The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About1990-03-13; City Council; Resolution 90-53I/ a 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 a 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 RESOLUTION NO. 9 o -53 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA APPROVING A CONDITIONAL NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR A CONDITIONAL AND SPECIAL USE PERMIT TO DEVELOP A 173 UNIT SENIOR CITIZEN PROFESSIONAL CARE FACILITY. CASE NAME: AYRES SENIOR CENTER. CASE NO.: CUP 88-21/SUP 89-5 WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Carlsbad, did on tt day of February, 1990, hold a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed to consider said request, and WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and consideri testimony and arguments, examining the initial study, analyzing the infor submitted by staff, and considering any written comments received, th Council considered all factors relating to the Conditional Nc Decl arati on. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the City Coun fol 1 ows : A) That the foregoing recitations are true and correct. B) That based on the evidence presented at the public hearing, th Council hereby approves the Conditional Negative Declaration accorc Exhibit "ND", dated October 18, 1989, and "PII", dated August 3, 191 the mitigation monitoring program outlined in appendix "Pl', ai hereto and made a part hereof, based on the following findings: Findinqs: 1. The initial study shows that the proposed project could have a sign' impact on the environment, however, there will not be a significant in this case because the mitigation measures described in the . study have been added to the project. 2. The site has been previously graded pursuant to an earlier enviror analysis. 3. The streets are adequate in size to handle traffic generated proposed project according to the traffic report provided that mit. conditions of approval are complied with. 4. There are no sensitive resources located onsi te or located so as significantly impacted by this project provided that mitigating conc of approval are complied with. e a 1 2 3 4 5 6 Conditions: 1. This project if approved is subject to all conditions contained i Counci 1 Resolution Nos. 90-54 and 90-55 plus compl i ance wi following mitigating conditions: A. Earth and Water - Runoff from this project is convej environmentally sensitive areas. The developer shall F adequate means of el iminating grease and oi 1 s from drainagc to discharge. Plans for such improvements shall be approved City Engineer prior to issuance of any building permits f site. 7 11 B. Noise - The following requirements shall be noted on the building plans: 8 9 10 11 I. The required glazing for the project to meet the Sta City interior noise criteria of 45 dB CNEL is as follc a. Standard single strength glass, or windows with i Transmission C1 ass (STC) rating of 22 or greater 1 windows on all elevations of all units of the pv 12 b. All sliding glass doors (SGD) shall be 3/16 inch 13 c. A1 1 entry doors shall be 1 3/4 inch sol id core. 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 ~ ~ 11. Since windows and doors must be closed to meet the ir noise standard, mechanical ventilation which meets tl change requirements of the UBC must be provided in shaded on the site plan of the project attached to the i study. Where windows are required to be unopenable o closed in order to meet the interior noise stan mechanical ventilation and cooling, if necessary, sh provided to maintain a habitable environment. The shall supply two air changes per hour to each habitabl including 20% (one-fifth) fresh make-up sir obtained di from the outdoors. The fresh air inlet duct shall be of attenuating construction and shall consist of a minimum feet of straight or curved duct or six feet plus one st degree bend. I C. TransDortationKirculation - Participate in the re-construct the Alga Road/El Camino Real Intersection as required by th 6 Local Facilities Management Plan. 23 24 25 26 27 28 2 0 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of th Council of the City of Carlsbad, California, held on the 13th day of March , 1990, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: Council Members Lewis, Mamaux and Larson NOES: Council Member Pettine ABSENT: Council Member Kulchin ABSTAIN: None ATTEST: STHA oAU&NKF@iZ, City C1 erk KAREN R. KUNDTZ, Deputy City Clerk (SEAL) 3 LALIIJ I L .lU CONDITIONAL NEGATIVE DECLARATION PROJECT ADDRESS/LOCATION: Southwest corner of El Camino Real and Alga Road. