CC Resolution 2001-165RESOLUTION 2001-165
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, CERTIFYING A MITIGATED
NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
FOR ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 2001-438
PREPARED FOR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 2001-
694, THE LA QUINTA COMMUNITY PARK
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 2001-438
APPLICANT: CITY OF LA QUINTA
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of La Quinta, California, did, on
the 6th day of November, 2001, 4tn day of December, 2001 and 18t`' day of
December, 2001, hold duly noticed Public Hearings to consider Environmental
Assessment 2001-438 for Capital Improvement Project 2001-694, located at the
northeast corner of Adams Street and Westward Ho Drive, more particularly described
as follows:
APN: 604-061-006
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California,
did, on the 23rd day of October, 2001 hold a duly noticed Public Hearing to consider
Environmental Assessment 2001-438 for Capital Improvement Project 2001-694,
located at the northeast corner of Adams Street and Westward Ho Drive; and
WHEREAS, said Environmental Assessment has complied with the
requirements of The California Environmental Quality Act and the Rules to Implement
the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970" (as amended; Resolution 83-68
adopted by the La Quinta City Council) in that the Community Development
Department has prepared an Initial Study (EA 2001-438) and has determined that
although the proposed Capital Improvement Project 2001-694 could have a significant
adverse impact on the environment, there would not be a significant effect in this case
because appropriate mitigation measures were made a part of the assessment and
included in the conditions of approval and a Mitigated Negative Declaration of
Environmental Impact should be filed; and,
WHEREAS, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments,
if any, of all interested persons desiring to be heard, said City Council did find the
following facts, findings, and reasons to justify certifying said Environmental
Assessment:
1. The proposed Capital Improvement Project will not be detrimental to the health,
safety, or general welfare of the community, either indirectly, or directly, in that
no significant unmitigated impacts were identified by Environmental Assessment
2001-438.
GAWPDOCS\CCReso-COA\CIPEA438Park. wpd
Resolution 2001-165
Environmental Assessment.2001-438
Capital Improvement Project 2001-694
December 18, 2001
2. The proposed Capital Improvement Project will not have the potential to degrade
the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or
wildlife population to drop below self sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a
plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of rare or
endangered plants or animals or eliminate important examples of the major
periods of California history or prehistory.
3. There is no evidence before the City that the proposed project will have the
potential for an adverse effect on wildlife resources or the habitat on which the
wildlife depends.
4. The proposed Capital Improvement Project does not have the potential to
achieve short-term environmental goals, to the disadvantage of long-term
environmental goals, as no significant effects on environmental factors have
been identified by the Environmental Assessment.
5. The proposed Capital Improvement Project will not result in impacts which are
individually limited or cumulatively considerable when considering planned or
proposed development in the immediate vicinity, as development patterns in the
area will not be significantly affected by the proposed project.
6. The proposed Capital Improvement Project will not have environmental effects
that will adversely affect the human population, either directly or indirectly, as
no significant impacts have been identified which would affect human health,
risk potential or public services.
7. There is no substantial evidence in light of the entire record that the project may
have a significant effect on the environment.
8. The City Council has considered the Environmental Assessment 2001-438 and
the Environmental Assessment reflects the independent judgement of the City.
9. The City has on the basis of substantial evidence, rebutted the presumption of
adverse effect set forth in 14 CAL Code Regulations 753.5(d).
10. The location and custodian of the City's records relating to this project is the
Community Development Department located at 78-495 Calle Tampico, La
Quinta, California.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of
La Quinta, California, as follows:
G:\WPDOCS\CCReso-COA\CIPEA438Park.wpd
Resolution 2001-165
Environmental Assessment 2001-438
Capital Improvement Project 2001-694
December 18, 2001
1. That the above recitations are true and correct and constitutes the findings of
the City Council for this Environmental Assessment.
2. That it does hereby certify Environmental Assessment 2001-438 for the
reasons set forth in this Resolution and as stated in the Environmental
Assessment .Checklist and Addendum attached hereto and on file in the
Community Development Department.
3. That Environmental Assessment 2001-438 reflects the independent judgement
of the City.
4. That the City Council hereby adopts the attached Mitigation Monitoring Plan.
PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta City
Council held on this 18t' day of December, 2001, by the following vote, to wit:
AYES: Council Members Adolph, Henderson, Perkins, Sniff, Mayor Peria
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
JOH J. PEKr ayor -
City f a Qui to alifornia
ATTEST:
9--fz�
JUNE REEK, CMC, City Jerk
City of La Quinta, California
APPROVED AS 'TO FORM:
M. KATHERINE JENSO , City Attorney
City of La Quinta, California
Environmental Checklist Form
1. Project Title: Capital Improvement Project 2001-694
La Quinta Community Park
2. Lead Agency Name and Address: City of La Quinta
78-495 Calle Tampico
La Quinta, CA 92253
3. Contact Person and Phone Number: Christine di lorio, 760-777-7125
4. Project Location: Northeast Corner of Adams Street and Westward Ho Drive
5. Project Sponsor's Name and Address: City of La Quinta
78-495 Calle Tampico
La Quinta, CA 92253
6. General Plan Designation: Park Facilities
7. Zoning: Parks and Recreation
8. Description of Project: (Describe the whole action involved, including but not limited to later
phases of the project, and any secondary, support, or off -site features necessary for its
implementation. Attach additional sheets if necessary.)
