ~
p
t'"
j. v
i, µ"' y
i y
. ~ q ~..~ « L7 p v~ .
'
~~<''`~~~:~~:'~~>••`•r~
• d
~ •~ '~ N ~ ,~ ~ ~ •~, ~
q
~ G
~~
~
b
a A. ~ ' a ~ o qq ~ on ,o w ~ ~
o~ ~ o ~ ~ a
`~ Z G' d '
~
q A a ,own
~~
~' o' N
~ q ,, a~
~
~
~ a
i
a
i
a~
~~
~ o x a~
+-. q q
~
A ~ ~ a~ A. c
,, a
i
~ a
O ~ G ~ O , q
a~ a~ w ~ ~ ~
,. ~
o•
`
w..
.
,-' ,d ~,
cd
U
...
a
.
~ fi7
.
~ ,~ ~ on ~ 3 ,o ~, ~ ~ ~
3 ~
?'~~ a
~
~A1 ~
7
A
~ o
o
Ch
..
..
~ u ~ a ~ w
w
.o m a..
a
•~
,'~
N
N
on
5
q
o a
U o
~ o
(~ T
~~i
c
0
U o
w ~~
T
~i ~
I"~
~~'~~ :.
:;:;~~:;. .•i;:
'...
•. ~.:
:::::::
~iy
~~ ~ ~~ 3
Nx, b ~~
a
W ~ „ ~ w
T
•'•••~
° a~
~~ ~ ~ ~,°°
a O a~ ,~ .~ ~ an
y a
~i
O CI `: ~~~ o o a~
G a~ ~ ~ w
O~C7a~ ~~a
o',
~ o b w w a~
c0 ~ ,~ ao ~ o, o
{::{< ' ~
. ~ a~,
~n o: n '.w~ q q ~
_ O
.~ o id
a~
N
>
a> c~ a~ o a~
a"
b
y b
O
N
>~ id
N
O •U U ~ ~ 0 0; '~ 4,
bu a~ ,~ a, ~ o ~ .~ >
a~ ~ w
N ^' U N ti
^^~„"
.a
O
q
pp 4.
'~
4•,. ~ .~.
N '. ~
> O
bq
N
N: b' c' i~
O
O N N .C
N
O
N 4.
b~ d ~+
O '~ ~
O
'b
8
^ N >
L, N
O r. ~ o
~'
.--~
id
N c~ N
C'"' U
td'
Lam' iii
3 ~ ~
w
o ,~
w .a, o
b,
a~ ~
H J a. o ~,
b a~
~~yj ~
a
W b +r. '«
q N
o
w 3 ,•.
F+ vi U
pp ti
.y. O~ '~ O Li.
~ # cd
o W
vr. O .r N O O ~'. O'. N ,~ N N
o• O w w ^
O .t~ ~.
C..'
N.
C~
~. a N _
bq
O
~d b
O ~ O >>
Ey O
b
~•,, . ~,
G, N O
.^ t~ >
... a~ ~ «'7 `~ a~ w .a
N '~=+ c~ p p
cd
~- <d N ~+'
N
iy cd N ed N
yy q >1 ~r O
~1 i;:; ~ O cd N LY O N ~ Fi y ,G, ~ N ,-~ N
O O y
~n ~ >
O ~ _ '~ >
N
u y
O
~j O
N
c.~ ~ 8
H q
bq 'rJ
~.
.C
.D,. fir'. N
O br. id
b
' y~ T ~ u
a. a~ o ~ ~ ~
ti '~
b
V N
oq is
w
0
~ ~
>'::'~~~~{~~~~~ >' o as °o 'G > o °o .~a o ° o ~ ~`~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ >, a~ ~,
ob q w q q ,moo ~~n
#v%f .<. : ., Li; w y wi L.. b .o'-' o o c~ q: a~ ~ ~ ~ iv ~ v
..
a" w ~ o ?,~
;S~i~:~>~%<:;<iy~: pp. y.. cv. p O «~+ fn TJ .D. O N a) a) 'C
L'i bA U
pp a._i N td
O
cd'
a .n ,~
~ ~ .~ ~ p
~ ~b b
.~ • ~ ~ '
~ o a~ o ~ a~ ~ a~ b
~.
a o a~ ~ . ~
p
}}y,~
b
>
0
U ti
N L.'
N N N ~d
G O O
O
O O'
CO' N N w t.
F. ~
~U
~~ A'~f7,b~ ~ w.o a> wA 3 d' 3 w Ow Sw
p
iiJ~i'r,
;;;~.;_ N
oq
c
o
o°
I1.. rr
(]'~ T
ti.
i
o
~~
i T
/1
0
O 0
{Yi N
~a
a
a
0
~~
c~ a
p~
~ O
Ow
H
H
H
d
.~
0
U
N
d'
.~
:~
0
.;
~ 3
~ o
0
•~
.~ ~
.~ ;
G
.b N
o 'a
~ o
b
a~
.~ U
ti
G .
bA
o ~
ao
.;.