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: A 173 unit Senior Citizen apartment project with a community cent building, pool, reflection pond, tea house, walking course and two underground parkir , garages on 5.92 acres. The City of Carlsbad has conducted an environmental review of the above described projE pursuant to the Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act a1 the Environmental Protection Ordinance of the City of Carlsbad. As a result of said review, Conditional Negative Declaration (declaration that the project will not have a significant imp: on the environment) is hereby issued for the subject project. Justification for this action is 4 file in the Planning Department. A copy of the Conditional Negative Declaration with supportive documents is on file in tt Planning Department, 2075 Las Palmas Drive, Carlsbad, California 92009. Comments from tt public are invited. Please submit comments in writing to the Planning Department within thir (30) days of date of issuance. DATED: October 18, 1989 CASE NO: CUP 88-21/SUP 895 Planning Director APPLICANT: Robert J. Royce, A.I.A. PUBLISH DATE: October 18, 1989 DN:kd 2075 Las Palmas Drive 0 Carlsbad. California 92009-4859 (61 9) 438-1 11 STATE OF CALIfORNIA4FCICE Of THE GO ah,, 0 GEORGE OEUI OFFICE OF PLANNING AND RESEARCH 1400 TENTH SfRm SACRAMNIO, CA 95814 November 16, 1989 Don Meu City of Carlsbad 2075 Las Palmas Drive Carlsbad, CA 92009 Subject: Ayres Senior Citizen APartments SCH# 89010039 Dear Mr. Meu: The State Cle8ringhouse submftted the above nanud environmental documc selected state agencies for review. The review period is closed and I the state agencies have Conmmnts. Thir letter acknowledges that yo1 complied with the State Charinghouse review requirements for envirormental documentm, pusuat to the California Environmcntal Qualit: Plense call Garrett Ashley at (916) 445-0613 if you have any qui regarding the environment81 review process. When contacting the CleariI in this matter, pleare use the eight-digit State Clenringhouse number sc v. 1p.7 respond promptly. Sincerely., -+4 IC"_ David C. Nunenlump Deputy Director, Pennit Assistance ENVIRONM R AL IMPACT ASBESSMENT FORM W - PART I1 (TO BE COMPETED BY THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT) CASE NO. CUP 88-21/SUP 89-5 DATE : Auaust 3, 1989 I. BACKGROUND 1. APPLICANT: Robert J. Royce, A.I.A. 2. ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER OF APPLICANT: 2956 Roosevelt St., it3 Carlsbad. CA 92008 (619) 434-6529 3. DATE CHECK LIST SUBMITTED: 11. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS (Explanations of all Affirmative Answers are to be written under Section I11 - Discussion of Environmental Evaluation) - YES MAY BE NC - 1. Earth - Will the proposal have significant results in: a. Unstable earth conditions or in changes in geologic substructures? - b. Disruptions, displacements, compaction or overcovering of the soil? c. Change in topography or ground surface relief features? d. The destruction, covering of modification of any unique geologic or physical features? e. Any increase in wind or water erosion of soils, either on or off the site? f. Changes in deposition or erosion of beach sands, or changes in siltation, deposition or erosion which may modify the channel or a river or stream or the bed of the ocean or any bay, inlet or lake? - - - - X - e 2. Air - Will the proposal have significant results in: a. Air emissions Or deterioration of ambient air quality? b. The creation of objectionable odors? c. Alteration of air movement, moisture or temperature, or any change in climate, either locally or regionally? 