Construction of park facilities on an 18.07 acre parcel located at the
northeastern corner of Adams Street and Westward Ho Drive. Facilities will
include a concession stand building with office space, restrooms, a tot lot,
basketball court, a skate park, two baseball fields and various soccer fields. The
basketball court, skate park, baseball and soccer fields are proposed to be
lighted for night play. The site is currently vacant desert lands.
9. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting: Briefly describe the project's surroundings.
North: Low density residential, single family residential units
South: Major public facilities, La Quinta High School
West: Adams Street, Low density residential beyond
East: Low density residential, single family residential units
10. Other agencies whose approval is required (e.g., permits, financing approval, or
participation agreement.)
Not applicable
P:\PC Reso & C0A\CIP694CkIstEA438.wpd
Environmental Factors Potentially Affected:
The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this
project, involving at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact" as
indicated by the checklist on the following pages.
Aesthetics
Agriculture Resources
Air Quality
Biological Resources
Cultural Resources
Geology and Soils
Hazards and Hazardous
Materials
Hydrology and Water Quality
Land Use Planning
Mineral Resources
Noise
Population and Housing
Public Services
Recreation
Transportation/Traffic
Utilities and Service Systems
Mandatory Findings
Determination (To be completed by the Lead Agency.) On the basis of this initial evaluation:
I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment,
and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment,
there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been
made by or agreed to by the applicant. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will
be prepared.
I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.
I find that the proposed project MAY have a "potentially significant impact" or "potentially
significant unless mitigated" on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been adequately
analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been
addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets.
An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects
that remain to be addressed.
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment,
because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR
pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier
EIR, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project,
nothing further is required.
d 0
Da e
FKJ
U
W
G:\WPDOCS\Env Asses\CIP694CkIstEA438.wpd
Evaluation of Environmental Impacts:
1. A brief explanation is required for all answers except "No Impact" answers that are
adequately supported by the information sources a lead agency cites in the parentheses following
each question. A "No Impact" answer is adequately supported if the reference information sources
show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one involved (e.g. the project falls
outside a fault rupture zone). A "No Impact" answer should be explained where it is based on
project -specific factors as well as general standards (e.g. the project will not expose sensitive
receptors to pollutants, based on a project -specific screening analysis).
2. All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including off -site as well
as on- site, cumulative as well as project -level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well
as operational impacts.
3. "Potentially Significant Impact" is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an
effect is significant. If there are one or more "Potentially Significant Impact" entries when the
determination is made, an EIR is required.
4. "Neizative Declaration: Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated"
applies where the incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from "Potentially
Significant Impact" to a "Less Significant Impact." The lead agency must describe the mitigation
measures, and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less than significant level (mitigation
measures from Section XVIII, "Earlier Analysis," may be cross-referenced).
5. Earlier analysis may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other
CEQA process, an effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration.
Section 15063(c)(3)(D). Earlier analysis are discussed in Section XVIII at the end of the checklist.
6. Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references to
information sources for potential impacts (e.g., general plans, zoning ordinances). Reference to a
previously prepared or outside document should, where appropriate, include a reference to the page
or pages where the statement is substantiated.
7. Supporting Information Sources: A source list should be attached, and other sources
used or individuals contacted should be cited in the discussion.
8. The analysis of each issue should identify:
a) the significance criteria or threshold used to evaluate each question; and
b) the mitigation measure identified, if any, to reduce the impact to less than
significance
G:\WPDOCS\Env Asses\CIP694CkIstEA438.wpd
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources):
Would the proposal result in potential impacts involving:
I. AESTHETICS: Would the project:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? (General Plan
Exhibit CIR-5)
b) Damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock
outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway?
(General Plan EIR, page 5-12 ff.)
c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the
site and its surroundings? (Application materials)
d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would
adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? (Application
materials including Musco Lighting Preliminary Information Package)
II. AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES:. In determining whether impacts
to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead
agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and
Site Assessment Model prepared by the California Dept. Of
Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on
agriculture and farmland. Would the project:
a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of
Statewide Importance (Farmland) to non-agricultural use? (Master
Environmental Assessment 5-29, 5-32)
b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson
Act contract? (Zoning Map)
c) Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to
their location or nature, could individually or cumulatively result in
loss of Farmland, to non-agricultural use? (Aerial photographs)
III. AIR QUALITY: Where available, the significance criteria established
by the applicable air quality management or air pollution control
district may be relied upon to make the following determinations.
Would the project:
a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable Air
Quality Attainment Plan or Congestion Management Plan? (SCAQMD
CEQA Handbook)
b) Violate any stationary source air quality standard or contribute to an
existing or projected air quality violation? (SCAQMD CEQA
Handbook)
c) Result in a net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project
region is non -attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air
quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed
quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? (SCAQMD CEQA
Handbook)
d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations?
(Project Description)
Potentially
Potentially Significant Less Than
Significant Unless Significant No
Impact Mitigated Impact Impact
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
km
X
X
G:\WPDOCS\Env Asses\CIP694CkIstEA438.wpd 4
e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people?