N
C
T ~
~
O ~
~ ~d
~
~ ~ ~~++ ~ ~
~
q
:a b
W 0 N
~~
0 U
3 > '~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ y ~ ~ a~~i
~~ ~ ~ w° oA a
w o v~
~ a~ °o
o ~ ~ o
~ b 3 ;". o o ~
o o
~
b
~ ~ a~ ~, A
b
.
w° 3 '~ b ° ;~ °' ~ ° ~ ~ ,~
~ 3 ~ •
a °' '" x ~ ~ ~ ~
~ 3
a~ ,-+ ~ ~ o y y a~ ~ •~ ~ w
y .~ '~ ~ O c'~ 'b U U ~ ~ "' ,d.
~
~ 4
3 4i ,~ O O ~
~
°'
'~ ° ~ ~ w ~ ~ b w
~ o
.~ `
~ o
~ ~
~ ~ a
~ c a .~ o
3
p ~
~ ~
~ o ~
,.. ~,
~ ~ ~ ~ p
~ o o 'd 3
7 b
~
~ ~ ~ > ~ ~ .~
O
o C
~ ~
~~..
°
vw ,~ N ,~ ~ v~
F
b
a~ ~ .n
3 ^
«, ~ ~
o ~ ~
cd w
'~ ~ ~ a ~ a o , ~ ~ ~ .d g o ,~ 3
~ ~
~
~
a h -°
~ ~ 3"
~ b 3 a 3
y w c ~
q
o ,~
~ .~ a. ~ ~ a~
l ~ '
~ N
O N F
a y
~ ~. ~
h H
q ~
ti~
O.
d N ~
N cd
O
.
o U p
b
~ ' ~
'~ > .~
'~ ~ ~ ~~ N
a'Oi g ~ ~ 3 a~'i ~
U ~ c
~
Q rn
~ ~ °
' ,
Q ~
° Q v a~ a~ w b v
W o °
' ~ ~ q '
w ~J .-1 ° a~ w
0
0
O
o ~~~
~,¢ ~~
•~ ~ as ~ w o
a~
a3i F'' ~ ~ ~'~
~ q,~p Q.o
cn N " ~ ~
~ ~ ~ ~
a~
U A ~'~,
.b U ~ w ,c a°i
~,~~..
.n °A`~co°.
c4 ~ ~ ~"
v"i p N ~ a
a> y
N^ ~ '~ ed
C ~ w ~ b
,,~~ aed
H U b U ~~ o
~ a~ c -~
~ ~ ~ U ~
H Q ~ .O •~ :.~".
w
b y ~4 b .Ur U. G
~ ~ ~ .
U w c~
o U . ~ o ,a
a. ~ 0 3 ~
o C7 ,~ Q, ~ a~ ,~;
a~~ .c ~
^pl O ti ~ q
y `~" N ~ ~..b ' GL
9 r. O
C ~ '~ ~ R.
'~ O ~ ~ ~ q cq
'O ~ y '~ A b .ty
~ O ~ A ~ .N w
~~U o~ ~ an
~°~,
~ - -~_
~~»~~<~
:i4ii:i(i~:ii
~~:~
/~
} ~:•
::~:C~:~ti ••~••'•
i,
J ~
~ ~
v`
.
::
M1•~•ii
?
•ii~i
N
V1
•+
~i ~
'N
~ Vl
+J
y
~i .~
GJ
N
.'
i a./
Ir
O C ..,.~,.... . o ~ o~
~ o~ o~ o
~ A ~ a~
~,
N
(~ o ~ :~
3 ~ ~' a~ •,~
~ u ,~
-
p:,
:
>#'
•
`
~~a'
:>
'
~: > A
o o ~
H U A~ a
~
A 3
> a
o o a~
H U A~ a.
~
A
'o a,.
pO a~
A'
~a ;
:
•
:
s
i
:
: a. 0.i
,.~ ~ ~ ~~
E ~
a ~ c~ ~
. ~, ~w3~ `~~~
~ ~, ~w ° ~
3
a .
~
o a
a a~ ,, ~
a `~
0 0
a~
4.
'~ .
~
o ~
°
0
'" ~,
a
cd
a.
0
0
°
~,
~~.
W ~ O C7 a, ~..~ ~ ~ a O C7
a
~ ~d~w
a O
C7
•~
o a~
~ ° ® a~
o ~
a ~
7
O
c
~+'
~
a .-+
P
v, '
N
.~
c _
o
'
~ ~
N
_
N
N
w
~
od V~
1--1
v,
~~
b
l
o 0
~a
a
,:.,
~
U
O
bn
~~
'm O
o
.
~
N
p
v,
O
ccdd O
w, q
N
~ O
T
w ~
v,
~n 'L1.
4r
O ~.