3. Water - Will the proposal have significant results in: a. Changes in currents, or the course or direction of water movements, in either marine or fresh waters? b. Changes in absorption rates, drainage patters, or the rate and amount of surface water runoff? c. Alterations to the course or flow of flood waters? d. Change in the amount of surface water in any water body? e. Discharge into surface waters, or in any alteration of surface water quality, including but not limited to, temperature, dissolved oxygen or turbidity? f. Alteration of the direction or rate of flow of ground waters? g. Change in the quantity of ground waters, either through direct additions or withdrawals, or through interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations? h. Reduction in the amount of water otherwise available for public water supplies? -2- m YES MAY BE - Ni - - - X - - - - - - - - e m - YES 4. Plant Life - Will the proposal have significant results in: a. Change in the diversity of species, or numbers of any species of plants (including trees, shrubs, grass, crops, microflora and aquatic plants)? b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare or endangered species of plants? c. Introduction of new species of plants into an area, or in a barrier to the normal replenishment of existing species? d. Reduction in acreage of any agricultural crop? 5. Animal Life - Will the proposal have significant results in: a. Changes in the diversity of species, or numbers of any species of animals .(.birds, land animals including reptiles, fish and shellfish, benthic organisms, insects or microfauna)? b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare or endangered species of animals? c. Introduction of new species of animals into an area, or result in a barrier to the migration or movement of animals? d. Deterioration to existing fish or wildlife habitat? 6. Noise - Will the proposal significantly increase existing noise levels? 7. Liaht and Glare - Will the proposal sig- nificantly produce new light or glare? 8. Land Use - Will the proposal have significant results in the alteration of the present or planned land use of an area? -3- MAY BE X X - NC - - - - - - - - - - - e 1) - YES MAY BE - N ( 9. -. Natural Resources - Will the proposal hsve significant results in: a. Increase in the rate of use of any natural resources? - b. Depletion of any nonrenewable natural resource? 10. Risk of Uwet - Does the proposal involve a significant risk of an explosion or the release of hazardous substances (including, but not limited to, oil, pesticides, chemicals or radiation) in the event of an accident or upset conditions? 11. PoDulation - Will the proposal signif- ' icantly alter the location, distribu- tion, density, or growth rate of the human population of an area? 12. Housinq - Will the proposal signif- icantly affect existing housing, or create a demand for additional housing? 13. TransDortation/Circulation - Will the proposal have significant results in: a. Generation of additional vehicular movement? b. Effects on existing parking facili- ties, 'or demand for new parking? c. Impact upon existing transportation systems? d. Alterations to present patterns of circulation or movement of people and/or goods? e. Alterations to waterborne, rail or air traffic? f. Increase in traffic hazards to motor vehicles, bicyclists or pedestrians? X X X -4- - - - - - - - - - - 8 0 - YES 14. Public Services - Will the proposal have a significant effect upon, or have signif- icant results in the need for new or altered governmental services in any of the following areas: a. Fire protection?, ~ b. Police protection? c. Schools? d. Parks or other recreational facilities? e. Maintenance of public facilities, including roads? f. Other governmental services? 15. Enerav - Will the proposal have significant results in: a. Use of substantial amounts of fuel or energy? b. Demand upon existing sources of energy, or require the development of new sources of energy? 16. Utilities - Will the proposal have significant results in the need for new systems, or alterations to the following utilities: a. Power or natural gas? b. Communications systems? c. Water? d. Sewer or septic tanks? e. Storm water drainage? f. Solid waste and disposal? 