(Project Description) I X
IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES: Would the project:
a) Have a substantial adverse impact, either directly or through habitat
modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or
special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations,
or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service? (Master Environmental Assessment, Exhibit 5-1)
b) Have a substantial adverse impact on any riparian habitat or other
sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans,
policies, regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game
or US Fish and Wildlife Service? (Master Environmental Assessment,
p. 5-2 ff.)
c) Adversely impact federally protected wetlands (including, but not
limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) Either individually or in
combination with the known or probable impacts of other activities
through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other
means? (Master Environmental Assessment, p. 5-2 ff.)
d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any resident or
migratory fish or wildlife species or with established resident or
migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of wildlife nursery
sites? (Master Environmental Assessment, p. 5-2 ff.)
e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological
resources such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? (La Quinta
Municipal Code; General Plan)
f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation
Plan, Natural Conservation Community Plan, or other approved local,
regional, or state habitat conservation plan? (Master Environmental
Assessment 5-5)
V. CULTURAL RESOURCES: Would the project:
a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical
resource which is either listed or eligible for listing on the National
Register of Historic Places, the California Register of Historic
Resources, or a local register of historic resources? (General Plan EIR,
p. 4-77 ff.)
b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a unique
archaeological resources (i.e., an artifact, object, or site about which it
can be clearly demonstrated that, without merely adding to the current
body of knowledge, there is a high probability that it contains
information needed to answer important scientific research questions,
has a special and particular quality such as being the oldest or best
available example of its type, or is directly associated with a
scientifically recognized important prehistoric or historic event or
person)? ("Phase II Archaeological Investigations at Westward Ho
Park," Archaeology Advisory Group, August 2000)
c) Disturb or destroy a unique paleontological resource or site?
-- (Lakebed Delineation Map)
d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of
formal cemeteries? (General Plan EIR, p. 4-77 ff.)
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
0.1
M
X
G:\WPDOCS\Env Asses\CIP694CkIstEA438.wpd
VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS: Would the project:
a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects,
including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving:
i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most
recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State
Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a
known fault? (General Plan EIR, Exhibit 4.2-3, page 4-35)
ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? (General Plan EIR, page 4-30 ff.)
iii) Seismic -related ground failure, including liquefaction? (General
Plan EIR, page 4-30 ff.)
iv) Landslides? (General Plan EIR, page 4-30 ff.)
b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? (General Plan
EIR, page 4-30 ff.)
c) Be located on a geological unit or soil that is unstable, or that would
become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on -
or off -site landslides, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or
collapse? (General Plan EIR, page 4-30 ff.)
d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the
Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or
property? (General Plan EIR, page 4-30 ff.)
e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks
or alternative waste water disposal system where sewers are not
available for the disposal of waste water? (Master Environmental
Assessment 5-32)
VII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS: Would the
project:
a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through
the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials?
(Application Materials)
b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through
reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the
likely release of hazardous materials into the environment?
(Application Materials)
c) Reasonably be anticipated to emit hazardous materials, substances,
or waste within one -quarter mile of an existing or proposed school?
(Application Materials)
d) Is the project located on a site which is included on a list of
hazardous materials sites complied pursuant to Government Code
Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to
the public or the environment? (Riverside County Hazardous Materials
Listing)
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
F.�
X
X
X
G:\WPDOCS\Env Asses\CIP694CkIstEA438.wpd 6
e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a
plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or
public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people
residing or working in the project area? (General Plan land use map)
f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip; would the
project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the
project area? (General Plan land use map)
g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted
emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? (Master
Environmental Assessment p. 6-11)
h) Expose people or structures to the risk of loss, injury or death
involving wildlands fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to
urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands?
(General Plan land use map)
VIII. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY: Would the project:
a) Violate Regional Water Quality Control Board water quality
standards or waste discharge requirements? (Master Environmental
Assessment 6-26, 6-27)
b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially
with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in
aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (i.e.,
the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level
which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which
permits have been granted? (General Plan EIR, page 4-57 ff.)
c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area,
including through the alteration of the course of stream or river, in a
manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off -
site? (General Plan EIR, page 4-30 ff.)
d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area,
including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or
substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner
which would result in flooding on- or off -site? (General Plan EIR, page
4-30 ff.)
e) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity
of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems to control?
(General Plan EIR, page 4-30 ff.)
f) Place housing within a 100-year floodplain, as mapped on a federal
Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood
hazard delineation map? (Master Environmental Assessment 6-13)
g) Place within a 100-year floodplain structures which would impede or
redirect flood flows? (Master Environmental Assessment 6-13)
KI
km
X
K1
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
IX. LAND USE AND PLANNING: Would the project:
a) Physically divide an established community? (Specific Plan Project
Description) X
G:\WPDOCS\Env Asses\CIP694Ck1stEA438.wpd
b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of
an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited
to the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning
ordinance) adopted for the purposes of avoiding or mitigating an
environmental effect? (Master Environmental Assessment 2-11)
c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural
communities conservation plan? (Master Environmental Assessment 5-
5)
X. MINERAL RESOURCES: Would the project:
a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource
classified MRZ-2 by the State Geologist that would be of value to the
region and the residents of the state? (Master Environmental
Assessment 5-29)
b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally -important mineral
resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan
or other land use plan? (Master Environmental Assessment 5-29)
XI. NOISE: Would the project result in:
a) Exposure of persons to, or generation of, noise levels in excess of
standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or
applicable standards of other agencies? ("City of La Quinta Community
Park Noise Study," Urban Crossroads, August, 2001)
b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne
vibration or groundborne noise levels? ("City of La Quinta Community
Park Noise Study," Urban Crossroads, August, 2001)
c) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels
in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? ("City
of La Quinta Community Park Noise Study," Urban Crossroads,
August, 2001)
d) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a
plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or
public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working
in the project area to excessive noise levels? (Master Environmental
Assessment)
e) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the
project expose people residing or working in the project area to
excessive levels? (General Plan map)
KI
01
X
X
X
X
KI
X
X
XII. POPULATION AND HOUSING: Would the project:
a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for
example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for X
example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure) ? (General
Plan, page 2-14)
G:\WPDOCS\Env Asses\CIP694CkIstEA438.wpd 8
b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the
construction of replacement housing elsewhere? (Application
Materials)
c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the
construction of replacement housing elsewhere? (Application
Materials)
XIII. PUBLIC SERVICES
a) Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts
associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental
facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the
construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in
order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other
performance objectives for any of the public services:
Fire protection? (General Plan MEA, page 4-3 ff. )
Police protection? (General Plan MEA, page 4-3 ff. )
Schools? (General Plan MEA, page 4-9 ff. )
Parks? (General Plan; Recreation and Parks Master Plan)
Other public facilities? (General Plan MEA, page 4-14 ff. )
XIV. RECREATION:
a) Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and
regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial
physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated?
