HomeMy WebLinkAbout2012-001 - Statement of Overriding Considerations, and Adopting a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program• RESOLUTION NO. 2012-001
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
SANTA ANA CERTIFYING THE ENVIRONMENTAL
IMPACT REPORT FOR THE SAN LORENZO SEWER LIFT
STATION PROJECT, ADOPTING CERTAIN FACTS,
FINDINGS AND A STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING
CONSIDERATIONS, AND ADOPTING A MITIGATION
MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA ANA AS
FOLLOWS:
Section 1. The City Council of the City of Santa Ana hereby finds, determines,
and declares as follows:
A. In compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
(Public Resources Code § 21000 et seq.) and Title XIV, California Code of
Regulations, Section 15000 et. seq. (CEQA Guidelines), the City of Santa
Ana has prepared an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) to analyze the
environmental impacts of the San Lorenzo Sewer Lift Station Project
(Project No. 06-3510), which would upgrade and replace an existing
• sewer lift station located generally near the intersection of South Bristol
Street and West Segerstrom Avenue.
B. In compliance with CEQA and CEQA Guidelines Sections 15063 and
15082, the City prepared an Initial Study and Notice of Preparation (NOP)
of a Draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR), which was distributed to the
Office of Planning and Research, all responsible and trustee agencies and
other interested parties on April 12, 2010.
C. In compliance with CEQA and CEQA Guidelines Sections 15087, the City
provided public notice of the availability of the Draft EIR and sent a notice
of completion to the Office of Planning and Research on July 14, 2010,
which began a 44-day review period, ending on August 27, 2010. On
August 30, 2010, the City extended the review period for an additional 14
days, until September 10, 2010, for a total review period of 58 days.
D. In compliance with CEQA and CEQA Guidelines Section 15088.5,
following the City's review of public comment letters received on the Draft
EIR and previously prepared (but never certified) Final EIR, the City
determined a need to incorporate substantive revisions to the Draft EIR,
thereby necessitating a re-circulation of the Draft EIR for public review.
Accordingly, the City prepared a Recirculated Draft EIR (RDEIR) and sent
a notice of completion to the Office of Planning and Research on
September 14, 2011 and provided notice of the availability of the RDEIR
•
Resolution No. 2012-001
Page 1 of 4
as required by CEQA Guidelines Section 15087, which began a 47-day
public review period for the RDEIR that concluded on October 31, 2011.
E. The City prepared a Final EIR, which includes all comments and
recommendations received on the RDEIR, a list of persons, organizations,
and public agencies commenting on the RDEIR, the City's written
responses to significant environmental points raised in the review and
consultation process, and the RDEIR and associated technical
appendices.
F. The City provided written responses to all agencies and members of the
public commenting on the Draft EIR at least ten (10) days prior to
certification of the EIR.
G. The City Council of the City of Santa Ana fully considered this matter, and
all public testimony, written and oral, at its regularly scheduled meeting of
February 21, 2012
H. The City has prepared Findings of Fact in compliance with Public
Resources Code Sections 21081 and 21081.5 and CEQA Guidelines
Section 15091 for every significant impact of the San Lorenzo Sewer Lift
Station Project, including an explanation of the rationale for each finding.
1. The San Lorenzo Sewer Lift Station Project will have one significant
transportation/traffic impact that cannot be mitigated to below the level of
significance.
J. The City has prepared a Statement of Overriding Considerations in
compliance with Public Resources Code Sections 21081 and CEQA
Guidelines Section 15093, which finds that specific economic, legal, social,
technological or other benefits of the San Lorenzo Sewer Lift Station
Project outweigh the significant and unavoidable impact identified in the
EIR.
K. The City has prepared a Mitigation, Monitoring and Reporting Program
(MMRP) in compliance with Public Resources Code Sections 21081.6 and
CEQA Guidelines Section 15087 to ensure compliance with the mitigation
measures identified in the EIR during project construction, implementation
and operation.
L. All attached documents, including the Final EIR, the MMRP, the findings
and statement of overriding considerations, the Request for Council Action
dated February 21, 2012, and the record of proceedings are incorporated
herein by this reference as though fully set forth.
Section 2. The City Council of the City of Santa Ana further finds, determines,
and declares as follows:
A. The City Council certifies that:
1) The Final EIR has been completed in compliance with CEQA.
Resolution No. 2012-001
Page 2 of 4
• 2) The Final EIR was presented to the City Council of the City of Santa
Ana, which reviewed and considered the information contained in the
Final EIR prior to approving the project.
3) The Final EIR reflects the City of Santa Ana's independent judgment
and analysis.
B. The City Council adopts the Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding
Considerations, attached to this Resolution as "Exhibit A."
C. The City Council adopts the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program,
attached to this Resolution as "Exhibit B."
D. All attached documents, including the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting
Program, the CEQA Findings of Fact and the Statement of Overriding
Considerations, are hereby incorporated by reference as though set forth
in full.
Section 3. Pursuant to Title XIV, California Code of Regulations ("CCR")
§735.5(c)(1), the City Council has determined that, after considering the record as a
whole, there is no evidence that the San Lorenzo Sewer Lift Station Project will have the
• potential for any adverse effect on wildlife resources or the ecological habitat upon
which wildlife resources depend. The proposed project exists in an urban environment
characterized by paved concrete, roadways, surrounding buildings and human activity.
Therefore, pursuant to Fish and Game Code §711.4(c)(2) and Title XIV, CCR §753.5,
the payment of Fish and Game Department filing fees is not required in conjunction with
this project.
Section 4. This Resolution shall take effect immediately upon its adoption by
the City Council, and the Clerk of the Council shall attest to and certify the vote adopting
this Resolution.
ADOPTED this 21 st day of February, 2012.
Resolution No. 2012-001
Page 3 of 4
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Joseph Straka, Interim City Attorney
By-
YES: Councilmembers: Alvarez, Benavides, Bustamante. Martinez, Pulido,
Sarmiento, Tinaiero (7)
NOES: Councilmembers: None (0)
ABSTAIN: Councilmembers: None (0)
NOT PRESENT: Councilmembers: None (0)
CERTIFICATE OF ATTESTATION AND ORIGINALITY
I, MARIA D. HUIZAR, Clerk of the Council, do hereby attest to and certify the attached
Resolution No. 2012-001 to be the original resolution adopted by the City Council of the
City of Santa Ana on February 21, 2012.
Date: ---? J?2- 71-2:'/ z
?f
Clerk of the Council
City of Santa Ana
Resolution No. 2012-001
Page 4 of 4
• ATTACHMENT "A"
SAN LORENZO LIFT STATION PROJECT
(SCH No. 2010041028)
CE61A Findings of Fact/
Statement of Overriding Considerations
•
Prepared for:
The City of Santa Ana
Public Works Agency
Water Resources Division
200 S. Daisy Avenue
Corporate Yard, MS 85
Santa Ana, CA 92703
Prepared by:
T&B Planning, Inc.
17542 East 17th Street, Suite 100
Tustin, CA 92780
February 21, 2012
r?
Contents Attachment "A"
Contents
Section Page
Chapter 1 - Introduction ......................................................................................... 1-1
Chapter 2 - CEQA Findings ...................................................................................... 2-1
2.1 Introduction ............................................................................................... 2-1
2.2 Findings Regarding Environmental Impacts .............................................. 2-2
Chapter 3 - Findings Regarding Project Alternatives ............................................... 3-1
3.1 Introduction ............................................................................................... 3-1
3.2 Project Objectives .....................................................................................3-1
3.3 Selection of Alternatives ............................................................................ 3-1
3.4 Project Alternative Findings .......................................................................3-3
3.4.1 No Project Alternative ..................................................................... 3-3
3.4.2 Modified Construction Configuration C.2 Alternative ..................... 3-5
3.4.3 Alternative Site Location No. 1 (Alternative Site No. 1) .................. .. 3-6
3.4.4 Alternative Site Location No. 2 (Alternative Site No. 2) .................. .. 3-8
3.4.5 Alternative Site Location No. 3 (Alternative Site No. 3) .................. 3-10
3.4.6 Alternative Site Location No. 4 (Alternative Site No. 4) .................. 3-12
3.4.7 Alternative Site Location No. 5 (Alternative Site No. 5) .................. 3-13
3.4.8 Alternative Site Location No. 6 (Alternative Site No. 6) .................. 3-15
3.4.9 Alternative Site Location No. 7 (Alternative Site No. 7) .................. 3-16
3.4.10 Alternative Site Location No. 8 (Alternative Site No. 8) .................. 3-18
3.4.11 Alternative Site Location No. 9 (Alternative Site No. 9) .................. 3-20
3.4.12 Alternative Site Location No. 10 (Alternative Site No. 10) .............. 3-22
3.4.13 Alternative Site Location No. 11 (Alternative Site No. 11) .............. 3-24
3.4.14 Alternative Site Location No. 12 (Alternative Site No. 12) .............. 3-27
3.4.15 Alternative Site Location No. 13 (Alternative Site No. 13) .............. 3-29
3.4.16 Alternative Site Location No. 14 (Alternative Site No. 14) .............. 3-31
San Lorenzo Lift Station EIR (Project No. 06-3510) 1
CEQA Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations
Contents Attachment "A"
• 3.4.17 Alternative Site Location No. 15 (Alternative Site No. 15) .............. 3-33
3.4.18 Alternative Site Location No. 16 (Alternative Site No. 16) .............. 3-35
3.4.19 Alternative Site Location No. 17 (Alternative Site No. 17) .............. 3-36
3.4.20 Alternative Site Location No. 18 (Alternative Site No. 18) .............. 3-39
3.4.21 Alternative Site Location No. 19 (Alternative Site No. 19) .............. 3-41
3.4.22 Findings on Alternatives that were Considered but Eliminated
from Detailed Analysis in the Draft EIR .......................................... 3-43
3.4.23 Additional Findings .......................................................................3-45
Chapter 4 - Statement of Overriding Considerations ............................................ 4-47
4.1 Introduction ............................................................................................. 4-47
4.2 Unavoidable Significant Adverse Impacts ...............................................4-47
4.3 Overriding Considerations .......................................................................4-48
4.3.1 Project Benefits ............................................................................. 4-48
•
•
San Lorenzo Lift Station EIR (Project No. 06-3510)
CEQA Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations
Chapter 1 Introduction Attachment 'A'
Chapter 1 - Introduction
The City of Santa Ana (City) adopts the following Findings of Fact in connection with the San
Lorenzo Lift Station Project (Project). Such Findings must be adopted by the City pursuant to the
requirements of Section 21081 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (Public
Resources Code §21000 et seq.) and Section 15091 of the State CEQA Guidelines (CEQA
Guidelines) (14 Cal. Code Regs. §15000 et seq.) prior to approval of a project for which an
Environmental Impact Report (EIR) has been certified which identifies one or more significant
environmental effects. The City also adopts the Statement of Overriding presented in Chapter 4 of
this document, which provides the specific reasons that the Project's economic, legal, social,
technological, or other benefits outweigh its adverse environmental impacts.
This document is organized as follows:
Chapter 1 Introduction to CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding
Considerations.
Chapter 2 CEQA Findings of Fact regarding the significant environmental impacts of
the Project and the mitigation measures for those impacts identified in the
Environmental Impact Report (EIR) prepared for the Project and adopted as
conditions of approval.
Chapter 3 Findings regarding the alternatives to the Proposed Project evaluated in the
EIR and the reasons that such alternatives were rejected or accepted.
Chapter 4 Statement of Overriding Considerations explaining the specific reasons that
the Project's economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits
outweigh its adverse environmental impact.
Brief Proiect Description
The Project area is located at the western terminus of San Lorenzo Avenue, immediately north of
West Segerstrom Avenue and south of an existing alley. The Project would replace the existing
Segerstrom Lift Station, which is located beneath South Bristol Street approximately 700 feet to the
west of the new lift station site.
The Project will consist of a newly constructed lift station that will be housed within an
approximately 8-foot by 30-foot block structure, measuring approximately 17 feet in height. The
following facilities will be installed within or beneath the block structure: electrical panels and
control center; a below-ground wet well of sufficient size and depth to prevent back up and
surcharging of the upstream sewer mains; a below-ground dry well to house the pumps, motors,
associated equipment and appurtenances; a gravity odor control system; and a stairway access into
the dry well.
Landscaping and hardscape improvements are included as part of the new lift station. The Project
includes the repaving of a portion of the western end of San Lorenzo Avenue, portions of an existing
San Lorenzo Lift Station EIR (Project No. 06-3510) 1-1
CEQA Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations
Chapter 1 Introduction Attachment "A"
• alley, and a portion of West Segerstrom Avenue, along with the installation of new sidewalks in
areas where existing sidewalks have fallen into a state of disrepair and/or will be demolished during
lift station construction. Some existing landscaping along West Segerstrom Avenue will remain.
The Project also includes the installation and operation of approximately 1,300 linear feet of new
underground sewer infrastructure, including approximately 560 linear feet of 15-inch gravity sewer
pipe; approximately 190 linear feet of 12-inch gravity sewer pipe; approximately 545 linear feet of
10-inch force main; and sewer manholes and appurtenances. Construction of these new facilities will
occur beneath the paved rights-of-ways of South Bristol Street and West Segerstrom Avenue. The
new infrastructure will be needed to connect several existing sewer mains to the Project.
After construction of the Project is complete and the new subsurface sewer pipes and manholes are
installed, the new lift station will move effluent through the station and into gravity sewer lines,
which will convey the sewerage to the Orange County Sanitation District's (OCSD) Reclamation
Plant No. 1, located in the City of Fountain Valley adjacent to the Santa Ana River. Effluent will
continuously flow through the Project and will not be stagnant. The Project will replace the
Segerstrom Lift Station and will not increase the capacity of the City's existing sewer system. The
Project will be constructed with odor control devices and the City will regularly monitor the facility
to ensure it is functioning properly.
After the Project has been constructed and is in operation, demolition of the existing Segerstrom Lift
Station will occur. Demolition activities will involve abandonment in place of the existing lift station,
including the removal and disposal of all lift station equipment and filling of the existing wet well
manhole with sand. An existing generator, located southerly of the existing lift station, will remain
in place and will serve as a back-up power source for the proposed Project. Some removal and
replacement of existing sidewalk and roadway pavement will occur in association with proposed
demolition activities. Demolition of the existing Segerstrom Lift Station will occur in conformance
with all applicable federal, state, and local regulations and standards. All roadway segments
disturbed by Project construction will be resurfaced.
CEOA Compliance
As described in Section 1.3.1 of the EIR, the City originally prepared and processed a Mitigated
Negative Declaration (MND) for the proposed Project in December 2008. The MND was adopted by
the City Council on February 2, 2009. However, the MND was challenged in California Superior
Court by an adjacent property owner, and the Court ordered the lead agency to vacate its approval of
the MND and required preparation of a project EIR. The City published a Draft EIR for the Project
and circulated it for public review between July 14, 2010 and September 10, 2010. Following the
City's review of comment letters received in response to the Draft EIR and a previously prepared
(but never certified) Final EIR, the City determined a need to incorporate substantive revisions to the
Draft EIR, thereby necessitating a re-circulation of the Draft EIR for an additional public review
period. Accordingly, the City prepared a Recirculated Draft EIR (RDEIR) and sent a notice of
completion to the Office of Planning and Research on September 14, 2011 and provided notice of the
availability of the RDEIR as required by CEQA Guidelines Section 15087, which began a 47-day
public review period for the RDEIR that concluded on October 31, 2011.
The key procedural actions related to the proposed Project and CEQA to date include:
•
San Lorenzo Lift Station EIR (Project No. 06-3510) 1-2
CEQA Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations
Chapter 1 IntnxJuctlon Attachment IA"
• Circulate Initial Study/Notice of Preparation of a Draft EIR: April 12, 2010 through May 12,
2010 (30 days);
• Provide Notice of Availability of the Draft EIR, file Notice of Completion (NOC) with the
Office of Planning and Research and circulate Draft EIR for Public Review: July 14, 2010
through September 10, 2010 (58 days);
• Provide Notice of Availability of the RDEIR, file NOC with the Office of Planning and
Research and re-circulate the RDEIR for Public Review: September 14, 2011 through
October 31, 2011 (47 days); and
• Prepare Final EIR, including all comments and recommendations received on the RDEIR, a
list of persons, organizations, and public agencies commenting on the RDEIR, the City's
written responses to significant environmental points raised in the review and consultation
process, and the RDEIR.
San Lorenzo Lift Station EIR (Project No. 06-3510) 1-3
CEQA Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations
Chapter 2 CEQA Findings Attachment 'A'
•
Chapter 2 - CEQA Findings
2.1 Introduction
This chapter presents the impacts that were identified in the EIR and the findings that are required in
accordance with Section 15091 of the CEQA Guidelines. The possible findings for each significant
adverse impact are as follows:
1. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or
substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the EIR ("Finding I").
2. Such changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another public
agency and not the agency making the finding. Such changes have been adopted by such
other agency or can and should be adopted by such other agency ("Finding 2").
3. Specific economic, social, or other considerations, including provision of employment
opportunities for highly trained workers, make infeasible the mitigation measures or project
alternatives in the EIR ("Finding 3").
• CEQA requires that the Lead Agency adopt mitigation measures or alternatives, where feasible, to
avoid or substantially reduce significant environmental impacts that would otherwise occur as a
result of a project. Project modifications or alternatives are not required, however, where they are
infeasible or where the responsibility for modifying the project lies with some other agency (State
CEQA Guidelines §15091(a)[2],[3]). Public Resources Code Section 21061.1 defines "feasible" to
mean "capable of being accomplished in a successful manner within a reasonable period of time,
taking into account economic, environmental, social, and technological factors." State CEQA
Guidelines Section 15364 adds another factor: "legal" considerations. (See also Citizens of Goleta
Palley v. Board of Supervisors [Goleta II] [1990] 52 Ca1.3d 553, 565 [276 Cal. Rptr. 410].)
When an agency approves a project with significant environmental effects that will not be avoided or
substantially lessened, it must adopt a statement that, because of the project's overriding benefits, it
is approving the project despite its environmental harm. (CEQA Guidelines §15043). This written
statement is known as the Statement of Overriding Considerations. The Statement of Overriding
Considerations demonstrates that the decision making body of the Lead Agency has weighed the
benefits of the project against its unavoidable adverse effects in determining whether to approve the
project. If the specific economic, legal, social, technological or other benefits of the project outweigh
the unavoidable adverse environmental effects, the adverse environmental effects may be considered
"acceptable." (CEQA Guidelines § 15093.)
The California Supreme Court has stated that, "the wisdom of approving any development project, a
delicate task which requires a balancing of interests, is necessarily left to the sound discretion of the
local officials and their constituents who are responsible for such decisions. The law as we interpret
and apply it simply requires that those decisions be informed, and therefore balanced" (Goleta H, 52
_ Cal.3d 553, 576 [276 Cal. Rptr. 401]).
San Lorenzo Lift Station EIR (Project No. 06-3510) 2_1
Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations
Chapter 2 CEAA Findings Attachment "A"
2.2 Findings Regarding Environmental Impacts
Table 2-1, CEQA Findings, summarizes the environmental impacts of the Project which either have
no impact or are less than significant, the significant impacts of the Project that will be reduced to
less-than-significant levels with mitigation, and the significant and unavoidable impact.
The City hereby finds that Project impacts associated with the issue areas of Hazards/Hazardous
Materials, Utilities/Service Systems, and Water Quality/Hydrology either have no impact or are less
than significant. This finding is based on the explanation and analysis included in RDEIR Chapters
3.2, 3.5 and 3.6, respectively, which the City ratifies, adopts and incorporates in these findings.
The City hereby finds that mitigation measures have been identified in the RDEIR that will avoid or
substantially lessen Project impacts associated with the issue areas of Air Quality, Noise, and
Transportation and Traffic to a less than significant level. This finding is based on the explanation
and analysis included in RDEIR Chapters 3.1, 3.3 and 3.4, respectively, which the City ratifies,
adopts and incorporates in these findings.
The City hereby finds that mitigation measures have been identified in the RDEIR that will lessen
Project impacts associated with the issue areas of Transportation and Traffic, specifically the impact
to intersection operations during implementation of Construction Configuration C.2 under
Transportation/Traffic Threshold 1, but not to a less than significant level. This finding is based on
the explanation and analysis included in RDEIR Chapter 3.4, which the City ratifies, adopts and
incorporates in these findings.
In addition, the City hereby finds that impacts to the following issue areas would not occur as a result
of the Proposed Project: Aesthetics; Agricultural Resources; Biological Resources; Cultural
Resources; Geology/Soils; Land Use/Planning; Mineral Resources; Population/Housing; Public
Services; Recreation; and Utilities/Service Systems (except for wastewater). This finding is based on
the explanation and analysis included in Initial Study prepared for the Project, which the City ratifies,
adopts and incorporates in these findings.
Additional facts that support the findings are set forth in the Final EIR, the staff report to the City
Council, and the record of proceedings for the Project. Key discussions that support the Findings
from the Final EIR are summarized in the "Evidence/Rationale Supporting Finding" column of Table
2-1. However, other evidence may be contained in the overall record of the project to further support
the finding. In making these findings, the City ratifies, adopts and incorporates the analysis and
explanation in the Final EIR, and ratifies, adopts and incorporates in these findings the
determinations and conclusions of the Final EIR relating to the environmental impacts and mitigation
measures, except to the extent any such determinations or conclusions are specifically and expressly
modified by these findings.
The documents and other materials that constitute the record of proceedings on which the Project
findings are based are located at the City of Santa Ana Public Works Agency, 200 South Daisy
Avenue, Corporate Yard, MS 85, Santa Ana, California, 92703. The custodian for these documents
is Steve Worrall, Senior Civil Engineer. This information is provided in compliance with Public
Resources Code §21081.6(a)(2) and CEQA Guidelines §15091(e).
San Lorenzo Lift Station EIR (Project No. 06-3510) 2-2
Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations
•
•
•
W?
V
N
?^Y
i
U
0
E C
Co
?
G
G N .
. c
d O O cC
a ° o 3 r
>
' a
o °
i
?
?
o
E U° o °j a s
O
O
Nd • ? o ? ' ? c
Na . ? ? C y '? ? °' U
U ` .LU' U sU. N c
C
a °
o
o b
? vs n E E? ai E ° aS' 3.E ° °
o o
•
`° W
o
U
^ ca Et R o °t
'
a
w
:
a `d ti a? au U • ° oo-?
a
cL E
C 'U m
; o U c
C ' 'y •
?'
?
p
u
a U 4 bq U a ^ U a U U G 110 cad a4 Y N O "a a ^ It
U ,L
Cd to
?
o ¢
?'c
w
C N".
to
?3•
?,
.
v
Q a
N? a? ?._dUr a
b
1
Q
R? b
p rn ? r
G?
O C
1 ^ U
s 3 9
U o° °
"
"
8.0
G
N °?'
°
o b 7 v i
0
°
U> cn G O p bD F. V (Y] U' id a a
'O
p a
E
W
te
'
U
? ? 0 0
U
?-
(, ? a
r
-
C
b t
, p ? v,
•
O
G
Z O c
d a V] bA'v .N p 'O CY. G. C1 Q i., ?y, b4 y, a. y U
Z I'D U O- j rYi? U p F-? Q 6? 6? G bGA ^ C N
U
Z Z v
a j a
U
L'
O t
i
G
a a> O
_
.
p
._
d
cd U
«
O
O 4J U iU., y cd O Q y [? U y '?U^, ^d
•
U y
ct U
'
p a
O C
G
T7 r?
? G N Ql
ti ?
z ?
Q
U > b bb
°o o > p 3 o F..5 O ?,
U O
O
O ?
o
U
G a
G G O !^
U U
p •a O a0 N a G U` U Qu
.J •
y W CL ° ?? O L 9
O '- •U •
E a2
m F
O
x to C
3 1.
p
U O O
.
O
U 3 rii
.Z
0 0 th Z
o. Z
o°
'10 o o c a n' C
?- Y
a° E- CC
0
L1 a U E n v U U a n w a U ¢ c? w° U i?: 0 0
N
m ?
p :1
U Y
- M M
u
u 'E
O O p ? G ?,,, G U cd G a y
N
G N U ?.
E
a 0
O U ? y W
U a?
?
y
p
E
lu r-
a? Y M0 G, 4. > U p O ?-+ cd 'O •Y a`"i . °U 4. cd a U ti
U '= G
U° 'O
' _
a
'?
O O ^ ?
O 0. •? 'O
G, E U
,, ?• c? o ban° ° Q a Yw o a 3 E a
w
a G
E a y a a N p J) o x°= x axi a r- •= o c ° o m
!
+-' o
-cj
c«
y y U p ?. U .C .
a 'O U YO O -
•? cd
r- S
E- C3
a O a a 0. -m W 0. T by 4J
a
o
£ 3 o
E
"
' .? M M
v
n
d c v y
> E on N p
o c
c
y a` a? 0 3 o v d a ^? ? i v :: ?" a w Q .E •? d ? s
° a a
U U cEi a by 4 v v p a M U E U a 6 a>. d, U C p
U O v 0 0
s
U .?.+ 0. a •? N O_ `n U .,.? U y_ U G p U s G .D ,a O cd >
cu
? U .?.+
E
F
o.
E U 3 .? cq Q a a` a H 3 E c° s y °??' a¢. a
Q= M
Fy
a
p
U
'D
U _ w
O
a o a; a, ., E
y bj
a 0 N co
O N V G X N id O a?'i C O
p
?
a G O ccd.
? _ a a
? G O ate. O .O > v, N O ? E ? ° y ? `
,
.E
? o
v' b°o 3 = w `1
E
O Z7
G
R3 0.
y O
rn U
C
ea
F cd ?
. .? ti W
a? a a
in E
O UU
F O
•4
U
V L=. .
C cd
: a s a
F? UU 3N ° 3
R
M
w
05 -c
c
?
e?
N
a
.y
N
'O
y
O
U
bq
'D
O
0
N
U
W
4-
O
bq
a
'C
c
w
Q
d
w
u
O
M
0
z
U
a?
'o
0.
W
c
O
r-a
N
a
L
O
Q
Q
U
N
Y U yY.
ti G
ti
U .? h
h
U
?l V1 •?
N
y
? O
y U
? ? 3 N
U 6t
O G
U p .L ? a
3
'
c
'?
aoiw
•
a, U cC _
ti L'
U
C ° O p ? ?
G
O
c ?' `?
°
o G?
a
i Y
-
W c
o
f?F?- o ?•C c
'a??w w
o a °?' c o>> c o°° Y 4 ° z 2 o 3 G
"
Y
H b
(? v
o o N
on
° T
G o o
-
a - m--'E;, u I- 3 mo o - m
°'
ca
n -0 ?
o
c o
o
°
'
' ? ?
: s o
G
i
i c
v ?.
N
? Y o ° a
o > .
aw
0
L. o
LL Cn ? •-G,, p p O O y' O b N U> 'G > ?, O m .?+ O >
Y
o
G
Gd O N i O p O 10 'D 0. A. y
7 p N N° p U O
c
c
C p
0.¢ f. Y U Y p .
0.
u o p N G o ,> U v a o° H ti r o ou c
G °- 3 G u
°'
to th r-
3 w? >
v:,0-
°
oy3°'? oGU°?'
7:1
?
a
.
°3
o f a o o' G 5 -o y v w N a U a
G u p-o o U G G ?w v y a E is ca On b > o
>>
3
3
3 °
C
o o a
n o x
0 a
G o. U
0 a
N
U i O ? Y N ° aNi --?
3 w to ri
o y o G ?' •
a .
a i
y o ?° ?°
tQ
U U 0. G O O D b O W
`
`°
• G
? °
?
> .a w
o Nap ?
3
?
w a
M a
c
0 °?
'
rn ? :: O O
ti+
U M ?'' °? v a? is O G C c•; U
•o p v, O .a
Q G c U
.
G? ? ?.-° ?U. O V] Q M cGC
7 aJ '? 'O
U 'w cGd ? on ? rn
U
co
?' .iC O F. U r G y i?.•,
4- G ?
O O
.a ? y? G
'a U ? id 4"
y
j
N U
, U U
G O cci
O C
0 7 0 ° p C O
p
U p
0.1 v ti 0.?.IE U'Y 0.w 2 O Z Q
IT
N
c
0
.8
a?
v
-0
U
M
o >
?o
O
t, G
a ?
E
W?
O U
? O
N 'a
o w
aQ
• ix
t
E
a
U
N
•
-
?
0 C
U
C, G
?
C
by C
?
.? Lon
.b C R
6 7 y
U O vi ? 'O ?
y C
C
N Bo
U
to O •/
i
U ?+
U
a c C 0 aI Y
,L
m 0 .? N C C
4: O C 4Nw:'C? .rw O C' O.? 5^00
tr;
U O W
;? O O cu
U
ti N
_O •C ? at
W v' Q Q c ?'•" O '_"' ?' '?
C ? G r
o 0o ti
?' ? '
°
.° ? zz d o
01
?
o? a
d
o & 0 3 c .
3? U¢ ? a 8 U -o
? ?
o.
?
a? a °' ° s ti .
s
d
o?
h
y h y r s v oa v; axi ° -°= o cxi ??
aaj •O O S y
-z Ij O i y d O fi oyi 4-. a b0 •d O cd
Z L1 W b4 'C : • i Q o
? -SZ O U Q O
4;
fi O fi h i y p
CC b
p
'- N .D V
N
Z .
4 Y '3 i fi
N C O y Q Q a
C ?i
o o o r y ,m
Q Q
z -t:
'? 5
?
'+
t c
c
'A
v o 0 3 E
?
O
77
?'
LL p
Y Sy,
) N Q
?' U F
C
oh
o
?
.fi OS fi ?
? 'y d
`?L
?s
?i?'?v
U
•«, C
U
Y
Y
bpv•6
•??
CU
v v
o S o s fi fi s i o
i
d qs r R .
o
a
i
O
NJ fi
ti
CS C
?
Oq U V U
o s O a a
o
_ h
dr Q V
d
Q E° v° i b0 C O
w [
U .y ? a' ° a?i z
v
U O ? C p ? U h h .,p .? ?
z xd V .? U ?1 v ? _V ? i i h
? ? •> •O '?' .vii ? bCD 3 ? ^?'
O p
O O O a a
p O p Q
u p !? O Q„ ,? UQ :
• O d 0 U a?+ W O C ?
N
N cl
m M
v
O N F^
4. c3 v? M
° '? U 3^ a? ° v o ,o o c U
Y= U ?« M U CC
G y U y y
'?
It
°
a y3 O
:: E o a?a? w c? 0 3 U a' U g
80 ap, N? '? cCC Y N k0-
ca o >
lu 00
C vi ? C M M
CD
a ? L' C N ? C ?.
?« o
~
°
'
L
.. aoi ro °
pp m ° 3 a
°
-
i
l-.
N
U O.
.:. p L1
G
U v? O p °U O U
O
U U U U
a. ,-. ti
U y 0 0
y
O N
ai
b . ?O O O 'Z7
C ?