17. Human Health - Will the proposal have significant results in the creation of any health hazard or potential health hazard (excluding mental health)? -5- MAYBE - N( - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 0 0 - YES MAY BE NC - 18. Aesthetics - Will the proposal have significant results in the obstruction of any scenic vista or view open to the public, or Will the proposal result in creation of an aesthetically offensive public view? - 19. Recreation - Will the proposal have significant results in the impact upon the quality or quantity of existing recreational opportunities? - 20. Archeoloaical/Historical/Paleontolo~ical - Will the proposal have significant results in the alteration of a significant archeological, paleontological or historical site, structure, object or building? .. - 21. Analyze viable alternatives to the DrODOSed Droiect such as: a) Phased development of the project, b) alternate site designs, c) alternate scale of development, d) alternate uses for the si1 e) development at some future time rather than now, f) alter- nate sites for the proposed, and g) no project alternative. The project proposes development of 173 senior citizen apartmer 5.92 acre site. The project includes an on-site community building, a pool, reflection pond, tea house, a walking course, underground parking garages containing a total of 107 parking The site has been previously graded out to two pads with a slog feet between them. The site is lower in elevation than El Cami and Alga Road. To the north of the site is Alga Road and the futu~ Paseo. Real (Von Der Ahe) Commercial/Governmental Center approvec City Council on March 21, 1989. To the south are single family res and to the west is the 36 unit Seaport Villas Condominium proje the east is El Camino Real and Multiple Family Units. The proje be developed to be compatible with adjacent developments as surrounded on three sides by public streets and a 100 foot buff be provided from properties to the south due to an S.D.G.&E. ea5 a) Phasing of the project would not be a significantly environn superior alternative as on-site infrastructure and amenitie need to be constructed in their entirety for even a portion project reducing any benefits derived from phasing. In addit entire site has been previously graded and contains no sigr natural resources. b) Alternative site designs have been considered including an c proposal for 206 units and later 188 units. The present desic consists of 173 units provides a superior site design incl -6- ( greater perce Rage of open space on-site m In addition to a re in traffic generation. C) The present scale of development proposed is less than E proposals which are mentioned in category Ib@ above. The E project design and scale of development complies with or excc city requirements and can be accommodated on the site significant unmitigatible environmental impacts will be crez d) Alternate Uses for the site would typically consist of medium residential uses such as small lot single family homes or tow1 duplexes, triplexes and low density apartment developments 1 to the RM (Medium Density) land use classification of the Plan. The General Plan Housing Element provides policy direc. proposed actions that encourage the city to provide senior housing through the CUP process in conjunction with the RT For this reason senior citizen housing is considered a desira. e) Development at some future time rather than now would cont: vacant nature of the site. This would be inconsistent P General Plan and zoning designations for the site as well residential land use guidelines which encourage multi-family locate near commercial centers where public facilitj infrastructure will be available to accommodate the propos Development at some future time would not provide additional opportunities to meet the goals of the Housing Element. f) Alternative sites for senior citizen housing can be found wi. city as it may be permitted by Conditional Use Permit in the : M, R-W, R-3 and in the PC zone if a Master Plan provides These sites may not present environmental benefits or h advantage of being in close proximity to a commercial/governmental center. g) The no project alternative would retain the previously grade1 a vacant condition which is inconsistent with the General 1 Zoning designations for the site. -7- - YE 9 MAYBE - N( 22. Mandatory findinas of siqnificance - a. Does the project have the potential to substantially degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wild- life 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 en- dangered 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 dis- advantage of long-term, environmental goals? (A short-term impact on the environment is one which