(Application Materials)
b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the
construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an
adverse physical effect on the environment? (Application Materials)
XV. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC: Would the project:
a) Cause an increase in traffic which is substantial in relation to the
existing traffic load and capacity of the street system (i.e., result in a
substantial increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to
capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections)? (General Plan
EIR, page 4-126 ff.)
b) Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service
standard established by the county congestion management agency for
designated roads or highways? (General Plan EIR, page 4-126 ff.)
c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase
in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety
risks? (General Plan EIR, page 4-126 ff.)
d) Substantially increase hazards to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves
or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm
equipment)? (General Plan EIR, page 4-126 ff.)
e) Result in inadequate emergency access? (Application Materials)
K1
F�
*1
X
X
X
X
GI
KI
X
X
X
X
X
G:\WPDOCS\Env Asses\CIP694Ck1stEA438.wpd 9
f) Result in inadequate parking capacity? (Application Materials)
g) Conflict with adopted policies supporting alternative transportation
(e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? (Application Materials)
XVI. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS: Would the project:
a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable
Regional Water Quality Control Board? (General Plan MEA, pg 4-24 )
b) Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater
treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction
of which could cause significant environmental effects? (General Plan
MEA, page 4-24 )
c) Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage
facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which
could cause significant environmental effects? (General Plan MEA,
page 4-27)
d) Are sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from
existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded
entitlements needed? (General Plan MEA, page 4-20)
e) Has the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the
project determined that it has adequate capacity to serve the project's
projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments?
(General Plan MEA, page 4-20)
f) Is the project served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to
accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs? (General Plan
MEA, page 4-28)
XVII. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE:
a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the
environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife
species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-
sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community,
reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or
animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of
California history or prehistory?
b) Does the project have the potential to achieve short-term, to the
disadvantage of long-term, environmental goals?
c) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but
cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that
the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in
connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current
project, and the effects of probable future projects)?
d) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause
substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or
indirectly?
XVIII EARLIER ANALYSIS.
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
K4
G:\WPDOCS\Env Asses\CIP694CkIstEA438.wpd 10
Earlier analysis may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, one or more effects
have been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. Section 15063(c)(3)(D). In this case a
discussion should identify the following on attached sheets.
a) Earlier analysis used. Identify earlier analysis and state where they are available for review.
No earlier analysis were used in this review.
b) Impacts adequately addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the scope of and
adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and state whether such effects were
addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis.
Not applicable.
c) Mitigation measures. For effects that are "Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated," describe the
mitigation measures which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address
site -specific conditions for the project.
See attached Addendum.
SOURCES:
Master Environmental Assessment, City of La Quinta General Plan 1992.
SCAQMD CEQA Handbook.
General Plan, City of La Quinta, 1992.
City of La Quinta Municipal Code
Phase II Archaeological Investigations at Westward Ho Park, Archaeological Advisory Group, August
2000.
City of La Quinta Community Park Noise Study, Urban Crossroads, August 2001.
Preliminary Hydrology Study, Huitt-Zollars, October 2001
Musco Lighting, LLC, Preliminary Information Package - Section A, Light Structure System
G:\WPDOCS\Env Asses\CIP694CkIstEA438.wpd 11
Addendum for Environmental Assessment 2001-438
I.c1&d)
The proposed project is designated in the General Plan for a park facility. Such
a park facility is proposed. The proposed park will include lighting for three
purposes:
1. Parking lot lighting to meet City standards to illuminate the parking lot
adjacent to Westward Ho Drive. This lighting will not generate any light
off -site, and will not create substantial light. No significant impact is
expected.
2. Lighting along the perimeter walkway in the form of bollards, which will
be louvered to direct lighting downward. This lighting will not generate
light off -site, and no significant impact is expected.
3. Lighting for the basketball, baseball and soccer fields, as well as lighting
for the skate park. This lighting will be placed on steel poles ranging in
- height from 40 to 80 feet, with multiple light sources on each pole,
ranging from 4 to 15 light sources. The lighting analysis performed for
the proposed park demonstrates that the light generated by this type of
lighting will create light levels at the surrounding properties of 2.9 foot
candles upon installation'. This analysis included the potential cumulative
impacts associated with lighting at the La Quinta High School, which did
not contribute any readable light level at the residential properties on the
northern boundary. This represents a potentially significant impact
without mitigation.