C O O L
-`"p
o
G. O '> U w 'LS
?
°
°' ?°
??cco °
y
o o
?° 3 U .? p?Y?
w
°o o
z ?
o .
?
3
°?
°' H •
Y '
¢ Ey' Uc° o
N v
a?i a
i
zcz. •?u
'fl
M
C °
' R
E C •?
0 0 o O
y cC t
°
c
o o
°
- X Y
U U ti ti
U o O Q o
' o 0 M U
-c ° 3 ai
4 Uz a?
; a
i
o
„
x
o
U U?c? 3^ 304 E c U C E° z 0
tt Z cCa ab
N
0
i..
N
C
0
U
on
'D
O
4-.
0
c
U
N
y
U
w
4-?
O
ao
C
v
C
w
Q
G
W
U
O
M
0
U
'o
a
W
C
O
.Y
0
W
Q
V
Q
V
N
U
Y ? ? a
e
4 ° ? ? y ? s
U o a -? o r '?
? fi ? o Q o ? ? ? ? o Q fi ?
? •?
.`
? G
.
? ?
O
fi to fi O
? O .
y ?
v Y
O
N>
il? v Y fi
? '?_
? •? v
i Y ?
p
Y '
y
O w0 ?
O
Q .? ?. ? '? Q N
? .?
o? o>
'ZS O V] ? Q ° ?
pNj O rn fi
'Z3
"? U Y
°
\
O
y
° N
o
.•°
,
e?
Y y
0?
? U Y
to o ? fi d
O °
O d •
O
Y Y
Z ?
Y ,?
fi
U
°
- o
o
a y
.
? c> OQ O .
O
sz
0 2
o° o
a o
LL .
.
, 4 4
O to o
a
'i a
o r oa fi i fi o .t ep sz 5° 4 w o
m to -sz
o Q z o fi Y o o i C C o
N
S p O N °U N >{ N i ° fi y 0 ? °U O R N fi i S o°i y O O
Q
o
'
'
F+ U fi ?, O fi N ° O
Ct Q fi N T3 ° Q ?n fi Y h Y R,
0
ZS h
'r
N
N
O
M M
C ? ? aq a`?i 1-1
?
0.
CO
9 v y O C
O.
_
O • ? U vi O ? c.,
0. O
U
-j
ON-
M 10
y ?
c!?
F
d O •?
N a? C c
bL M
ti O
_N in N t""' 7 4 ?
0. y ', .y ca
L 'V1 Q ? ^
O
?
0.
C 'O _U ,? N ? O COd
,"' 'O O C' 'C N
3
`
'
v? v o c
;d -o Q
a ? y
c .o U ' Rs a a a
U
O c6 cC V 0.b ? 0. ?' 'O w U
? ? w O id ? 'O O b0
cd ? .? cct o 3 ti « c 3 'v? .
i
N
0
cu
.b
O O
vi bq
M C
O O
zo
N O
rti ?
W +••cii
O U
8 0
? O
--'?„to+
c ?
ow
Q.
r. cy
m W
Q
• t
t
U
Q
•
a
U
N
•
fi t 2
°
?
'
ctifii y ti
Q o m d o -
o oYi Q d
°
?
' o
d
?o R
Z y 0 „'
d fi p
ti 5 p fi N
U
'
0 ° fi
?} O U O
fi
fi 01 d .? 0 Y 01 Y .y '-'
O
y
?
01 y
O) r? O Zi "., O .? U O U U •? 0)
? p
fi
? U
v
Ii U +?.•ti U p1 h ?0 '? ???
? •p U fi .°.,' fi
`?' ?°' p. O fi y
? „p
O O O U
? O O?
C '?' 'rto O '? d h r
y 4' fi
, ,
fi S Q OU Ofi v K '? Q O tl O Q S O S i
y fi
N 01 O
. fi m 0N' .. fi U 01 p1 5
V 5 .O 5 Q 0i S h U O U Obi O
U fi
O? ,O O?? ,??, 0• C .? "Y., Q y O fi ?" O •? C O
y OO ° ° o .U C Y O°? ?Y ° ° 00 S a y O O CY ti
00 ? Cf ° Q fi C O M `? ti tY Q O Q S tY O S fi 3 C Q O± 'ZS
N
m
v
N
0
O O
^u
M C
O >
zo
.(D 0
L ?
a ?
wY
O v
?w
? o
C .?
? Q
r%
Q
E
V
Q
V
N
?^z
i
U
COC ? O U_
N E ? Q
N
"O O ?
N b a U a
U N
U
Y O N
N
L y op, ?? o a ?
'CZ
c o
12
w o G
¢ N
N rK.
? U v?? b ?? W
bL
c
v
Y v w H
c w
'ZS i
•d 4 ° C ro a 4, ai O in C b O y N C?
° Y Q w N °? ?! U a a o o .o C
o f
.p Q '? r i d• G
O N N i- M y a (? C3 U U 0 bn " Cn C N C
r
o o i_•? c" i 3
h d
B ' o a.'i Q a a°i IS
3 ?? c
U cd •?
O> C R 0 0 O O
ao.
U
y
y
? Y
ca u
fi S Q O a N N 4 3 N.
Z U a° z a i Q _?
Y i O?
S N G i U a p a un.Q "vim tin O a a v
i3 O
a ' y
v N p C O 0°
Y. y
,
G C' N v, Q Q V O Q .
-
N
ti
U
N U U bll '0 U `+. U
U
i+ ti ry CO r C1 ,rQ Q Cn w
CL O U s.
:3> U N O ° c.
?0? 2 0 0? a 0n .r y oCA;a ?.2? ° o?z ?^
i m d oa
>G> y
V
sz Z: "
°' aNi o' 0 0 3
o q• o 0 o z
2 Q C3 •? ?°>3 a U U o °
w N v C aai a? R1
c? 0 > E a0i c a N
d
Qa.° 3wv?Uiacn ?wGGQ a?' 07 L1a
N
M cn
.0
U
N
UU „°4: ??3 NNW
O G ?O N = O to to7R ?. a
P
CL a .
a o
4
N c? Y s
" a? ?• ti o°?
? ? c o
U a i7 p O
? M O ? . ? O caC 4"
.° ' o U a? c O
N ??'
0
00 00
U c v c' .a o
cC
?
"' ,
O U .L' U N O
N fn Y
to th
N
? 0. U
c ?° w o o ? N
on Y
C's bh 4,
C cd cC U b U
U=
on M [?
Ical
,? U
L
'O
00
"'
et
N
4
O C N d
N
bn cC ^0 U
0
0
? w
r.
t0 ti cNC C -.
4 _,
c
r .
O c? C O N U
"' G
's: C
N y C
g ;; •?
a
a a ? a
.
O
?l a U ° c
°
a
=
" •
a
•?
? /
?
Q ,.
? N
N
o c ?
a -o
•--? ? N Cd .U I„i
•0 ? ?..
RS ?^.• °
? /
?
Q
p O
Q U CC ? > ?
? .r
?. A S E Y ti C i. ?"' 0 E o
W U C O iU. cC O C 4?`-• U b U ;? O U .0 O U N
F O U E H a °' tcd o o d a 3 U °o CQd E° a O
OP
N
0
i..
O
.D
o
U
?n bq
M C
O ?
zo
Y
? o
'o
L ?
W Y
O U
? O
N ?
c ?
Lw
a Q
Q
V
Q
•
a
U
N
•
v C ?
^o o ° a
;? o ? v
? v
C i U ? ,s
v Off- G +?
4.
>
U
?
O C ? ?
'O
° o Y s Up z.?°?.°v ?; cv
W o i? i o o
E Z
o 3 ;° w F
°
3 a Q
3 c
.
o
?'?U
xN??¢° ?? c
U _
?;
E Y ?Yr0.H i
?
uo
v o a a°i F- ¢° o
? COn c son o N c
'
C9 3 ° c.? ?.
o y
c.5 N on ¢ W o E ov'o °' ? o o b .
o 0C)
Y D ai Y m Eson EU
Z 3 on v v c ?, cC O o on °
a
v
d a N C y v H E °
z
_Z y
w ? .
F
o o ° v c a ..
_ v v v -- H_ v Cas ow
v °
O
2 ? Q?
3 c E 3 w
U
LL >
Co ? E
°' C °° c
= d v
- Y to O y G a b o r
5 a
i
o,o 3aW°? ?UU
d n? do ' oy oUUzE
W
c
o a ? `W °v
o o G U ?[z O.E
0 ? °
?
` o
U E O 0.
0. bn ' 7 f
O ^
4
U
?
?
Y 0 A
? w
?
C
F- 0 3 ^
z
?
ti
LG
O c
` o °' son M
c
bUA .Y p> U p O D Z .O" N U O 0 .?
U C s
z 0 V] cC 'C W O E"'" G
W C
°Con 3 V]d YU cUd ° a °?°_UU. U
(y
0 0 0 0 ° Y
Q C. U
N
M
N v
M
0
r+ 'O f?l U ^? ? 7
M M
• y C ate'. C
.
3 ° f7 0 ° " w
E
v
w
•C v '
v 'o W o
n ^
U
U
y
'
"
a?•r.
s, .C O
N 'O 0. C
r- Cl 3 v a o G° °o o W
v
C
y O U G U O U X i C_ v v 0 C«
00
O
U
O^
O O M? to
N
F y
° on on
d
o
n E y
C°
C °
° y
v
i a
?a
i
c n ?
O V] E Y 3 al °U a"O.+ Q M
Q
cW_ c C? ° 3 Y
N
Gn
? y C V
, ,
7
v
O
a ? Q??o`"oc3>c UE?o
E o o o 3° aoi o° Oo 0
IZ
U
r
y
-
" ?' U
O
O sue'. F 00 M
U aF- F a
3
E?W
E
s m
.
rn.
UU 3 y
1
N
is
Cd
N
-a
_ C
O °
M C
O 'E
O O
z'
N 0
•O
W ?
L cn
O U
Lo
C
N -a
C ?
O Li+
W Q
Q
t
W
U
N
0
?
?
aoi
-o °
a•?
.? o zz
Gd U U L w ? °
c
l
R a c di .D i b >' ^.
to c a? w U E o 0
C U p vi .N.•
th ca
d W
G E U O O ?" U aUi 4. P. ^ c
4. y G R
O G O R U U
?
A ? U
vG
E' E d
U
.
O
y
2
c7 m
d
U
U
Q G U is E E N O
1 G U vi G O? O
E
3
C O R
U
? O
00 Y Y V y 0
i
. U U r..
G U
C ?
Q
`?'
'
Y
. U
?
%p
Q, 0. ? ?' R ? by N •N ? ? by ?
E a '? y E 3 •5 '? d u '? °° a
U a? Y u -,o v a? U
m '' a c Y G a? o o °° o °' o Z c on _ °' z ° C °° c o
W Y ai o
° 3 °' as
O ti 3R• .a C/°] > O aci
N
d U 'GO O W '''^' ti w `n .? Par F" vi O N ?"' yy N G id
U O ° r.. cGd f'" U ti
U
o c o
oo ° ss a?
o c '> o° a v `o a 3 o° aci ° o
c°
o ?- o Y yb ° o a
one a? ° E•? G
O
'
°
?
R
c
N G P. O Y O U
C9 ° o ?4 ° ti G O
U ?l U G o 7
' p .?
,•„
U
.
a'E GV R? tw o-o?? a'.
Q U ~/ ti 4 O «?'. C
n b U Q
CD '_'
•O N OU z z vi U G
y .. ?n R O
C
Z G Ud H C `/ R.
R O
Q
GO _
3 N .- U R N ° O Q G C _ U G
cd U cd y
LL
v ?'" a y
o o > t a R R U z E o c Q U °
"
? R U
'
W c
w
.+ ?' U O
.
U Qy X¢?ti?Gp TO
c?i G U K cd ..O
o
cd
-- G 4
??^E4 OCOO?GE?
dU??CLX0.bgVM
`? o"° i? 3 ci,? ? o O
y
?,•? ?wQ G ?o ? o•c ? ° ? ,
en ? R o ? ? ??'? o
C Z A. ? vOi v, A O y G ? y
' G ? ? • ?' pUq ? F ? ? ? ? ? ? ¢' ? ? K ' ? Z ¢ G ? G bGA ' ?
ao o 00 5 ° °
r .? d U U Oa M W S..
v U °ccnow °?a?"a ?' ?Q U?°Uw ?'?
° ° E•5CA
Q C4 U
N
N v,
M
v
O >? p•' ? ? U ? ? m Y
? O ? y ? H G N ¢, G G N 1U. id
?=?E
E??°Nt?w?Q"N
a3
o
o
N U U U
R
O N y O y c>d
N" m
O N
r
•--. O
b
'y '3 GUU ° 3 ?3a •n .n ? ° ° c ° owl ? o ° ? Y
w U d. a•?. N c v E> 0 o b E G? E
?-? Rs a? ?v E•N ° ?• mow- °
E
J5 O o
o
c
n ¢.
a ?? i v o
a
i 3 ?
c
F o. EU.o 3.CCQ na EaF 3 E °? d aG ° Rbd
' c U H
o 00 ai ?b o
c U v =
o l o
3
o
C Q 'o G o ° >
> o
O G O 'a •N 3 •? o y d 00 G c O
o R °O- a
° E
? °
o o c'E d'> N E y R
ad •
E ? E
? a 3 ` w °
' o ? v' ?
c
m .
2 c
_
.?° ?
a
i
o 0 0
N o i v° c
w
°_? w y U
c
^
M
O UU F= iw
F UU 3N ° 3?'.Ea1rnAC? ?f
0
'O
ti
0
U
bq
c
N
O
'+y
0
c
0
lt?
w
w
0
C
G
b
fS.
d
O'
U
O
M
O
z
U
a?
'o
L.
p?-1
W
c
0
.Y
a
N
0
W
Q
V
•
V
N
•
cls
ti G
?
N .
r-? V]
N "L7 ? U
U
?
y p ?
N
?
U p ?+ U T O G
N OU 75 > T3
3
Y
c api e?
U
[d ..
? ,L L
U
?
7 U b
...i 4; O C
i
tw?
v-d U L c ?'
`
U
°
W
o a
bn
i s
.?
cr
L
U
kr F- O
. r
C?Z
DA
bq
bU -Z3
..C .,?„ ti° L O O C 2 G 4j
,, W - .? ° O CC LR.1 tt7
a o a o n °' ° 3>° o c Y o
yl O L
Y R '
O U Q 0. y '??.' R O O b
(
, a?
? d
c i7 ? ? O? U O? 'b y O O y
f"
O
'_' cC
bq ,b
"
U
U O
y 0 c^
C
O U G1.
p p0 C E
cca U vi
~ O w
w N ?
-.
Z
LL -° O ai 0
O ° N
g
g
G ayUi U U ° Q^ ° c a c E c c E
0.
°
Y
y U
^ c O c
^? °_ °
La
O y
° c 'L Y a°4i
z!
ti
O
>
? O
'3
o o G
U
U = E 'O
c a L N
? .bp [ by by
O
c0 C
•
cl
a o o i L W^ c o o
W
U ??? ?7 °
bb
=oY3?o °? to tb
°
O
° c
o
° to
U M ti 7 O '?" O
n
G p 3 2 U U p E E o o a
b
.
ai
z 3 ?
c
a 3 ?
W O
°
CL zw?
o
o o
o 0 0 o c U a-
c
w5=
L1 ?cn a 3 ?F- a?Q?°U 0 0
0
d
M M Fy.. O V1 ?, ^U M M
U a? W cI ' j U U rn v? W *F
t
0. 0. v
y y'
ca
C
U 0. O> U 0. a.
0 o v ai a?onN N ?Q ro c ?LL
0 ? C U O O U
E •?
°
c
c
cd
> 00 0o o
n o
n
m M, 'O r' >
•
m
c N M
a?? -Cu ., 3 cOC N .O .?
U 4Ni ° N
o av
? ? c^w`-
bq yj
.? M M ?
n
00 00 4. 3 Y O U] U •I- M M
cz O bL CIO ca M m O p N a? O to bA
° Boa ?°U,=?3?
o ?? ?j bnU acobcn«
°'
a ? i O
U b •? p a
7 _
Q M
VI L
FO cOa ? w^tl ? C7 -c QOm
L
c o c c U ?v
0 3. v o
?N
v g Ca a
i
o L1 3 'U Y 3 ° o
,? Q '? c o
C '? i .? _ '? c o? a o c .UO ?s c aUi Q c°
G cd LL
U
'? i
G
G
c
7 O ^p
C
'
p C's u .2 U .
O N 7 On V- U3 O O
15
U^
C
+ U oo m
U L N Y
'
C O
O D U R
= -
C O 7
G O
t: G N N •L d4
? U U 3 a° 0
[ F
.5 W i? y o
rl
rl
1
N
c
0
N
'G
C
O
U
E
'O
O
w
O
c
U
E
+U+
U
w
O
'a
C
w
Q
W
U
O
kn
m
O
z
U
U
'o
a
W
C,
N
C
O
•
Q
U
W
U
N
U
? G
U .?
'° cad
? ? 7 U C
O U O y y
?GL3°-'?y
3
>
U
y
G
G
°
c c
c U 2 y W
U
w H O ? .?' c>d 'y U k.
?" L
g Y E O r c-o
UU
O '? FQ-' cC 0. G a?i ° G0.
O L
- Q 4. ? Q O C?
P
e,
.
Y
G .D .3 F- y ° v, ci-? p Q °,.° •? " G
L ^ y p U G w° ti O ca v .
•
U ° ?- L E- V 'N lu v W.
•G
b G° dU O
L L U U cd N
c3
tl>
C9 G U C G 0. O O U w LL O Cn ° c¢d p
' y
.O
O tq U y O O cz
Cl
O
Z i G cC v O p O
C?
a Q 6 ._ d
° " a0 Q
u
O w 'C G C U C
G
°a ii :° r- lu o E
0
z
i
on
CU 2 C
°
L. o c a cad c? i a3 GQ o
U.
°
° p M o G o
CC ??
LL L Vl H U. t S. 'O y G N G
O O n,?
m w? G Y L• N°
?_ o ti v `° ° o
g ao U Q c> o Nu o
b >
,d 0. N
U N p p 7 U p k. 0.c L
U O R c G U> h
U
y O O U LL Q c bb ° G O sU, a G Y ,'a, °
a `cd 4=. p- U G U b G G ro
O W Y .Y' c
? w U G rn cd G.. U
.' '+?' "p i» y
?? Y aL? cL?
*
,
E ao o > E° o
o ?
p4 o 0 o a °3 a d ?? p
G
?
G
.
r. O Q a. U ,. 0. U Q U U 01 Q c0 y G ,? + cd cd C
cd a
,? O .fl V1 C/] U G •
M fn
rr
N
75
to
U a G d'
'GU
.
.
•3 ? ,? Y N ? .? ? M M
o cL N u W
U [? G YO O? G L rn
P a
U 3
c
d .?
_ M
4
7 G G G w
°
E 4
d p aGi o •a CC, a b b Y
3
° ?
8
o a
b o
n
o
o
L„ d
>
?c 00
ti
O ? M M
? N
? ?
O
'?
y
•.
CL
+
.+
N
N
rn
y
?
U .U F+ .a M M
CGS. G p ca Y o C ,? .G
U bAUH G
'? Ut•
??
?
U
?
?
•
t
.
.
+
(? 3 0 0 0 G b v'?i Q cn m
h
G
W
G
O ?' .? E
0 -6
Z .o o v a° N
Q
a b
L cs
o
G ? rn G id "v, 3 U G G 0.
cnE= F c°?a 3 0 ° W oQ P 3.
N
N
L"
O
C
0
U
on
W
O
N
Cd
cl)
w
w
0
Cr.
'E7
w
Q
d
w
U
0
M
0
O
U
N
O
a
w
.Y
a
N
G
r-a
Q
U
•
V
N
•
L?
? O? O
•
? ? O C O
•
c
3°
N 3 c?i'?°
c
U E y c? ca v Oi
U ,C ,? ?IOr fd F
N
U?+?
U _
•
?2 G
i--i b I.
. 7-,
'a Y
O
Y _ s.
N
g4
W, C ?- N G U C ?" C b N G U CC
•w U O iO
O CL
0
C Q a> U O
. y
, 0
?
' ^'
4: C •
iC ?
? p ? 4, C .? is ?, ? ? .
•
U
U R; 2 E C y C
C y :
O C
U
C
F-' ca U It V
i ttf b fC N 'C7
.r
VN
?' L
y
i . .
c
N lu
Q
Z C
o •?
y C
O .?
Y
I.L ?
bA ?
Oq
/V? C E c ?
U €G ??
'O L L
U
sU
U U
U N
.
N ••
c 3 .?
? N U N U
?
// _
0
F a ?
?+ . N a c
£.' . bll
N M N M
to lu
cl:
a a a a
0 0 0 C
n 73 "m
C
c
n
a
v
>
O M w
a O
'- ;' w
^
N c?i C a?
N M C
Oq
O cn
ti « O U ? p
Q N 7 Q M 7
? YO >> bq
o N 3 °??° o°'n
C c° ?o o U
7 U
' o
• a
? 'G Nv ° o
.fl
is ? O v' C s,
an o co " a
o C .'"
c
U ro ? ^
b4 C C ?
¢ 'o Y .o o ._ ? ?
b y
'ro N
.N ?
3 ,
c ? o
ti ? ? N vi
'b >- ? ? •v
c
c
ca w g
-o
N
2 a?
1
W
>, O
° o
c
s OO 7i ca
= o ca ^o
c
'c 3 C
c
i o s N
W ca
C
' ^ N
L
c
G O N ? 11 by 7 ?) N C! c
b C .S Ov •2
>
°-' a
i o 0 ai
Ca° >
'
? p a? ° v F o ° ?o a b d aoi o
? °' cq
1'-
C
ca
o
? ?
y d a Ir
N ? ?
? c
o
d ? U 'N U ? ? ? N ?
.
U .
?
' yam,, 'O
• O d
`' ? 0
?
• ? i-
N
°
'°
N
a F-? a
c 3 ca
ca O N U O U ? W O
C
I'"'
O
I
Z
i N ca
N
N Y ?
.
?
? .? .°-', on ?
y? ca ?'
?. C C O I. N U
'
?' ?
p o
0."
N O n,
?
N
•N+
C O C
.
U
C
?x _ aO o. -
?
C
Z
d
.a ?
wa ? 3 Us 2--S
Z
d
w °:: 3 °'a
M
N
N
C
0
N
-a
0
U
cn
'O
k
0
4-r
O
c
N
N
Ca
U
w
0
C
-a
C
f%
d
d
W
U
0
M
0
z
U
N
O
a
W
C
0
.Y
N
C
sU.
0
cz
n
e
Q
m
N
C
U N
4
? G O
0 U
E
t
.,
a> G ' C G ?
y E G w .° 'O CO
w
r+j y ,O id
y bq'^
ca 4?. -p 4a cd
G
a iU. •? G
N ?
O U 6
0
ro C W a? y W
v
Y CG G E Y °'
N E G
°
W E° E 8 a
w
°
o
w
cO
'b b o o w
o
yA ? y
Y U 7 "O N G U U G
tr.
~ c
C
-
v ? o w
?
? cC . ? w Op
F' cC N? N N U b
E" cC U cC N N N ...
? o
G
x
N ti
U G
cn F?
p
ti t
L
Z
Z G
° ° U
O
U
Y ?
LL G
a E
U O G
0
? L N i?-
,
° U '
N ~
?°' G y
E?
3 C .
N G
co
a E a°
to
v E .? ? E
~
ti M M M
N
to ?
as as
0 0 0 0
b 'O
O
b
° M W E ? W
N M I N M G
o '?co u" G GZ
O b h
v
'"
U U
am
??-+ y
., O
In -r
L1 M V
L M
O U b
°
°
b v
o
a
° .E
0
cl
-
43
x
U 3
a o N ? c c D
^r C
o ca
d a o o .E 3•°- ¢ o $ °c 'C o "
3 v ?
?
?
°
3 N
°
?
° a
a
^ ?- °
,
° W a? N a? ?
ca
0
°' r N a " ?- v N¢ b C v Y a a -
s G
G
G, C O U
G
.
, cC
.?
46 •?
G G «+ to
U c. aGi U U> N° y cGC N O U V
r?
•: v •N 3 cC i
y ai v w
' U
r
'^
'ti Q+
G
7
w0 G ?'
a?
a
N ,
b C
b0 .-. N
G
N N G U ?.^
?.
.
^
O
7 N U p .U i G ?' G ti G b4 aU. sU. ,C a> G°
a
?
z
0 O 0
°
t
• P
y Y ?•r
C
° E c E w .
°
O G
0 0 0
N O s C° E N •
U in G ,Z ? Q E^ 3 •N U
0
N
.a
•N
C
0
U
ago
b
O
4,
0
C
N
Cd
U
w
4?
0
N
an
c
[z,
Q
d
W
U
O
M
O
z
U
'o
a
W
L."
O
.y
N
G
L
0
U
•
N
C
• U
?w N
? o
3??GG c?G
°' G G
ai O
by ••?
U
a ??+ N i-i ?
Q'
N
E G O i •? •7
pp
C
v.
_4
E 2 3-Y E 2
0
N
N
? aGi ? w
w fx C ^ U ? ? is
?
?
o
W N ? ? ?
+
«'?+ G b y E U
-0 80
2 o
t
0. V. ra LT-
r ?
4
E
Y :,
O ' b
Y
? T
C
- G •
c CC C •? c
V ^' O ' k
.A on :° E
H d V Cd N N V :° H Cl o m N N V 72 E-
0
Y
?
N .L F
4.
V
Q,
N c ~
U
N
40
d
Z `•
Ij
G
° ' U
Z
cu
y
O
C
IL
on a
GJ
G
C
W G _
o
b w N ~ o
a+ -
y E
3 - 3
N m
N U c c
U .O
j1 ? L=r
L=. ? yN.
V
.59
E
i E E
? M M M M
cu w
as as c°
a
0 0 0 0 °o
b m "
Q! m C13
;
O
¢? w O 7 W O
° Q -- ¢
M G N M G N
O 'Lon
a N G .L' FL.
O bb o G
O
4-. CC
. vi
5
? +.+ O V -S O
N L
y cGi
Q? 7 _
Q 7 V e Q
L
y
y? C O U
O vi .0 G R N [?
b ? N c.. b
GO ° C G 7
"O
V Q -o " 3 '0 2 0 c`°i
? •n, r 7 ?? .E o 'N o 3
' N
G
? a
.? C Qu> o o w
C
N N G N N C N .3 R
d
to
d
G ° o
3 N
CO a?
L
? o N ?
L' .N. .L to bb of
m
'
a .
E
w
a? a
i a
a N N ' o o
n 'o .
o
ri c o u o_
U o
a N" a` c"„ N co
.. a i FG
° F :? N C7 F 3 °
a a
i a
o a °' a F?
C
G
e s
O
sU,
C
? C O
N
GG
O
U O .?
G
...
+
C cGi "«
O c
b
01
C
"aG.+ U '? .N
N
° O N .
=0 O
rw0, f1 ._ ai
= • •
fl .n
7:1
bl?
N
G
N
G •? 0. id .L'
b
O O G' ?z y N W G IJ U U
y c
y •
? E? iv
o a
i ..
N. 4
a
i a`i - p,
ro? E° o o? E c N o 7
o ?2 y
t a' 7 ° c° !.+ UO
?_? w m
v o ea
?
N
.? C7 w W wo a? a G U co E- o v z a CG C7 Q .
3 3 G° m a c° x _'?
?n
N
°
'O
o °
kn ao
m t?
O ?
zo
? O
Q. ?
W ?
U7
C
O v
c? G4
? o
N° c
'C
C ?
O Li•i
d
n U
e
Q
a
U
N
m a
.
ow ?
U
O
? ?
O
bU p U °'
3-?i E
o
•b Y ? CL o
N
`? CC,
?
?
w v v
,? c W
v. ai A O
F
?
^. C O iC .?
p ,
L
N G cd 3 U Lam' ? U N U U
^
•?, o•?.Uw ?w v•? a•c.?w ?w
g
as ca v, ? a? .n
F- ca U cc v, ? v
0
c
w ai
°
Z °
U
0
Z O
• ?y U
O
LL G
U a
3 0
°
ID
ry°ti U ' ?
fU. ?• a?j
1
N
c
o
A` cz U
N ?
7
M N
U
N (
en
W A c
b
F
ti
b .G 4 pp
0
o 0
a k.
U -o .y
'U
O 7
N O N
cv ,,._, v, ti W
v
-
en N C to
cz
° b0
Q ? o
o °
¢ bn
O N ? v, rn .?
O .D co -a ti c ° a)
sue. -,d ai y; •. O Z L1
iC "
??. ; a o
y 3 cC 8 rn U
ci .
.
c' tc+ b U
i
'
3
'? W «a), a) F. O U 'O ' O
y ,j
E"' cC' 0.Li
°
p N d y cC cC y C a
i C .L
a) o F" O A L1. 'O 'u, F
° 0 3 w w o G o 7
o api y
v '3 ca O U
C', y
r o c c? E
O °
a ti ti -a U O .a v,
o o bo ?
o
°
' O y C .° U v O s• p Y
o a, o o
a o .E
° c
y° o b b Q 7 5-
s.? c o
o bn
a'
C
y
p
o p
?
o
,o
c
y '
'?
?' 0.
G
•
o
'd 'O ^p
U O 'O O 'O
:
G
R 0
x
;?
c
cC
y
14
. ?
i?.
t? .0 N r0. 'b N .X ? E C
N
p ,
.?
.
f?• -p O C ? U
O. 'tl ^t7 O 'O O
U tS
C C G
' O
O 0
'?
i
U
'C
C Y
.a *' '_ cC a3i
O' P
O
?„
Q O.
F, O O
x C? x F o 'Z: bn U .
O
O
A v v 3 ?? s? 3? 3
Z ,
. ?
? , v
H a y. a ?
0
V
.b
Q
U
tin
c
"O
0
w
O
c
a?
E
cr
a
cl
w
w
O
bq
c
=o
G
LT,
Q
o'
U
Q
M
O
z
U
a)
'o
a
W
0
.Y
N
C
O
Q
i'
U
•
N
U
C13 M
L) M
U
• ? w
C U
? C
C
U
v 3 5 E 2 v? Y
2
E
o
c
c Y ?q °?G ?
o
° ? ?CZ
m
U?U
W ? U LYE. U U
a.
? U
C ti
ti 7 U ai > C w RJ 'O •• ^C • ^ ai
? .?
?.
C
L= C
?
y C
G
?
. C . C •? ? T
O •
U T U . ^ . °U
I,+^` V ^- U j, aCi . G • U I+;, rn 4+
U
,
at 'O 4: U C
F" cCC ? ? vCi •? y .b C
F? cC ? cad ? •? N .?
O
C C
?
N ?
CO) y
y U C
G'
u
VI U
Q
Z U
o ?•'
° •?