N
N'
0
+
Ri
to o
N
O N '
w
b
cd~
U
b ~
, ~y
~
~
yy cd
a N O..
b
>
' O
N
r+
N
G ar ~p
C.1
U
r,. o-.i
d
O a
N
3
3
, N
N
p
cd
7
'~
N
O
N
in
' N
4a
N
ti
O
N
~
y
D
~
~ O
E~
b
o
.b,
o
, ~
w ,.,
~'
b
O
~ U
a~
~
b ,
~
cd w
~
~~qq+
a
N
w . ~
~~
a.
w o U
c
b
o
~ ..
a~ ~
on
~ q ,
.o v,
~
~- ~,
~y ,. ~
Q
,
o cd
O
v~
h ..
' ~;
~
'
1'
G
o
U
...
Or
'
.
°
~..
bA 4.
vZ
~
F
w .~
~
a
n
o
w
~
U
'w
0
w T
o
«.~
p
Vl
G
,~
b
~
b
N
a~ cd -.
v ~
~,
•~ .-~
~
,~ ~
'w
o
~
~
o
~
~
a
w
•d b
on
>
~
o
O
~: .~
U
3 ~d' a~ o
fn a ~
N ~' c..
~ ~
~ ~. cd
O. r..
O N -~
~ ~?+ b
N ,n. ° q
4+~
a, ° q
G.
.... N
W
Q
o,.
o
~
.~
~
b
~
~ „
bn a~
o
~
F w~
a
~ w
o
~
b
~
~ a~ ~
o
.5
° o,°
., .. ~
~ ~
. w
bn . ti
,
.~
a~
.. k ~ O. w N .~ N N ~., O g g 40; U vi b' O ~, ti. b w b .:bD ~
3
0
~ a~
.~ .
cd
~ ~ '
f a~ > ~' ~ o a~ o N ~ ~ a o ~, A °
<:<•: y V
w h ~
.. w . b w
d~
d a Q.
~.
0.
Z+ ~
O A
b N U
~
~ .
c
O , . ~
~,
q '..~ b~q O ~ C+ u I ,.,
. Nom" bA O GY
a c~ ~ N "" ~
a,
~,
w
~ ~" '~
v ~, ~• d >
~O
. ~ ~ bq ~
>
'.-10-' :~
vi..•..
'"
N 9' 'U
c~
a~
>
'C.
•
c~ b
b
o ~
~
d. '.; ,~.
a o
O
~
'
o
~ o
'
G
4+
o i
a
«.~
..r
..,
b v
O N
~
'
~ c
i
o
~
~ q
y
O
o cd
r
:<:z:;s::;::>>•;:.
:::•:F••:•;;.>:;~:{.
:~
io ~
~ E: ~.
, c>d
ti. t~
.
.o .. a
,~ ..+ o
0
~ U
~ N b1) "
~ ~
N ~
b
a
ti
p
c
d ~ .~.~' U
.
a
y .~ '''
a~
w
O ~~
T
~ °.
C c~"d ~.''
:: a~ ~ a
~~'~%`~
~ O
a~
w.
~ ~
ti a~
~ ° ..~
O ~, cn
w. ,~ aq
d
'y
~ a a~ ,._,
a, ~,
a
O
ar ~
w a~
~, a
y
' a~
4. a~
~
~ ar
a' w
.. u
4.w ab ~, ¢~ ~a www z a w ~.~
o
w a ~
GT+ ~ '~
w
c~
nn '~'
a~
':':::~:?i'S:i~a~: a~
N o -~
a eV
w bA
:;::: N CS
d' et
N
O
U o
L4. N
~, T
a., a
~ ~
0 0
0
o
N
a
a z.
~ w
~ z
O ~
cd 5
C7 w
9
a
G
~ o
J o
0
N
(~ T
~i ~
~~
o
ply N
a~
c~ a
a
a
o
y
c~ a
O
.b
~ fir
E ~
h
Q T
rI~ _~yy
V "C)
~,,~ ~ o ~a
a,3 ~ ~
G ~ d¢
EyUA~A¢~~A~
aa~~
.5 ~~ aw3 ~
o~~ao~o
O~c7aa~~~~a
?;
o
y ~.. U
~~ur~~
~ o •3
;~ b ~
~ ~
O
O U N '~O
a~~
U ~ :~
o.~ ~ " 3
a~ ~ ~ o
'b ~~ N W
N ~ ~
b ~ ~ C ~
6
o ~ ~ ,a
w ~ o '~ ~.
N ~ 4y N
~ ~ o
~ N ~ ~ b
qai~.~ ~
o ~ N p
~~~ ;w
~y.~o ~U
F N
H
~ N ~ b
U ,a ~
b a
U
E'+ 3 '~ N ~
~~~~,~
.°b o 'a a`tli o
~H ~ ~N
0
c~ b o
a~ O
~
r
.~ :~ .~ ~ U
wr
O ;~ U bA ..`~.
~
'~ ~ ~
o Q' F.