The sports lighting poles will range in height from 40 to 80 feet and are made
of steel. The steel structure of the poles could result on a visual impact on the
vistas to the south. A mitigation measure has been added to require the
painting of the poles in a buff matte color, to ensure that the potential visual
impact is reduced to a less than significant level.
Parks are exempt from the City's lighting standard, which requires that no light
spill onto adjacent properties. The following discussion addresses the potential
impacts associated with the ball field lighting located along the northern
property line, adjacent to single family residential lots at this location. Although
exempt from the standard, however, the lighting at the park still represents a
potentially significant environmental impact on neighboring residents specifically
Musco Sports Lighting, Lighting Plan, 8/17/01.
G:\WPDOCS\Env Asses\CIP694EA438.wpd 1
z
along the northern property line. In order to assess the potential impact,
analysis was conducted regarding the lighting levels, the available data and the
potential mitigation measures which the City may consider in evaluating the
proposed project. The lighting levels represented on the lighting plan show the
level of light which will occur at the adjacent property line at installation of the
light fixtures. After 80 to 100 hours, the lighting level will lessen by 20%,
because the bulbs lose intensity2. This lowering in intensity will reduce the light
levels at the northern property line to 0.048 to 2.32 footcandles, depending on
the location. (As a comparison, test were completed of light levels under street
lights on Westward Ho Drive or Adams Street and resulted in a range of
illumination from 2 to 4 footcandles.) Light fixtures will be shielded to limit the
potential glare, and shielding will be adjusted after installation to reflect
conditions on the site. The proposed park facilities will be used Monday through
Sunday. It is estimated that the sports fields will be utilized 325 days per year.
Night practices and games are usually on week nights and Saturday, while the
Sunday usage is generally during the daylight hours. City policy restricts lighting
to no later than 10 p.m.3. Lighting levels will therefore range from 0.048 to
2.32 footcandles from dusk to 10 p.m., Monday through Saturday. The level
of activity, and the number of fields being used, will vary based on the
organization. In order to further mitigate the potential impacts, the following
measures shall be implemented.
1. All field lighting fixtures shall be on individual on/off and City operated
timer controls.
2. Fields shall be lit only if in use. Lighting on fields which are not in use
shall remain off. The City will inform all persons and organizations which
reserve the fields that this measure is in place, and shall establish policies
and penalties for persons or organizations which violate this measure.
3. All sports field lighting shall be set on automatic timer to turn off at 10
p.m., if not manually turned off prior to that time.
4. No lighting shall be permitted for the northernmost three fields on
Saturday and Sundays.
5. From August through February, when soccer games and practices occur
after dusk, all other soccer fields shall be utilized before the northernmost
three fields are lit. Only if the other nine fields are occupied will the
Musco Lighting, Preliminary Information Package - Section A, Light Structure System.
Letter from Dodie Horvitz, Community Services Director, July 11, 2001.
G:\WPDOCS\Env Asses\CIP694EA438.wpd 2
lighting be turned on at the northernmost three fields.
6. All sports park light poles shall be painted a neutral, matte color.
7. Upon installation of the light fixtures fine tuning of light shields will
reduce light spills at the northern property line.
These standards will mitigate the potential impacts of light and glare to a less
than significant level.
111. c) The Coachella Valley is a non -attainment area for PM 10 (particulate matter of
10 microns or smaller). The construction of the proposed project has the
potential to generate dust, which could contribute to the PM 10 problem in the
area. In order to control PM 10, the City has imposed standards and
requirements on development to control dust. These impacts can be mitigated
by the mitigation measures below:
1. No earth moving activity shall be undertaken without the review and
approval of a PM 10 Management Plan.
2. Construction equipment shall be properly maintained and serviced to
-- minimize exhaust emissions.
3. Existing power sources should be utilized where feasible via temporary
power poles to avoid on -site power generation.
4. Construction personnel shall be informed of ride sharing and transit
opportunities.
5. Cut and fill quantities will be balanced on site.
6. Any portion of the site to be graded shall be pre -watered to a depth of
three feet prior to the onset of grading activities.
7. Watering of the site or other soil stabilization method shall be employed
on an on -going basis after the initiation of any grading activity on the
site. Portions of the site that are actively being graded shall be watered
regularly to ensure that a crust is formed on the ground surface, and shall
be watered at the end of each work day.
8. All disturbed areas shall be treated to prevent erosion until the site is
constructed upon. Pad sites which are to remain undeveloped shall be
seeded with either a desert wildflower mix or grass seed.
G:\WPDOCS\Env Asses\CIP694EA438.wpd 3
9. Landscaped areas shall be installed as soon as possible to reduce the
potential for wind erosion.
10. SCAQMD Rule 403 shall be adhered to, insuring the clean up of
construction -related dirt on approach routes to the site.
11. All grading activities shall be suspended during first and second stage
ozone episodes or when winds exceed 25 miles per hour.
12. All buildings on the project site shall conform to energy use guidelines in
Title 24 of the California Administrative Code.
13. Bicycle racks and/or other mandated alternative transportation provisions
shall be included in project design, in conformance with City ordinances
in effect at the time of development.
With the implementation of these mitigation measures, the impacts to air quality
from buildout of the park will not be significant.