Y
LL O bJ
C b 'ice
b =E
W a o
s
U ...
y U
N
^ N
M
U N M N
vi M
co M pUq O
0. pp p. 0..
0 0 0° o
•n b
b c
> > M
a p W
M
. W
^ lu N R
r C
c oco
O o ?w
U i
U C C
4-.
Q ? o
?° ° Y o o? n 'o S o -
? o
N a 3 ' o°
c -o E a
a s o b ,, ° ._
o
° c E
° N
a E a o E U
0 m e U 3 s -? a
•
C 7 V C O
cO 4 S
C 'O 'O U x i •
N
^ c O 'U a H
U
a
-p c
C
U
Y N O '?
" O
.' !''.
ca 0
Y 0
aCi vai n C O
.
v CO a C ybj
Cn a
C
b •
U O
p?
A> Q
?
^
C, M E: E n U C
-
`? ,
a U_ U b c
3 c> •? m, ;? M
c
O o
>
o c`o a
c ° •a. w a? `E '° `? y
a'
U G o 'D ? .on ?
o• o
o o y "
??
a
v p
x o E o a
° 4 0
o
a o. H 8v a? o ZU C7v? x u
F A UUU 3 E c
y E
3 x ¢ cl,
rl
I
N
0
N
C
O
U
on
^o
j
O
4-
0
C
N
U
C?
U
w
4•+
0
bA
?o
c
Q
d
W
U
O
M
U
O
W
O
Q
m
t
V
N
o o 0 a .?
v c ;' o ci 3 .? c °' .o ci
ro
?
0
U
`°
c
Y °? G? W G o W
Y
C4 b y y Y a?i E o k.
c ca 3 a?
°
c°i c ca 3
4'
°
w_ w
c_ ?
C jc
' N
>1 u
U ti a c_ 4-
_
U ippd b? ?„ C U C N id 'O ? cr+•.. C U C
i
C
F-'
U cd rn rn U v,
n U
cC U c
C
.c
w N ?
O r Q'
N C
«
U
C
U O .?
Z ° C
•
'O C
?
VI
W o c°
U a -? y
w
R y ? y
3
N ?o M
U •^
4 d U
bq ca
b
b0 .? ?
q
N
M N
M
hq ? N
b11 ?
O C
C
O U
lu Y
? w
'
.ow
Y >
o?
R ° p' N
NM
CN OEM
C
U t
U
Q M Q
U
?'
C w
° -o
cCC -o -o U
o m =0
° CZ,
-0 M
p ° ?
' id ate. ?n C •?,.C <'?'
py C
°
• •? ?; a? C Y 'j C rn c? j p 'cC C y
?
G R °
°
a
rn Y ?
r
µ1
V] s
Sr .? a+ N .,4
F-d
> p" 7 ^
p o Lr
G' a
U N
C ?", V•i
U .?., U?
n-. °
p+ U .?
¢ C W m U .O > "6 N Z C
C
Q 'O N N
O
y y v, y
r5
C
n y0 q =
>. •'. N Cd y U cO ' 4„ C N
p
- r- " co
E
° o a ° ° c o o a o b M i 'i '°- o o> 3 a v o
? a3i a
3 .U O 41
O G by cC
.C .b 'F, ? .0 R b C U Y E C
W° C 0
b R U C N U N O
N 'C -O O O bA C .
O
7 4: bq C b U
?
R
z n na Q ro H °a o' ai a>i 3
C
0
C?
N
'O
O U
vi bq
M C
o >
zo
U 0
O O
O
a. ?
a
N
W ?
O U
?w
? w
N ?
o w
? Q
d
v? U
Q
•
C?
N
C7
h
cC L:
U U
G ca is
?
O G •? ? ? p
q ? ,? ? O ti
ccdi a° o •° ? 3 .? ? ? .? -o u c ? .? ?
v? 3 x E 2 10 C.)
o?
,,
e
E
7E 3 i E ICJ
o
?
o ?
C T v E U
Ll +?•' 'b `?'' U cC Y C 'D V iu
y °?'
° y ° E o G' w Q ai o 0 o fi
.
C 'O U P! 4.
U ? G y C
F cd u cC ? 7, U U i?C ? E? C a0i C
F U T 'O L". C U C
.., cd U cd v? v, U ..? F cd U cd v. v, U ...
C O
i.. b v
y U a v
V> u
U
Z p G
O .? a
O
C u C
W D
?
3 'O
ti 3 -o
.w
a 'O p
w N v
U '
¢' U U y a ?
N a
U •,?
rn
ca O
j?
i? C U
cU3 j+ U
Gi iC
E tom=
.. V % H
N cz
M ? M
M M M
M icS
pp (1.. y M
U U
U ?
C?
0. C
O
C C
P"'0. 0.t
O w
0 G
0 0
0 0
'O b
b oc
?
O v •-W O M
,
bq
"' cd ¢• M
? M R. ?
N
d
P.
O C F
G•?u., c
C0.
O O? U
a"
G O C
°
ti ^O i O"
. ?
Q ?o ac
Q ? W
o `? g =
'Y
?
a U X p o „ o ..d •cy w o •
? G ? •= U v vi 3 ?
x U? •
?
o Y
.
w w v
F'
a o >
??
G
z N
.?
U a p v cc
U o
F o o a>
° c
°'
j .
G o > p o
a
ro
G
p t = 27
y
G x o o U ° U E
a 3 a° x° G C
o
°
40 °
a
p o c
o p
¢
U b
.
u
C a ?+ cs a a c •? w
cc o
?" O
?
U
p
c3 `o
n E
U •°
w ¢ o o
° D
x C C
'
cd o a=
s ca
` a`
U U
z .C b
,a U ,
N y
ti U' U 4, is c?CC
ai cd U
U
?
C
?
O '? v
cd "'
° O
D U
.? C y U y b a s
y O U U C
= y,
ti F N O Y~
O U O C
o
z 3 .
c
e
.a
,
. •
a O o N G v
.00 t- '
x F P, a G o 0 3
C
Z ti
U
-? o
C7 Z
o ,
Y a U
i> G
O
f C 3 P. s 0 3 W) 0 ?, ° O
O x
z w U
U
U
PL a• y o
0 0 C
Q z a G° ' a
H
N
L
N
y
O O
U
cn OA
M C
? .L
O ?
zo
Q O
O ?
N
W ro
c CIO
O v
?w
o
?th
o ?
N ?
C ?
? Q
Q
U
W,
N
U
c. a
E U O
L? pq 0 y
U
,.. 0 0?
p
U
a 40 '.0
y cc 'C?
own =
c is o on
ate'
: a c p •°-?'S
bop „.t? c U
¢?
oo
v j 71
L
? ?. ?o CL L
a ? ccl
0
r- y -ed
0
r.
y Y a W
G
°' cd v y W
c? m e y W
y as
CG
i
G? Y a
° c c o c b a?
W •? o c c o c b
W
•C o c o c Y
W
is -a
(? o o w
.0
y
Y A y o o
z "'O L E lu
•? G GJ C?
Y CL y o 0 o k
z 'O L E G a? C?
p
X CL
r
N U o? a? > y
? ^O Gb
q Y U ? v o a? a? > y
^9 ? v
?? N? N a? o? a? > y
G ? V.?'tl y? ? v
?'G..
. . G
5
C; ,? G '? .cj 4. ti 4_
? 'rn G 'G .U ? cn ??•
U 'T ? C •V ?;, cn .W
? ?
8 ° ° Ew U ?7° Ew G
• U
?
d) ?
?
c s
.
N
? U 7
U
y
•
? ..?-
it
C U L
? ..Ni
Z?
_ C
O
Z O C
b C
'E 'a C
O _
? G O ? C
0
O. ? U y p- U ;? v
? Y
3
N
cz
U O
ca
N U qo
e)
U
ca
C G
G
p
p ;
Cn ?' C
ti o=
G .
N
(+? C M C v cn M
bU0 ?" ? ? ? W
? W cC ? U
a Y a? w a d 0. a
p ?O G y..
O p C G S
0 0 ?, G C
p 0
? •r 'O ?i 'O cCC O ? cGC
O M O M s0. N
• .
a ? M Cn .?'+ M
? a ? G G G C L
.n O O C
v? O
? ? ? ?
O U
'?
? U
ti C?
Q W emu, i G
v
C? N W .+
.
Q N M C? N
U
•o b
C
? U O i
F
4-.
O
U
•D tt?U?
4-.
U
L ;;
b
67 w
a?oi X z o¢ 0. c F- F a"i a: Q F v c'
G
? ? W o F ° Y `° ? ° G o °- c .n ? i o 'o Y ? U ^o cn o ' o .. 'o & ?' o o
o G .? t v °0 3
.
b a? a c a
a
U p
z aU. 'v? a
U G.' U U C
rn
'G R7 G
U cC N ti
U O L N v' ti. Y
O N
.C rn O c U r+ O 0 rn 0
f 0 0 O V O
.
h O G t cC
•? 'G
U
O U > •p F' ti •C G p cCC .
.+
ti ? C U = U 7 U b ~ .. ti -
N y It
O X
Z W a?
C? 'C
P C
C s. U OD p
O 'C > 'ti G L
F y
.1 X
.r W .
y rn O
W U L
d F .L ?„ O C O a? O
H C G ti> w G U O
Z cC s.
a F- S." ?.. cC .... O
F [L z e v U U
.a
..
7?r
N
O
o U
M _G
O ?
zo
N O
O
a
O ejj
Yw
? o
C ?
Ow
Q
• t
U
Q
•
V
N
• U
cCd ? c
U b0 •.,
d 6' 0.y v? ti • ?
aj cr
U
O. ?, •? •7
a.
y cC R ?
A ''?'' R CC O
Y C3 CC
U
Y ? F-" w R U y
a) R R U ?
Y G w
c
72
E n E U G
.
C C O V
C' E 'O v E U R
O
O
w ;
y E U t• U U i
O G
b
^O •O ° U .6 U
C C _
?y A
Ci U O p w
U p
R
u aUi O O Lrr
•y'
'C
'O
? ?O C O
' ?+- C R °
?
N v o °' U y
^ ° a R 3 ?
•1 g E
'
'E •Ll t=
a) R v v a) D R N dd y 7 U b H CCC y m vC .N N
C
? C C
U. R
? R
OA
C
W _ c
U y y
lu
a,
r-
L ?
Y a,
? aJ
; y
N 3 3
A
A``
W
? U
v U
j
.Y cU0 ?^
0. C U 4"
E
M ? 1
M 7
cn M
a) ? M
?
R
G
C
0 C ° °
w °M[Sa or,w
M C 4 M E
W
J2 C .C L .
O to
y C .? L?.
O 00 N
7
oc
M
Q O o0 v
'??^ M 00
U U s:.
R a) bA °
U
U C C
?G
v' c
U R cj
U
u C CIS
OA •-- O y
Y ? a G
'
U 't .
.
7 a? O O Y
U i R O R
b e q° N ?= o °o on ¢
° v -d O
c 3 on
o
?
U s.
110 0, rn R
D o T z
x
c?
o o. a°i R° 3 0 a
v C a
i
a
i
F. ? o c r.
U
c o
R
-o
O r-
ul
ti 0. b .C v, U 'y U w,
U y,
R ROO
7 v, R 14 0. •
?
'O
Q o
Y U •U
R R G 6
OR?°
•C C 0. 0. ...,
y
U
U
U
Q sR.
[- ,L O C O 'O U cCC C O, b C
y a?
o
O E c p
F- U 3
a v?
a' a) ^O
E° ,
a)
.
c?i R a o c o vi
R Z
U
c
d
7.1
o°
?'y
o
r?
U
. C U
.a
W
H¢ R E o c o U
) U H 3
«
E- U 3 y
N
N
O
'O
_ C
O O
O
z >
o
a) O
O
, 15
C ?
O v
? O
.a an
o ?
N ?
C c
L ?T
O ¢
.7 d
ri U
e
Q
m
Q
a
U
N
O. ?
U
bD p U C
cn3;E°3
O
LY
O U U
a;
N C,
?] •? C C 00 C
'O.+ Ctr U ? O ? O N
• ? rUj y y U 3 'O
?j•T?.E.?w- ?w
U
N c3 .a E? O U G
E" cOO a>i c?3 vOi ' ? ? "?3
Z
0
Z
6L
6
W
U
N
W
70
v
c
U ? Q
3 y ? c
rn .? O F.?'O
7
4.
O
N r4 W
? WQ .C ? y ? U C
G Y O ^ 45
N O
U N ? U 3 U
f•-? cOC N cad ti •? U "O
P. 7
U
U O ?
L? •fl c? rd ?
G p N•?7
bA p U .., ?
v5 37S E 2
0
Y W .G 'O N E c?i
cC 9 b U ? ? O
a > =.tp
H N m. U
O
F r- O
-
U
4
i
sU. U ? y
?
? O
O •? U
O
y b
YO
p ap
O ''"' O
C
•
? ? O
? 7
O
3 .ti " 3 -d
.r o
3 ?
O U
O
.
L:+ C3 U u .
E
? E
w
M
Vl
" cn M
U M
to
cC
0. m I
b4 a m p
OP.
Ow 0
O
O 73 b
O b Y C
p OG
C3 O O >O
?n Vl (y!
' v, v?
' ? W
? c+i W ? ?? o c
o ?cnm ° b ?u
Imi k+ V h
?
QM+?.+
Cam .+
,
Q o
C
F
..
C
>
G N
'.U-+ O Y
vi c00 N G U
3
N
'O N
.'"
M
U
O
U E Co U
cd v
t:
7 "
z E
t c U a? o y
A 0.
ti
' O b
,?
~
y E
O
k y
U b o
a
O 0
?
? N c
i
N
N
E
? ci
.,
O a
i
H
^O a
.
.+ ,«
y
. .
am.
p v o °? >
E F- W c
C N
a? b
0
'
C c., F-+
o api y
y ? a
b
i y
G
zn O
.?
a`i a}
i
n b w
? G C
~^?
.??
y
H
p
o `?
3 " o ?° 3 .
p c
n °° p
a ro °' a
°
°3?? ? zw3 ce ?v [-?
3 •E 3 w c? 3 w
?x w
v H °? ° ao ax)
z3
Ca
¢ o
v
H
N
N
N
0
.p
O O
U
M
N
z
a?i O
'o
Q
W cd
C/)
O ccaj
yw
0
y
E
? E
o w
?l
Q
V
•
V
N
0
U F
U
•
O ° ?'
U
? C
O r
,
O
O ai ? G O
? ? 4) W •.~. U ? Y c? fC 1O.
° QJ O"
V] U ? C
s~ ?,
ca w ? W R ?
? W' ° G? o E W •E a? E o c
U
-o C ' E cC a' - O O . ?
C= C . E :,
'
59 U
C
D H a 5 N .
a) :O .
O 'O a .?: 'O
F• RS U ca .n rn a) ...
O
A G
?
a) .C
t•.
y U a
Z
7 p .?
0
Z U
O ?
O .?
LL
? O
LY ° E c
U a?
?
U O w
r C U
U • ? ca
y
_
Oq c
bq .: P" b0
1
1
?
bD?
a V
a ' W
oth t
0.
O
3
P
O-.E
? FO •D G GL
O cC 4
O O
O L C G M ?
o s M
Y
14
y
O
L
'O
c c
C m
C, a?i cs W .a ° v
d Q i
0
'O U
O
C
O
C O O
m
03
'?
cd O c
-
C c
'O O G vi
°z a°, y lu c 2 > C: bb D ° r- c
a
'a i.
c O
co a
a c
c
'Q ow
?"?w 7? ? ??D' ?3o?c Eo.?'" Ea ? ° Eyoa
o •E 3 a ° ? v c Q u cl o m co v ;? o
'L u E a '? U «N
??a,a,„
v
a ti
Ca
N
3 c • y "d .?
? iy
o C,
iy
'v Y /-r fLL a~-+-+ L IV. ' f LC? ..i'•. 1-' ?". cz .?1""
? U
E
9 Y U
`° '.ter F. 0 E y
?
?
o ?
3 •E o ° w ?
3 ° o
Z ? Y
3 (Q •
`C N .
3 ? .? ? ;: N
? ,?
CO E c
3 c
o ? .? b
` .? v ?
Q
°
.
Q ca =3 .
C 3
a
i
M
N
N
0
•Y
L
N
'D
C
O
U
bq
C
'LY
.L
4-a
O
C
N
N
U
ca
w
w
0
eq
c
Q
d
W
U
O
M
O
U
?^^o
F?•1
W
O
.y
N
L
0
W
ct
V
Q
a
U
N
0
AQ w
c
b
' ? '
c
3
„
? N c
3
V Y c? i6 w ca .Y' a cC ti
In.
0
as Y 11 w 0.) q)
o o c
W W p O O p
ro
o
y C .d ? ? .? ? a? y ? -p sv.
N 3 Q ° 3
Cj 'N c •; 4; w U c .? w
:? E?E c c ° 8w c c
F d a? cd 7 v._ E- d a? c v m u
ti
v '? c
Z
O .2 K
O •?
Z .-. ? Y
W
_bb b0
W q
c °c O
E c
U
r. v
3
3 .?
N
c w
in. c a r
N O
M M 0
V1 ?
M ? M
yW N Cd
? one
a pp 0.
O 0. O
"? b .Y 'O C O
?
O > d
M
cd ?
a? M O p
a'? lp
O M O M ?
O .C M to
? O O ?
V ?
?_ Y O .
.+
? y N
Q DD +'?.+ Q ? ^
°
?' v;
' v c c .?
3 ? ? o.
•o a? E i ? °i c o ? '•o
? 3 0 0 ? °
a ;? c „ o ? ?
3 ?
N ?
c o
N ? o o ? o ?
'xy U n 3 d =O c
c ? ? o c N
o
a o ? ?
- ?
° ? on ? a? c •? c 'b
° o s o c E ?' ?'
°
H ? v ? ? ? w ? ti ?
° c
3 z
06-0 s-. ... .81
o
V1
r.
f^
o
p >> U ..d ' ? C N U
un
o
C.)
A
c
C4
e
O cd bq .? '? h W
4 .
3 0 0
`
cd C ,zy y ° O Q v -0.., ti 'N' ?O 7 cOd ° ai 'G G O j
a
O N to v
w o°
co Y
cd c
.C "C o
'rn
N o
?• o w c ti '
i
7 C O w. cd
° Y
rn
cd o
N
-a w E E v a
.? Y cd p
o
•
a ? E
a a
?
? ?
o
•v
'b
o c c ;? c
-o c ?'C
;
c
?
? ? o (J ? ? ¢,
o ?,
0
N
.N
O O
M T?+
O O
z'
N O
O
W ?
O U
?w
0
? o
N 'b
ow
? Q
Q
t
V
Q
•
V
N
•
J V
,? t?
^-, p
L= ro is
a ?
N lu 7
m L
to V V w CC C? 4? Cd L
?
y
•
' y
y O a y N .?
6 _
bD O sO, •a
v
.y
? a Y E °' 3 Z E 2
0 0
0
°
W E b 0 ti 8 U K
'? n u lu ° W
L
C 0 U d
•? Q C O ?°. O
•
° o .rr ?Q?// N N O
O A
Y 2 OO O O O [L
D
GJ C
L4 .? L'i G 0
b C b
u C
) OU
.
c ° dw a0i
o ' ° Ew
O -?i b EE w
O
H a v a v
? 0 ° c
a c
C '?
?
-? ?
s 0
a
v
0
h lu
ai
? 0
n y
Z .0 . .
.? i-..
Z ?
O •1 ?
O .? O
O
LL C?
W)
y
60
C
LU O
° ° O
U
y N V ?
y v a
3 '° ~
N
Cd '15 a
ca
?`= •_
N ?E
M
v M
N n M
R M C
to
p-a as aY
0 0 0 0
0 c '+-
0 0
O
b 72
s. '"" W O? .. W O M
?'. M C 4 M c
'?
G' .L LL
G .?' (i,
O bL 0..
C
(? ? W
c b
ow a
c
°
a
w
°
v
c °
°'
a?
s 3
° °
y
0 3 0 o y ° -°
o
c E
0 y
_ o
.51
3
?
?"
cC O
°Y? o ?•
YO
?
G
•O [?
3
U
o o
cC
? G
?.. O
bow o?
° C3 t'i °o' ° N a to „
? D O
x -°N
`
0,C
a o°
H 3
x b °
d
:
4
u
3 o
0
N. N a? . E o
t
'
V
72
v
o °
a s
O C
?
?
°
a aj cc
s°?
E
p
a
C r
o8 sY
a 'D
o
3
O
i
N
O o
o
N O N
O v
U ?a
o
a O
7
i
.a 3 x .
v
i
d
)
a c0a °? '? 3 y cO
.a x a
+ .C
'ti F? C'
.
F- '? a c ° = O
Z 0
H c a n ??
N
N
0
N
.D
O °
^, U
?n bA
M C
U O
a? O
O
a ?
O v
C
? o
N
c ?
o w
Q
Chapter 3 Findings Regarding Project Aifernathres Attachment "A"
Chapter 3 - Findings Regarding Project Alternatives
3.1 Introduction
The RDEIR prepared for the Project considered numerous alternatives to the Project and ultimately
analyzed twenty-one (21) of these alternatives in detail. This chapter describes the Project's
objectives and design criteria used to develop and evaluate the project alternatives presented in the
RDEIR. A description of the alternatives compared to the Project and the findings regarding the
feasibility of adopting the described alternatives are presented below.
3.2 Project Objectives
The project objectives of the proposed San Lorenzo Sewer Lift Station Project are as follows:
• To construct a new sewage lift station (the San Lorenzo Lift Station) near the intersection of
South Bristol Street and West Segerstrom Avenue to replace an existing lift station that has
exceeded its design life (the Segerstrom Lift Station).
• To install modern lift station equipment and associated wastewater conveyance infrastructure
to reduce the potential of a sewer spill or equipment failure.
• To provide a lift station facility in which electrical components of the facility are housed
above ground so as to preclude the potential for electrical failure during peak storm events
(due to flooding).
• To construct a lift station facility that provides sufficient access space for maintenance of the
lift station facility.
• To avoid detrimental effects to existing businesses during construction and long-term
operation of the lift station facility to the extent feasible.
• To improve safety for both motorists and City workers by providing for an above-ground lift
station facility located outside of existing roadway rights-of-way.
• To minimize odor-related nuisances to land uses in close proximity to the new sewage lift
station through the installation of a gravity odor control system.
• To install landscape and hardscape improvements in areas that will be disturbed by lift station
construction.
• To safely demolish and abandon the existing Segerstrom Lift Station in accordance with
applicable federal, state, and local regulations and standards.
3.3 Selection of Alternatives
The RDEIR evaluated twenty-one (21) alternatives, including the No Project Alternative, in Chapter
5.0. This evaluation compared the environmental advantages and disadvantages of each alternative to
the Proposed Project. The No Project Alternative, as required by CEQA, considers a scenario in
San Lorenzo Lift Station EIR (Project No. 06-3510) 3-1
CEQA Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations
Chapter 3 Findings Regarding Project Altematlves Attachment "A'
is which no new lift station facility would be constructed and the existing lift station north of the South
Bristol Street/West Segerstrom Avenue intersection would continue operating as it does under
existing conditions. The Modified Construction Configuration C.2 Alternative addressed an
alternative to the Proposed Project that would reduce or eliminate the Project's significant and
unavoidable impact to the intersection of South Bristol Street/West Segerstrom Avenue by modifying
the construction schedule for portions of construction Phases 11, 14 and 16. In addition, the RDEIR
evaluated a total of nineteen (19) alternative site locations, as follows (refer also to Figure 5-1 of the
Final EIR):
• Alternative Site No. 1 would be sited at the western end of San Lorenzo Avenue, but would
occur fully within existing public rights-of-way (including temporary construction and
staging areas).
• Alternative Site No. 2 would be sited within an existing City park located at the northeast
corner of the West Segerstrom/South Shelton Street intersection.
• Alternative Site No. 3 would be sited in the parking lot of an existing medical office and
retail center (2835 South Bristol Street).
• Alternative Site No. 4 would be sited within an undeveloped parcel located behind 2402
South Bristol Street.
• Alternative Site No. 5 would be sited in the parking lot of an existing commercial complex
(approximately 3001-3005 South Bristol Street).
• Alternative Site No. 6 would be sited in the parking lot of an existing commercial center
(approximately 2840 South Bristol Street).
• Alternative Site No. 7 would be sited would be sited in the parking lot of an existing
commercial center (approximately 2840 South Bristol Street).
• Alternative Site No. 8 would be sited in the parking lot behind an existing medical office
building (2810 South Bristol Street).
• Alternative Site No. 9 would be sited in the parking lot behind an existing medical complex
(2720-2740 South Bristol Street).
• Alternative Site No. 10 would be sited in the parking lot behind an existing medical building
(2700 South Bristol Street).
• Alternative Site No. 11 would be sited in the parking lot behind an existing medical building
(2650 South Bristol Street).
• Alternative Site No. 12 would be sited in the parking lot of an existing hospital (2701 South
Bristol Avenue).
• Alternative Site No. 13 would be located in the parking lot in front of an existing commercial
building (2449 South Bristol Street).
• Alternative Site No. 14 would be located in the parking lot of an existing commercial
complex (located at the southeast corner of the intersection of South Bristol Street and West
Warner Avenue).
•
San Lorenzo Lift Station EIR (Project No. 06-3510) 3_2
CEQA Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations
Chapter 3 Findings Regarding Pro/ectAlfemothres Attachment "A"
• Alternative Site No. 15 would be located in the parking lot of an existing commercial
complex (located at the southeast corner of the intersection of South Bristol Street and West
Warner Avenue).
• Alternative Site No. 16 would be located within Carl Thornton Park (1801 West Segerstrom
Avenue).
• Alternative Site No. 17 would be located in the parking lot of an existing commercial
complex (approximately 3200 South Bristol Street).
• Alternative Site No. 18 would be located in the parking lot of an existing commercial center
(approximately 3300 South Bristol Street).
• Alternative No. 19 would be located in the parking lot of an existing commercial center
(approximately 3301-3365 South Bristol Street.
These alternatives were selected to foster meaningful public participation and informed decision-
making. Among the factors that were taken into account when considering the potential feasibility of
alternatives (as described in CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6[f][1]) were site suitability,
environmental impacts, economic viability, availability of infrastructure, regulatory limitations,
jurisdictional boundaries, and attainment of the Project's objectives. As stated in Section
15126.6(f)(3) of the CEQA Guidelines, an EIR need not consider an alternative whose effects could
not be reasonably ascertained or whose implementation is remote and speculative. Additionally, an
EIR need not consider an alternative that would not achieve most of the basic project objectives or
that is infeasible. (CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6[a].) An EIR also need not consider every
conceivable alternative to a project; the range of alternatives is governed by the rule of reason. (ld.)
The analysis in the EIR includes sufficient information about each alternative to provide meaningful
evaluation, analysis, and comparison with the Proposed Project.
3.4 Project Alternative Findings
The Lead Agency's findings on each alternative and the rationale behind each finding are set forth
below.
3.4.1 No Project Alternative
3.4.1.1 Summary of the No Project Alternative
The No Project Alternative is included in the EIR Alternatives analysis (Section 5.4.1) as required
pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6(e). The CEQA Guidelines require evaluation of an
alternative that considers what would reasonably be expected to occur on the property in the
foreseeable future if the Project were not approved, based on current plans and consistent with
available infrastructure and community services. The No Project Alternative therefore assumes that
the Proposed Project is not approved and the existing Segerstrom Lift Station facility located beneath
South Bristol Street would continue operating into the foreseeable future. Construction of a new lift
station facility, new underground sewer infrastructure, and sewer manholes and appurtenances
associated with a new lift station would not occur under this alternative. The existing lift station
facility beneath South Bristol Street would not be demolished under this alternative and would
continue operating. No landscape or hardscape improvements would occur under this alternative.
San Lorenzo Lift Station EIR (Project No. 06-3510) 3-3
CEQA Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations
•
•
Chapter 3 Findings Regarding Project AltematAes Attachment 'A'
3.4.1.2 Comparison of Environmental Effects
The impacts of this alternative were evaluated and compared to those of the Project. As concluded in
the Final EIR, implementation of the No Project Alternative would eliminate all of the Project's near-
term construction-related impacts. However, several long-term impacts would increase with
implementation of this alternative, including increased impacts to air quality, hazards/hazardous
materials, transportation/traffic, and water quality/hydrology. Long-term impacts from noise would
be slightly reduced under this alternative due to the increased distance between the existing lift
station facility and nearby sensitive receptors.
3.4.1.3 Finding and Rationale for the No Project Alternative
The City hereby finds that specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations
make the No Project Alternative infeasible.
Although the No Project Alternative would avoid all of the Project's near-term construction-related
environmental effects, including the Project's significant an unavoidable impact to the intersection of
South Bristol Street/West Segerstrom during the implementation of Construction Configuration C.2,
this alternative would not meet any of the Project's basic objectives. Specifically:
• The No Project Alternative would not result in the construction of a replacement lift station
to replace the existing lift station that has exceeded its design life.
• The No Project Alternative would not allow for the installation of modern lift station
equipment and associated wastewater conveyance infrastructure that would reduce the
potential for sewer spills or equipment failure.
• The No Project Alternative would not provide for a replacement lift station facility in which
electrical components are housed above ground to preclude the potential for electrical failure
during peak storm events, as the existing lift station facility houses all of its electrical
equipment underground and is subject to flooding.
• The No Project Alternative would not provide for a facility that accommodates sufficient
access space for maintenance workers, as the existing facility is located beneath the crown of
South Bristol Street and affords very little space for maintenance workers.
• The No Project Alternative would not avoid detrimental effects to existing businesses, as the
existing lift station would continue to require frequent maintenance to clear blockages due to
debris collected in the system and the risk from a sewage spill under the No Project
Alternative would be increased in comparison to the proposed Project.
• The No Project Alternative would not improve safety for motorists and City workers, as the
existing lift station is located within the right-of-way of South Bristol Street, a major City
thoroughfare.
• The No Project Alternative would not reduce the potential for odor-related nuisances to land
uses in close proximity to the facility, as no new odor-control systems would be installed.
• The No Project Alternative would not provide for hardscape and landscape improvements
and would not result in the demolition of the existing outdated facility.
The No Project Alternative would not meet the basic Project objectives and therefore would not
provide the numerous benefits of the Project, as set forth in the Statement of Overriding
Considerations, including the installation of a replacement lift station facility that reduces the
San Lorenzo Lift Station EIR (Project No. 06-3510) 3-4
CEQA Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations
Chapter 3 Findings Regarding ProjectAftrnathres Attachment "A"
potential for sewer spills and nuisance odors; enhanced City worker and vehicular safety; improved
appearance of the immediate area (i.e., hardscape/landscape improvements); and the provision of a
generally more reliable and efficient lift station facility as compared to the existing facility.