~
~
~ U Vi ^^
G
O
O N
h N
D ~ LL ti
~
b
~~ >
cd b
~a'b ~
w
~
~
~ o
~ '~ ,
~,
a~
b
~ ~~. ~ ~ ~ ~
~
~ 3
~n ~-' ~y F.1 ~
'O N aU.~ Vl
4~
~ 3 a~ ~ 3
~ 3
.~ ~
~ ~ cad .
F~j ~ ~
ry+ (y y U
~ ~3
G ~ ~
~ '~ ~ ~ „~ 3
a~i ° ~ v ~
:'~ ~
~ ,~ ~q 3 ~ 3 ~ °.~
cd ~" U y ~
4~ id ~ ~
~ ~ ~ h b
N N ti ~
~ ~
q ~ U
~ > ~
U ~ ,
> a ~ an
v
~ a~ ce
~
~
~ a ~
i ~
O
U
.
~
~ ~
` H
~ a
a~
0 a.
0
0
"C ti
O ~
D N
,
U ,~
N ~" y
C
p
y
. O
~ ~
~ O U
:~
.o ~ U R~
a
~
O H ~
" ~ ~
N ,0
0 F+ tn. ~
~
N ~ ~ y U
p ~ ~ ~
~, ~ ~ ~
~
w w b a ~
.
"~
~
~~ 'b ~
i
U .~ U ty
U ~.
N ; ~ T .G
cd
~
0 . ~ ..Vr ~ (y 4 ~
~ o a 3 a~i
O
~-' ~ .N
b C' O
~
a
~
~ a
~ 3 ~ .
N o
'
b
o
'" .
a a ~v ,~;
a
i ~
°' oo ~ ...
U
~U ~
r ~ ~
y ~ ,~+
a ~ ~ > ~ ,~E
¢x~w ° ~~~~r~
N
c~
W
.;. .;. .;. ,. .;. .;.
a
•1
1
"'"
0
N
a~
~a
O ~.
~,
0
U'
C5 w
pO
O
H
W
F
C7
..,E-~
~,
y ~
O
oA
q'
H a°
~~a ~w3 ~
o°n o d a o ~ o
0
aqi
Z b' ~''
a~ ~ ~
•~ q ~' q
0 0, ~
~'~ a
,o ,own ,~ •~
aqi . ~ ~~ y
id 'd t" q
N ~' '~
O
N ~
C7 '~ q G
~„~ N U
~ `~ o
a~
o °i" c
q ~.o,•"
H~~a
o .~ ~ o
~ a~
~~~~~
o
qaq ;~ "
a b a .°q
>,ao
d y w. U
Ei a"
U` O
~ U a' O O
W .q ~ U G.
0'3 J o v
cad td ~ '~
by ;~..~. +~~- .:
a+ O'
4.
w H
Gd
V
~,~~~~
~. o ~
po~o3~
3
> ,n a
E°UA~A
~,~ ~w3 ~
a ° ~ ~ °' c c
O~C7a~•~ ~py.
~ ~ ~
a, ,~ 'b^^ b ~ b .~
~ y ~n >i ~ cd .`y ~ ObA ~
~. ~ ~; ;~' ~ o ~
~ q ~ ~ ~ ~ 'c9 ;b v, on > a~ y q
o ~ ° q °~ ,~ h e,
W ~ ,~ o
a, abi o a~ w ~ a~ ~.. ~ .~; x a~'
3 O ~; ~, v~ p, ~ q ~: q
N H o, a~ ~ o~ w' o N~~ O o
~ U m ~. > ti O~ q N O b
w° a ~ ,~ ~ b ry°, ~ c b, c ~ ~ ~ ~ ~,
0
~.~. ~• p p~ ~ N ~, N N. ~ O'er ~ 'N F ~ a
.~ ~n O ~ 7G q Nq G1~ y ~ ~O q o ,~ ~ o o~
aq ~ b ~ ~ ~ , ~ ~ a~ > .~ w
o •~ cu ~ o >, o y ,~
~,G ~, p q:O `~ o ~ ~ W ~ ~,~ oq p q ~.N,~
p U ~. iS ,n p •., a) p.
qa aqi `~ •~ ~ a% ~ ~ .'~ ~ 'o ~' o' a' 3 .~ w' •v aCi a'
GJ .. ~. cd _ G _
~.d o '~ op~ a~~O ~ o a ~b^^ W ~'~ ~z ~ ~ W
41 ~ N ~~' q N ^'~ O ~ y O' ~ O cd~ ~ ~ N ~ tU. ~O ti
~ .o ~ o .o a °' ~ ° ° ~ a~ o ~ ~ o q, N o
~~~ ~ WE+ZZ ~ v Q, :? ~ W'~Z o oa W oZ
F ° --•
tinp'~
~. 0 j eye eye eye e4 eye p0
.~
rl'
o~
c
a
0
U
u.. ~~
T
~.