occurs in a relatively brief, definitive period of time while long-term impacts will endure well into the future.) - c. Does the project have the possible environmental effects which are in- dividually limited but cumulatively considerable? (IICumulatively con- siderable" means that the incremental effects of an individual project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, 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? - -8- .III. DISCUSSION OF EWIaENTAL EVALUATION 0 1. Earth - The site was previously graded into two flat pads. T? Report submitted for the project indicates that a large amount was required to create this lot in 1977. Approximately 20,oc yards of earth will be cut and filled on site to level out t which differ in elevation by up to 15 feet and create . underground parking garages. Runoff from this project is c to environmentally sensitive areas. The developer is requ provide adequate means of eliminating grease and oils from c prior to discharge. 2. Air - The project will not create objectionable odors or emissions that will significantly deteriorate ambient air c The project's finish grade elevation below El Camino Real a Road combined with the proposed open.,corridor.,+gill not dist flows. a. 3. Water - TI%& project provides .significanedmeter lanc and an onsite drainage system with numerous catch basins tc the amount and rate of surface water runoff. Approximately 60 of the site will be landscaped so as to not significantly absorption rates. As stated under section 1 on earth the dE is required to provide adequate means of eliminating grease i from drainage prior to discharge. . ." %. - .."% L. .. - *.- *. .F*.>~ " 4. Plant Life - There is no environmentally significant plant site as it has been previously graded. Existing vegetation c . primarily of weeds and grasses. 5. Animal Life - Due to the disturbed nature of the site as well location adjacent to major roadways and surrounding developmen1 or no animal life exists on site. 6. Noise - An acoustical analysis has been prepared for the E: The project traffic will not significantly increase existin levels. Outdoor areas of the project will be impacted by pr noise levels of 65 to 67 dB CNEL and less from adjacent rc The principle outdoor living areas within the project are significant distances fromadjacentroadways and benefit from I= shielding so that projected noise levels will be mitigated db CNEL for future roadway noise sources, less than the 60 maximum permitted. The required glazing for the project to meet the state a] interior noise criteria of 45 db CNEL is as follows: a. Standard single strength glass, or windows with a Transmission Class (STC) rating of 22 or greater. (All on all elevations of all units of the project) b. All sliding glass doors (SGD) should be 3/16'' glass. c. All entry doors should be 1 3/4 inch solid core. -9- DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMEN R ' L EVALUATION (Continued) 0 Interior noise levels with these recommendations are calcu be less than 45 dB CNEL with doors and windows closed. Since and doors must be closed to meet the interior noise s mechanical ventilation must be provided in Units shaded attached site plan of the project which meets the air requirements. of the UBC. Where windows are required to be un or kept closed in order to meet the interior noise st mechanical ventilation and cooling, if necessary, shall be to maintain a habitable environment. The system shall suppll changes per hour to each habitable room including 20% (on fresh make-up air obtained directly from the outdoors. The f inlet duct shall be of sound attenuating construction a1 consist of a minimum of ten feet of straight or curved duc, feet plus one sharp 90" bend. These requirements have beenmade mitigationmeasures forthe 7. Liaht iS Glare - The Project topographic and site design reduc and glare impacts to surrounding areas. Low intensity light be used within the project for safe and convenient nighttim 8. Land Use - The density of the proposed project is significant] than that allowed by the RM (Medium density, 4-6 DU/AC) Gene designation, The Zoning Ordinance however, allows Senior Housing up to 75 dwelling units per net acre through City approval of a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) . In addition