The No Project Alternative would increase impacts to the environment under long-term conditions as
compared to the Project. The existing Segerstrom Lift Station facility was originally constructed in
the 1960s and has exceeded its design life. The existing lift station facility has become inadequate to
handle existing sewerage flows and is obsolete in comparison to modern lift station designs. The
existing lift station is prone to frequent maintenance (two to three times per week) in order to clear
blockages due to debris collected in the system. In addition, due to the age of the equipment, the
existing pumps are subject to frequent mechanical failure (requiring maintenance) and it is difficult
to obtain necessary replacement parts for the existing facility. These conditions result in an
increased potential for sewer spills as compared to the Project. With the increased potential for
sewer spills under long-term conditions, impacts to air quality (odors), hazards/hazardous materials,
and water quality/hydrology would increase under the No Project Alternative. Since the existing lift
station is located within the northbound travel lanes of South Bristol Street, long-term maintenance
of the existing facility would result in periodic lane closures along South Bristol Street, which would
result in increased impacts to traffic and air quality.
The City finds that the No Project Alternative would fail to meet the Project's basic objectives and
would result in an increase in long-term impacts to the environment, and therefore rejects the No
Project Alternative as infeasible.
3.4.2 Modified Construction Configuration C.2 Alternative
3.4.2.1 Summary of the Modified Construction Configuration C.2 Alternative
The Modified Construction Configuration C.2 Alternative (analyzed in RDEIR Section 5.4.2) would
incorporate a modified construction schedule for the five (5) weeks in which Construction
Configuration C.2 would need to be in place. Specifically, traffic control measures associated with
Construction Configuration C.2 would be restricted to between the hours of 6:45 p.m. and 7:00 a.m.
instead of allowing for 24-hour lane closures as proposed by the Project. All other aspects of
construction activities would be identical to the Project, and there would be no change to the long-
term operational characteristics of the facility under this alternative.
3.4.2.2 Comparison of Environmental Effects
Implementation of this alternative would reduce the Project's near-term significant and unavoidable
construction-related impact at the intersection of South Bristol Street/West Segerstrom Avenue,
which would occur between the hours of 7:15 a.m. and 8:00 a.m. and between the hours of 2:30 p.m.
and 6:45 p.m. (Monday through Friday) by approximately two weeks. However, because
construction activities associated with Construction Configuration C.2 would be modified to occur in
the nighttime, between the hours of 6:45 p.m. and 7:00 a.m., a significant and unavoidable noise
impact would result due to the exposure of nearby sensitive receptors to noise levels in excess of the
City's Noise Ordinance standards. Impacts related to air quality/greenhouse gas emissions,
hazards/hazardous materials, utilities/service systems, and water quality/hydrology would be similar
to the proposed Project's impacts during construction. During long-term operation of the proposed
facility, all impacts would be the same under both the Modified Construction Configuration C.2
Alternative and the proposed Project.
San Lorenzo Lift Station EIR (Project No. 06-3510) 3-5
CEQA Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations
Chapter 3 Findings Regarding projectAiternathm Attachment "A"
• 3.4.2.3 Finding and Rationale for the Modified Construction Configuration C.2
Alternative
The City hereby finds that specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations
make the Modified Construction Configuration C.2 Alternative infeasible.
Although the Modified Construction Configuration C.2 Alternative would reduce the Project's
significant and unavoidable construction-related impact at the intersection of South Bristol
Street/West Segerstrom Avenue by a period of two (2) weeks, this alternative would result in new
significant and unavoidable noise impacts for a period of two (2) weeks because construction
activities would be required to occur during nighttime hours to allow sufficient time to set up and
remove traffic control measures. Such nighttime construction activities would invariably result in
significant noise levels that would impact nearby sensitive receptors, including residents of the
nearby apartments and the Studio Inn Hotel. Such noise levels would exceed the City's Noise
Ordinance requirements for nighttime noise levels, and would result in a significant and unavoidable
impact to noise.
In addition, and as discussed in EIR Section 3.4.7, modifying the timing restrictions for Construction
Configuration C.2 so as to allow construction during the daytime while completely avoiding
significant traffic impacts during the five (5) weeks in which Construction Configuration C.2 would
be in place is not feasible. Specifically, during the three (3) weeks during the construction of a new
manhole within the South Bristol Street/West Segerstrom intersection, Construction Configuration
C.2 would need to be in place 24 hours per day. Accordingly, this alternative would reduce (by a
period of 2 weeks), but would not avoid, the Project's significant and unavoidable impact to
• transportation/traffic.
On balance, the City finds that the reduction in duration of significant unavoidable impacts to
transportation/traffic that would occur under this alternative does not justify the significant and
unavoidable impacts to noise that would result from the nighttime construction activities required for
this alternative. Therefore, the City finds that the Modified Construction Configuration C.2
Alternative is not feasible.
3.4.3 Alternative Site Location No. 1 (Alternative Site No. 1)
3.4.3.1 Summary of Alternative Site No 1
Under this alternative a lift station would be constructed at the western terminus of San Lorenzo
Avenue (Alternative Site No. 1) in lieu of the proposed Project site. The location of Alternative Site
No. 1 is depicted on Final EIR Figure 5-1. Alternative Site No. 1 is almost identical to the proposed
Project but would be constructed wholly within the existing public right-of-way of San Lorenzo
Avenue and an unnamed public alley. This alternative would not require the acquisition of private
property. Although the acquisition of private property that would occur as part of the proposed
Project would not result in a significant environmental effect, construction of a lift station at
Alternative Site No. I was selected in order to evaluate construction of a lift station on an alternative
site that would not require the City of Santa Ana to acquire any private property.
3.4.3.2 Summary Comparison of Environmental Effects
As detailed in RDEIR Section 5.4.3, relocating the proposed lift station to Alternative Site No. 1
would neither avoid nor reduce the Project's near-term significant and unavoidable construction-
San Lorenzo Lift Station EIR (Project No. 06-3510) 3-6
CEQA Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations
Chapter 3 Findings Regarding Pro/ect AitematAm Attachment "A"
related impact at the intersection of South Bristol Street and West Segerstrom Avenue, which would
occur between the hours of 7:15 a.m. and 8:00 a.m. and between the hours of 2:30 p.m. and 6:45 p.m.
(Monday through Friday). Alternative Site No. 1 also would create a new, significant long-term
impact to public services by adversely affecting the provision of police protection services. This
alternative also would result in a significant impact to emergency access under long-term conditions,
which could only be mitigated with the acquisition of private property, thus, negating the purpose of
analyzing this alternative, i.e., to examine whether it would be possible to design the project to avoid
the need to condemn private property. Impacts related to air quality/greenhouse gas emissions, noise,
utilities and service systems, and water quality and hydrology would be similar to the proposed
Project's impacts during construction and long-term operation. Additionally, both the City's Police
Department and Fire Department object to this alternative for the reasons explained above.
3.4.3.3 Finding and Rationale for Alternative Site No. 1
The City hereby finds that specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations
make Alternative Site No. 1 infeasible.
Alternative Site No. 1 would not avoid or substantially lessen the Project's near-term significant and
unavoidable construction-related impact at the intersection of South Bristol Street and West
Segerstrom Avenue, which would occur between the hours of 7:15 a.m. and 8:00 a.m. and between
the hours of 2:30 p.m. and 6:45 p.m. (Monday through Friday). This alternative also would introduce
new impacts to public services (long-term) and emergency access (long-term) that would not occur in
association with the proposed Project. None of the other impacts associated with the proposed
Project would be avoided or substantially lessened with implementation of this alternative.
Additionally, the Santa Ana Police Department reviewed the proposal to construct a lift station at
Alternative Site No. 1, and determined that this alternative has the potential to adversely affect public
safety. In a letter dated March 15, 20101, the Police Department indicated that locating a lift station
at Alternative Site No. 1 would obstruct the line of sight for patrol and passerby, thereby inhibiting
the ability of police (and the public) to monitor activities within the alley located north of this
alternative site location. In addition, the Police Department noted that a lift station at Alternative Site
No. 1 would leave a significant amount of dead space behind the building which could "provide
concealment for transients and other undesirable activities" and "create an attractive nuisance" for
graffiti (see RDEIR Appendix H for the complete letter from the Santa Ana Police Department). The
only available mitigation for this impact would be to re-locate the proposed lift station to the west,
which would be the same design as proposed by the Project.
Further, the City Fire Department reviewed the proposal to construct a lift station at Alternative Site
No. 1 and determined this alternative would interfere with the ability of emergency vehicles to
navigate the turn between the west end of San Lorenzo Avenue and the north-south oriented alley.
(See letter from Fire Chief Dave Thomas to Raul Godinez, dated March 17, 2011, RDEIR Appendix
H.) Specifically, the Fire Department determined at Alternative Site No. 1 would not meet the Fire
Department's minimum turn radius requirement (minimum 20-foot interior and 40-foot exterior turn
radius), as required by Santa Ana Municipal Code (SAMC) Sec. 14-25. In addition, the City has an
Automatic Mutual Aide agreement provided by the Costa Mesa Fire Department (CMFD), and such
aid may be provided by larger CMFD vehicles that require a minimum 28-foot interior and 46-foot
' The letter from the Santa Ana Police Department included in Appendix H of the RDEIR is erroneously dated
March 15, 2010; this letter was actually provided to the Public Works Department in March 2011.
San Lorenzo Lift Station FIR (Project No. 06-3510) 3-7
CEQA Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations
Chapter 3 Findings Regarding Project Altematlves Attachment "A"
exterior turn radius. Construction of a replacement lift station at Alternative Site Location No. 1
would interfere with the ability of fire trucks to make such turns. This alternative would, therefore,
adversely affect the Fire Department's ability to respond to emergencies in the Project vicinity.
The City has determined that these concerns about the impacts of Alternative Site No. 1 on public
safety render it infeasible, particularly in light of the fact that Alternative Site No. I would not avoid
or substantially lessen any significant effects of the project. (See CEQA Guidelines Section
15126.6(b).)
3.4.4 Altemative Site Location No. 2 (Alternative Site No. 2)
3.4.4.1 Summary of Alternative Site No. 2
Alternative Site Location Number 2 (Alternative Site No. 2) would involve the construction of a new
replacement lift station within an existing City park located at the northeast corner of the West
Segerstrom Avenue/South Shelton Street intersection instead of the proposed Project site.
Alternative Site No. 2 is located approximately 0.15-mile northeast of the proposed Project site. The
location of Alternative Site No. 2 is depicted on Final EIR Figure 5-1. Development of a lift station
at Alternative Site No. 2 would occur wholly within an existing City-owned park; therefore, this
alternative would not require the acquisition of private property. The lift station that would be
constructed at Alternative Site No. 2 would consist of a similar above-ground block structure as the
proposed Project. In addition, the lift station at Alternative Site No. 2 would feature similar
equipment and appurtenances as the proposed Project. This alternative would require the
construction of approximately 115 percent increase in the length of underground sewer conveyance
. infrastructure as compared to the proposed Project (i.e., 2,800 linear feet, as compared to 1,300 feet
for the proposed Project). The duration of the construction phase would be increased as compared to
the Project to accommodate the construction of additional underground sewer conveyance
infrastructure.
3.4.4.2 Summary Comparison of Environmental Effects
As detailed in RDEIR Section 5.4.4, relocating the proposed lift station to Alternative Site No. 2
would neither avoid nor reduce the proposed Project's near-term significant and unavoidable
construction-related impact at the intersection of South Bristol Street and West Segerstrom Avenue,
which would occur between the hours of 7:15 a.m. and 8:00 a.m. and between the hours of 2:30 p.m.
and 6:45 p.m. (Monday through Friday). In addition, development of a lift station at Alternative Site
No. 2 would result in a new significant and unavoidable impact to recreation, as this alternative
would reduce park land in the City and would exacerbate an existing deficiency of park and
recreation facilities in the City. Specifically, the City has a standard of providing two (2) acres of
park land per 1,000 residents (SAMC, Sec. 35-108); however, the City currently does not meet this
standard and is providing less than one (1) acre of park land per 1,000 residents. Development of a
lift station at Alternative Site No. 2 would reduce the amount of available park land in the City (by
approximately 0.15 acre during the 12 months of construction, and by approximately 0.03 acre under
long-term operating conditions). This temporary and permanent loss of parkland would exacerbate
the existing deficiency of parkland in the City. This alternative also would result in an increased, but
mitigable, long-term air quality impact due to the potential to expose nearby odor-sensitive uses to
substantial offensive odor levels during worst-case accident conditions. Impacts related to
construction-related air quality/greenhouse gas emissions and noise would be increased under this
alternative, but would not result in any new significant impacts as compared to the proposed Project.
•
San Lorenzo Lift Station EIR (Project No. 06-3510) 3_8
CEQA Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations
Chapter 3 Findings Regarding Project Alhernaffi es Attachment 'A'
Impacts related to air quality/greenhouse gas emissions (long-term), noise (long-term), utilities and
service systems, and water quality and hydrology would be similar to the proposed Project.
3.4.4.3 Finding and Rationale for Alternative Site No. 2
The City hereby finds that specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations
make Alternative Site No. 2 infeasible.
Alternative Site No. 2 would not avoid or substantially lessen the Project's near-term significant and
unavoidable construction-related impact at the intersection of South Bristol Street and West
Segerstrom Avenue, which would occur between the hours of 7:15 a.m. and 8:00 a.m. and between
the hours of 2:30 p.m. and 6:45 p.m. (Monday through Friday). This alternative also would introduce
new impacts to recreation (near- and long-term) that would not occur in association with the
proposed Project, and would increase potential long-term odor impacts affecting nearby sensitive
receptors, in addition to increasing impacts to construction-related air quality/greenhouse gas
emissions and noise. None of the impacts associated with the proposed Project would be avoided or
substantially lessened with implementation of this alternative.
Furthermore, the City Parks, Recreation and Community Services Agency (PRCSA) submitted a $2.4
million grant application to the state's Urban Greening Grant Program2 on June 16, 2011 to develop
the existing park as an "Eco-Park," which may feature amenities such as a community amphitheater,
rock climbing area, picnic area, interpretive center, demonstration gardens, jogging trails and
sidewalks, and open turf areas. (See Memorandum from Ron Ono, Administrative Service Manager
of the City of Santa Ana PRCSA, to Steve Worrall, dated November 23, 2011.) The City hopes to
use the park site as a showcase to educate residents on the value of water and energy conservation
and provide landscape examples of drought tolerant plants, water harvesting techniques, solar panel
installation, amphitheater for education classes, and natural type play equipment for adjacent
residents. (See letter from the Gerardo Mouet, Executive Director, PRCSA, to R. Godinez, included
in RDEIR Appendix H.) The site is also located a block west of Flower Street Bike Trail and the
Golden Loop Bike Trail, which will make the site accessible to all residents in Santa Ana and
adjacent cites. (Id.) A conceptual plan for this facility is presented on RDEIR Figure 5-2,
Conceptual West Segerstrom Avenue Eco-Park. The development of a lift station at Alternative Site
No. 2 will interfere with any future development of this park for the community. Awards are
anticipated to be announced early 2012. Regardless of whether the City receives a grant in this round
of the Urban Greening Grant Program, it plans to improve the recreational opportunities at this park
site and any construction of a Sewer Lift Station at the site would conflict with these community-
serving objectives.
The City has determined that these concerns about the impacts of Alternative Site No. 2 on
recreational opportunities in the City render it infeasible, particularly in light of the fact that
Alternative Site No. 2 would not avoid or substantially lessen any significant effects of the project.
(See CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6(b).)
z http•//resources.ca.gov/bonds prop84 urbanareenin2.html (last accessed December 6, 2011).
San Lorenzo Lift Station EIR (Project No. 06-3510) 3-9
CEQA Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations
Chapter 3 Findings Regarding ProjectAllemathres Attachment "A"
• 3.4.5 Alternative Site Location No. 3 (Alternative Site No. 3)
3.4.5.1 Summary of Alternative Site No. 3
Alternative Site Location Number 3 (Alternative Site No. 3) would involve the construction of a new
replacement lift station in the parking lot of an existing medical office and retail center located at
2835 South Bristol Street in lieu of the proposed Project site. Alternative Site No. 3 is located
approximately 0.05-mile north of the proposed Project site. The location of Alternative Site No. 3 is
depicted on Final EIR Figure 5-1.
The lift station that would be constructed at Alternative Site No. 3 would include a similar above-
ground block structure as the proposed Project. In addition, the lift station at Alternative Site No. 3
would feature similar equipment and appurtenances as the proposed Project. This alternative would
construct 23 percent less underground sewer conveyance infrastructure than the proposed Project,
and it is anticipated that the duration of the Construction Phase 11 would be decreased by six (6)
work days (approximately one week) as compared to the Project. The construction schedule for this
alternative would otherwise be similar to the Project.
This alternative would not require construction activities within the South Bristol Street/West
Segerstrom Avenue intersection or beneath the existing paved right-of-way of West Segerstrom
Avenue (east of South Bristol Street). Therefore, this alternative would not require the
implementation of Construction Configuration C.2. In addition, this alternative would not require
implementation of Construction Configurations B.1, B.2, and C.I. However, this alternative would
require the installation of new sewer facilities beneath the existing paved right-of-way of South
• Bristol Street that are not proposed as part of the proposed Project (i.e., to the north of the existing
Segerstrom Lift Station). Specifically, this segment of South Bristol Street contains a 20-inch OCSD
trunk sewer, a 36-inch MWD pipeline, a 16-inch water main, and a SCE/MCI Duct Bank. These
utilities would require special support during construction of the new 18-inch sewer, as the new
sewer line would need to be installed at a depth of approximately 16 feet. Construction along this
segment of South Bristol Street likely would require supporting the utilities from the top of the trench.
Due to these existing utility constraints beneath South Bristol Street, portions of this roadway would
need to be closed to accommodate construction associated with this alternative. Implementation of
this alternative would otherwise be similar to the proposed Project during construction conditions.
Development of a lift station at Alternative Site No. 3 also would require the City to acquire private
property to implement a temporary construction easement, accommodate the proposed lift station,
and provide easements for proposed sewer lines, since the proposed lift station would be constructed
within the parking lot of an existing medical office and retail center located at 2835 South Bristol
Street.
3.4.5.2 Summary Comparison of Environmental Effects
The environmental effects of constructing the proposed lift station at Alternative Site No. 3 in
comparison to the proposed Project site are shown in Final EIR Table 5-1 and described in detail in
RDEIR Section 5.4.5. This alternative would avoid the Project's significant and unavoidable impact
associated with Construction Configuration C.2; however, this alternative would create a significant
and immitigable near-term traffic impact to a portion of the South Bristol Street road segment that
would not occur as part of the proposed Project. This alternative's significant and immitigable
impact to South Bristol Street would occur for approximately 14 days during construction,
is approximately eleven (11) days shorter than the proposed Project's significant and immitigable
San Lorenzo Lift Station EIR (Project No. 06-3510) 3-10
CEQA Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations
Chapter 3 Findings Regarding Project AtternatAms Attachment 'A"
impact associated with Construction Configuration C.2. In addition, construction of a lift station at
Alternative Site No. 3 would exacerbate an existing parking deficiency at this location by eliminating
approximately 20 parking spaces during near-term construction, and five parking spaces under long-
term operating conditions. Near- and long-term impacts to parking at Alternative Site No. 3 would
represent a significant and immitigable impact. As such, impacts to transportation/traffic would be
greater at Alternative Site No. 3 as compared to the proposed Project site.
This alternative also would result in a slight increase in the severity of impacts to air quality as
compared to the proposed Project, because relocating the proposed lift station to Alternative Site No.
3 would have a greater potential to expose nearby odor-sensitive uses to substantial offensive odor
levels during worst-case accident conditions; however, odor effects would be mitigable to a level
below significant. Total construction air quality/greenhouse gas emissions would be modestly
reduced under this alternative due to a slightly shorter construction period, although average daily
construction emissions would be similar to the proposed Project. Impacts related to near-term water
quality and hydrology would be slightly increased under this alternative, while impacts to noise,
utilities and service systems, and water quality and hydrology (long-term) would be similar to the
proposed Project.
3.4.5.3 Finding and Rationale for Alternative Site No. 3
The City hereby finds that specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations
make Alternative Site No. 3 infeasible.
Although this alternative would avoid the proposed Project's significant and unavoidable impact to
the South Bristol Street/West Segerstrom Avenue intersection, this alternative would introduce a new
significant unavoidable impact along South Bristol Street, which would occur for approximately 14
days (11 days shorter than the proposed Project's significant unavoidable impact). When considered
in conjunction with this alternative's near- and long-term significant and unavoidable impacts to
parking, the City finds that this alternative would, on the whole, result in increased impacts to
transportation/traffic as compared to the proposed Project. Accordingly, the City rejects Alternative
Site No. 3 as infeasible because it would result in an overall increase in environmental impacts as
compared to the proposed Project and would not avoid or substantially lessen any significant effects
of the Project. (CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6(b).)
Additionally, as indicated in Section 5.4.5.4, this alternative would exacerbate an existing parking
deficiency by eliminating approximately 20 parking spaces during near-term construction, and five
parking spaces under long-term operating conditions. Under this alternative, a 6,420 square-foot
portion of the parking lot would be closed and unavailable to site patrons during the entire
construction phase (i.e., approximately 12 months) to accommodate construction and staging
activities. Based on an analysis of this site, it is estimated that up to 20 parking spaces would be
impacted and unavailable for the duration of construction activities, resulting in a deficit of
approximately 61 parking spaces during the construction phase. Furthermore, construction of a
connection between the proposed lift station and new east-west trending sewer facilities would
require trenching activities within the parking lot that would impact additional parking spaces and
internal drive aisles for a period of several weeks during construction, which would result in adverse
effects to site access and internal circulation. Alternative Site No. 3 includes doctor's offices, a
Physical Therapy Center, Orthopedic Clinic, Prenatal Care Facility and "Orange County Health Care
Agency" offices. Ingress and egress to this parking lot is tight and many of the patrons are
handicapped or physically impaired drivers, pregnant women, or elderly. Construction of the Lift
San Lorenzo Lift Station EIR (Project No. 06-3510) 3-11
CEQA Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations
Chapter 3 Findings Regarding Project Affematlves Attachment "A"
• Station and associated pipelines through the parking would create significant confusion and safety
issues for the public. Therefore, this alternative is rejected as infeasible because it would
substantially interfere with and disrupt the medical and retail uses at this location. Further, unlike the
proposed Project site where the City has an existing sewer easement, construction at this location
would require the City to acquire private property to provide easements for proposed sewer lines.
Finally, construction of the lift station at this location would replace currently developed, useable
land, in contrast to the proposed Project site, which is vacant and undeveloped.
3.4.6 Alternative Site Location No. 4 (Alternative Site No. 4)
3.4.6.1 Summary of Alternative Site No. 4
Alternative Site Location Number 4 (Alternative Site No. 4) would involve the construction of a
replacement lift station in an undeveloped field located behind 2402 South Bristol Street instead of at
the proposed Project site. Alternative Site No. 4 is located approximately 0.45-mile northwest of the
proposed Project site. The location of Alternative Site No. 4 is depicted on Final EIR Figure 5-1.
The lift station that would be constructed at Alternative Site No. 4 would include a similar above-
ground block structure as the proposed Project. In addition, the lift station at Alternative Site No. 4
would feature similar equipment and appurtenances as the proposed Project. This alternative would
construct 108 percent more underground sewer conveyance infrastructure than the proposed Project,
and it is anticipated that Construction Phase 11 would be increased by an additional 61 work days
(approximately 12 weeks) as compared to the proposed Project. The construction schedule for this
alternative would otherwise be similar to the proposed Project.
This alternative would not require construction activities within the South Bristol Street/West
Segerstrom Avenue intersection or beneath the existing paved right-of-way of West Segerstrom
Avenue (east of South Bristol Street). Therefore, this alternative would not require the
implementation of Construction Configurations B.1, B.2, C.1, or C.2. However, this alternative
would require the installation of new sewer facilities beneath the existing paved right-of-way of
South Bristol Street that are not proposed as part of the Project (i.e., to the north of the existing
Segerstrom Lift Station). Due to existing utility constraints beneath South Bristol Street, portions of
this roadway would need to be closed to accommodate construction associated with this alternative.
Specifically, this segment of South Bristol Street contains a 20-inch OCSD trunk sewer, a 36-inch
MWD pipeline, a 16-inch water main, and a SCE/MCI Duct Bank. These utilities would require
special support during construction of the new 18-inch sewer, as the new sewer line would need to be
installed at a depth of approximately 16 feet. Construction along this segment of South Bristol Street
likely would require supporting the utilities using trench boxes or shields, which in turn would
require a larger area of closure along South Bristol Street during construction. Implementation of this
alternative would otherwise be similar to the proposed Project during construction conditions.
Development of a lift station at Alternative Site No. 4 also would require the City to acquire private
property to implement a temporary construction easement, accommodate the proposed lift station,
and provide easements for proposed sewer lines, as the proposed lift station would be constructed in
an undeveloped field located behind 2402 South Bristol Street.
3.4.6.2 Summary Comparison of Environmental Effects
The environmental effects of constructing the proposed lift station at Alternative Site No. 4 in
• comparison to the proposed Project site are shown in Final EIR Table 5-1 and described in detail in
San Lorenzo Lift Station EIR (Project No. 06-3510) 3-12
CEQA Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations
Chapter 3 Findings Regarding Project Allernathres Attachment "A"
RDEIR Section 5.4.6. This alternative would avoid the proposed Project's significant and
unavoidable impact associated with Construction Configuration C.2; however, this alternative would
result in a significant and unmitigable near-term impact to a portion of the South Bristol Street road
segment that would not occur as part of the proposed Project. This alternative's significant and
unmitigable impact to South Bristol Street would occur for approximately 16 weeks (approximately
11 weeks longer than the Project's significant and unmitigable impact associated with Construction
Configuration C.2). Unavoidable impacts to transportation/traffic would also occur when
construction activities disrupt left-turn movements, thereby diverting traffic to adjacent intersections
or encouraging cut-through traffic in local neighborhoods; such impacts would not occur in
association with the proposed Project. Near-term significant and immitigable impacts would occur
over a longer duration under this alternative; therefore, impacts to traffic and circulation are
considered to be greater at Alternative Site No. 4 as compared to the proposed Project site.
Total construction air quality/greenhouse gas emissions would be increased under this alternative due
to a longer construction period, although average daily construction emissions would be less than
significant and similar to the proposed Project. Impacts to near-term water quality and hydrology
also would be increased under this alternative due to a larger area of impact, although such effects
would be reduced to a level below significant with mitigation. Impacts to noise, utilities and service
systems, and water quality and hydrology (long-term) would be similar to the proposed Project.
3.4.6.3 Finding and Rationale for Alternative Site No. 4
The City hereby finds that specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations
make Alternative Site No. 4 infeasible.
Although this alternative would avoid the proposed Project's significant and unavoidable impact to
the South Bristol Street/West Segerstrom Avenue intersection, it would introduce a new significant
unavoidable impact along South Bristol Street, which would occur for approximately 11 weeks
longer than the Project's significant and immitigable impact associated with Construction
Configuration C.2. Therefore, the City finds that implementation of this alternative would result in
increased impacts to transportation/traffic as compared to the proposed Project. Accordingly, the
City rejects Alternative Site No. 4 as infeasible because it would result in an overall increase in
environmental impacts as compared to the proposed Project and would not avoid or substantially
lessen any significant effects of the Project. (CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6(b).)
This alternative also is rejected as infeasible because it would fail to meet, or would not be as
effective in achieving, the Project's objective to minimize disruptions to existing businesses, since
construction of this alternative would require near-term closures of the center median that allows left-
turn access into the parking lots of existing businesses.
3.4.7 Alternative Site Location No. 5 (Alternative Site No. 5)
3.4.7.1 Summary of Alternative Site No. 5
Alternative Site Location Number 5 (Alternative Site No. 5) would involve the construction of a
replacement lift station in the parking lot of an existing commercial complex located at 3001-3005
South Bristol Street in lieu of the proposed Project site. Alternative Site No. 5 is located
approximately 0.04-mile southwest of the proposed Project site. The location of Alternative Site No.
5 is depicted on Final EIR Figure 5-1. The lift station that would be constructed at Alternative Site
No. 5 would include an above-ground block structure similar to the proposed Project and would also
San Lorenzo Lift Station EIR (Project No. 06-3510) 3-13
CEQA Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations
Chapter 3 Findings Regarding Project Affemathres Attachment 'A'
• feature similar equipment and appurtenances as the proposed Project. In addition, the construction of
a lift station at Alternative Site No. 5 would require similar construction activities as the proposed
Project (including the need to construct a manhole within the South Bristol Street/West Segerstrom
Avenue intersection), and would follow a similar construction schedule. Development of a lift
station at Alternative Site No. 5 also would require the City to acquire private property to implement
a temporary construction easement, accommodate the proposed lift station, and provide easements
for proposed sewer lines (as discussed in Section 5.2.3), as the proposed lift station would be
constructed within the parking lot of an existing commercial retail center located at 3001-3005 South
Bristol Street.
3.4.7.2 Summary Comparison of Environmental Effects
As summarized in Final EIR Table 5-1 and described in detail in RDEIR Section 5.4.7, relocating the
proposed lift station to Alternative Site No. 5 would neither avoid nor reduce the proposed Project's
near-term significant and unavoidable construction-related impact at the intersection of South Bristol
Street and West Segerstrom Avenue, which would occur between the hours of 7:15 a.m. and 8:00
a.m. and between the hours of 2:30 p.m. and 6:45 p.m. (Monday through Friday); in fact, under this
alternative the duration of Construction Configuration C.2 (and the significant unavoidable impact)
would increase due to the need to completely cross the West Segerstrom Avenue right-of-way. In
addition, development of a lift station at Alternative Site No. 5 would create new, significant near-
term impacts transportation/traffic due to inadequate parking capacity. Impacts related to air
quality/greenhouse gas emissions, noise, utilities and service systems, and water quality and
hydrology would be similar to the proposed Project.
• 3.4.7.3 Finding and Rationale for Alternative Site No. 5
The City hereby finds that specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations
make Alternative Site No. 5 infeasible.
Alternative Site No. 5 would not avoid or substantially lessen the Project's near-term significant and
unavoidable construction-related impact at the intersection of South Bristol Street and West
Segerstrom Avenue, or any other impacts associated with the proposed Project.
Furthermore, this alternative would result in the elimination of approximately 27 parking spaces
during near-term construction resulting in a temporary deficiency of six (6) parking spaces for a
period of up to twelve (12) months. Because this alternative would result in inadequate parking
capacity at an existing commercial retail center during construction, it would substantially interfere
with and disrupt the existing commercial retail center that utilizes the parking lot, as well as fail to
meet the Project's objective of avoiding detrimental effects to existing businesses. Further, unlike
the proposed Project site where the City has an existing sewer easement, construction at this location
would require the City to acquire private property to provide easements for proposed sewer lines.
Finally, construction of the lift station at this location would replace currently developed, useable
land, in contrast to the proposed Project site, which is vacant and undeveloped. Based on these
considerations, the City rejects Alternative Site No. 5 as infeasible and finds that it would not avoid
or substantially lessen any significant effects of the Project. (CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6(b).)