~'
a
L
U
a
O
~,
O'
..a
J
O
N
T
s
::> t:::::::::::> '
'~z`?
t~~~ `•
~ ~
::A4::~3:s:~ •~
~,
••• ~••
q ~
~~ E7 ~ ~ G
o
a~
W ° N c x N U
°~ o
ON ~ ~ °.~
~ ~~,A
~i
a ~
~,
~~
~~r ~
w 3
> ,n
oo~
HUA~ a ~
~~.~
A~w
C7 ^, U
a 5
3
: •~irt:i
~
~
~S
a
7 ..,
.~
p. N b.
:
S
:
i
: O (i~
0 ~
a~
a
''
::
< .~ .n
a~ .
., ~o
~ b00 o N
o q'
~
q a~
~ ,~ q.. bA'.
a
o
0
~
~
WW v~~~
`n O
c.7a l
~y+a
a o
~ ~ a~
CAS
rrMM
V
:
i0
O
'.7 U
', b ,.,
>
L. N
~
N
1
N
' O y U ..
CV
q
q
M
N
O
{ bA
~
~
~
„)
N
h
N
'
ti
O
N
O
I
.o~•
~
i--i
~ .-. q I.
~
O
W
1
' b
..
,..
q ~
q
~
'
'
W
a~
. '~'
y
~
0
p
~
H
m
O
'
d
v],
w
~~
C ::
•
:%~
,, .
„
~
..,
a~
q
O
.~ ~
•
U
.,
.~
o
0
.
~
0
ti
a
no
~,
q
ra.
o
b
~
w
~ b
o
w
a~
N
0
~ -.
w ~
en '
,~
~
:
~
a
G
q
G
o
a
'b
8
a~
' a~
~
pp
<d
^!
'
~ w
x
.~
~
,~
ti
O
~
q
, N
a~
a
b
cV a..
~ i
~
~
a O
cd
,~
N
,~ cd' w,.
~
,a
F
~
~,
~ ._ >
1 °
o
Ci••,. N.
~ o ~ .~
~
i
b
b
~
N cd N
~ w ~
~
~,.,.
.,
a,
~
U
. ~
c~ b.
w ~. cv
q >
p q
a >, o w ~
'
.c7
~ a~
o .~
~ ~
~
'~ ~
~ a o.
A:
v ,. ti
w
q ~ ~
H
W
.b
~
`~
~
w
N
~
q
N
,
^
d
n
'
o v a~
d
Kn
o a
O
Z 4
sW
," h
~ o, .~ .
0
a o
a
q
a~ ~
7
~
.q ,q
~
3
0
'
.~ .°
0
~
a
4, ar w
g
o
b '~
'~ w
on
~
1
~ ~ a
y
C~
rn
cd
C
> 0
+
d
U
d
N
i
0
n
N
a:
0
0
4.
cd
~
~'
G~
O
q
O
--I bA
N
U
~d ~, >
'~
o b ~
0
"
7
a~
~ •
~' ~
~
y, ...
U
'
o
o
W
.-i
'~
~,
k
W
~
a~
++
a
o
°
,.
H f ~ o ~ ~ . b
~ M
. ~
~'
' q
'~:~•„ a ~ 3 ~ as' on ~a off 'v
a '~ ~ ~
'~ w
~ ~ ~ ~ I
'b v on a. > I ~
.
o ...
R1
_ n
ti, td
~ .,
~
b
.
~. pp N U~ U bq Q:I. W O '~
£%i p
Opo .d ' ^ .~ o' '~ a~ y, a; c'~I o ap p, y ~ U o o Pa
a~ ~
~ ~ o a~
~
a~
~
A a~
,-;
~
a.
~
~ w° b W ~ ~ ~ ~ .~ N ti °' a ° ~ -~ ~ 4'
U o y, c 'a~ .~
q
~ ~ .n ~' '~
,,
y a~
~ 'I..
ro ,~ on
`~ ,.. 'Cl on ~,
.. 4.
' d b ~
~ 3
' b ~
.~ .~ a~ ai ~ ~ a~
tt
~'i
~ ~y
~,
a~ «~
oq ~
H
O'
•N ~
q ~v~
Z
,-,
/)
p
~
.. b0
~+
d
d
G .~
~ a~
~
O N
. ~ ^.
~W W
a ~., ~
N
O
U
ti
A a~W ,
~•. ~
~ > a~
a7 td
O U
W C4 (,)
ocn
o
~
U
N
q
W
o
U ~,
G ~,
.~.
~
~~ . a
~
~
~
I,
b ~
I
pp ~ N
~' ~ ~
N ^-'
~'r'2 a
.
p
°' a ~
.~
0
.
.
.
.
~~~fi~>~` ,~
o
a
n
•~
~
~' c
1
~
~'
an
c
~.
G
O o
U a
tciq.
c~ T
N
O
O'
.a
c
N
C
U °
0
ni
Ct. ~
::: i; niiii}:
~W;:;:.. is
~.;:;
}
LyL~wwrr..~~
;'~~:'~ ~
: ~''• a~
CyyS a a
F~ ~:.::.;:.:;.:::.;:.>
„„~~ ~ G ~
H. ~ ::::: :iai:::i:::i'4wZ:;:;::ii:Si''' O N > O
O ~' ' o°n ~ °' ~ -' a ~
o a a
0
0
.~
a a~
W.