IV. a) The park site has been impacted by construction on adjacent properties, and
has been previously graded. Further, the site is isolated by surrounding
development. The park occurs within the mitigation fee area for the Coachella
Valley Fringe -toed Lizard Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP). The City shall pay
the required fees for purchase of off -site habitat, as required in the HCP. This
will reduce impacts to the species to a less than significant level.
V. b) A cultural resource survey and resource recovery were conducted for the
subject property'. The field work consisted of 32 backhoe trenches and 12 test
units. Five recorded sites Which had been identified were tested, and
considerable material recovered. The study concluded that the resource
recovery effort, and the monitoring undertaken during grading of the property,
had mitigated potential impacts to cultural resources to a less than significant
level.
VI. a) i) & ii)
The proposed park lies in a Zone IV groundshaking zone. The property, as with
the rest of the City, will be subject to significant ground movement in the event
4
"Phase II Archaeological Investigations at Westward Ho Park," Archaeology Advisory Group, August
2000.
G:\WPDOCS\Env Asses\CIP694EA438.wpd 4
of a major earthquake. The site is not subject to liquefactions. Structures on the
site, including the bathrooms, offices and lighting standards, will be required to
meet the City's standards for construction, which include Uniform Building Code
requirements for seismic zones. The City Engineer will require the preparation
of site -specific geotechnical analysis in conjunction with the submittal of
grading plans (please see below). This requirement will ensure that impacts from
ground failure are reduced to a less than significant level.
VI. b)
The subject property is subject to soil erosion due to wind. The City will
implement requirements for a PM 10 management plan, which will control this
hazard (please see Air Quality, above). The soils on the property will also be
examined through an on -site soil analysis required prior to issuance of grading
permits. These requirements will reduce potential impacts to a less than
significant level.
Vill. c)-e)
The City requires that all construction projects retain the 100 year 24 hour
storm on -site. This will control the amount of runoff which exits the site during
a storm. The proposed grading plan for the site includes the use of the
northeastern -most soccer field as a retention basin. The hydrology study
prepared for the site indicates that soils are adequate to support percolation,
and that the retention plan will be effective'. The park's drainage plan will be
reviewed and approved by the City Engineer prior to the issuance of grading
permits. The creation of areas which are mostly sod will encourage percolation
of water into the soil. The design of the park includes depressions where the
fields are located, to assure adequate detention of storm water. This will ensure
that impacts to the City's flood control system are reduced to a less than
significant level.
XI. a) & c)
A noise analysis was prepared for the proposed park project'. The study found
that the existing noise environment at the northern property line ranges from
52.2 to 63.9 dBA Leq, and that construction and operation of the park will
increase noise levels by about 2.1 dBA Leq. Short term louder noise levels will
occur during games and practices at the park, but these will generally be during
the less sensitive daytime hours, for short periods of time. The proposed park
will also include a public address system, which is to be utilized twice every
— "Final Environmental Impact Report, City of La Quinta General Plan," 1992.
6
"100 Year Hydrology & Hydraulic Report for La Quinta Community Park," Huitt-Zollars, October 2001.
"City of La Quinta Community Park Noise Study," Urban Crossroads, August, 2001.
G:\WPDOCS\Env Asses\CIP694EA438.wpd 5
year, for the opening and closing of the season. The study found that the noise
levels at the park are likely to be overshadowed by the noise emanating from
traffic movements on Adams Street.
Short term impacts will also occur during construction of the facilities at the
park. In order to mitigate construction impacts, the following mitigation
measures are to be implemented:
1. All construction vehicles or equipment, fixed or mobile, shall be equipped
with properly operating and maintained mufflers.
2. Construction activities shall comply with the City of La Quinta Municipal
Code standards for construction times (Section 6.08.050).
3. All vehicle and equipment storage, stockpiling and other similar activities
on the site shall be located along the Westward Ho Drive frontage, as far
away from the existing residential units as possible.
The study also recommends operational mitigation measures, as follows:
1. The park should be open only from the hours of 6 a.m. to 10 p.m.
2. All other soccer fields shall be utilized before the northernmost three
fields are used.
3. Use of the public address system shall be limited to two times per year,
during daylight hours only.
XV.a) The use of the park will generate traffic, particularly from families coming to
sports practices or games. This traffic will be sporadic, and concentrated
during specific time periods. During much of the day, very little traffic will enter
or leave the site. In order to determine the worse case scenario for traffic
generation, the highest generation factor was used (Saturday) to calculate
traffic at the site. As a result park can be expected to generate up to 226 trips
per day8 on busy days. This will be divided between 113 entering and 113
exiting, in short time periods when practices and games occur. Traffic levels on
Westward Ho Drive are currently light, and are concentrated on activity at the
High School. The activities at the High School should not conflict with activities
at the park, insofar as organized sports occur during school off -hours. Potential
hazards associated with the concentrated activities at the park are not expected
to be significant, however, the following mitigation measure shall be
implemented to ensure that traffic conflicts do not occur.
s
Institute of Transportation Engineers, "Trip Generation" 6th Edition. For land use category "County Park
(412)" per acre on a Saturday.
G:\WPDOCS\Env Asses\CIP694EA438.wpd 6
_ 1. The Public Works Department shall monitor the traffic movements
associated with the first days of organized play for baseball and soccer
associations. Should hazardous conditions occur, the Department shall
establish procedures and standards for traffic control at the site, and
require the sports associations to provide traffic control personnel at the
beginning and end of practice and/or game sessions, to ensure that safe
ingress and egress occurs at the park.