•
San Lorenzo Lift Station EIR (Project No. 06-3510) 3-14
CEQA Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations
Chapter 3 Findings Regarding ProjectAltematNes Attachment "A"
3.4.8 Alternative Site Location No. 6 (Alternative Site No. 6)
3.4.8.1 Summary of Alternative Site No. 6
Alternative Site Location Number 6 (Alternative Site No. 6) would involve the construction of a
replacement lift station in the southern portion of a parking lot of an existing commercial center
located at 2840 South Bristol Street instead of the proposed Project site. Alternative Site No. 6 is
located approximately 0.15-mile west of the proposed Project site, northwesterly of the South Bristol
Street/West Segerstrom Avenue intersection. The location of Alternative Site No. 6 is depicted on
Final EIR Figure 5-l.
The lift station that would be constructed at Alternative Site No. 6 would include a similar above-
ground block structure as the proposed Project. In addition, the lift station at Alternative Site No. 6
would feature similar equipment and appurtenances as the proposed Project. This alternative would
require the construction of 46 percent less underground sewer conveyance infrastructure than the
proposed Project. As a result, it is anticipated that the duration of Construction Phase 11 would be
decreased as compared to the Project. The new sewer lines required in support of this alternative
would be constructed within the alignments of West Segerstrom Avenue (westerly of South Bristol
Street), and within South Bristol Street (northerly of West Segerstrom Avenue), and would require
the construction of a manhole within the intersection of these two roadways (thereby necessitating
implementation of traffic control in a manner similar to Construction Configuration C.2).
Development of a lift station at Alternative Site No. 6 also would require the City to acquire private
property to implement a temporary construction easement, accommodate the proposed lift station,
and provide easements for proposed sewer lines.
3.4.8.2 Summary Comparison of Environmental Effects
As summarized in Final EIR Table 5-1 and described in detail in RDEIR Section 5.4.8, relocating the
proposed lift station to Alternative Site No. 6 would slightly increase the duration of the Project's
near-term significant and unavoidable construction-related impact at the intersection of South Bristol
Street and West Segerstrom Avenue, which would occur between the hours of 7:15 a.m. and 8:00
a.m. and between the hours of 2:30 p.m. and 6:45 p.m. (Monday through Friday). In addition,
development of a lift station at Alternative Site No. 6 would create new, significant near- and long-
term impacts to transportation/traffic due to inadequate parking capacity. Near-term air quality
impacts would be slightly reduced under this alternative due to a shorter duration of construction, and
long-term odor impacts would be slightly reduced due to a slight increase in the distance to the
nearest sensitive receptor. Near-term hydrology and water quality impacts also would be slightly
reduced due to a smaller area of disturbance. Non-odor related impacts related to air
quality/greenhouse gas emissions (long-term), impacts to noise, and impacts to utilities and service
systems would be similar to the proposed Project.
3.4.8.3 Finding and Rationale for Alternative Site No. 6
The City hereby finds that specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations
make Alternative Site No. 6 infeasible.
Specifically, Alternative Site No. 6 would not avoid or substantially lessen the Project's near-term
significant and unavoidable construction-related impact at the intersection of South Bristol Street and
West Segerstrom Avenue, which would occur between the hours of 7:15 a.m. and 8:00 a.m. and
San Lorenzo Lift Station EIR (Project No. 06-3510) 3-15
CEQA Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations
Chapter 3 Findings Regarding ProjectANemathfes Attachment 'A'
• between the hours of 2:30 p.m. and 6:45 p.m. (Monday through Friday); in fact, impacts to this
intersection would slightly increase under this alternative. Further, implementation of the proposed
lift station at Alternative Site No. 6 would result in the elimination of approximately 14 parking
spaces during near-term construction, and six parking spaces under long-term operating conditions,
which would result in deficiency in parking by 13 spaces and five spaces under near- and long-term
conditions, respectively.
Because this alternative would result in inadequate parking capacity at an existing commercial center
during construction, it would substantially interfere with and disrupt the existing commercial center
that utilizes the parking lot, as well as fail to meet the Project's objective of avoiding detrimental
effects to existing businesses. Further, unlike the proposed Project site where the City has an
existing sewer easement, construction at this location would require the City to acquire private
property to provide easements for proposed sewer lines. Finally, construction of the lift station at
this location would replace currently developed, useable land, in contrast to the proposed Project site,
which is vacant and undeveloped. Based on these considerations, the City rejects Alternative Site No.
5 as infeasible and finds that it would not avoid or substantially lessen any significant effects of the
Project. (CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6(b).)
3.4.9 Alternative Site Location No. 7 (Alternative Site No. 7)
3.4.9.1 Summary of Alternative Site No. 7
Alternative Site Location Number 7 (Alternative Site No. 7) would involve the construction of a
replacement lift station in the northeast portion of a parking lot of an existing commercial center
• located at 2840 South Bristol Street in lieu of the proposed Project site. It should be noted that
Alternative Site No. 7 would occur in the same parking lot described above for Alternative Site No. 6.
Alternative Site No. 7 is located approximately 0.10-mile northwest of the proposed Project site. The
location of Alternative Site No. 7 is depicted on Final EIR Figure 5-1.
The lift station that would be constructed at Alternative Site No. 7 would include a similar above-
ground block structure as the proposed Project. In addition, the lift station at Alternative Site No. 7
would feature similar equipment and appurtenances as the proposed Project. This alternative would
require the installation and operation of approximately 77 percent less underground sewer
conveyance infrastructure than the proposed Project and it is anticipated that the duration of
Construction Phase 11 would be decreased by eight (8) work days (approximately 1.5 weeks) as
compared to the proposed Project. The construction schedule for this alternative would otherwise be
similar to the proposed Project.
This alternative would not require construction activities within the South Bristol Street/West
Segerstrom Avenue intersection or beneath the existing paved right-of-way of West Segerstrom
Avenue (east of South Bristol Street). Therefore, this alternative would not require the
implementation of Construction Configuration C.2. In addition, this alternative would not require
implementation of Construction Configurations B.1, B.2, and C.1. However, this alternative would
require the installation of new sewer facilities beneath the existing paved right-of-way of South
Bristol Street that are not proposed as part of the Project (i.e., to the north of the existing Segerstrom
Lift Station). Specifically, this segment of South Bristol Street contains a 20-inch OCSD trunk sewer,
a 36-inch MWD pipeline, a 16-inch water main, and a SCE/MCI Duct Bank. These utilities would
require special support during construction of the new 18-inch sewer, as the new sewer line would
. need to be installed at a depth of approximately 16 feet. Construction along this segment of South
San Lorenzo Lift Station EIR (Project No. 06-3510) 3-16
CEQA Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations
Chapter 3 Findings Regarding Project Alternathres Attachment "A"
Bristol Street likely would require supporting the utilities from the top of the trench. Due to these
existing utility constraints beneath South Bristol Street, portions of this roadway would need to be
closed to accommodate construction associated with this alternative. Implementation of this
alternative would otherwise be similar to the proposed Project during construction conditions.
Development of a lift station at Alternative Site No. 7 also would require the City to acquire private
property to implement a temporary construction easement, accommodate the proposed lift station,
and provide easements for proposed sewer lines.
3.4.9.2 Summary Comparison of Environmental Effects
The environmental effects of constructing the proposed lift station at Alternative Site No. 7 in
comparison to the proposed Project site are shown in Final EIR Table 5-1 and described in detail in
RDEIR Section 5.4.9. This alternative would avoid the proposed Project's significant and
unavoidable impact associated with Construction Configuration C.2; however, this alternative would
create a significant and immitigable near-term impact to transportation/traffic due to a LOS
deficiency that would occur for approximately twelve (12) days during construction, which is a
reduction in comparison to the proposed Project, which would result in a deficient LOS for up to
twenty-five (25) days during construction. However, construction of a lift station at Alternative Site
No. 7 would result in inadequate parking at an existing commercial retail center both during
construction and long-term operation. Near- and long-term impacts to parking at Alternative Site No.
7 would be a significant and immitigable impact. Therefore, because Alternative Site No. 7 would
still result in a significant and unavoidable near-term traffic impact, and would result in significant
near-term (12 months) and long-term impacts to parking capacity, impacts to transportation/traffic
would be increased with implementation of Alternative Site No. 7 as compared to the proposed
Project.
Total construction air quality/greenhouse gas emissions would be decreased under this alternative
due to a shorter construction period, although average daily construction emissions would be less
than significant and similar to the proposed Project. Impacts related to near-term water quality and
hydrology also would be decreased under this alternative due to a smaller area of impact. Impacts
associated with long-term odors would slightly increase under this alternative, although with
mitigation this impact would be reduced to less than significant levels. Impacts to non-odor related
air quality/greenhouse gas emissions (long-term), noise, utilities and service systems, and water
quality and hydrology (long-term) would be similar to the proposed Project.
3.4.9.3 Finding and Rationale for Alternative Site No. 7
The City hereby finds that specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations
make Alternative Site No. 7 infeasible.
Alternative Site No. 7 would, on balance, result in an overall increase in impacts to
transportation/traffic as compared to the proposed Project. Although this alternative would avoid the
proposed Project's significant and unavoidable impact to the south Bristol Street/West Segerstrom
Avenue during the five weeks in which Construction Configuration C.2 would be in place, this
alternative would result in a LOS deficiency that would occur for approximately twelve (12) days
during construction, and also would result in a new significant and unavoidable impact to parking
(near- and long-term) that would not occur in association with the proposed Project. In light of these
considerations, the City finds that Alternative Site No. 7 would result in an overall increase in near-
San Lorenzo Lift Station EIR (Project No. 06-3510) 3-17
CEQA Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations
Chapter 3 Findings Regarding ProjectA/iernativw Attachment •A'
• term impacts to transportation/traffic, and rejects this alternative as infeasible because it would not
avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effects of the Project. (CEQA Guidelines
Section 15126.6(b).)
This alternative also is rejected as infeasible because it would result in inadequate parking at an
existing commercial retail center, and would, therefore, fail to meet the proposed Project's objective
of avoiding detrimental effects to existing businesses. Detrimental effects to the business would be
further exacerbated by ongoing construction in close proximity to the existing commercial retail
center. Further, unlike the proposed Project site where the City has an existing sewer easement,
construction at this location would require the City to acquire private property to provide easements
for proposed sewer lines. Finally, construction of the lift station at this location would replace
currently developed, useable land, in contrast to the proposed Project site, which is vacant and
undeveloped.
3.4.10 Alternative Site Location No. 8 (Altemative Site No. 8)
3.4.10.1 Summary of Alternative Site No. 8
Alternative Site Location Number 8 (Alternative Site No. 8) would involve the construction of a
replacement lift station in the parking lot of an existing medical office building located at 2810 South
Bristol Street in lieu of the proposed Project site. Alternative Site No. 8 is located approximately
0.15-mile north of the proposed Project site. The location of Alternative Site No. 8 is depicted on
Final EIR Figure 5-1. Alternative Site No. 8 includes only the eastern portion of the parking lot, as
the westernmost portion of the parking lot is part of the adjacent parcel to the north (which is
discussed below as part of Alternative Site No. 9).
The lift station that would be constructed at Alternative Site No. 8 would include a similar above-
ground block structure as the proposed Project. In addition, the lift station at Alternative Site No. 8
would feature similar equipment and appurtenances as the proposed Project. This alternative would
require the installation and operation of approximately 27 percent less underground sewer
conveyance infrastructure than the proposed Project and it is anticipated that the duration of
Construction Phase 11 would be decreased by four (4) work days (approximately 1 week) as
compared to the proposed Project. The construction schedule for this alternative would otherwise be
similar to the proposed Project.
This alternative would not require construction activities within the South Bristol Street/West
Segerstrom Avenue intersection or beneath the existing paved right-of-way of West Segerstrom
Avenue (east of South Bristol Street). Therefore, this alternative would not require the
implementation of Construction Configurations B.1, B.2, C.1, or C.2. However, this alternative
would require the installation of new sewer facilities beneath the existing paved right-of-way of
South Bristol Street that are not proposed as part of the proposed Project (i.e., to the north of the
existing Segerstrom Lift Station). Specifically, this segment of South Bristol Street contains a 20-
inch OCSD trunk sewer, a 36-inch MWD pipeline, a 16-inch water main, and a SCE/MCI Duct Bank.
These utilities would require special support during construction of the new 18-inch sewer, as the
new sewer line would need to be installed at a depth of approximately 16 feet. Construction along
this segment of South Bristol Street likely would require supporting the utilities from the top of the
trench or the use of trench boxes/shields. Due to these existing utility constraints beneath South
Bristol Street, portions of this roadway would need to be closed to accommodate construction
associated with this alternative, which has the potential to result in adverse effects to vehicular
San Lorenzo Lift Station EIR (Project No. 06-3510) 3-18
CEQA Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations
Chapter 3 Findings Regarding ProjectAltematAss Attachment "A"
circulation. Implementation of this alternative would otherwise be similar to the proposed Project
during construction conditions.
Development of a lift station at Alternative Site No. 8 also would require the City to acquire private
property to implement a temporary construction easement, accommodate the proposed lift station,
and provide easements for proposed sewer lines (as discussed in Section 5.2.3).
3.4.10.2 Summary Comparison of Environmental Effects
The environmental effects of constructing the proposed lift station at Alternative Site No. 8 in
comparison to the proposed Project site are shown in Final EIR Table 5-1 and described in detail in
RDEIR Section 5.4.10. This alternative would avoid the proposed Project's significant and
unavoidable impact associated with Construction Configuration C.2; however, this alternative would
create a significant and immitigable near-term impact to transportation/traffic due to a LOS
deficiency that would occur for approximately sixteen (16) days during construction, which is a
slight reduction in comparison to the proposed Project, which would result in a deficient LOS for up
to twenty-five (25) days during construction. However, construction of a lift station at Alternative
Site No. 8 would also result in inadequate parking capacity at an existing medical office building
both during construction and long-term operation. Near- and long-term impacts to parking at
Alternative Site No. 8 would be a significant and unmitigable impact. As such, impacts to
transportation/traffic would be greater at Alternative Site No. 8 as compared to the proposed Project.
Total construction-related air quality/greenhouse gas emissions would be reduced under this
alternative due to a slightly shorter construction period, although average daily construction
emissions would be similar to the proposed Project. Long-term odor-related impacts would be
slightly reduced under this alternative, though as with the proposed Project mitigation still would be
required to minimize to the extent feasible the proposed Project's potential to generate substantial
odor impacts. In addition, construction noise levels would be slightly reduced under this alternative
due to a slight increase in the distance to sensitive receptors; however, construction noise impacts
would be less than significant under both this alternative and the proposed Project. Impacts related
near-term water quality and hydrology would be slightly decreased under this alternative, while
impacts to noise (long-term), utilities and service systems, and water quality and hydrology (long-
term) would be similar to the proposed Project.
3.4.10.3 Findina and Rationale for Alternative Site No. 8
The City hereby finds that specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations
make Alternative Site No. 8 infeasible.
Alternative Site No. 8 would, on balance, result in an overall increase in impacts to
transportation/traffic as compared to the proposed Project. Although this alternative would avoid the
proposed Project's significant and unavoidable impact to the south Bristol Street/West Segerstrom
Avenue during the five weeks in which Construction Configuration C.2 would be in place, this
alternative would result in a LOS deficiency that would occur for approximately sixteen (16) days
during construction, and also would result in a new significant and unavoidable impact to parking
(near- and long-term) that would not occur in association with the proposed Project. In light of these
considerations, the City finds that Alternative Site No. 8 would result in an overall increase in near-
term impacts to transportation/traffic, and rejects this alternative as infeasible because it would not
avoid or substantially lessen the Project's significant effects. (CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6(b).)
San Lorenzo Lift Station EIR (Project No. 06-3510) 3-19
CEQA Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations
Chapter 3 Flndings Regarding Project Allematlves Attachment "A"
• This alternative also is rejected as infeasible because it would fail to meet, or would not be as
effective in achieving, the proposed Project's objectives. Specifically, Alternative Site No. 8 would
result in inadequate parking at an existing medical office building, and would, therefore, fail to meet
the proposed Project's objective of avoiding detrimental effects to existing businesses. Detrimental
effects to the business would be further exacerbated by ongoing construction in close proximity to
the medical office building. Further, unlike the proposed Project site where the City has an existing
sewer easement, construction at this location would require the City to acquire private property to
provide easements for proposed sewer lines. Finally, construction of the lift station at this location
would replace currently developed, useable land, in contrast to the proposed Project site, which is
vacant and undeveloped.
3.4.11 Alternative Site Location No. 9 (Alternative Site No. 9)
3.4.11.1 Summary of Alternative Site No. 9
Alternative Site Location Number 9 (Alternative Site No. 9) would involve the construction of a
replacement lift station in the parking lot of an existing medical complex located at 2720-2740 South
Bristol Street in lieu of the proposed Project site. Alternative Site No. 9 is located approximately
0.20-mile north of the proposed Project site. The location of Alternative Site No. 9 is depicted on
Final EIR Figure 5-1. Due to the existing configuration of this site and in order to minimize
disruptions to the existing use during construction and long-term operation, it is assumed that a
replacement lift station at this location would need to be located along or near the western property
line.
The lift station that would be constructed at Alternative Site No. 9 would include a similar above-
ground block structure as the proposed Project. In addition, the lift station at Alternative Site No. 9
would feature similar equipment and appurtenances as the proposed Project. This alternative would
require the installation and operation of approximately 12 percent more underground sewer
conveyance infrastructure than the proposed Project and it is anticipated that the duration of
Construction Phase 11 would be increased by nine (9) work days (approximately two weeks) as
compared to the proposed Project. The construction schedule for this alternative would otherwise be
similar to the proposed Project.
This alternative would not require construction activities within the South Bristol Street/West
Segerstrom Avenue intersection or beneath the existing paved right-of-way of West Segerstrom
Avenue (east of South Bristol Street). Therefore, this alternative would not require the
implementation of Construction Configurations B.1, B.2, C.1, or C.2. However, this alternative
would require the installation of new sewer facilities beneath the existing paved right-of-way of
South Bristol Street that are not proposed as part of the proposed Project (i.e., to the north of the
existing Segerstrom Lift Station). Specifically, this segment of South Bristol Street contains a 20-
inch OCSD trunk sewer, a 36-inch MWD pipeline, a 16-inch water main, and a SCE/MCI Duct Bank.
These utilities would require special support during construction of the new 18-inch sewer, as the
new sewer line would need to be installed at a depth of approximately 16 feet. Construction along
this segment of South Bristol Street likely would require supporting the utilities from the top of the
trench or the use of trench boxes/shields. Due to these existing utility constraints beneath South
Bristol Street, portions of this roadway would need to be closed to accommodate construction
associated with this alternative, which has the potential to result in adverse effects to vehicular
•
San Lorenzo Lift Station EIR (Project No. 06-3510) 3-20
CEQA Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations
Chapter 3 Findings Regarding Project AiternatAm Attachment 'A"
circulation. Implementation of this alternative would otherwise be similar to the proposed Project
during construction conditions.
Development of a lift station at Alternative Site No. 9 also would require the City to acquire private
property to implement a temporary construction easement, accommodate the proposed lift station,
and provide easements for proposed sewer lines.
3.4.11.2 Summary Comparison of Environmental Effects
The environmental effects of constructing the proposed lift station at Alternative Site No. 9 in
comparison to the proposed Project site are shown in Final EIR Table 5-1 and described in detail in
RDEIR Section 5.4.11. This alternative would avoid the proposed Project's significant and
unavoidable impact associated with Construction Configuration C.2; however, this alternative would
create a significant and immitigable near-term impact to transportation/traffic due to a LOS
deficiency that would occur for approximately 29 days during construction, which is a slight increase
in duration as compared to the twenty-five (25) days of construction during which the proposed
Project would create a significant unavoidable impact to transportation/traffic at the South Bristol
Street/West Segerstrom Avenue intersection. Impacts to transportation/traffic would also occur
when construction activities disrupt left-turn movements, thereby diverting traffic to adjacent
intersections or encouraging cut-through traffic in local neighborhoods; such impacts would not
occur in association with the proposed Project. Furthermore, construction of a lift station at
Alternative Site No. 9 would exacerbate an existing parking deficiency at the existing medical
complex both during construction and long-term operation. Near- and long-term impacts to parking
at Alternative Site No. 9 would be a significant and immitigable impact. As such, impacts to
transportation/traffic would be greater at Alternative Site No. 9 as compared to the proposed Project
site.
This alternative also would result in an increase in the severity of the Project's significant long-term
air quality impact as compared to the proposed Project, because Alternative Site No. 9 is closer to
nearby sensitive receptors than the proposed Project and would thereby have an increased potential to
expose nearby odor-sensitive uses to substantial offensive odor levels during worst-case accident
conditions. However, with mitigation (i.e., Mitigation Measure MM 3.1-1), long-term odor related
impacts would be reduced to less than significant levels. Total construction air quality/greenhouse
gas emissions would be increased under this alternative in comparison to the proposed Project due to
a longer construction period, although average daily construction emissions would be similar to the
proposed Project and would not be significant. In addition, construction noise levels would be
greater under this alternative due to the closer proximity of residential land uses; however,
construction noise impacts would be regarded as less than significant following mitigation, as with
the proposed Project. Less than significant impacts related near-term water quality and hydrology
would be slightly increased under this alternative, while impacts to noise (long-term), utilities and
service systems, and water quality and hydrology (long-term) would be similar to the proposed
Project and would be less than significant.
3.4.11.3 Finding and Rationale for Alternative Site No. 9
The City hereby finds that specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations
make Alternative Site No. 9 infeasible.
San Lorenzo Lift Station EIR (Project No. 06-3510) 3-21
CEQA Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations
Chapter 3 Findings Regarding Project AltematAas Attachment "A"
• Alternative Site No. 9 would result in an overall increase in impacts to transportation/traffic as
compared to the proposed Project. Although this alternative would avoid the proposed Project's
significant and unavoidable impact to the south Bristol Street/West Segerstrom Avenue during the
five weeks in which Construction Configuration C.2 would be in place, this alternative would result
in a LOS deficiency that would occur for approximately 29 days during construction, would result in
new significant unavoidable impacts due to the disruption of left-turn movements along South Bristol
Street, and also would result in a new significant and unavoidable impact to parking (near- and long-
term) that would not occur in association with the proposed Project. In light of these considerations,
the City finds that Alternative Site No. 9 would result in an overall increase in near-term impacts to
transportation/traffic, and rejects this alternative as infeasible because it would not avoid or
substantially lessen the Project's effects. (CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6(b).),
This alternative also is rejected as infeasible because it would fail to meet, or would not be as
effective in achieving, the proposed Project's objectives. This alternative would be less effective
than the proposed Project in minimizing odor-related nuisances to land uses in close proximity. In
addition, this alternative would exacerbate an existing parking deficiency at an existing medical
complex, and would therefore fail to meet the Project's objective of avoiding detrimental effects to
existing businesses. Detrimental effects to business would be further exacerbated by ongoing
construction in close proximity to the existing medical complex. Further, unlike the proposed Project
site where the City has an existing sewer easement, construction at this location would require the
City to acquire private property to provide easements for proposed sewer lines. Finally, construction
of the lift station at this location would replace currently developed, useable land, in contrast to the
proposed Project site, which is vacant and undeveloped.
• 3.4.12 Alternative Site Location No. 10 (Alternative Site No. 10)
3.4.12.1 Summary of Alternative Site No. 10
Alternative Site Location Number 10 (Alternative Site No. 10) would involve the construction of a
replacement lift station in the parking lot of an existing medical building located at 2700 South
Bristol Street in lieu of the proposed Project site. Alternative Site No. 10 is located approximately
0.25-mile north of the proposed Project site. The location of Alternative Site No. 10 is depicted on
Final EIR Figure 5-1. Due to the existing configuration of this site and in order to minimize
disruptions to the existing use during construction and long-term operation, it is assumed that a
replacement lift station at this location would need to be located along or near the western property
line.
The lift station that would be constructed at Alternative Site No. 10 would include a similar above-
ground block structure as the proposed Project. In addition, the lift station at Alternative Site No. 10
would feature similar equipment and appurtenances as the proposed Project. This alternative would
require the installation and operation of approximately 23 percent more underground sewer
conveyance infrastructure than the proposed Project and it is anticipated that the duration of
Construction Phase I 1 would be increased by 13 work days (approximately 2.5 weeks) as compared
to the proposed Project. The construction schedule for this alternative would otherwise be similar to
the proposed Project.
This alternative would not require construction activities within the South Bristol Street/West
Segerstrom Avenue intersection or beneath the existing paved right-of-way of West Segerstrom
Avenue (east of South Bristol Street). Therefore, this alternative would not require the
San Lorenzo Lift Station EIR (Project No. 06-3510) 3_22
CEQA Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations
Chapter 3 Findings Regarding Project Attematlves Attachment 'A'
implementation of Construction Configurations B.1, B.2, C.1, and C.2. However, this alternative
would require the installation of new sewer facilities beneath the existing paved right-of-way of
South Bristol Street that are not proposed as part of the Project (i.e., to the north of the existing
Segerstrom Lift Station). Due to existing utility constraints beneath South Bristol Street, portions of
this roadway would need to be closed to accommodate construction associated with this alternative,
which has the potential to result in adverse effects to vehicular circulation. Specifically, this segment
of South Bristol Street contains a 20-inch OCSD trunk sewer, a 36-inch MWD pipeline, a 16-inch
water main, and a SCE/MCI Duct Bank. These utilities would require special support during
construction of the new 18-inch sewer, as the new sewer line would need to be installed at a depth of
approximately 16 feet, and this depth would increase with distance from the existing facility.
Construction along this segment of South Bristol Street likely would require supporting the utilities
from the top of the trench or the use of trench boxes/shields. Implementation of this alternative
would otherwise be similar to the proposed Project during construction conditions.
Development of a lift station at Alternative Site No. 10 also would require the City to acquire private
property to implement a temporary construction easement, accommodate the proposed lift station,
and provide easements for proposed sewer lines.
3.4.12.2 Summary Comparison of Environmental Effects
The environmental effects of constructing the proposed lift station at Alternative Site No. 10 in
comparison to the proposed Project site are shown in Final EIR Table 5-1 and described in detail in
RDEIR Section 5.4.12. This alternative would avoid the proposed Project's significant and
unavoidable impact associated with Construction Configuration C.2; however, this alternative would
create a significant and immitigable near-term impact to transportation/traffic due to a LOS
deficiency that would occur for approximately 33 days during construction, which is an increase in
duration as compared to the twenty-five (25) days of construction during which the proposed Project
would create a significant unavoidable impact to transportation/traffic at the South Bristol
Street/West Segerstrom Avenue intersection. Significant and unavoidable impacts to
transportation/traffic would also occur when construction activities disrupt left-turn movements,
thereby diverting traffic to adjacent intersections or encouraging cut-through traffic in local
neighborhoods; such impacts would not occur in association with the proposed Project. Mitigation
for left-turn movement disruptions is not available since the existing parcels along South Bristol
Street have limited access points that cannot be replaced. Furthermore, construction of a lift station at
Alternative Site No. 10 would also result in inadequate parking capacity at an existing medical office
building both during construction and long-term operation. Near- and long-term impacts to parking
at Alternative Site No. 10 would be a significant and unmitigable impact. As such, impacts to
transportation/traffic would be greater at Alternative Site No. 10 as compared to the proposed Project
site. All other direct and cumulative near-term impacts to transportation/traffic would be less than
significant and similar to the proposed Project.
This alternative also would result in an increase in the severity of the Project's significant long-term
air quality impact because Alternative Site No. 10 is closer to nearby sensitive receptors than the
proposed Project and would thereby have an increased potential to expose nearby odor-sensitive uses
to substantial offensive odor levels during worst-case accident conditions. However, long-term odor
impacts would be reduced to less than significant levels with incorporation of Mitigation Measure
MM 3.1-1. Although total construction air quality/greenhouse gas emissions would be increased
under this alternative due to a slightly elongated construction period, impacts would be less than
significant since average daily construction emissions would be below SCAQMD thresholds, as with
San Lorenzo Lift Station EIR (Project No. 06-3510) 3-23
CEQA Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations
Chapter 3 Findings Regarding Project Altemathres Attachment "A"
• the proposed Project. In addition, construction noise levels would be greater under this alternative
due to the closer proximity of residential land uses; however, construction noise impacts would be
regarded as less than significant as with the proposed Project. Impacts related near-term water quality
and hydrology would be slightly increased under this alternative (though such impacts would not be
significant), while impacts to noise (long-term), utilities and service systems, and water quality and
hydrology (long-term) would be similar to the proposed Project.
3.4.12.3 Finding and Rationale for Alternative Site No. 10
The City hereby finds that specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations
make Alternative Site No. 10 infeasible.
Alternative Site No. 10 would result in an overall increase in impacts to transportation/traffic as
compared to the proposed Project. Although this alternative would avoid the proposed Project's
significant and unavoidable impact to the south Bristol Street/West Segerstrom Avenue during the
five weeks in which Construction Configuration C.2 would be in place, this alternative would result
in a LOS deficiency that would occur for approximately 33 days during construction, would result in
new significant unavoidable impacts due to the disruption of left-turn movements along South Bristol
Street, and also would result in a new significant and unavoidable impact to parking (near- and long-
term) that would not occur in association with the proposed Project. In light of these considerations,
the City finds that Alternative Site No. 10 would result in an overall increase in near-term impacts to
transportation/traffic, and rejects this alternative as infeasible because it would not avoid or
substantially lessen any significant effects of the Project. (CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6(b).)
This alternative also is rejected as infeasible because it would fail to meet, or would not be as
effective in achieving, the proposed Project's objectives. This alternative would not be as effective
in achieving the Project's objective to minimize odor-related nuisances to land uses in close
proximity. In addition, this alternative would result in inadequate parking at an existing medical
office building, and would, therefore, fail to meet the proposed Project's objective of avoiding
detrimental effects to existing businesses. Detrimental effects to business would be further
exacerbated by ongoing construction in close proximity to the existing medical office building.
Further, unlike the proposed Project site where the City has an existing sewer easement, construction
at this location would require the City to acquire private property to provide easements for proposed
sewer lines. Finally, construction of the lift station at this location would replace currently developed,
useable land, in contrast to the proposed Project site, which is vacant and undeveloped.
3.4.13 Alternative Site Location No. 11 (Alternative Site No. 11)
3.4.13.1 Summary of Alternative Site No. 1 1
Alternative Site Location Number 11 (Alternative Site No. 11) would involve the construction of a
replacement lift station in the parking lot of an existing medical building located at 2650 South
Bristol Street in lieu of the proposed Project site. Alternative Site No. 11 is located approximately
0.27-mile north of the proposed Project site. The location of Alternative Site No. 1 I is depicted on
Final EIR Figure 5-1. Due to the existing configuration of this site and in order to minimize
disruptions to the existing use during construction and long-term operation, it is assumed that a
replacement lift station at this location would need to be located along or near the western property
line.