WW L7 ~» O~c7a~ ~.~a
a o :~
b ~ ~~
y U N '°'
a
~ ~ °~' a
'k _ a'
N
M
N N
N
N
ti a
~i ~-y
V]'. N dA.
'b
H
a ~ ~ _
N O
'.' ~ "'~ ~ ',7 w F' O w y
N
,~ ~ ~ c
fd C4 N
a
a
C7 ~o W U
w ~o ^
o
on
4.r
00 o a~ ~n w
a ~ '~:
U
~ a
Cn
~.
b.
a a~'.
O O N N
O v~
a o
~ ~. a~ a~ v
«, .., w
~ -~ ~ o
~'
a
o w
.n ~..;
b .~ ~ .
b ~
w
a~
b w
.~
^ x >, ,
v~ N
a~ N
:;: ~ N l/~' C/l
C~ f~
/.~
O y
U ~ vi ~ N
~' Fi (/1
N 'r ~ O
f~
,a .o
H, 0, ~ ca v, EH, ~ ~ :a ,~ eo o ~"~ ~ ~ ~;
a
a~ a~ F"' >, a ~, ,~ o,
.~ '~ a~ o. a a~ a~ I
a
~ N i-i ~ fd
w oq
a.
m~ a ci o~ ti o a ~ I
... ~a o ~ b r. ~ a~ ~
t~~+ U
Q' .ta :~ ': '~ a: o
~ a, a, U vb~
b
w w a ~ o
a, ~
N cd ^
tr .a
a ~ ~. ~ a
o ~ ,e' ~ o; o
~r , ~ bu tb o a nn 3
N L.r ~A
.a 1:+
N 1r
yy ,r i w
F~~ O ;•`::: ;: C~ +' bA, '~ .O .~ p: a - U V1.. CA O, N, a
3 ~ a b ~ ~ a :~ ~, a~ -~ „
° ~ Y< _ a v
.b
~I' O
p. cd
U
'" ~+
0 h
a., .
Ir w+
O TJ. •• ,~
O c~
O
1i '~+
ti
O
N N
44~~ .Li .
~ ~
F~1
N
O a
N td
pp .a N
1--1 b4 ~ ti
~ N cd
ti N
o a~ 0 5 ,o~~n ~r ~ > a,
k ~,:::. bn ,~ a U o v a
U ~ G. U ol) va ~„ ti~ cd
~ y U ~ on > ,., A
,~
.r Ir > 'd
°, oq ~ '"
h'
a
w a
~••~ N
O N
a
H N V]
N N
_ w
fd
N .D
1-i 1.+
i"~ ° b
a
A a b
~ a~ aai `'' U b ~ ..., a b ~ o U ~ U- ,,, ~ o. ~? W G ~ ~.
,~ a a~ . a a~ C7 a a w ~ a~
N
y b an o ~ b a~ .d ~, a~ o a~ ~ a~ ~ ~ ?? no
3 e, „
.~
~~..yy ~
w
a
~i' a~
~y+
_ N v~
'> ~I > N
N yy ~ W..
~ ~ ~"
v~ N N
u wo w '
w ~
0
a~ ~ w
O O U N
U i.. ctl.
.,~ w ~..'
,~ '~
f. O G ~ ~ N
0.i W' W A ~ W' C7
•<:.<•:::. ~ a O ~.
~ ~
d ~ U
a .~ ~, o~ ,. ,. .,. .,. .,. .,. .,.
~' ~
c
'~
0
U o
L4 r
[G T
Qi .~-,
rn
~'
H
O
a
z
C7
z
5
s
W
9
z
~~ ~ ~,
n
~;. x::::::>::::> o
U
Lr
:~?I^Yiiiiiii
1«F ~ .
. ~.. . i
:j;:;:~k;:?••• :ii iii:+~...
'•'•'•'~'~'' •'~ ir: ~:? iiriiiii:
}( 1~
::}i:~5>'i~ji: ~i$ip~~,iijiiii:
^~ ~ IMY:;:;•;?:iii
•i::~:} •• ?'~: ~:ti~:~.~'' rii:•:~i is
y~F
.., ..
::>::::
~ q o ~
~ N 3 ~ > a ~ p a.
nab ~ ..~ ~ ~ «.~ ~ x
~<<
'~
C N
'~ ` w q v
~ ~ o ai o
o a~ ~ b
q
p
+.~
C7
w
q
ar
q
~F~Aj-~1 N U
~ ~ ~
O
b
a
., a~ a~
~ a~
b
a
~ w
.>
W 4~
q ~ q -~ w
bq ~
q O
w
O O a~
U 8
a~ U
N
N
N
b p 'in
cd ~-'
H
U .
S N N
''~MM 1 ~ r. cC N A :O O.