the Element of the General Plan encourages the provision of senior housing through the CUP process in conjunction with the RD-M, and R-3 zones. The project design provides adequate p setbacks to provide a buffer from adjacent uses, The proposed is 29.22 DU/AC when utilizing the entire acreage of the Site DU/AC when excluding the S. D. G. &E. easement form the total of the site. In addition 60% of the site will be landscap provides evidence that the requested density is justifiable 9. Natural Resources - The site has been previously graded. No 10. Risk of UDset - The project will not store or require thc 11. Population - The proposal will not alter the distribution o resources exist on site. hazardous substances in the daily operation of the facility rate of the human population for the area, The population for the site however will increase from 68 persons under the General Plan designation, utilizing a factor of 2,471 per! unit, to 206 persons (1 person/studio apt., 1.25 persons/l apt. , 2 persons/2 bedroom apt. ) . This increase is permitted to the Housing Element for the provision of Senior Citizen 12. Housinq - The project will provide Senior Citizen Housing satisfy the polices and actions of the Housing Element. -10- DISCUSSION OF EWIRONMEN 44 h EVALUATION (Continued) 0 13. TransDortation/Circulation - The project will generate ad< vehicular trips over what the Local Facilities Management E Zone 6 provided for the site. A Traffic Impact Analysis was I for the project focusing on the intersection of Alga Road Camino Real. The additional trips generated by the Senior ( Apartment project will be offset by projects in the zone ti approved for fewer units than anticipated by the Zone P1' mitigate traffic impacts caused by the project the developer required to participate in the reconstruction of the Alga Camino Real intersection as required by the Zone 6 Local Fac Management Plan. 14. Public Services - The project is located in Local Fac Management Zone 6. Services will be provided throu implementation of that zone plan. 15. Enerav - The project will not use substantial amounts of .. energy. Food will be provided and served at a common facilil project will be in close walking distance of commercial/govez facilities and has access to public transit. 16. Utilities - The project will be required to improve tht Batiquitos Pump Station and make improvements to the trunk lir the North Shore of Batiquitos Lagoon. Other utilities exist the public right-of-way adjacent to the site and will be provide service to the project. 17. Human Health - The project will not create any health hazards, levels within the units and in the outdoor recreation areas within acceptable levels with the implementation of the mit measures for noise. 18. Aesthetics - The project's topographic, architectural and la; site design results in a sensitive aesthetic treatment of tl which is compatible with surrounding projects including the a: Plaza Paseo Real commercial/governmental center. In addit: project complies with the development standards of the El Cami Corridor. 19. Recreation - The project will not reduce the quality or wan. existing recreational opportunities. On site recreation fac are proposed including a pool, reflection pond, community building, tea house, croquet court, and a health walk course 20. Archeoloaical/Historical/Paleontolouica& - There is no evidc significance on this site as it has been previously graded 2 soils report provided indicates that the present site elevat the result of a significant amount of fill. Rev q -11- IV. DETERMINATION (To Be e Completed By The Planning 0 Department) On the basis of this initial evaluation: I find the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. x I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect j this case because the mitigation measures described on an attached sheet have been added to the project. A Conditional Negative Declaration will be proposed. I find the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. /a”//- 87 Date Signature /a”//- 87 ignature ~Olrsi8cl D&td V. MITIGATING MEASURES (If Applicable) All submittals to the City of carlsbad to fulfill the conditions mitigated Negative Declaration shall reference: 1) the project file 88-21/SUP 89-5; b) This Negative Declaration’s State Clearinghouse No the specific mitigation number listed below. 