•
San Lorenzo Lift Station EIR (Project No. 06-3510) 3-24
CEQA Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations
Chapter 3 Findings Regarding Project Attemath es Attachment 'A'
The lift station that would be constructed at Alternative Site No. 11 would include a similar above-
ground block structure as the proposed Project. In addition, the lift station at Alternative Site No. 11
would feature similar equipment and appurtenances as the proposed Project. This alternative would
require the installation and operation of approximately 32 percent more underground sewer
conveyance infrastructure than the proposed Project and it is anticipated that the duration of
Construction Phase 11 would be increased by 16 work days (approximately three weeks) as
compared to the Project. The construction schedule for this alternative would otherwise be similar to
the Project.
This alternative would not require construction activities within the South Bristol Street/West
Segerstrom Avenue intersection or beneath the existing paved right-of-way of West Segerstrom
Avenue (east of South Bristol Street). Therefore, this alternative would not require the
implementation of Construction Configurations B.1, B.2, C.1, or C.2. However, this alternative
would require the installation of new sewer facilities beneath the existing paved right-of-way of
South Bristol Street that are not proposed as part of the Project (i.e., to the north of the existing
Segerstrom Lift Station). Due to existing utility constraints beneath South Bristol Street, portions of
this roadway would need to be closed to accommodate construction associated with this alternative,
which has the potential to result in adverse effects to vehicular circulation. Specifically, the segment
of South Bristol Street between this site and the existing lift station facility contains a 20-inch OCSD
trunk sewer, a 36-inch MWD pipeline, a 16-inch water main, and a SCE/MCI Duct Bank. These
utilities would require special support during construction of the new 18-inch sewer, as the new
sewer line would need to be installed at a depth of approximately 16 feet, and this depth would
increase with distance from the existing facility. Construction along this segment of South Bristol
Street likely would require supporting the utilities from the top of the trench and/or the use of trench
boxes/shields. Implementation of this alternative would otherwise be similar to the proposed Project
during construction conditions.
Development of a lift station at Alternative Site No. 11 also would require the City to acquire private
property to implement a temporary construction easement, accommodate the proposed lift station,
and provide easements for proposed sewer lines.
3.4.13.2 Summary Comparison of Environmental Effects
The environmental effects of constructing the proposed lift station at Alternative Site No. 11 in
comparison to the proposed Project site are shown in Final EIR Table 5-1 and described in detail in
RDEIR Section 5.4.13. This alternative would avoid the proposed Project's significant and
unavoidable impact associated with Construction Configuration C.2; however, this alternative would
create a significant and unmitigable near-term impact to transportation/traffic due to a LOS
deficiency that would occur for approximately 36 days during construction, which is an increase in
duration as compared to the twenty-five (25) days of construction during which the proposed Project
would create a significant unavoidable impact to transportation/traffic at the South Bristol
Street/West Segerstrom Avenue intersection. Significant and unavoidable impacts to
transportation/traffic would also occur when construction activities disrupt left-turn movements,
thereby diverting traffic to adjacent intersections or encouraging cut-through traffic in local
neighborhoods; such impacts would not occur in association with the proposed Project. Furthermore,
construction of a lift station at Alternative Site No. I l would also result in inadequate parking
capacity at an existing medical office building both during construction and long-term operation.
Near- and long-term impacts to parking at Alternative Site No. 11 would be a significant and
San Lorenzo Lift Station EIR (Project No. 06-3510) 3-25
CEQA Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations
Chapter 3 Findings Regarding Project AltematA es Attachment 'A'
• immitigable impact. As such, impacts to transportation/traffic would be greater at Alternative Site
No. 11 as compared to the proposed Project site.
This alternative also would result in an increase in the severity of the Project's significant (but
mitigable) long-term air quality impact because relocating the proposed lift station to Alternative Site
No. 11 is closer to nearby sensitive receptors than the proposed Project and would thereby have an
increased potential to expose nearby odor-sensitive uses to substantial offensive odor levels during
both normal operation and worst-case accident conditions. Odor impacts associated with this
alternative would, however, be reduced to less than significant levels with mitigation (i.e., Mitigation
Measure MM 3.1-1). Total aggregate construction air quality/greenhouse gas emissions would be
increased under this alternative due to a slightly elongated construction period, although average
daily construction emissions would be less than significant and similar to the proposed Project. In
addition, construction noise levels would be greater under this alternative due to the close proximity
of residential land uses; however, construction noise impacts would be regarded as less than
significant as with the proposed Project. Impacts related near-term water quality and hydrology
would be slightly increased under this alternative but would remain below a level of significance,
while impacts to noise (long-term), utilities and service systems, and water quality and hydrology
(long-term) would be similar to the proposed Project and would be less than significant.
3.4.13.3 Finding and Rationale for Alternative Site No 11-
The City hereby finds that specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations
make Alternative Site No. 10 infeasible.
Alternative Site No. 11 would result in an overall increase in impacts to transportation/traffic as
compared to the proposed Project. Although this alternative would avoid the proposed Project's
significant and unavoidable impact to the south Bristol Street/West Segerstrom Avenue during the
five weeks in which Construction Configuration C.2 would be in place, this alternative would result
in a LOS deficiency that would occur for approximately 36 days during construction, would result in
new significant unavoidable impacts due to the disruption of left-turn movements along South Bristol
Street, and also would result in a new significant and unavoidable impact to parking (near- and long-
term) that would not occur in association with the proposed Project. In light of these considerations,
the City finds that Alternative Site No. 10 would result in an overall increase in near-term impacts to
transportation/traffic, and rejects this alternative as infeasible because it would not avoid or
substantially lessen any of the significant effects of the Project. (CEQA Guidelines Section
15126.6(b).)
This alternative also is rejected as infeasible because it would fail to meet, or would not be as
effective in achieving, the proposed Project's objectives. This alternative would not be as effective
in achieving the proposed Project's objective to minimize odor-related nuisances to land uses in close
proximity. In addition, this alternative would result in inadequate parking at an existing medical
office building, and would therefore fail to meet the proposed Project's objective of avoiding
detrimental effects to existing businesses. Detrimental effects to business would be further
exacerbated by ongoing construction in close proximity to the existing medical office building.
Further, unlike the proposed Project site where the City has an existing sewer easement, construction
at this location would require the City to acquire private property to provide easements for proposed
sewer lines. Finally, construction of the lift station at this location would replace currently developed,
useable land, in contrast to the proposed Project site, which is vacant and undeveloped.
•
San Lorenzo Lift Station EIR (Project No. 06-3510) 3-26
CEQA Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations
Chapter 3 Findings Regarding Project Altemathres Attachment 'A"
3.4.14 Alternative Site Location No. 12 (Alternative Site No. 12)
3.4.14.1 Summary of Alternative Site No. 12
Alternative Site Location Number 12 (Alternative Site No. 12) would involve the construction of a
replacement lift station within the parking lot of an existing medical complex located at
approximately 2701 South Bristol Street instead of at the proposed Project site. It should be noted
that although construction of a replacement lift station at Alternative Site No. 12 could occur
anywhere within the block bounded by South Bristol Street, Hemlock Way, Central Avenue, and
Baker Street, with exception of the existing AutoZone use at the northwestern corner of the site and
the existing residential uses abutting Baker Street, for purposes of analysis it is assumed that the
replacement lift station would be constructed in the southwestern portion of the block (i.e., near the
intersection of Hemlock and South Bristol). Alternative Site No. 12 is located approximately 0.15-
mile north of the proposed Project site. The location of Alternative Site No. 12 is depicted on Final
EIR Figure 5-1.
The lift station that would be constructed at Alternative Site No. 12 would include a similar above-
ground block structure as the proposed Project. In addition, the lift station at Alternative Site No. 12
would feature similar equipment and appurtenances as the proposed Project. This alternative would
require the installation and operation of approximately 42 percent less underground sewer
conveyance infrastructure than the proposed Project; however, the segment of South Bristol Street
between this site and the existing lift station facility contains a 20-inch OCSD trunk sewer, a 36-inch
MWD pipeline, a 16-inch water main, and a SCE/MCI Duct Bank. These utilities would require
special support during construction of the new 18-inch sewer, as the new sewer line would need to be
installed at a depth of approximately 16 feet, and this depth would increase with distance from the
existing facility. Construction along this segment of South Bristol Street likely would require
supporting the utilities from the top of the trench and/or the use of trench boxes/shields, which would
elongate the construction schedule. Due to these constraints, it is anticipated that the duration of
Construction Phase 11 would be increased by two (2) work days (approximately 0.5 week) as
compared to the proposed Project. However, this alternative would not require the construction of a
sewer bypass during Phase 2 of construction, thereby shortening that phase of construction by up to
two (2) weeks. The construction schedule for this alternative would otherwise be similar to the
proposed Project.
This alternative would not require construction activities within the South Bristol Street/West
Segerstrom Avenue intersection or beneath the existing paved right-of-way of West Segerstrom
Avenue (east of South Bristol Street). Therefore, this alternative would not require the
implementation of Construction Configurations B.1, B.2, C.1, or C.2. However, this alternative
would require the installation of new sewer facilities beneath the existing paved right-of-way of
South Bristol Street that are not proposed as part of the Project (i.e., to the north of the existing
Segerstrom Lift Station). Due to the existing utility constraints beneath South Bristol Street
(described above), portions of this roadway would need to be closed to accommodate construction
associated with this alternative, which has the potential to result in adverse effects to vehicular
circulation. Implementation of this alternative would otherwise be similar to the proposed Project
during construction conditions.
Development of a lift station at Alternative Site No. 12 also would require the City to acquire private
property to implement a temporary construction easement, accommodate the proposed lift station,
and provide easements for proposed sewer lines.
San Lorenzo Lift Station EIR (Project No. 06-3510) 3-27
CEQA Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations
Chapter 3 Findings Regarding Project AifematAss Attachment "A"
• 3.4.14.2 Summary ComDari
son of Environmental Effects
The environmental effects of constructing the proposed lift station at Alternative Site No. 12 in
comparison to the proposed Project site are shown in Final EIR Table 5-1 and described in detail in
RDEIR Section 5.4.14. Alternative Site No. 12 would avoid the proposed Project's significant and
unavoidable impact associated with Construction Configuration C.2; however, this alternative would
create a significant and immitigable near-term impact to transportation/traffic due to a LOS
deficiency that would occur for approximately twenty-two (22) days during construction, which is a
slight decrease in duration as compared to the twenty-five (25) days of construction during which the
proposed Project would create a significant unavoidable impact to transportation/traffic at the South
Bristol Street/West Segerstrom Avenue intersection. Impacts to transportation/traffic would also
occur when construction activities disrupt left-turn movements, thereby diverting traffic to adjacent
intersections or encouraging cut-through traffic in local neighborhoods; such impacts would not
occur in association with the proposed Project and would represent a new significant and
unavoidable impact to traffic/transportation. Furthermore, construction of a lift station at Alternative
Site No. 12 would exacerbate an existing parking deficiency at an existing medical complex both
during construction and long-term operation. Near- and long-term impacts to parking at Alternative
Site No. 12 would be a significant and unmitigable impact. Since this alternative would significantly
impact traffic along South Bristol Street and would significantly impact parking, impacts to
transportation/traffic would be greater at Alternative Site No. 12 as compared to the proposed Project
site.
Total construction air quality/greenhouse gas emissions would be slightly reduced under this
• alternative due to a slightly reduced construction period, although average daily construction
emissions would be similar to the proposed Project and would not be significant. Near-term
nighttime construction noise and long-term odor impacts are assumed to be slightly reduced under
this alternative, but as with the proposed Project these effects would be reduced to less than
significant levels with incorporation of mitigation. Impacts related to near-term water quality and
hydrology also would be slightly decreased under this alternative due to a smaller area of impact,
although as with the proposed Project such impacts would be less than significant. Impacts related to
operational noise, utilities and service systems, and water quality and hydrology (long-term) would
be similar to the proposed Project and would be less than significant.
3.4.14.3 Finding and Rationale for Alternative Site No 12
The City hereby finds that specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations
make Alternative Site No. 12 infeasible.
Alternative Site No. 12 would result in an overall increase in impacts to transportation/traffic as
compared to the proposed Project. Although this alternative would avoid the proposed Project's
significant and unavoidable impact to the south Bristol Street/West Segerstrom Avenue during the
five weeks in which Construction Configuration C.2 would be in place, this alternative would result
in a LOS deficiency that would occur for approximately 22 days during construction, would result in
new significant unavoidable impacts due to the disruption of left-turn movements along South Bristol
Street, and also would result in a new significant and unavoidable impact to parking (near- and long-
term). Impacts to parking and turn movements would not occur in association with the proposed
Project. In light of these considerations, the City finds that Alternative Site No. 12 would result in an
overall increase in near-term impacts to transportation/traffic, and rejects this alternative as infeasible
•
San Lorenzo Lift Station EIR (Project No. 06-3510) 3-28
CEQA Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations
Chapter 3 Findings Regarding Project A?tematNes Attachment "A"
because it would not substantially lessen any significant effects of the Project. (CEQA Guidelines
Section 15126.6(b).)
This alternative also is rejected as infeasible because it would fail to meet, or would not be as
effective in achieving, the proposed Project's objectives. This alternative would exacerbate an
existing parking deficiency at an existing medical complex and would interfere with access to this
site during construction, and would therefore fail to meet the Project's objective of avoiding
detrimental effects to existing businesses. Detrimental effects to business would be further
exacerbated by ongoing construction in close proximity to the existing medical complex. Further,
unlike the proposed Project site where the City has an existing sewer easement, construction at this
location would require the City to acquire private property to provide easements for proposed sewer
lines. Finally, construction of the lift station at this location would replace currently developed,
useable land, in contrast to the proposed Project site, which is vacant and undeveloped.
3.4.15 Altemative Site Location No. 13 (Altemative Site No. 13)
3.4.15.1 Summary of Alternative Site No. 13
Alternative Site Location Number 13 (Alternative Site No. 13) would involve the construction of a
replacement lift station in the parking lot of an existing commercial building located at
approximately 2449 South Bristol Street in lieu of the proposed Project site. Alternative Site No. 13
is located in the same general shopping center as Alternative Site Nos. 14 and 15, which is generally
bounded by Central Avenue on the South, Bristol Street on the West, and Warner Avenue on the
north. Alternative Site No. 13 would be located in the south-central portion of this shopping center,
just northerly of El Pollo Loco (2501 South Bristol Street). Alternative Site No. 13 is located
approximately 0.40-mile north of the proposed Project site. The location of Alternative Site No. 13
is depicted on Final EIR Figure 5-1.
The lift station that would be constructed at Alternative Site No. 13 would include a similar above-
ground block structure as the proposed Project. In addition, the lift station at Alternative Site No. 13
would feature similar equipment and appurtenances as the proposed Project. This alternative would
require the installation and operation of approximately 65 percent more underground sewer
conveyance infrastructure than the proposed Project and it is anticipated that the duration of
Construction Phase 11 would be increased by 34 work days (approximately seven weeks) as
compared to the proposed Project. The construction schedule for this alternative would otherwise be
similar to the proposed Project.
This alternative would not require construction activities within the South Bristol Street/West
Segerstrom Avenue intersection or beneath the existing paved right-of-way of West Segerstrom
Avenue (east of South Bristol Street). Therefore, this alternative would not require the
implementation of Construction Configurations B.1, B.2, C.1, or C.2. However, this alternative
would require the installation of new sewer facilities beneath the existing paved right-of-way of
South Bristol Street that are not proposed as part of the Project (i.e., to the north of the existing
Segerstrom Lift Station). The segment of South Bristol Street between this site and the existing lift
station facility contains a 20-inch OCSD trunk sewer, a 36-inch MWD pipeline, a 16-inch water main,
and a SCE/MCI Duct Bank. These utilities would require special support during construction of the
new 18-inch sewer, as the new sewer line would need to be installed at a depth of approximately 16
feet, and this depth would increase with distance from the existing facility. Construction along this
segment of South Bristol Street would require supporting the utilities from the top of the trench
San Lorenzo Lift Station EIR (Project No. 06-3510) 3-29
CEQA Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations
Chapter 3 Findings Regarding ProjectAllernathles Attachment "A'
. and/or the use of trench boxes/shields, which would elongate the construction schedule. Due to these
existing utility constraints beneath South Bristol Street, portions of this roadway would need to be
closed to accommodate construction associated with this alternative, which has the potential to result
in adverse effects to vehicular circulation. Implementation of this alternative would otherwise be
similar to the proposed Project during construction conditions.
Development of a lift station at Alternative Site No. 13 also would require the City to acquire private
property to implement a temporary construction easement, accommodate the proposed lift station,
and provide easements for proposed sewer lines.
3.4.15.2 Summary Comparison of Environmental Effects
The environmental effects of constructing the proposed lift station at Alternative Site No. 13 in
comparison to the proposed Project site are shown in Final EIR Table 5-1 and described in detail in
RDEIR Section 5.4.15. This alternative would avoid the Project's significant and unavoidable
impact associated with Construction Configuration C.2; however, this alternative would create a
significant and immitigable near-term impact to transportation/traffic due to a LOS deficiency that
would occur for approximately 65 days during construction, which is an increase in duration as
compared to the twenty-five (25) days of construction during which the proposed Project would
create a significant unavoidable impact to transportation/traffic at the South Bristol Street/West
Segerstrom Avenue intersection. Impacts to transportation/traffic would also occur when
construction activities disrupt left-turn movements, thereby diverting traffic to adjacent intersections
or encouraging cut-through traffic in local neighborhoods; such impacts would not occur in
association with the proposed Project and would represent a new significant and unavoidable impact
• to traffic/transportation. As such, impacts to traffic and circulation would be greater at Alternative
Site No. 13 as compared to the proposed Project site. Mitigation would not be available to reduce
these effects to less than significant levels, as it is not possible to construct this alternative without
affecting the travel lanes within South Bristol Street, and the ability to make left turns along South
Bristol Street during construction.
Total construction air quality/greenhouse gas emissions would be increased under this alternative due
to a longer construction period, although average daily construction emissions would be similar to
the proposed Project and would be less than significant. In addition, construction-related impacts to
water quality and hydrology would be increased under this alternative due to a larger area of impact,
although such effects would be less than significant with mandatory regulatory compliance. Long-
term odor impacts associated with accident conditions and near-term noise impacts associated with
nighttime dewatering activities would be slightly decreased under this alternative, due to the
increased distance to nearby sensitive receptors, although as with the proposed Project such effects
would be less than significant (with implementation of Mitigation Measures MMs 3.1-1, 3.3-1, and
3.3-2). Impacts related to noise, utilities and service systems, and water quality and hydrology (long-
term) would be similar to the proposed Project and would be less than significant.
3.4.15.3 Finding and Rationale for Alternative Site No 13
The City hereby finds that specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations
make Alternative Site No. 13 infeasible.
Alternative Site No. 13 would result in an overall increase in impacts to transportation/traffic as
compared to the proposed Project. Although this alternative would avoid the proposed Project's
•
San Lorenzo Lift Station EIR (Project No. 06-3510) 3-30
CEQA Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations
Chapter 3 Findings Regarding Project Alternatives Attachment 'A"
significant and unavoidable impact to the south Bristol Street/West Segerstrom Avenue during the
five weeks in which Construction Configuration C.2 would be in place, this alternative would result
in a LOS deficiency that would occur for approximately 65 days during construction, and would
result in new significant unavoidable impacts due to the disruption of left-turn movements along
South Bristol Street. Impacts to turn movements would not occur in association with the proposed
Project. In light of these considerations, the City finds that Alternative Site No. 13 would result in an
overall increase in near-term impacts to transportation/traffic, and rejects this alternative as infeasible
because it would not substantially lessen any significant effects of the Project. (CEQA Guidelines
Section 15126.6(b).)
This alternative also is rejected as infeasible because it would fail to meet, or would not be as
effective in achieving the proposed Project's objectives. This alternative would cause serious
disruptions to existing business along South Bristol Street due to the need to construct sewer lines
near the median, and would further disrupt the businesses within the shopping complex where this
alternative site is located. This alternative would therefore fail to meet the proposed Project's
objective of avoiding detrimental effects to existing businesses.
3.4.16 Alternative Site Location No. 14 (Altemative Site No. 14)
3.4.16.1 Summary of Alternative Site No. 14
Alternative Site Location Number 14 (Alternative Site No. 14) would involve the construction of a
replacement lift station in the parking lot of an existing commercial complex located at southeast
corner of the intersection of South Bristol Street and West Warner Avenue in lieu of the proposed
Project site. Alternative No. 14 is located in the same general shopping center as Alternative Site
Nos. 13 and 15, and would be constructed just northerly of the Chase Bank (2407 South Bristol
Street). Alternative Site No. 14 is located approximately 0.50-mile north of the proposed Project site.
The location of Alternative Site No. 14 is depicted on Final EIR Figure 5-1.
The lift station that would be constructed at Alternative Site No. 14 would include a similar above-
ground block structure as the proposed Project. In addition, the lift station at Alternative Site No. 14
would feature similar equipment and appurtenances as the proposed Project. This alternative would
require the installation and operation of approximately 112 percent more underground sewer
conveyance infrastructure than the proposed Project and it is anticipated that the duration of
Construction Phase 11 would be increased by 64 work days (approximately 13 weeks) as compared
to the proposed Project. The construction schedule for this alternative would otherwise be similar to
the proposed Project.
This alternative would not require construction activities within the South Bristol Street/West
Segerstrom Avenue intersection or beneath the existing paved right-of-way of West Segerstrom
Avenue (east of South Bristol Street). Therefore, this alternative would not require the
implementation of Construction Configurations B.1, B.2, C.1, or C.2. However, this alternative
would require the installation of new sewer facilities beneath the existing paved right-of-way of
South Bristol Street that are not proposed as part of the proposed Project (i.e., to the north of the
existing Segerstrom Lift Station). The segment of South Bristol Street between this site and the
existing lift station facility contains a 20-inch OCSD trunk sewer, a 36-inch MWD pipeline, a 16-
inch water main, and a SCE/MCI Duct Bank. These utilities would require special support during
construction of the new 18-inch sewer, as the new sewer line would need to be installed at a depth of
approximately 16 feet, and this depth would increase with distance from the existing facility.
San Lorenzo Lift Station EIR (Project No. 06-3510) 3-31
CEQA Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations
Chapter 3 Findings Regarding Project AitematA es Attachment 'A'
. Construction along this segment of South Bristol Street would require supporting the utilities from
the top of the trench and/or the use of trench boxes/shields, which would elongate the construction
schedule. Due to these existing utility constraints beneath South Bristol Street, portions of this
roadway would need to be closed to accommodate construction associated with this alternative,
which has the potential to result in adverse effects to vehicular circulation. Implementation of this
alternative would otherwise be similar to the proposed Project during construction conditions.
Development of a lift station at Alternative Site No. 14 also would require the City to acquire private
property to implement a temporary construction easement, accommodate the proposed lift station,
and provide easements for proposed sewer lines.
3.4.16.2 Summary Comparison of Environmental Effects
The environmental effects of constructing the proposed lift station at Alternative Site No. 14 in
comparison to the proposed Project site are shown in Final EIR Table 5-1 and described in detail in
RDEIR Section 5.4.16. This alternative would avoid the Project's significant and unavoidable
impact associated with Construction Configuration C.2; however, this alternative would create a
significant and unavoidable near-term impact to transportation/traffic due to a LOS deficiency that
would occur for approximately 84 days during construction, which is an increase in duration as
compared to the twenty-five (25) days of construction during which the proposed Project would
create a significant unavoidable impact to transportation/traffic at the South Bristol Street/West
Segerstrom Avenue intersection. Impacts to transportation/traffic would also occur when
construction activities disrupt left-turn movements, thereby diverting traffic to adjacent intersections
or encouraging cut-through traffic in local neighborhoods; such impacts would not occur in
• association with the proposed Project. As such, impacts to transportation/traffic would be greater at
Alternative Site No. 14 as compared to the proposed Project site, and mitigation would not be
available to reduce these effects to less than significant levels, as there is no way to construct this
alternative without affecting the travel lanes within South Bristol Street, and because there is no way
to avoid affecting left turns along South Bristol Street during construction.
Total construction air quality/greenhouse gas emissions would be increased under this alternative due
to a longer construction period, although average daily construction emissions would be similar to
the proposed Project and impacts would be less than significant. In addition, construction-related
impacts to water quality and hydrology would be increased under this alternative due to a larger area
of impact, but would remain below a level of significance. Long-term odor impacts associated with
accident conditions and near-term noise impacts associated with nighttime dewatering activities
would be slightly decreased under this alternative, due to the increased distance to nearby sensitive
receptors, although as with the proposed Project impacts would be reduced to less than significant
levels with implementation of Mitigation Measures MM 3.3-1 and 3.3-2. Impacts related to noise,
utilities and service systems, and water quality and hydrology (long-term) would be similar to the
proposed Project and would be less than significant.
3.4.16.3 Finding and Rationale for Alternative Site No 14
The City hereby finds that specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations
make Alternative Site No. 14 infeasible.
Alternative Site No. 14 would result in an overall increase in impacts to transportation/traffic as
compared to the proposed Project. Although this alternative would avoid the proposed Project's
•
San Lorenzo Lift Station EIR (Project No. 06-3510) 3-32
CEQA Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations
Chapter 3 Findings Regarding Pr%ctAiternathow Attachment "A'
significant and unavoidable impact to the south Bristol Street/West Segerstrom Avenue during the
five weeks in which Construction Configuration C.2 would be in place, this alternative would result
in a LOS deficiency that would occur for approximately 84 days during construction, and would
result in new significant unavoidable impacts due to the disruption of left-turn movements along
South Bristol Street. Impacts to turn movements would not occur in association with the proposed
Project. In light of these considerations, the City finds that Alternative Site No. 14 would result in an
overall increase in near-term impacts to transportation/traffic, and rejects this alternative as infeasible
because it would not avoid or substantially lessen any significant effects of the Project. (CEQA
Guidelines Section 15126.6(b).)
This alternative also is rejected as infeasible because it would fail to meet, or would not be as
effective in achieving, the proposed Project's objectives. This alternative would cause serious
disruptions to existing business along South Bristol Street due to the need to construct sewer lines
near the median, and would further disrupt the businesses within the shopping complex where this
alternative site is located, and would therefore fail to meet the proposed Project's objective of
avoiding detrimental effects to existing businesses.
3.4.17 Alternative Site Location No. 15 (Alternative Site No. 15)
3.4.17.1 Summary of Alternative Site No. 15
Alternative Site Location Number 15 (Alternative Site No. 15) would involve the construction of a
replacement lift station in the parking lot of an existing commercial complex located at southeast
corner of the intersection of South Bristol Street and West Warner Avenue in lieu of the proposed
Project site. Alternative No. 15 is located in the same general shopping center as Alternative Site
Nos. 13 and 14, and would be constructed near the existing Starbucks, located at the corner of South
Bristol Street/West Warner Avenue. Alternative Site No. 15 is located approximately 0.50-mile
north of the proposed Project site. The location of Alternative Site No. 15 is depicted on Final EIR
Figure 5-1.
The lift station that would be constructed at Alternative Site No. 15 would include a similar above-
ground block structure as the proposed Project. In addition, the lift station at Alternative Site No. 15
would feature similar equipment and appurtenances as the proposed Project. This alternative would
require the installation and operation of 123 percent more underground sewer conveyance
infrastructure than the proposed Project and it is anticipated that the duration of Construction Phase
11 would be increased by 70 work days (approximately 14 weeks) as compared to the proposed
Project. The construction schedule for this alternative would otherwise be similar to the proposed
Project.
This alternative would not require construction activities within the South Bristol Street/West
Segerstrom Avenue intersection or beneath the existing paved right-of-way of West Segerstrom
Avenue (east of South Bristol Street). Therefore, this alternative would not require the
implementation of Construction Configurations B.1, B.2, C.1, or C.2. However, this alternative
would require the installation of new sewer facilities beneath the existing paved right-of-way of
South Bristol Street that are not proposed as part of the Project (i.e., to the north of the existing
Segerstrom Lift Station). The segment of South Bristol Street between this site and the existing lift
station facility contains a 20-inch OCSD trunk sewer, a 36-inch MWD pipeline, a 16-inch water main,
and a SCE/MCI Duct Bank. These utilities would require special support during construction of the
new 18-inch sewer, as the new sewer line would need to be installed at a depth of approximately 16
San Lorenzo Lift Station EIR (Project No. 06-3510) 3-33
CEQA Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations
Chapter 3 Findings Regarding Project ABematAss Attachment 'A'
• feet, and this depth would increase with distance from the existing facility. Construction along this
segment of South Bristol Street would require supporting the utilities from the top of the trench
and/or the use of trench boxes/shields, which would elongate the construction schedule. Due to these
existing utility constraints beneath South Bristol Street, portions of this roadway would need to be
closed to accommodate construction associated with this alternative, which has the potential to result
in adverse effects to vehicular circulation. Implementation of this alternative would otherwise be
similar to the proposed Project during construction conditions.
Development of a lift station at Alternative Site No. 15 also would require the City to acquire private
property to implement a temporary construction easement, accommodate the proposed lift station,
and provide easements for proposed sewer lines.
3.4.17.2 Summary Comparison of Environmental Effects
The environmental effects of constructing the proposed lift station at Alternative Site No. 15 in
comparison to the proposed Project site are shown in Final EIR Table 5-1 and described in detail in
RDEIR Section 5.4.17. This alternative would avoid the Project's significant and unavoidable
impact associated with Construction Configuration C.2; however, this alternative would create a
significant and unmitigable near-term impact to transportation/traffic due to a LOS deficiency that
would occur for approximately 90 days during construction, which is an increase in duration as
compared to the twenty-five (25) days of construction during which the proposed Project would
create a significant unavoidable impact to transportation/traffic at the South Bristol Street/West
Segerstrom Avenue intersection. Impacts to transportation/traffic would also occur when
construction activities disrupt left-turn movements, thereby diverting traffic to adjacent intersections
• or encouraging cut-through traffic in local neighborhoods; such impacts would not occur in
association with the proposed Project. As such, impacts to transportation/traffic would be greater at
Alternative Site No. 14 as compared to the proposed Project site, and mitigation would not be
available to reduce these effects to less than significant levels, as there is no way to construct this
alternative without affecting the travel lanes within South Bristol Street, and because there is no way
to avoid affecting left turns along South Bristol Street during construction.
Total construction air quality/greenhouse gas emissions would be increased under this alternative due
to a longer construction period, although average daily construction emissions would be similar to
the proposed Project and would be less than significant. In addition, construction-related impacts to
water quality and hydrology would be increased under this alternative due to an increased area of
impact, although such impacts would be less than significant. Long-term odor impacts associated
with accident conditions and near-term noise impacts associated with nighttime dewatering activities
would be slightly decreased under this alternative, due to the increased distance to nearby sensitive
receptors, although as with the proposed Project such impacts would be less than significant due to
implementation of Mitigation Measures MM 3.3-1 and 3.3-2. Impacts related to noise, utilities and
service systems, and water quality and hydrology (long-term) would be similar to the proposed
Project and would be less than significant.