Q' ~y
a+ p a N
C~ GY ^^ U
R, te1
CL O
'. N R~
~Fq :~.
cd C7'....
U
~ "~ q
~~
a~ ~ ~ '"
h ~ '"
o ~ w
a w
a~
m
w., .
~.
a~
0
~.
-- a
'~ o
> a.
a~
a ~ ~
o -~
a
~ a~ ~ a~
a
,a o ,~ a~ o > ~ y O ~ 3 > ~,
,a '~ .~
.~ O
q a~
_ o ~,
~ ~, ~ o
rn
C7 ...
~a
0
O o q .q
o >
rn ,~ ,~, ., ~ y «~ y cn o ~ y a v '~
3 a~ •.. o .., ~d ~ q O
^~ rn p ~ H
~ 3 "
h a a~ v q ~
N ~--~ U ~'• cd N
4+ q b :~ 'J
q cd
a~ a~
~;
U q
w
., o a~ ~:,
o ~ ~
~ ~ ~ ~
~ q ... .. ~ •... ~ b ' ~ .. ~' A. ,,
O s~
'. .~ N ~ ... ~ w y y., 1 q ~ . ~ b ,,, o q
,~ o~ ~ N o„u. O .. ~ a q
~ ., ~ °~ o a. ~; o
Z O o ,'~ '~ o ~ •~ o ~ ° o ,~ '~, q 'o ~ ~ ~ o ,~ o 'b 3
..' a~
.., a~ o
...
o ..,
q d o
a~. O U
b
~~
q
.-.
N
h
H CL ' U
bA
v: q .~ q
~~', b ~ N
O
~.+ O
r. ,p «' J
N
F q
o. ~ o E .~
~a,~~ ~b•~ °„~a o c°~i ~ w oQ; ~ `gib q o ~ o aO
~~'%~~z:a~::; ~ ~ O ~ o ~ .5 o a ~ ~ ~' a~ a~ >' ~ ~ >, as .b ~ •o
~"' %>:~~af:::;:z:::•:::::?•;: v, q o G]. ~n ^ on U > b ~ N ,~ cd b
:::::i~r~:::::::::t::::•::•> a ~ ~ ,~ y O w >, ~ 4U~- .~ v3, b ~ ~ ,aqi q p ~ ~ > ~ .~ a~ .
::::::.
::::::.
'y R. C.w ~ a~ `d ~ ~ ca .~ q c,.w w O '~ q `+. 'd ~' <~ p a~
..::>:..
b0 .~ ..C0. N ~. q ~ Q
a~
~ -; b ,~
cd cE
~ a
U ' ~ ~, ,-~
p b w~_~ h a w q ,q q p o i N .a~ ~ > vi ~ 3 :~ ,o 3~ ~:
... ~~, q ~ ~ a3 r w ~ a~i a`~i a~ a~ 0 a~ 'ro ~ ~n U Q ~ ~ «~ 27 ~ '" c
o .~ w ~ a~ ~ ,~ «, ,.~ O o O a. w
~ .~ ~ ~ v a q
q w o w o ~+- o ~, b 0 c
• 'd y > a~ O d d ~ b ~. ~... O q ~ v v
q" w O ~ n
a • ~ ~ ono ~, ~ o a~ o .-, P-. o ,~ ~ o . ~ >
> O ~ ~
a ~ ~ ~ ,.~ ~ ~ O b b a~ a~ ~ ~ a~ -- a~ a c
q r. ,+°: sd ~ O .ti a. w q. P. - ~ ~ O P. P,' W o ,. W E-~ b ~ a
O O~~ O N N ~~ '~ 0.
N~
~ ~ ~ ~ bA
c0 `,~
a~ a
O
p N N ~ 'U ~~' ~, d
.q q b .., Ly ,b w. q ~= CL c
V y N~ w. y O O d• .• Oi O • a
m~ U U v, ~ o w 3 a o ••
a o. «~ C
c
Y ~' R
~ ~ L
d' ~l' <
0
J
O
<~>~>«'
~~>
`~':'
~
~
.
:ii~:~:;:j~ ~i:~~tii? i:~
I~
::?::•'':::~
~
~
I
~y
~ ~
~ CC1 ~v
~ "C) rR~1
V
.
~
!
,
J ::..
:j:~
M.
y N
~ ad ~
W
O
•<~i`4i~:::~
:: ;i ...
::. a~
a ,L~' ~ O
0
C'
C N.
~
ai N ~ ,~
~ ~ >
c
a
pp
a c
3
~
a ~
:: .
Fo-~UAc~ .
A .
.
F~(~
~'
~a
y.~~ .~ .., ~ ,
a ~ ~~ ~ ~~~ ~w3 ~' :~ ~~ ~w3 ~ .~
,
'
WW
'
' O~
C7a. ~ ~y+ a O~C7 aa~ ~~a ~~v
o
a .