2. No sporting events shall occur after 5:00 p.m. on days when the La
Quinta High School has a scheduled home football game.
XVll.a)
The proposed project will not degrade habitat, or significantly impact cultural
resources. The potential impacts to biological resources, limited to Coachella
Valley Fringe -toed Lizard, will be mitigated by the payment of fees, as required
in the Habitat Conservation Plan. The impacts to cultural resources have been
addressed through the field testing and excavation previously undertaken.
XVll.b)
The proposed project does not have the potential to achieve short term goals
to the detriment of long term objectives. The land is planned for park facilities
�- in the General Plan, and has been so for some time. The City had envisioned
this site as a park, and is now implementing its plans.
XVII. c)
The proposed park's impacts have been mitigated. Analysis of the lighting for
the park included the potential cumulative impacts of the high school stadium
lighting, however, the lighting analysis demonstrated no light spillage along the
northern property line.
XVll.d)
The potential impacts associated with lighting, noise and air quality, which
could have a detrimental impact on human beings, have been mitigated to a less
than significant level.
G:\WPDOCS\Env Asses\CIP694EA438.wpd 7
W
O
�.
CD
co
3:
W
Z
�
N
a�
0
H
�
c
a
(�
co
�
U)
W
to
co
Q
W
U
O
Z
z
c
O
a
0
U
a
(D
ui
z
O
s
.0
°
0
O
C)
`O
a
U
Q
Z
Z
z
d
U
a
d
�
pp
t�7
Q
J
z
a
1L
Q
Q
J
W
U
Z
O
O
Z
~
Cr
p
cc
a
H
v
W
Q
GC
O
O
o
�
C�
a
0
Q
ZO
W
O
NO
a
Z
O
O
F
Q
a
Q
Q
Z
C7
rn
_
~LU
I
IL
LU
to
O
N
Z
v
V W
W Q
a
2 U
H
o
E
H >
O
N
O
4-0
c
Z o0
Q
N
E
ao
co
_
a H
�
�
o
W cc
O
a
o
O
O
co
U
N
U
LL
Z Z
3: O
O
O
Z
JO F-
a
Z
Z
Q
U
J
O a
Q
Q
W
a
J
a
W J
U
WLLJ
c
U
W
Q ••
�o
W
Q
W >
U m
Z
Q W
av
W
O=
U U
Q
W
U
Z
o�
Z
J
COR
O
FA P.
O z
N
W
W
y
� U
La
�
o- a
Z
E E
O
—
a
CC
M�
co
v
I-
U
P t
W
cn Fn
a
_
~
> cW
Cc
C
Q
•� H
C
N
NLU
Q
y
c
c
c
c
c
LL
O
O
•U
O
'U
O
'U
O
'U
-NZ'U
C
a
a
oa
a
a
U
.O
v)
cn
cn
cn
Cl)
.c 4-
c
c
c
c
c
C a
—
'D
'0
•�
_�
cn
O
O
O
O
_m
a .c
LL
_O
LL
U.
LL
LL
+.+
.E
++
.E
(D `
`
�-
O
`�- a ca
O
m
m
(o
"-
O
a.
c
a
a
a
a
O
c •� C
c
c
c
C
•`
ca +�
O
to U •D
cn
>
"0 N
>
'C N
c
>
-0 0
c�
y
•-
U
O
a
E
O
C
_O
c
C
C
C
+,
U
O 0) C
•5
0
'�
c O
•0 'w
c O
•0 'w
0
'�
O
Co
O
+.+ C
•5
+.+
C
�..
O
y
U.
(D
O=
O
C
0--cO
O
O 00 O
O O
a .a
a
U
c >`
c
O +=
N
C
c o E
0 E
c
0
a
c
o
a
0
O E
E
U
.�
U
•�
U
O�
E
U
U
> o
>
aD U
0
a
cn
cn
cn
ca
0
cn
0)O E
w
o
E 0
E
=
E
CD
O
E
SE
c E i
U
E
i E
E
i
c
E
i
E
`
E a
r
E
a E
a
E
a
:°
'5
E
a
E
a
O O
O
O
O O
O
O
O
o
O
O
O
Muccn
UOUM
Uo
Moro
Uo
O
N
O
c
c
`
c�
-�
0
-0
a
y
� U
O
C �
O
L
�
U
m
to
c c
y
w y
y
O
.a
O
U
O O
O
co
-C+-'
C
0
+ O
O
O
aCU
O
X O
L
(n +�-+
7
L
U
w=
Q
.0 V
O
cn
f
+-
O
L
E
O
c
C O
o
E
0
'
E
s;
O
a�
L
•O
N
O
E E
_�
a�
c
C
0
i
0
_
.0
•.p a)
0
a
cu
O
c
cn
Q
Z (n
Z
:3 LL
(n
c
LL . c
W
Q
W >-
m
Z
Q W
J �C
a v
gW
O=
U V
Q
oc
W
H
V
_Z
H
O CDLL.