3.4.17.3 Finding and Rationale for Alternative Site No 15
The City hereby finds that specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations
make Alternative Site No. 15 infeasible.
•
San Lorenzo Lift Station EIR (Project No. 06-3510) 3-34
CEQA Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations
Chapter 3 Findings Regarding Project Alternathes Attachment "A"
Alternative Site No. 15 would result in an overall increase in impacts to transportation/traffic as
compared to the proposed Project. Although this alternative would avoid the proposed Project's
significant and unavoidable impact to the south Bristol Street/West Segerstrom Avenue during the
five weeks in which Construction Configuration C.2 would be in place, this alternative would result
in a LOS deficiency that would occur for approximately 90 days during construction, and would
result in new significant unavoidable impacts due to the disruption of left-turn movements along
South Bristol Street. Impacts to turn movements would not occur in association with the proposed
Project. In light of these considerations, the City finds that Alternative Site No. 15 would result in an
overall increase in near-term impacts to transportation/traffic, and rejects this alternative as infeasible
because it would not avoid or substantially lessen any of the significant effects of the Project.
(CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6(b).)
This alternative also is rejected as infeasible because it would fail to meet or would not be as
effective in achieving the proposed Project's objectives. This alternative would cause serious
disruptions to existing business along South Bristol Street due to the need to construct sewer lines
near the median, and would further disrupt the businesses within the shopping complex where this
alternative site is located. This alternative would therefore fail to meet the Project's objective of
avoiding detrimental effects to existing businesses.
3.4.18 Alternative Site Location No. 16 (Alternative Site No. 16)
3.4.18.1 Summary of Alternative Site No. 16
Alternative Site Location Number 16 (Alternative Site No. 16) would involve the construction of a
new replacement lift station within an existing City park (Carl Thornton Park) located at 1801 West
Segerstrom Avenue in lieu of the proposed Project site. Alternative Site No. 16 is located
approximately 0.4-mile west of the proposed Project site. The location of Alternative Site No. 16 is
depicted on Final EIR Figure 5-1.
Development of a lift station at Alternative Site No. 16 would occur wholly within an existing City-
owned park; therefore, this alternative would not require the acquisition of private property. The lift
station that would be constructed at Alternative Site No. 16 would include an above-ground block
structure similar to the proposed Project. In addition, the lift station at Alternative Site No. 16 would
feature similar equipment and appurtenances as the proposed Project. This alternative would require
the installation and operation of approximately 208 percent more underground sewer conveyance
infrastructure than the proposed Project. The duration of Construction Phase I 1 would be increased
as compared to the Project, to accommodate the construction of additional underground sewer
conveyance infrastructure.
Although the acquisition of private property that would occur as part of the proposed Project would
not result in a significant environmental effect, relocation of the proposed lift station to Alternative
Site No. 16 was selected for consideration to allow decision-makers to compare the impact of the
proposed Project against the impact of an alternative that would not require the acquisition of private
property.
3.4.18.2 Summary Comparison of Environmental Effects
The environmental effects of constructing the proposed lift station at Alternative Site No. 16 in
comparison to the proposed Project site are shown in Final EIR Table 5-1 and described in detail in
RDEIR Section 5.4.18. Relocating the proposed lift station to Alternative Site No. 16 would slightly
San Lorenzo Lift Station EIR (Project No. 06-3510) 3-35
CEQA Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations
Chapter 3 Findings Regarding Project AltematA es Attachment `A"
. increase the duration of the proposed Project's near-term significant and unavoidable construction-
related impact at the intersection of South Bristol Street and West Segerstrom Avenue, which would
occur between the hours of 7:15 a.m. and 8:00 a.m. and between the hours of 2:30 p.m. and 6:45 p.m.
(Monday through Friday). In addition, development of a lift station at Alternative Site No. 16 would
result in a new, significant impact to recreation, as this alternative would reduce park land in the City
and would exacerbate an existing deficiency of park and recreation facilities in the City.
Construction-related impacts related to air quality/greenhouse gas emissions and hydrology and
water quality would be increased under this alternative as compared to the proposed Project, but
would be less than significant. Impacts related to air quality/greenhouse gas emissions (long-term),
noise, and utilities and service systems would be similar to the proposed Project and would be less
than significant, although long-term impacts associated with odors under accident conditions would
be slightly reduced under this alternative and would be less than significant with the incorporation of
Mitigation Measure MM 3.1-1 (similar to the proposed Project).
3.4.18.3 Finding and Rationale for Alternative Site No 16
The City hereby finds that specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations
make the Alternative Site No. 16 infeasible.
Alternative Site No. 16 would slightly increase by a period of one to two days the Project's near-term
significant and unavoidable construction-related impact at the intersection of South Bristol Street and
West Segerstrom Avenue, which would occur between the hours of 7:15 a.m. and 8:00 a.m. and
between the hours of 2:30 p.m. and 6:45 p.m. (Monday through Friday). This alternative also would
introduce new significant and unavoidable impacts to recreation (near- and long-term) that would not
• occur in association with the proposed Project, and would increase construction-related air
quality/greenhouse gas emissions and water quality/hydrology impacts. None of the significant
impacts associated with the proposed Project would be avoided or substantially lessened with
implementation of this alternative. In light of these considerations, the City rejects Alternative Site
No. 16 as infeasible because it would avoid or substantially lessen any of the significant effects of the
Project. (CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6(b).)
3.4.19 Alternative Site Location No. 17 (Alternative Site No. 17)
3.4.19.1 Summary of Alternative Site No. 17
Alternative Site Location Number 17 (Alternative Site No. 17) would involve the construction of a
new replacement lift station in the parking lot of an existing commercial office (AT&T) located at
3200 South Bristol Street in lieu of the proposed Project site. Alternative Site No. 17 is located
approximately 0.25-mile southwest of the proposed Project site. The location of Alternative Site No.
17 is depicted on Final EIR Figure 5-1. In order to minimize disruptions to the existing AT&T
building, the replacement lift station would be constructed in the western portion of the parking lot at
this site.
The lift station that would be constructed at Alternative Site No. 17 would include a similar above-
ground block structure as the proposed Project. In addition, the lift station at Alternative Site No. 17
would feature similar equipment and appurtenances as the proposed Project. This alternative would
require the installation and operation of approximately 54 percent more underground sewer
conveyance infrastructure than the proposed Project and it is anticipated that the duration of
Construction Phase 11 would be increased by 30 work days (approximately four weeks) as compared
•
San Lorenzo Lift Station EIR (Project No. 06-3510) 3-36
CEQA Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations
Chapter 3 Findings Regarding Project Altemattim Attachment 'A"
to the Project. The construction schedule for this alternative would otherwise be similar to the
Project.
This alternative would require construction activities within and adjacent to the South Bristol
Street/West Segerstrom Avenue intersection; however, the duration of construction activities within
the intersection would be reduced to one (1) week under this alternative. Traffic control associated
with demolition of the existing lift station facility still would require up to two weeks; accordingly,
traffic control within the intersection of South Bristol Street/West Segerstrom Avenue would occur
for a total duration of three weeks, rather than the five weeks associated with the proposed Project.
In addition, this alternative would not require implementation of Construction Configurations B.1,
B.2, or C.1.
However, this alternative would require the installation of new sewer facilities beneath the existing
paved right-of-way of South Bristol Street that are not proposed as part of the Project (i.e., to the
south of the South Bristol Street/West Segerstrom Avenue intersection). The segment of South
Bristol Street between this site and the existing lift station facility contains a 20-inch OCSD trunk
sewer, a 36-inch MWD pipeline, a 16-inch water main, and a SCE/MCI Duct Bank. These utilities
would require special support during construction of the new 18-inch sewer, as the new sewer line
would need to be installed at a depth of approximately 16 feet, and this depth would increase with
distance from the existing facility. Construction along this segment of South Bristol Street would
require supporting the utilities from the top of the trench and/or the use of trench boxes/shields,
which would elongate the construction schedule. Due to these existing utility constraints beneath
South Bristol Street, portions of this roadway would need to be closed to accommodate construction
associated with this alternative, which has the potential to result in adverse effects to vehicular
circulation. Implementation of this alternative would otherwise be similar to the proposed Project
during construction conditions.
Development of a lift station at Alternative Site No. 17 would require the City to acquire private
property to accommodate the proposed lift station. In addition, this alternative would require the
City to acquire a temporary construction easement to facilitate construction of the proposed lift
station.
3.4.19.2 Summary Comparison of Environmental Effects
The environmental effects of constructing the proposed lift station at Alternative Site No. 17 in
comparison to the proposed Project site are shown in Final EIR Table 5-1 and described in detail in
RDEIR Section 5.4.19. This alternative would reduce the Project's significant and unavoidable
impact associated with Construction Configuration C.2 by two weeks; however, this alternative
would create a significant and unmitigable near-term impact to the capacity of South Bristol Street
for a period of approximately 46 days, which is an increase in duration as compared to the twenty-
five (25) days of construction during which the proposed Project would create a significant
unavoidable impact to transportation/traffic at the South Bristol Street/West Segerstrom Avenue
intersection. As such, impacts to transportation/traffic would be greater at Alternative Site No. 17 as
compared to the proposed Project site, and mitigation would not be available to reduce these effects
to less than significant levels because there is no way to construct this alternative without impacting
travel lanes on South Bristol Street. Furthermore, construction of a lift station at Alternative Site No.
17 would exacerbate an existing parking deficiency at this site both during construction and long-
term operation. Near- and long-term impacts to parking at Alternative Site No. 17 would be a
significant and unmitigable impact. Construction activities at Alternative Site No. 17 also would
San Lorenzo Lift Station EIR (Project No. 06-3510) 3-37
CEQA Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations
Chapter 3 Findings Regarding Project AffernatAes Attachment "A'
i result in a significant and immitigable near-term impact to traffic and circulation due to inadequate
emergency access (i.e., Garry Street). As such, impacts to traffic and circulation would be greater at
Alternative Site No. 17 as compared to the proposed Project site, and would be significant and
unavoidable.
This alternative also would result in an increase in the severity of long-term odor impacts as
compared to the proposed Project, because Alternative Site No. 17 is located in closer proximity to
existing sensitive receptors that could be exposed to odors under accident conditions; however, as
with the proposed Project, mitigation would reduce this impact to less than significant levels. In
addition, construction noise levels would be greater under this alternative due to the closer proximity
of residential land uses; however, construction noise impacts would be mitigated to less than
significant levels, as with the proposed Project. Total construction air quality/greenhouse gas
emissions would be increased under this alternative due to a longer construction period, although
average daily construction emissions would be similar to the proposed Project and would be less than
significant. In addition, construction-related impacts to water quality and hydrology would be
increased under this alternative due to a larger area of impact, but would remain below a level of
significance. Impacts related to noise (long-term), utilities and service systems, and water quality
and hydrology (long-term) would be similar to the proposed Project and would be less than
significant.
3.4.19.3 Finding and Rationale for Alternative Site No. 17
The City hereby finds that specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations
make Alternative Site No. 17 infeasible.
• Alternative Site No. 17 would result in an overall increase in impacts to transportation/traffic as
compared to the proposed Project. Although this alternative would reduce by a period of three weeks
the proposed Project's significant unavoidable impact to the South Bristol Street/West Segerstrom
Avenue intersection, this alternative would create a significant and immitigable near-term impact to
the capacity of South Bristol Street for a period of approximately 46 days, or 21 days longer than the
proposed Project's significant unavoidable impact to the South Bristol Street/West Segerstrom
Avenue intersection. Furthermore, construction of a lift station at Alternative Site No. 17 would
exacerbate an existing parking deficiency at this site both during construction and long-term
operation. Near- and long-term impacts to parking at Alternative Site No. 17 would be a significant
and immitigable impact. Construction activities at Alternative Site No. 17 also would result in a
significant and immitigable near-term impact to traffic and circulation due to inadequate emergency
access (i.e., Garry Street). In light of these considerations, the City finds that Alternative Site No. 17
would result in an overall increase in near-term impacts to transportation/traffic, and rejects this
alternative as infeasible because it would not avoid or substantially lessen any of the significant
effects of the Project. (CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6(b).)
This alternative also is rejected as infeasible because it would fail to meet, or would not be as
effective in achieving, the proposed Project's objectives. This alternative would not be as effective as
the proposed Project in meeting the Project's objective to minimize odor-related nuisances to land
uses in close proximity. In addition, this alternative would exacerbate an existing parking deficiency
at an existing commercial office building, and would, therefore, fail to meet the Project's objective of
avoiding detrimental effects to existing businesses. Detrimental effects to business would be further
exacerbated by ongoing construction in close proximity to the existing commercial office building.
- Further, unlike the proposed Project site where the City has an existing sewer easement, construction
San Lorenzo Lift Station EIR (Project No. 06-3510) 3-38
CEQA Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations
Chapter 3 Findings Regarding Project Alt ernathres Attachment 'A'
at this location would require the City to acquire private property to provide easements for proposed
sewer lines. Finally, construction of the lift station at this location would replace currently developed,
useable land, in contrast to the proposed Project site, which is vacant and undeveloped.
3.4.20 Alternative Site Location No. 18 (Alternative Site No. 18)
3.4.20.1 Summary of Alternative Site No. 18
Alternative Site Location Number 18 (Alternative Site No. 18) would involve the construction of a
new replacement lift station in the parking lot of an existing commercial retail center located at 3300
South Bristol Street (i.e., Target shopping center) in lieu of the proposed Project site. Alternative
Site No. 18 is located approximately 0.35-mile southwest of the proposed Project site. The location
of Alternative Site No. 18 is depicted on Final EIR Figure 5-1.
The lift station that would be constructed at Alternative Site No. 18 would include a similar above-
ground block structure as the proposed Project. In addition, the lift station at Alternative Site No. 18
would feature similar equipment and appurtenances as the proposed Project. This alternative would
require the installation and operation of approximately 62 percent more underground sewer
conveyance infrastructure than the proposed Project and it is anticipated that the duration of
Construction Phase 11 would be increased by approximately 90 work days (approximately eighteen
weeks) as compared to the proposed Project. The substantial increase in construction duration is due
in part to the need to cross the existing railroad tracks near the intersection of Alton Road/South
Bristol Street, which would require approximately six weeks (30 working days) to complete. The
construction schedule for this alternative would otherwise be similar to the Project.
This alternative would require construction activities within and adjacent to the South Bristol
Street/West Segerstrom Avenue intersection; however, the duration of construction activities within
the intersection would be reduced to one (1) week under this alternative and traffic control associated
with demolition of the existing lift station facility still would require up to two weeks; accordingly,
under this alternative, traffic control affecting the intersection of South Bristol Street/West
Segerstrom Avenue would occur for a total duration of three weeks, rather than the five weeks
associated with the proposed Project. In addition, this alternative would not require implementation
of Construction Configurations B.1, B.2, and C.1.
However, this alternative would require the installation of new sewer facilities beneath the existing
paved right-of-way of South Bristol Street that are not proposed as part of the Project (i.e., to the
south of the South Bristol Street/West Segerstrom Avenue intersection). The segment of South
Bristol Street between this site and the existing lift station facility contains a 20-inch OCSD trunk
sewer, a 36-inch MWD pipeline, a 16-inch water main, and a SCE/MCI Duct Bank. These utilities
would require special support during construction of the new 18-inch sewer, as the new sewer line
would need to be installed at a depth of approximately 16 feet, and this depth would increase with
distance from the existing facility. Construction along this segment of South Bristol Street would
require supporting the utilities from the top of the trench and/or the use of trench boxes/shields,
which would elongate the construction schedule. Due to these existing utility constraints, portions of
this roadway would need to be closed to accommodate construction associated with this alternative.
Moreover, the duration of construction for this alternative site location would greatly increase due to
the need to cross the railroad tracks running parallel and north of Alton Avenue. Implementation of
this alternative would otherwise be similar to the proposed Project during construction conditions.
San Lorenzo Lift Station EIR (Project No. 06-3510) 3-39
CEQA Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations
Chapter 3 Findings Regarding Project ANemathes Attachment "A"
is Development of a lift station at Alternative Site No. 18 would require the City to acquire private
property to accommodate the proposed lift station. In addition, this alternative would require the
City to acquire a temporary construction easement to facilitate construction of the proposed lift
station.
3.4.20.2 Summary Comparison of Environmental Effects
The environmental effects of constructing the proposed lift station at Alternative Site No. 18 in
comparison to the proposed Project site are shown in Final EIR Table 5-1 and described in detail in
RDEIR Section 5.4.20. This alternative would reduce the Project's significant and unavoidable
impact associated with Construction Configuration C.2 by two (2) weeks; however, this alternative
would result in a significant unavoidable impact to the capacity of the South Bristol Street roadway
for a total of 94 days (or 69 days longer than the proposed Project's significant unavoidable impact).
In addition, this alternative would result in significant unavoidable impacts to the intersection of
South Bristol Street/Alton Avenue for the five (5) days in which construction activities would occur
within the intersection, which represents a more severe impact to transportation/traffic than would
occur under the proposed Project. Furthermore, construction of a lift station at Alternative Site No.
18 would exacerbate an existing parking deficiency at this existing commercial retail building both
during construction and long-term operation, which would result in a total parking deficiency of 69
spaces and 58 spaces under near- and long-term conditions, respectively. Near- and long-term
impacts to parking at Alternative Site No. 18 would be a significant and immitigable impact. As such,
impacts to transportation/traffic would be greater at Alternative Site No. 18 as compared to the
proposed Project site.
• Total construction air quality/greenhouse gas emissions would be increased under this alternative due
to a longer construction period, although average daily construction emissions would be similar to
the proposed Project and would be less than significant. In addition, construction-related impacts to
water quality and hydrology would be increased under this alternative due to a larger area of impact,
but would remain below a level of significance. Impacts due to nighttime dewatering during
construction would be slightly decreased under this alternative and, as with the proposed Project,
would be reduced to less than significant levels with incorporation of Mitigation Measure 3.3-2. All
other impacts associated with noise would be similar to the proposed Project and would be less than
significant. Impacts related to utilities and service systems and water quality and hydrology (long-
term) would be similar to the proposed Project and would be less than significant. Impacts
associated with operational odors under accident conditions also would be slightly reduced under this
alternative; however, with implementation of Mitigation Measure MM 3.1-1, odor impacts would be
less than significant for this alternative and the proposed Project. All other long-term impacts to air
quality/greenhouse gas emissions would be similar to the proposed Project and would be less than
significant.
3.4.20.3 Finding and Rationale for Alternative Site No 18
The City hereby finds that specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations
make Alternative Site No. 18 infeasible.
Alternative Site No. 18 would result in an overall increase in impacts to transportation/traffic as
compared to the proposed Project. Although this alternative would reduce the Project's significant
and unavoidable impact associated with Construction Configuration C.2 by two (2) weeks, this
alternative would result in a significant unavoidable impact to the capacity of the South Bristol Street
San Lorenzo Lift Station EIR (Project No. 06-3510) 3-40
CEQA Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations
chapter 3 Findings Regarding Project Altemathes Attachment 'A"
roadway for a total of 94 days (or 69 days longer than the proposed Project's significant unavoidable
impact). In addition, this alternative would result in significant unavoidable impacts to the
intersection of South Bristol Street/Alton Avenue for the five (5) days in which construction
activities would occur within the intersection. This also represents a more severe impact to
transportation/traffic than would occur under the proposed Project. Furthermore, construction of a
lift station at Alternative Site No. 18 would exacerbate an existing parking deficiency at this existing
commercial retail building both during construction and long-term operation. Significant impacts to
parking would not occur under the proposed Project. In light of these considerations, the City finds
that Alternative Site No. 18 would result in an overall increase in near-term impacts to
transportation/traffic, and rejects this alternative as infeasible because it would not avoid or
substantially lessen any significant impacts of the Project. (CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6(b).)
This alternative also is rejected as infeasible because it would fail to meet, or would not be as
effective in achieving, the proposed Project's objectives. This alternative would exacerbate an
existing parking deficiency at an existing commercial retail building, and would, therefore, fail to
meet the Project's objective of avoiding detrimental effects to existing businesses. Detrimental
effects to business would be further exacerbated by ongoing construction in close proximity to the
existing commercial retail building. Further, unlike the proposed Project site where the City has an
existing sewer easement, construction at this location would require the City to acquire private
property to provide easements for proposed sewer lines. Finally, construction of the lift station at
this location would replace currently developed, useable land, in contrast to the proposed Project site,
which is vacant and undeveloped.
3.4.21 Alternative Site Location No. 19 (Alternative Site No. 19)
3.4.21.1 Summary of Alternative Site No. 19
Alternative Site Location Number 19 (Alternative Site No. 19) would involve the construction of a
new replacement lift station in the parking lot of an existing commercial retail center located at 3301-
3365 South Bristol Street in lieu of the proposed Project site. Alternative Site No. 19 is located
approximately 0.40-mile south of the proposed Project site. The location of Alternative Site No. 19
is depicted on Final EIR Figure 5-1.
The lift station that would be constructed at Alternative Site No. 19 would include a similar above-
ground block structure as the proposed Project. In addition, the lift station at Alternative Site No. 19
would feature similar equipment and appurtenances as the proposed Project. This alternative would
require the installation and operation of approximately 83 percent more underground sewer
conveyance infrastructure than the proposed Project and it is anticipated that the duration of
Construction Phase 11 would be increased by 89 work days (approximately 18 weeks) as compared
to the Project. The substantial increase in construction duration is due in part to the need to cross the
existing railroad tracks near the intersection of Alton Road/South Bristol Street, which would require
approximately six weeks (30 working days) to complete. The construction schedule for this
alternative would otherwise be similar to the Project.
This alternative would require construction activities within and adjacent to the South Bristol
Street/West Segerstrom Avenue intersection; however, the duration of construction activities would
be reduced to one (1) week under this alternative. Traffic control associated with demolition of the
existing lift station facility still would require up to two weeks; accordingly, under this alternative,
traffic control affecting the intersection of South Bristol Street/West Segerstrom Avenue would occur
San Lorenzo Lift Station EIR (Project No. 06-3510) 3-41
CEQA Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations
Chapter 3 Findings Regarding ProjectAliernatAfes Attachment "A-
• for a total duration of three weeks, rather than the five weeks associated with the proposed Project. In
addition, this alternative would not require implementation of Construction Configurations B.1, B.2,
or C.1. However, this alternative would require the installation of new sewer facilities beneath the
existing paved right-of-way of South Bristol Street that are not proposed as part of the proposed
Project (i.e., to the south of the South Bristol Street/West Segerstrom Avenue intersection). The
segment of South Bristol Street between this site and the existing lift station facility contains a 20-
inch OCSD trunk sewer, a 36-inch MWD pipeline, a 16-inch water main, and a SCE/MCI Duct Bank.
These utilities would require special support during construction of the new 18-inch sewer, as the
new sewer line would need to be installed at a depth of approximately 16 feet, and this depth would
increase with distance from the existing facility. Construction along this segment of South Bristol
Street would require supporting the utilities from the top of the trench and/or the use of trench
boxes/shields, which would elongate the construction schedule. Due to these existing utility
constraints beneath South Bristol Street, portions of this roadway would need to be closed to
accommodate construction associated with this alternative, which has the potential to result in
adverse effects to vehicular circulation. Moreover, the duration of construction for this alternative
site location would greatly increase due to the need to cross the railroad tracks running parallel and
north of Alton Avenue. Implementation of this alternative would otherwise be similar to the
proposed Project during construction conditions.
Development of a lift station at Alternative Site No. 19 would require the City to acquire private
property to accommodate the proposed lift station. In addition, this alternative would require the
City to acquire a temporary construction easement to facilitate construction of the proposed lift
station.
• 3.4.21.2 Summary Comparison of Environmental Effects
The environmental effects of constructing the proposed lift station at Alternative Site No. 19 in
comparison to the proposed Project site are shown in Final EIR Table 5-1 and described in detail in
RDEIR Section 5.4.21. This alternative would reduce the proposed Project's significant and
unavoidable impact associated with Construction Configuration C.2 by two (2) weeks; however, this
alternative would result in a significant unavoidable impact to the capacity of the South Bristol Street
roadway for a total of 109 days (or 89 days longer than the proposed Project's significant
unavoidable impact). Furthermore, construction of a lift station at Alternative Site No. 19 would
exacerbate an existing parking deficiency at this existing commercial retail building both during
construction and long-term operation. Near- and long-term impacts to parking at Alternative Site No.
19 would be a significant and unmitigable impact. As such, impacts to traffic and circulation would
be greater at Alternative Site No. 19 as compared to the proposed Project site.
Total construction air quality/greenhouse gas emissions would be increased under this alternative due
to a longer construction period, although average daily construction emissions would be similar to
the proposed Project and would be less than significant. In addition, construction-related impacts to
water quality and hydrology would be increased under this alternative due to a larger area of impact,
although such impacts would be less than significant. As with the proposed Project, impacts
associated with nighttime dewatering activities during construction would be reduced to less than
significant levels with compliance with Mitigation Measure MM 3.3-2. Long-term odor impacts
associated with accident conditions would be slightly decreased under this alternative in comparison
to the proposed Project and would be less than significant similar to the proposed Project. Impacts
related to long-term noise, utilities and service systems, and water quality and hydrology (long-term)
• would be similar to the proposed Project and would be less than significant.
San Lorenzo Lift Station EIR (Project No. 06-3510) 3-42
CEQA Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations
Chapter 3 Findings Regarding ProjectAlternathres Aftachment "A"
3.4.21.3 Finding and Rationale for Alternative Site No. 19
The City hereby finds that specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations
make Alternative Site No. 19 infeasible.
Alternative Site No. 19 would result in an overall increase in impacts to transportation/traffic as
compared to the proposed Project. Although this alternative would reduce the Project's significant
and unavoidable impact associated with Construction Configuration C.2 by two (2) weeks, this
alternative would result in a significant unavoidable impact to the capacity of the South Bristol Street
roadway for a total of 109 days (or 89 days longer than the proposed Project's significant
unavoidable impact). Furthermore, construction of a lift station at Alternative Site No. 18 would
exacerbate an existing parking deficiency at this existing commercial retail building both during
construction and long-term operation. Significant impacts to parking would not occur under the
proposed Project. In light of these considerations, the City finds that Alternative Site No. 19 would
result in an overall increase in near-term impacts to transportation/traffic, and rejects this alternative
as infeasible because it would not avoid or substantially lessen any of the significant effects of the
Project. (CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6(b).)
This alternative also is rejected as infeasible because it would fail to meet, or would not be as
effective in achieving, the proposed Project's objectives. This alternative would exacerbate an
existing parking deficiency at an existing commercial shopping center, and would, therefore, fail to
meet the Project's objective of avoiding detrimental effects to existing businesses. Detrimental
effects to business would be further exacerbated by ongoing construction in close proximity to the
existing commercial shopping center. Further, unlike the proposed Project site where the City has an
existing sewer easement, construction at this location would require the City to acquire private
property to provide easements for proposed sewer lines. Finally, construction of the lift station at
this location would replace currently developed, useable land, in contrast to the proposed Project site,
which is vacant and undeveloped.
3.4.22 Findings on Alternatives that were Considered but Eliminated from
Detailed Analysis in the Draft EIR
In addition to the 21 alternatives evaluated in the RDEIR, the Lead Agency considered two
additional alternatives. Both of these alternatives were eliminated from detailed analysis in the EIR
either because they did not meet the Project's basic objectives, would fail to reduce or avoid the
significant impacts of the Project as proposed, and/or were determined at the outset to be infeasible.
These alternatives are discussed below.
3.4.22.1 Saddleback High School Alternative
This alternative would involve the construction of a lift station at Saddleback High School, either on
a portion of the athletic field or parking lot adjacent to West Segerstrom Avenue. Such an alternative
would not require the acquisition of privately owned property.
The City hereby finds that specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations
make the adoption of this alternative infeasible. The Saddleback High School property is owned by a
public entity, the Santa Ana Unified School District (SAUSD). City staff inquired with the SAUSD
about use of the school's property for construction the lift station facility. In a letter dated April 11,
2011, the SAUSD rejected the concept because: 1) the District is currently in the design phase of
San Lorenzo Lift Station EIR (Project No. 06-3510) 3-43
CEQA Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations
Chapter 3 Findings Regarding ProjectAlternathnes Attachment "A"
• expanding the Saddleback High School and construction of the lift station would conflict with the
District's on-going plans to provide additional student facilities; 2) construction in the parking lot
adjacent to West Segerstrom would exacerbate already insufficient parking on-site for school events
and activities; and 3) construction that would result in the loss of a portion of the school's athletic
fields is prohibited under Title IX (1972 Education Amendments to the Civil Rights Act). SAUSD
is unwilling to offer use of the school property for construction of the lift station, and has provided
several reasons why construction of the lift station is inconsistent with ongoing SAUSD uses at the
school site. Because the property in question is currently owned and used by the SAUSD, it is likely
protected from the City's powers of eminent domain under the doctrine of prior public use. In order
to challenge the school's ownership of the property, the City would be required to file suit to
appropriate the site for a more necessary public use under Code of Civil Procedure §1240.610.
Given the proposed use as a lift station facility, compared to the current use as an educational
institution, such a suit would be unlikely to succeed. In any event, it is not City policy to exercise its
eminent domain powers on school property for public works projects. For these reasons,
construction of the lift station on the Saddleback High School campus is not feasible.
Additionally, construction of a lift station on the campus of Saddleback High School would not
reduce the significant and unavoidable short-term traffic impact associated with the proposed Project.
Construction of a lift station facility at the Saddleback High School would require the construction of
a manhole in the intersection of South Bristol Street/West Segerstrom Avenue, thereby resulting in a
need to implement Construction Configuration C.2 for up to five (5) weeks during construction on a
24-hour basis. As with the proposed Project, 24-hour lane closures associated with Construction
Configuration C.2 would result in a significant and unavoidable impact of the proposed Project. As
• implementation of Construction Configuration C.2 is the only impact of the proposed Project that
cannot be reduced to less than significant levels with the incorporation of mitigation measures, this
alternative site location would fail to meet CEQA's stated purpose of considering and discussing
alternatives in an EIR. CEQA Guidelines §15126.6(b) requires that "...the discussion of alternatives
shall focus on alternatives to the project or its location which are capable of avoiding or substantially
lessening any significant effects of the project..." CEQA Guidelines §15126.6(f)(2) further requires
that, in making the decision to include or exclude analysis of an alternative site, the "...key question
and first step in analysis is whether any of the significant effects of the project would be avoided or
substantially lessened by putting the project in another location. Only locations that would avoid or
substantially lessen any of the significant effects of the project need to be considered for inclusion in
the EIR." Since construction of the proposed Project at the Saddleback High School would fail to
avoid or substantially lessen the Project's sole unavoidable impact to transportation/traffic, such an
alternative is rejected as infeasible because it would fail to meet the standards for project alternatives
as set forth in CEQA Guidelines § 15126.6(b) or § 15126.6(f)(2).