+~
~
M
V
~i
:;:
b
p .~,
M
' „
<d
p
_
O
«+
~ .~
U
d b ~
N O
O
a
~
w
~
N b
~
i
n
1
~
a
c~ :~ <d
G'.
.
a~
b
b
a
p
cd
U t
~,
~
,
0
~b
-^ •~ o
~
~'
3
o
.O.
O
0
~
~
~
~
a
W
O
U
~
~
'
'
b ~.
A
U
~,
'"
.^"
U
~
p C~
O
Vi.
w
.. p
w
.c ~
b o
~
O .-.
~
cd
>
b ~
a~.
a~
~
O
O
., .~
o
o
•~
y
.
o
a~
'
~
0
b
a
~
w
.
~
a~
'~
N
a
qq ~,
~
r.
N
d
~ ~
b
Q
N
~+
oq
:+
i
^
8
~d.
O
'b:
o
~
O
a.+
r
q
~
E.
~
`
U ~
~,
bq
~. V'1
~ w ~
~
N ~
w+
.0 :
N
3
~
O
~d
.--.
~
F ~
H ~~~ r (V ."C..
~ ~., N
~i~
~ v~ N
~ t7 N O O'
U
a b'
a! Lam' '~' O O
~• ~ p w
C
~
~
v
' ~
~ ~
w
a
~
.
o
-~.
v
W
~
o
N
a
0
o
~
>
b ,
o
.~
a
a~
o
0
a
~
d
n
~
I
~
U
0
~ ~,:
~
c
G
0 «.~
a~
v~
0 ,
'"'. cd
'~
3 ^
.o
U ~~
N o.
~ .
~
a~
a~
w
CC
d
ro
~, ~ ~
o
O
c .
~
a~
a~
Z r~.
Q
~. a~ ~
4.
~ y O
bq ~ O
'4.i'.
N., ~ ~
~
c~
N a~
N
td
~ o a~
bUi 4+ .d.
U N '~ .
a~ r ~ ~,
b N.
c~, y ~ ,.. C7
''~
'd b
rn
~
H
~
.
C
_
.~ w
N
v~~
q
bA
•-+
N
w cd
CS
td
~y' ,D U
.n.
cd
b
~~
~
O
N N
w
CL
4
i
d
'
o
a
b
,
.
~
~
U
a~
u
i..
~
U
~
V'1
3
~
~D
O
.c
"
~
.
~
o
~,
~~
~ ... ,D
S
~
c
a~ ,~
o
N
0
>
d
1
o
o
w
~
,
,_,
W
d
,
a
~,
0
~
N
, ~ ~, ~
.
.~
,
> ~ N
~ o ~, ~ ~ ~,
a
N
3 ,~
cn
~
3 ~
~f •3 o
n a~~i a o •~, o
~ ~ p '~ ~ ~ .~ o
t°
~' o '~ .t°~ ttc
ry~y o
,,t
:n:•:,,•'9-iarsr:
#t~~
:
`
` ~ •~. U
~ ~, N.. N
` C
U ~a
' H ~,
bA' ', .-Ur O N qq
a~i G
b g5
?
~
y.,.. 'b y U. '^ O
°' ° .',~.
p
t O'. FN+ C.
w. °3'
~° y
a
:k:°N
i~3.'•?:
•:~ „•:
~
~w
O >,
N
O' U.
O
~
p.
F.
~., U
~
, o
ti~ ~"
. «+
b
~'
.~ •
a~
cd.
3 ,
N h
'~
3 .
'
~`
''~'~
~
'b
U
~
~,
3
O o cq
a~
.C a~
« _
.Ly
W .. ~
~
~ .~ b
°~' o
~ ~'
N
'g' ° o
X~ a~ ~ ~
w o .ter ~
?
a --' o ~, .~ c
~ .a; ~
a
~;::<:
.
.
:~::~::~:#~>%:~ a~ a~ ~ ~ cd ~ a~ °~
~ !-' ~t'
'b > a~ '~
o a~ a, ae°i , •~
.
,, ,
as " O '~'' '~ ~a .a ,
.
M a~ b
~ ~' ~ ,
pp b
'~ H ~ ~ U w
~ .d ° '_. o ,a Y
~ ~ o
on ,~ a o a ~ O a ,zy, ~'
gg o' .5 ~ ~
~ ~ ~ ~ °o ~
~ ~ w
a
.+.~ ~
~ ^~ U
..
W ~
'Cl
U' '~ ~
a~ .
c2
.., ^~ ~ c
] ~ U .n, ~ , o ~
~
s ti on w ~ ~ .
~ ~
a+
,., ~
Y.
~
~ ~ A ~ ~
~ ~ ~ 3
b
~
N UI
rb
cd
a N
~ N
d
•+ .-,
s
°
v~ .~ ,~
o.
r.
.o o o.N
~' ~
v~ .~ .~
o
.•
.•. ~' coo
.~ on
..
d
r w
ri w~p
r
et er et
U
x T
x
~.
a
0
a
w
z
~,.
a
z
w
w
z
z
N
S
Q
z