LU Z
m cc
O
a O
(AM
W
O
Q
ca
a
W
E
cc
c
U
LU
H
C
�
Q
y
a
-
O
J
LU
a
3
co
M
O
Ll
c
0
C
W
cn
U
O
a
T"•
W
Q
W }
0 o�
Q W
J �L
av
gW
O=
V V
�
C
c0
�
O
�
C
�
CO
N
O
C
CD
y
cv
U
m
c
a
E
V
2
o as
°
F�—
r a
U
c o
O
>
a a
O
c
c
c
0
O
U
V
O
V
O
c�
O
O
O
y O
C
O
C
O
N)
O
O
ti a�
y
cn O
O m
O
m
O CD
m
O m
.2 m
O
O
.2
m
O
.0 •�
.0
a m
a
a
a
m
a
a
a m
a m
> +.,
+,,
C c
C
O
�
O
E
a
+r
U.
°
U
E
;
m °c
O
E
04a
aD
N
`
aci
aai
p
+, c
Z
a O
cv
aai
-E
°
°
.c
-
•co
o
E�
Ng
o
CL
W O
U
c`C
U
W
W
co
c
° E
W
c
C
>. >
c
c
>,
>,
—
'.3
E`
E a
= O
O
O
t
:t�
O O
•�
U 0
U
U
U
U
m
U
m
rccc
F
c
c
O
ca
c
a�
o,
•c
�
Z
0
U
v
—
a� a
U
ai
cn
—
o
F-
co
v =
C
C
3
CO
N
+-+
N
c0
O
U
O
a
—
-
N
++
CAa�
LN
C
0 J
-o
y=
cn
o
c
cc
Q
rn
a
a
c
cv
O
_U
o a�
•+r rn
0
C
E
�
O
J
c
Lu
m c
•C
co
O
a
•-
c�
�
>
cn
Q
C
cn
>, —
H
LU
F-
G
C
LLI
m
uj
V
V m
Q W
Q W
J Y
J Y
gv
gW
U
U
V
V
a_
ow E
a
W
V O -o
;F � O
OC
W
c V
c
N j, •-
U
N m
J
O
p
V C_
V
CD
C
C
O N
Z
C
N
N
-C a
�
rn
o rn N
O rn C
c E
o rn
a `0 a
c
CL .0 O
+r
c
rn
O CD
a)
U.c
Z
co
J
m
uj cc
co
O.
V)
N
�
_O
Z Z
(D
_O
Z Z
N
00
+r
C O
00
y
y
C O
N
W
•cD E
W
W i
c
W U
> a
>
Z
co
N
Z
U
E N
0
0
+:�
o aD
•+=
Q
Jcc
m
H
cc
rn
co
C7W
E
aC
cn
+
C
N
oc
+,
W
Q
U
C�
cr.
co
7
CC W
Q
C
0
L N
*� C
oOC
(�
E
`o °
0
m
w
V
m
w
N
�%
W
>
>► U
(/�
}'
-C
C
y
Q
E N
_ Q
N
Q
a c
>
n
W
O '�
U N
—
> CIa
W
�
P
c
w
U)
U
O
0
a
t=
LO
W
Q
C
- W }
U o0
Z
Q W
J ]C
a U
gW
O=
U U
Q
c
O
c
O
c
O
u
•U
•0
L)W
~
a
a
a
U
c
c
c
U
U
U
2
2
2
-0
-v
M
a
a
d
4
4)
4)
LL
LL
LL
O
O
O
Cl)
N
C
•a
C
c
N
U
U
L)
Ca
a
CY)
0)
O
O
O
c
•C
C
•C
c
•`
O
6-
O
►-
O
0
0
o
Q
Q
Q
a
a
a
�
o
0
0
U.
Z
C
c
�
c
(D
N
O
N
CJ
W
mcc
0
O
E
O
E
O
U
•�
C)
•��..
U
•�
(D
Z Z
a
a
a
cn
�
cn
LU
0
>
m
m
E
E
E
•�
•�
E
E
E
O
O
O
co
In
m
U
U
U
U
L
Q,
E
(4 co
>
NO
r
O*'
O
+
c
o
c
c a)
co
�
aD z
Q
cvo
a
E
C
O
(�
=
y
`
E
0
O -
. n CD
O
W
E cn
Oc�0
W
E
p�
c
O
?
+=
rn
c
O
O
'+r
L)O
U
+_ O
to =
a
O
V O
U
cn
L-
W
>
W
OL
`
N 'O
�••'
-p
C
O &
O
�1-
O�
cn L-
0
m
M O
Z
c
O
E
o
+--
L)
a?
LU
a
•�
c c
+.�
y
a
O
+� ..
O O
aD
Z• V >.
x
a
Q a�
U v
J
a
Q
a 0
W
Q
0
W }
ca
Z
Q W
J Y
av
M W
O=
V V
C N
.p
Q
O
cv
H
O O
L U
V
cn CO
_v
`o o c
1- 2 LL cc
O
a
C7
�'
F-
� aci
M o
O
rn
L �
ii Q
cc
OLL C7
Z
ui
U
mCL
0
O
y .>
y
Z Z
O
>
02
u,
O O
3: � E
cc
:3
U E +j
E a
CL U im
a -�
O
co
4-J
0
Z
� 0 L- J O
O 7 L
I—
�a
c c c
co
E E c ca
_
W
�
:�"
E p C s Co
c
Q G
d
cv
U a
Vi
�
(n
cc O (n
Z
c
W
�, j v�ps-0
C C O) +,+
Q
m
+' O '+r E i 0
F-
O O a co
H
Q
W
c m4-- U) O c_ E
O c0 O .O
�C
O
2 O ZLiias
m
a
3
0
c
0
c)
5
c
w
cn
U
O
0
a