3.4.22.2 Retrofitted Segerstrom Lift Station Alternative
Under this alternative, the City would retrofit and upgrade the existing Segerstrom Lift Station
facility rather than constructing a replacement facility in another location.
The City hereby finds that specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations
make the adoption of this alternative infeasible. This alternative would fail to meet several of the
Project's basic objectives. Specifically, retrofitting of the existing Segerstrom Lift Station would not
allow the City to house electrical equipment above-ground. In addition, retrofitting the existing lift
station would require upgrades to existing electrical equipment and installation of additional
• equipment; the addition of new equipment would further restrict workable space within the facility,
San Lorenzo Lift Station EIR (Project No. 06-3510) 3-44
CEQA Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations
Chapter 3 Findings Regarding Project AitematNes Attachment 'A'
and therefore would not meet the Project's objective to "Provide a lift station facility that provides
sufficient access space for maintenance of the lift station facility." Moreover, such an alternative
would fail to meet the Project's objective to construct a replacement lift station facility located
outside of the public rights-of-way so as to minimize potential safety conflicts between motorists and
maintenance personnel. Finally, such an alternative would not achieve the Project's objective to
construct a new lift station facility, as this alternative would not involve the construction of a new lift
station but rather would involve upgrades to the existing facility.
3.4.23 Additional Findings
3.4.23.1 Findings Related to Recirculation of the RDEIR
CEQA Guidelines Section 15088.5 describes the conditions under which a Draft EIR that was
circulated for public review is required to be re-circulated for additional public review and comment.
CEQA Guidelines Section 15088.5 states that new information added to a Draft EIR is not significant
unless the Draft EIR is changed in a way that deprives the public of a meaningful opportunity to
comment upon a substantial adverse effect of the project or a feasible way to mitigate or avoid such
an effect (including a feasible project alternative) that the project's proponents have declined to
implement. "Significant new information" requiring recirculation includes, for example, a disclosure
showing that:
• A new significant environmental impact would result from the project or from a new
mitigation measure proposed to be implemented.
• A substantial increase in the severity of an environmental impact would result unless
mitigation measures are adopted that reduce the impact to a level of insignificance.
• A feasible project alternative or mitigation measure considerably different from the others
previously analyzed would clearly lessen the significant environmental impacts of the
project, but the project's proponents decline to adopt it.
• The RDEIR was so fundamentally and basically inadequate and conclusory in nature that
meaningful public review and comment were precluded.
As described in Section F.2 of the Final EIR, No Revisions to the Proposed Project, following receipt
of comments from the public in response to the 47-day public review period for the RDEIR, the City
evaluated the comments received and responded to all substantive comments (refer to Section F.3 of
the Final EIR). As indicated in the responses to public comment letters provided in Section F.3 of
the Final EIR, Responses to Comments, no comments were received on the RDEIR that warrant
revision to the analysis of the Project's impacts to the environment.
Additionally, the Final EIR does not identify any new significant environmental impacts that were
not already identified by the RDEIR, and no new mitigation measures were imposed on the proposed
Project that could result in a new significant environmental impact. The Final EIR also does not
identify any increases in the severity of any environmental impacts that were disclosed in the RDEIR,
and new mitigation measures are not required in order to reduce the severity of such environmental
impacts to a level below significant.
In addition, public comment letters on the RDEIR did not identify any new mitigation measures or
alternatives to the proposed Project that are considerably different from those already evaluated by
San Lorenzo Lift Station EIR (Project No. 06-3510) 3-45
CEQA Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations
Chapter 3 Findings Regarding Project Aitemathfes Attachment 'A'
• the RDEIR; accordingly, no feasible alternatives or mitigation measures were identified by the public
that would clearly lessen the significant environmental impacts of the proposed Project.
Finally, the City of Santa Ana finds that the RDEIR was comprehensive and thorough, and was
sufficient to provide the public with meaningful opportunities to comment.
Based on the foregoing, the City of Santa Ana has determined that recirculation of the RDEIR is not
warranted pursuant to Section 15088.5 of the State CEQA Guidelines.
3.4.23.2 Finding Related to the Analysis of Alternatives
The City Council finds that the RDEIR's analysis of alternatives complies with CEQA Guidelines
Section 15126.6 by providing sufficient information about each alternative to allow meaningful
evaluation, analysis and comparison with the proposed Project. Specifically, the detailed analysis in
RDEIR Section 5.0 and the summary provided in the RDEIR Table 5-1 give the City Council
sufficient information about each alternative, both before and after mitigation, to permit a reasoned
choice.
The City Council further finds that while the EIR's assessment of potential feasibility of alternatives
is informative, only City Council has the authority to make the findings required by CEQA. (CEQA
Guidelines §15025(b)(2) [reviewing body may not delegate the making of findings required by
CEQA Guidelines sections 15091 and 15093].) The findings presented herein reflect City Council's
consideration of all comments received in the RDEIR and Final EIR, and reflect the City Council's
final determination regarding feasibility, regardless of any statements of feasibility in the EIR.
• Finally, the City Council finds that using a submersible pump at the existing lift station as an
alternative to the proposed project, as has been suggested by a commenter, is not feasible for all of
the reasons set forth above in Section 3.4.22.2 of these Findings, explaining why the City would not
retrofit and upgrade the existing Segerstrom Lift Station facility rather than constructing a
replacement facility in another location.
•
San Lorenzo Lift Station EIR (Project No. 06-3510) 3-46
CEQA Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations
Chapter 3 Findings Regarding Project Attemathres Attachment "A"
Chapter 4 - Statement of Overriding Considerations
4.1 Introduction
Section 15093 of the CEQA guidelines states:
(a) CEQA requires the decision-making agency to balance, as applicable, the economic,
legal, social, technological, or other benefits of a proposed project against its
unavoidable environmental risks when determining whether to approve the project. If
the specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits of a proposed
project outweigh the unavoidable adverse environmental effects, the adverse
environmental effects may be considered "acceptable."
(b) When the lead agency approves a project which will result in the occurrence of
significant effects which are identified in the final EIR but are not avoided or
substantially lessened, the agency shall state in writing the specific reason to support
its actions based on the final EIR and/or other information in the record. The
statement of overriding considerations shall be supported by substantial evidence in
the record.
(c) If an agency makes a statement of overriding considerations, the statement should be
included in the record of the project approval and should be mentioned in the notice
of determination. This statement does not substitute for, and shall be in addition to,
findings required pursuant to Section 15091.
This Statement of Overriding Considerations describes the anticipated economic, social, and other
benefits or other considerations of the Project to support the decision to proceed with the Project
even though not all of the identified impacts are mitigated to a less-than-significant level.
4.2 Unavoidable Significant Adverse Impacts
Even with mitigation measures identified in the Final EIR for the Project, the following significant
impact is unavoidable because no feasible mitigation is available to further reduce the impact to a
less-than-significant level. Refer to Chapter 2, CEQA Findings, for further clarification regarding the
impact listed below.
Transportation/Traffic
Impacts to Intersection Operations During Implementation of Construction Configuration C.2 under
Transportation/Traffic Threshold 1: Implementation of Construction Configuration C.2, which would
occur on a 24-hour basis for up to a total of five weeks, would result in deficient levels of service at
the intersection of South Bristol Street/West Segerstrom Avenue between the hours of 7:15 a.m. to
8:00 a.m. and between the hours of 2:30 p.m. and 6:45 p.m. (Monday through Friday). This impact
is considered a near-term impact, and would only occur during the five weeks of construction during
which Construction Configuration C.2 would be in place. Mitigation Measures MM 3.4-3 and MM
3.4-5 have been imposed on the Project and will reduce, to the maximum feasible extent, the
San Lorenzo Lift Station EIR (Project No. 06-3510) 4-47
CEQA Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations
Chapter 3 Findings Regarding Project Altemathm Attachment "A"
. Project's impacts to this intersection. However, the only way to completely avoid this impact would
be to prohibit traffic control measures during peak hours. Prohibiting traffic control measures is not
technically feasible due to the extent of required improvements and associated traffic control
measures. Furthermore, construction of a manhole within the intersection of South Bristol
Street/West Segerstrom Avenue would require the excavation of a large hole that would preclude the
City's ability to safely remove traffic control measures. Accordingly, the City finds that this impact is
significant and unavoidable.
4.3 Overriding Considerations
The City hereby finds that economic, legal, social, technological or other benefits of the Proposed
Project outweigh the significant and unavoidable impacts identified in the EIR. In making this
finding, the City has balanced the benefits of the Project against its unavoidable significant impact
and has indicated its willingness to accept that adverse impact. The Santa Ana City Council finds that
the following benefits of the Proposed Project warrant approval of the Proposed Project
notwithstanding its significant, unavoidable environmental impact.
Having (i) adopted all feasible mitigation measures, (ii) rejected as infeasible alternatives to the
Project discussed above, (iii) recognized all significant, unavoidable impacts, and (iv) balanced the
benefits of the proposed Project against the its significant and unavoidable impact, the City hereby
finds that its benefits outweigh and override its significant unavoidable impact for the reasons stated
below. Each benefit set forth below constitutes an overriding consideration warranting approval of
the Project, independent of the other benefits, despite the Project's unavoidable impact.
• 4.3.1 Project Benefits
1. The construction and operation of a lift station facility facilitates a public need for the
conveyance and treatment of wastewater generated in this portion of the City, and the Project
is necessary to ensure the City's continued ability to provide for this essential public service.
2. The Project will provide for a new replacement lift station incorporating modern equipment
that will reduce the potential for sewer spills and equipment failure in the local area as
compared to existing conditions.
3. The Project will provide for a new lift station facility that houses electrical equipment above
ground, thereby reducing the potential for power failures during peak storm events as
compared to the existing condition.
4. The Project will enhance the safety of City maintenance personnel by providing for a
replacement lift station that is located outside of the rights-of-way of major thoroughfares
and that provides ample working space to conduct maintenance activities.
5. The Project will reduce long-term impacts to transportation/traffic and will improve vehicular
safety by eliminating the need for lane closures during routine maintenance of the lift station
facility, which is required under existing conditions.
6. The Project will incorporate modern odor control equipment that will reduce the potential for
exposing nearby sensitive receptors to objectionable odors as compared to existing conditions.
7. The Project will provide for landscape and hardscape improvements that will enhance the
appearance of the Project area.
•
San Lorenzo Lift Station EIR (Project No. 06-3510) 4-48
CEQA Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations
Chapter 3 Findings Regarding ProjectAilemathees Attachment W
8. The Project will provide all of the benefits listed above at a small, vacant, undeveloped
property through which the City has an existing sewer easement, and in close proximity to
the existing Lift Station, which minimizes the length of new sewer main required.
San Lorenzo Lift Station EIR (Project No. 06-3510) 4-49
CEQA Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations
ATTACHMENT "B"
•
SAN LORENZO LIFT STATION PROJECT
•
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
Prepared for:
The City of Santa Ana
Public Works Agency
Water Resources Division
200 S. Daisy Avenue
Corporate Yard, MS 85
Santa Ana, CA 92703
Prepared by.
T&B Planning, Inc.
17542 East 17111 Street, Suite 100
Tustin, CA 92780
February 2012
40
ATTACHMENT "B"
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
1.1 Introduction
This document reflects the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) requirements of
Public Resources Cod (PRC) Section 21081.6. The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
Guidelines Section 15097 states:
...In order to ensure that the mitigation measures and project revisions identified in the EIR
or negative declaration are implemented, the public agency shall adopt a program for
monitoring or reporting on the revisions which it has required in the project and the measures
it has imposed to mitigate or avoid significant environmental effects. A public agency may
delegate reporting or monitoring responsibilities to another public agency or to a private
entity which accepts the delegation; however, until mitigation measures have been completed
the lead agency remains responsible for ensuring that implementation of the mitigation
measures occurs in accordance with the program.
1.2 Enforcement
in accordance with CEQA, the primary responsibility for making determinations with respect to
potential environmental effects rests with the lead agency rather than the monitor or preparer. As
such, the City of Santa Ana is identified as the enforcement agency for this MMRP.
1.3 Program Modification
After review and approval by the lead agency, minor changes to the MMRP are permitted but can
only be made by the City of Santa Ana. No deviations from this MMRP shall be permitted unless it
continues to satisfy the requirements of PRC Section 21081.6, as determined by the lead agency.
1.4 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
The organization of this MMRP follows the subsection formatting style as presented within the San
Lorenzo Sewer Lift Station Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR). Only those subsections of
the environmental issues presented in the EIR that have mitigation measures are provided below in
Table 1, Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Matrix. All other subsections in the EIR do
not contain mitigation measures.
San Lorenzo Lift Station EIR (Project No. 06-3510) MMRP-1
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
z
w
x
U
Q
F
F
•
d
G
v
a
3
N
m
C?
L
v)
C
t
OTC
C
v
z
C?
L
C
CD
F
T
U T
O C ?
C
Q
rn ?
w3 ?3 ?
O •° p _U U
U a U
U a a
v
a
o w a w
? o
o
a v `° o
O G
C's v
° >
0
?
° a 3 C
o a a c'o
a o o
W R U U Pr
O •'C1 y 5 0-
-8 L1 •U p - 0 00 p '
Cd w
u .)
Q v a U
? ° •>
> E a .
v > p"
v a c o v C.w c
a
? ? ° v c o.o
? "D y O U
U
O
v ? ?
? ? 3
0 o v
U C -o c ?
a._ 'o o°= o
? ? C cC C? •O V
0 0 0 o v v^ v 3 o v v b v v v o v N v
v, ^O .? F-? .O E-? 3 '? «i +?" cOV [?-? •? .? > '
>i v v m
v
,, o c c bq.5 = a o 0 0
o o
cd
,+
y
O
p
0
c 4 0 'o
C fi
O
-? > R
. c
d O o
O N N
O
0
C's
° n 3
vi v 'ti
° E c o
3 c
o
'
°' YC
fi
O
U' v, O N a., U
.
Q
r o o
't
ca v 3 Y
"o
? v v
v Q u C v o„? cn
-E
, y o
.
o w ° o
'J
-0 cj
C
O w N O y '+? U 3 'G ,L G a ° +•O Y U
o ?
N E
T Y X N z K -,z Q
, .
c cOV N .? 'D h •fl '?' o
T O O C ccl u u w O. L'.
Y
N U .D v? U O .? 'b cC Y cC bA `n 7 .° - y O O Y O. L 0 O O fi
on N
o• o
a? S
c N a
u
¢ o°¢
fi
Y
N v
c
a
i
o w
y 3 c o 3 v v ° 0 2> v> °
cn C 4
°? v fi
O
U 3 L> ° Bpi ?' c0 L
o7t
° i1 p N
5
Cd
_
v v$ 0 0
E- v' 3 o F" o v
U >. C v, i.. `" O ?- «'?. 'C7 C rZ . G O
ti
t
"
°
? N r o= fi fi i o
O .O O O N U
.L
o
O U c? ?,
U N v ^'
•? b U U CJ
N
'
i>° c v au 9 y 3> a to ? v -
U v' b
C? U Oq U U U O 5
o Y r w y R v
a ro
E 3
o o„c ?rrfi'??
0 0 0
v > a°>.
a un n. o
3 a° U Q °
? M
a
L ? N M
C
N
a
w
O
v-?
M
Cd
z°
a
N ?
O ?
L O
Q. ¢
W ?
cc
0 on
0
.a So
O
a to
CZ?
a
N
z
w
x
c?
H
H
Q
C
v
T
U
? bUA .? O
0
Q, 0
O 'U > U
Y ? O
U O
U a Q w
W W 4J
0 o Y
W ?
v o api °' ° c a
cd `? c
to cd a? o on ? o ?
U 67 c p' on.? ?' os a
0
U
G
.
N U
0
`C O
y
? O
6
7 .? y 'Y O
0
w° w
3
?°
Q u
"
n a c
7
R
'c a
¢
Id m J8 -?
R
y `On N N C b U P O N •> C???? >
.
C, 0 3 F •? O '? 'o?_n ? ? Q? to u a •? ?
v ¢ y , 4 `z a7 ' L ccj o a?i
cl,
ca O y
p 0 0 C c3 p U p 00 _p
U 0 0
Y
ao°
bf)
O
•° W O
°A •U C •?'- 67 ° O 637 r-
,
Y
•
clj
o y a d z °s o o
o w c Y c x o Z mm •? ? s
h ?
U Z p fi `'?? i' fi d d
I
d? N
Q
Q S h
? y? i A r [
id C
? ? fi ti? O Q U U
y W O O
? U N ? ?' ? Q? y
3
'?
y O
S
?
y
?
y fi Q?
U Q V c' O i ?,
a
0
W .L
Q
? ? O bq
v s
V
'D
O N v i Qy .r fi U ,
y
.
?'"' O O Y N Y ..0 'sz p O r K '.•?`•
O N
U fi U ,"O
Q fi pQ •? y i '"
?
0 Q
Q ?' y v d fi
C> ti ,b 'y ?'" Y hfi
Q fi y fi h ¢' fi Zt
cU. U G 0 N
fi
fi v '? V p
go C, fi ?1
to b ¢i
a7 O K U ro 7 C C y fi O U o Q Q ?, ?' •.., y
a 67 67
°'
d
?
O d
o c
i ZZ4 a
i
c
s
°'
Q
O N
fi U y
0 0 42 ° °' y
m v '?
v v O
cu =' O v m Q tG °
C •°
67
o = o° fi? i t oo r s 2
? G Q .? ? ? m i w a7 •
? ? -o ? 3 a •? ? o ?
?, .? w z a, ? Q Q r ? m
_
," ^
?
U p
?
? _
U
? N '6
U ? ? ^O 0
y
'? h
y
V ? ? 4
y ?'
v
+
,
fi o._ ; '
fi
a d
v a ,
.
U
N +
0 .
„ U Q
U
c ? ° mti
ZS U ? d fi d
fi
' N U y d 01
S O j
•.. .+ ? O C ? '0 ? ;b [? U fi 'ZS fi Q fi ??
•
C If'
' ?
O
S Q o'
Q Cr 'w ?, 7zt fi O
4,
Q _
V O
Q
L
Q ca w in 44? U U w ca O Q
"?
N
M
rM
.C
C
v
c
0
c
0
?O
O
Z
O
3
O
C
J
CR
0
kn
M
O Lam,
z°
Q..
N C
O ?
L O
. b4
Rj+ C
.a O
N
N O
O C8
? bq
H
z
w
x
U
Q
F
F
Q
•
C
O
Z
3
O
O
vJ
v
?, •r m s 'ZS ? ? ?, ?; 'ZS r oo m •? m m
N O Q
?O
?
U
??
5
.
d S l O O •
2
•l p O S O
Y Y
'?^ fi
S •G ... p0 Y h cN U ti •ti O O ?" O c
r O
•? ti c
c q Ll 2
t" ms s" .
°
c
?" O Z
fi
fi O U
c? Oi
o_ o d •; s i ry o s c _` s° o? r v o;
o s a s
fi r o h ?? o ?? yam U
4.p Q U ,O -O O Q ° v, y S i
`' O U p Oq Al
tY O U 4 m
° 'ZI
i
p d 2t y .? '? O Sy
.Z .? d o p •? :j Z Ci
Z
'w ,? p? O
p
c ti
o m c .v m o i y U p r;, ' °-' ?
s
Q 'O .y s o o
o y s .fi '
h O d S fi c °' Z v .Q y K O .? ? z ? 'Z3 r z s
?"t U 0 r '?
°y c
ac? -rS h
zs
y C O a p z
? s °
° ° r° q
? ° O C Q o o O
o
?
o
B ?o a t? c 4 3 0o c c o oa o U O c c y 3 •r q O
Ci
m
CC
C
z
O
C
O
m
IT
a
a
0
C
kn
M
0
z
U
U
2
a
W
C
0
N
N
L
an
O
a
bq
C
O
'a
C
c?
bn
a
0
c
O
F
z
w
c
U
d
F
F
d
G
a
Z
N
'C
m
C
a
c
O
C
C?
L
m
v
fi fi v y O" o •y O '? S Cs i° v i h Q ) o ti
fi 0 •? ° ? O? ? S fi U N ? ti0?i '? ??? fi O fi? U fi U
(Z' to Z 4 s q, fi ° d Z! o Q' '? fi o v
d o fi 3'5, 2z, z o Q s m s r
S: ?3 Z3
-,Z5 En
•O a o ° i v' d h ° i r o c w i v Q
O ° ? -O ? •?. ? •? ? ? ? ? ? h y y fi .? v fi •O -D y -O vi U ?
r Ci s Q fi chi C fi d UO ?O U y fi l 'b G O
° o 0 00? i °Q ?4? r 3 ?O Q y 1s o n
U
G ?
pq O
Q Q cUd
? O O
?3 U
w
U a a.
•
0
G o
o Y
? o
on ? ? ^
G ?, N b
caUa?
0
U 0. F :Y ^' N b0 O? rG_C
.ice. ' ?'" O U' U O N?
id 'd O b ? ? ? r3 ?O
a ?8 c,
o i
G U ? O U U y. >
[.La E . U cC R C/2 Q
a Q r. -0
U G G 7 U 0 ?' ti
? O W i rn N G s..
o '° 3 a? ? 0 3 > .°
U cd ? ? ,*? U -? Q U
o ?
a M F. ?mp^ O
•? o Q ? o ? u°o?
y ti b O Q G ai G
•?-U t U O O OCL
K aNi O V] ? ? ? bq O G
cu r
u
CM
G
a
a
0
M C
i G
O C's
z°
a
a0i bGA
In.
W a
o Cd
y aQ
Y •?
? s.
0
N
? O
Ll
to
0 V
C
F
z
w
x
U
d
F
F
Q
•
•
o?
C
O
M
?o
0
Z
.Q
Q cOa
ro
L
?
C
U a a.
c
c °•o 0 3 o 4 C c c a
o
> v 7
0
2 °
`
Ua
°
d.
3
a
.
.S
R
cf Dn
r. c
.
•
0
a
O v p
4'.w? Ow
4. vi U A
i N C C G
? CC U N
w m Y 7- c
M as UUC..)
ro
a Y a? o c o o ?z- box
0 0° c .? Y c s v o °'
lu „
c
bb
°
O ??'., O .D O N N O GO .D 4. y ^ N N N C
? ? ? ? a a o to
n c Y ? c c 3 ? ? ?
0 o
? Q O O y
c z n U c
V y a ca ? O ?-• ? ?
U
>
? o o?
v
' o c°
i C
o C
°?
'
c, > on
a a v ^
Q
?
cn 3 c
n
c c, O v? c „ a c
o'>3awQ oc? aoo? aao?a
?? ?
c? x c 'C ° cd o c c •D F" Q Q y G a o Y ^? y
° Cn o c -,->, c ° S, ZO ° w o o a^?i
°o Q a?
ca M 3° 3 U ej U °' c '`? o
U
° ff c
^v H O a?
O N ?Q C1,,.D O y b00 w O .? O N
ti
V] O
U .D
.L'
C
? .C .C c °
q 'c3
C O
o c Q
v .?
°?
c C C 2?,
c
„ 3 c° 3 E- o-•- w c
b0 F U Q a v .
°
°o c .D
a
° c
° o o a
7
o
u
a N U 6) n ? ? ? --+ Y ? ? ? c3 'O LL F? O..L-+ X bCq O ? N ,? ? p
Y y .n L
.9
C vOi ?.' bb 00
4
v
N a
"O .1- ^p " k- Q C on 4.. p y i
C m °
O
°
3
c
O ?. O`
a N N ^C
o c
a?
v a? ao> c
c v c o
3v
3 a
.•
c o v
_
>
c. a? ° y ¢? a o c ?^
a> on c° v
z C:
n o 3 w
.
ocn aU Caa cz ov ._ a a o. ZQ c,o°U 0 0
o
O
N
7
r
G
C
t
C
O
C
O
C
O
C?
L
m
a
?o
a
94
0
Ln
M E
O sue..
z°
a
a ?
W?
C cd
o ?
c
•L
O
N
aci o
O
? aip
a
F
z
w
x
U
F
F
d
C
v
Z
QI
O
m
Y?^
vI
76
2
C
v
mOC
O
C
v)
?C
L
r
m
O
C
sC.
CID
an
0
Y
L
m
V
C ?
C
V,
C YO
¢ ¢ U
to X 2
G C'
C O O
u3 U
p U U
U
C? a a
b Y w ? ?
O ' ^ Q ca ? C • ? O '7 ti bO ? ? O ? ?
Y o
V) Con
•
_ o 0 0
O i sue.
C a E
O .? ba.0 •? !S
44••? .`?, c? U C M
uC, N C U ?
a C U C O
as ?UUoo
•
' C U Z y G O b cOd .y N Q ^a ?'
C13 vs
a U (? F pU .-. A. O rn U U y? 0
t: Q
R Y a¢ y0, O v, E U' C 0 y t. O
a F 'o o M o
C.1, U Y Z F 10, C .o .Ly U C' Lj U
.? 3 'n.. ° o
a > $ = a
c Lon v Q a?i o c, Q ° j aUi
Uy ?.a c. c 8 C3 a 3
c4a U t-- O ?--' :? ti i CO C U 000
03 bb
9:6 C5
Lon 0
Q ° a U Q
M
U
G ?
A bUO O
Q ¢ Ud
? O O
C3 U
?O U U
U
U a w
c o c
v ? V1 C U cUC 'D ? aUi
Y?„^ v •? L 's. ? O O C ? ? GOO 00 Gn ?
U Y bD ? .0.O U 6. O Y •F.
Y C.
a` .° y c° v rig Q .5 a o cUa ° 3 c 3 GG
•
U c
0
O C
cC ? 4C?
c U w ?
O y b4 ?
U ? y ?=
4 C
U
ca L„ U ?
? cOa C O N
O
a a °UU
•
00 a?i ,) O O .? bCO bCO N . C U Z C O K
00
th a)
O '. Q V] •C U t C s. G4 C C a/
U I" ca C?l
At C N O '? R. v," O W
4, •C ? ? ? N a w ^
O C C ?, y Q? p p 0.1 Q tU- O
L'a
-- y o 3^ Z H v a E
° N C •=b?'O yQ 29
c. U Y ca ? y Y
? ° `a 3 0 ?? a Gl? a U a c .5 ?
a
Id C's
° U R' £ ° ?
Gn Y y `a ? .o c? U o ? c«C o -o F ? w
o ,? o y a `o Z Q U ID 4)
Q a v 8° Q 0° as °U Q i Q y
v
rM
a
0
M
O ?
z°
aUi GSA
O ?
W "d
o `a
C4 'C
.? o
w •?
,.a o
N
o
o 'Y
C
F
z
w
x
d
H
H
Q
•
•
O
Z
Q
O
C
E
O
A
19
o
Q' Q U
? N V
G F
O O
?
?3 U
'IOU
U a a
'D F
a?
O
•? ? ? ? ? U cFa ? ?
"
E F c CO
c° a
03
p'
er
cn ?
a o cl cl V) °F 0
•
0F
U
c
o y an
a
?
U O b
_
O
`?•? ?nUW
2 U W
h ..?.+ t
?a bq ?
F
C
.
u
as °UL1
cF6 C ai U
ca
' °
3
O ..C C
to .G'
b4 .C
to h F ca 'Cf OF U O D U F N
O '°
.-. :?
cC `C N b
0
F O 'O
.L
Y .
+ ca
O
O •
W 'ca
U
G ,
O s
?
?
o y n.
F c y
F y ai c ca o
v 3 an F- . .
y
^a ro to `: N F .F y 7 a? U W nu v? a
-2 UO .2 r. r-
>
° - t 4 ° N ° a ° 3 F ° ?_
h
d) f k"' YO ? ?' N O Q `" n > 121. Z 0.4-. .. W ^ ?? Q =
Fa
O N Q N `
O ca C R c
C
;? ca N =a ti ai U F ° .
° tF° y w ,?, p O O ti +O- O y
O " C..) ^d R 'D cFa .D m R
' > ° .C ` O 0. W Q
V] p
O b ca '?
- .b cFa
^
? G F ca
O
N 7 7 .a.
A 7 O F
O b y
.? ? ? F •?
Cl O p
rn c,.. F ca O rn
O C ?
•? ?
cFa a
i
a? N
F '° bA
c?
'?
A •
te-, ° Y p- o by to p ?bA
.
a F 8
c y
a ,L' O
to r bb
rn
in C
o O
O
ca
F t,7 a
^
'F
U
°
' ca
w °U. m
o
0
0
o O
y F N
0
Ca ?c° a.3 0uc/ ¢OU o
0
0
v?
v
M
C?
L
C
t
DC
c
0
z
C
O
C
O
C?
C
r
v
o0
a
0
M E
O i
z°
a
O ?
c'" O
W ?
C ca
O ?
? F
O
? •c
r? O
N
a?i O
O C4
j to
c
Ln
ao
F
z
x
U
a
F
F
Q
Q
O
r
M
?o
0
Z
O
C
h
C
t
C
v
z
C
O
C?
L
m
.D
v
T T
bA ° c
C by °
Q' ¢ U ¢ Q U
w 3 U w? U
O ..V. U
U O. U U
N
U 0. 0. U 0. 0.
b
O T C y C C C O O^ y c^Od ? ?
E c Ga ° w °'
a
o
° c°
z 3 ari Q
a ovn
a o eat c
• 0 30
Z-
•
° 11
'
c
0 3 v
cc H y ?
U C y0 ro °a = cai
z b0 Q'
U O
? Q O
N+ 4,
O .[ N
~ °
U
?
C bo
O 4., +
a
U
U cC
'
„ ?
=U -GO
o N H c
.
a a.<°U-°M Z ?.flOY
'D U 'U '6 G' by X L: U 't7 U ^' N U O 4•• N r.. O q 4. -p y
N Q F.., ° a cC y U ca 1+ ^p ¢ f'^ N P. U Vl
°
O
?a
avO
'?"¢ o
U bA U ,
OO
O.
M N 0
l bh U C?, a U U ,? 0
v c^CC U
N C '? 0.¢ O N N Ga C C N> O .? R a N° aYi G CIO
E C o70 ai 0 6
^O U z F F- > •? o
.? w
y
¢ ?° a p
O O 0.
0 0 7 ^O y 0¢ N N N
a
Y
0
cC U U N ?, b
' o
' y¢ m O C bA ti
bA ^O bq
•; G C'L3i -d • F ? w o O
U
Q U rte- vi Q 7^ O Y O s, •? .Y
^ N i ti N bn t
R to
w .C U
CA
to .n ti to to V C Q t) .0 U .
0 to U
U o
i N O cC V
o
In.
° G cNa
o w U o a°Ji
c3
v
U o p o 0
14?
°
i Lt i a'? E
E= ° O Z a a n o °' a? o N
o c :5 b
0 0
M
M
cr)
a;
0i
0
M
°
z a
O t:
O
a ?
CG ?,
W ?
C ?
O OA
? • L,
0
N
L O
O •Y
bb
C