1. Earth and Water - Runoff from this project is conveyed to environn sensitive areas. The developer shall provide adequate mc eliminating grease and oils from drainage prior to discharge. PI such improvements shall be approved by the City Engineer prior to i of any building permits for the site. 2. Noise - The following requirements shall be noted on the buildins interior noise criteria of 45 dB CNEL is as follows: A. Standard single strength glass, or windows with a I. The required glazing for the project to meet the State a Transmission Class (STC) rating of 22 or greater for all on all elevations of all units of the project. B. All sliding glass doors (SGD) shall be 3/16 inch glass. C. All entry doors shall be 1 3/4 inch solid core. -12- MITIGATING MEASURES (Conmued) e 11. Since windows and doors must be closed to meet the interic standard, mechanical ventilation which meets the air requirements of the UBC must be provided in units shaded attached site plan of the project. Where windows are requirc unopenable or kept closed in order to meet the interio standards, mechanical ventilation and cooling, if necessary be provided to maintain a habitable environment. The syste supply'two air changes per hour to each habitable room incluc (one-fifth) fresh make-up air obtained directly from the ot The fresh air inlet duct shall be of sound attenuating const and shall consist of a minimum of ten feet of straight or cum or six feet plus one sharp 90" bend. 3. TransDortation/Circulatioq - Participate in the re-construction of t Road/El Camino Real intersection as required by the Zone 6 Local Fac Management Plan. VI. APPLICANT CONCURRENCE WITH MITIGATING MEASURES THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT I HAVE REVIEWED THE ABOVE MITIGATING MEASUI AND CONCUR WITH THE ADDITION OF THESE S TO THE PROJECT. grr ,, /+ye7 ate Signature DN: kd -13- m e .e- -. . - . " - ." .L .- .- - " / 8 c i* r r - ". - " " ..ab* '- I /.I , F1GURE 6: Shaded Building Areas Indicates Units Which Require Mechanical Ventilation e - -.."~.-,~ 1 v) m 03 CL 3 v) \ cv co co n. 3 V I H I .. v) cz W r 3 z W 2 LL m c( 2 5 c z 0 w v, W PC z w N I- 0 CL w c1 CI E z w v) v) w PC >- e W E e. z c V W 3 91 0 n. .. - In N 0, 0 z z w CT 0 n. .. V W 0 w L5 z 2 f 2 2 c w a z ez 0 ez W c( m 03 07 4 (0 PC W m 5 V W a W I- .. 3 d > 0 a z L < .- 0 -c tLaJ c, ie4 vc, v) aJ v)- '3" F LA& 0 c e?- nu- aJI v)s+ . *- v c,u= . am, z us Le co 0 mw-o "p 0 m E.? e.z:.p cc .- 4 c mw = e >ea0 n-0- u nQ) =a L u - %7 0 =e Ego -0 v 0'"s *- e .?- a .C IE e gz 0 U m? Q) 0 .=.?- v, s.?- E u na e2 2.2 3 &en a?- rn- e'; a0 u* c, -0. 3 7 Q)l u" wo - 3% ma a 0'; 0; Le 22 :z ze p 0 EZ 2W.Z s aJ v)z V) I* mz v) 2- 2.z E* m7.2 u E,"' x c4 v) sps2 s p5 E a z3 7.2- aJ e+.f 3 p v) aJ ZPZ LQ) *?- Em=? aJ azo v) c, .- ex m.?- VI .C *?->a= + eo .C U.C = s .r L Q)c, aJ" ECL~ CaJJP' .?- a .?- m L aJ m E'?- mo L m-r- e?- 0 *- .?- a e?- Ec,c,C, 3 E '?E 0 .r 0 c ou E c c, .C +eL . 0 Em aJ= h aJu uu E L me?- c 0 a0 1%- lLl I 0 0. aJm c 'C o'" :z ;2 mal xv) 4 :E m c vu t 7- VQ 2 P. (A -CL Y -- .- os a c," Y> U c Le Lm -- a .- q- 2 L-0 E c, .f 0 oc om ez 0 0 'C 0- .C -?- LI nm n L= ko E 0 u -- *?- m 00 +Y a?- s Lal (UE >a 9, E F U v) c m CL S 0 E F g -c v) 0, c U E L L 4c, aJ .?- *?- aJ .?- n aJ ea, -?- - c -= uc c on E u .C m U - ma E 3- E U E -?- .C .C 0. 2z k .C w a r I- > cc 00 Q,aJ c,c, mv, v)v) vu Uc, IQ) "rd * cu Lv, OL >Q)a am c,eL P E L" 0 c a -?- .C WUm 34) Q) v -- sa~ uv, ~a mew a-r V -0 EW c -?- \ I Y-L OQ, am -0 v) Ea+ "Y 40 ma aJ EOw u 4m me n e om 0 c,.r *?-- 0 LE .?- amu E Q Ear 00 m+ m -Em uc, LO .?- .r L& Ec, v)Q) EE 7 -r L aJ .C m 3.: a*- z E =.5g > -- CJ LY WE c: .C Y x. H .warn, .C T c iT T T S G a Q) .a *T LU- =rare VI c, .F rd m* g u *z -0 .- cE .- x Q-0 m a- mr c " m .r *- c, c, -7 3 E-- E LV- 2 E€ caJC ml- u 3P c *- 7 u c, c .C L e?- x m 3t n m €-c c =a me + a?- u a cos LE owa oma e- -c c c, e?- 7 cc, E 0 -7 Ev;S LCQl recc oma. aJv a oc ?Ea v)EQI ooa I=3L =-E: w mcnm aJa L-E 10 0 -c u L.r s ZQ awm ' mm P €4 n e?- e?- Y aJ" c, 0 cz e?- L F a*?- c mo =iUO aJ = aJ m3 E C ax U E*- - L .?- 4c, II v) OmES E 'C aJ E" en o .?- onao j Ti u a e7 '3 c E -?- L s 0 mLM Y Le-CTJ m I= It 0 .- Loa 7 aJ e?- 3 .- m c, Ere PC 0 L x *ora w +rw> an m a