12/14/1999 - City Council Special lei
' AGENDA
SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Tuesday
December 14, 1999
4:45 p.m.
EAGAN MUNICIPAL CENTER
City Council Chambers
I. ROLL CALL & AGENDA ADOPTION
II. VISITORS TO BE HEARD
III. CONSIDER JOINT APrC/APC TASK FORCE TO REVIEW
OFF-STREET PARKING , TREE PRESERVATION &
MITIGATION ORDINANCES & DEVELOPMENT/
REDEVELOPMENT ISSUES
IV. CEDAR/HWY 13 AREA TASK FORCE REPORT
(CEDARVALE & TH 13 AREA)
V. SALARY COMPENSATION STUDY
VI. OTHER BUSINESS
VII. EXECUTIVE SESSION
VIII. ADJOURNMENT
f
f
MEMO
city of eagan
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR& CITY COUNCILMEMBERS
FROM: CITY ADMINISTRATOR HEDGES
DATE: DECEMBER 10, 1999
SUBJECT: SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING/TUESDAY, DEC. 14, 1999
There are three (3) items listed on the Special City Council agenda including: 1) provide
direction to study ordinances as recommended by APrC Chair Lee Markell and the
Development Impervious Services/Tree Preservation Study Group Chair Terry Davis; 2)
receive and discuss the Cedar/Hwy 13 Area Task Force report; and 3) receive a report from
the City's consultant, Riley, Dettmann & Kelsey, who prepared the City's salary
compensation study.
CONSIDER A TASK FORCE TO REVIEW CERTAIN ORDINANCES RELATIVE
TO NEW DEVELOPMENT
At the December 6 Special City Council meeting, Lee Markell, Chair of the APrC, and
Terry Davis, Chair of the APrC Development/Impervious Services/Tree Preservation Study
Group, appeared and shared a request that the City Council give consideration to forming a
joint study group between the APrC and APC to review off-street parking, tree preservation
and mitigation ordinances and development/redevelopment issues. The purpose for
reviewing the ordinances is to consider regulations that would enhance the City's ability to
avoid excessive tree loss and promote greater green space preservation and expansion.
Mr. Davis appeared before the APC on Thursday, December 9, at their work session and
informed them of the desire by the APrC to jointly study possible ordinance changes that
would promote greater green space preservation and expansion. The APC was very
receptive and, as stated by the City Council at the December 6 meeting, since ordinances
will be reviewed, City Council policy requires a directive to their two (2) advisory
commissions to form a special task force to consider ordinance revisions.
At the December 6 meeting, this item was directed for consideration at the December 14
special meeting.
Enclosed on page is a copy of the presentation notes that Terry Davis shared at the
Special City Council meeting on December 6.
1
ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED:
r
To direct the APC and APrC to form a joint work group/task force to review the City
ordinances and/or policies for the purpose of enhancing the City's ability to avoid excessive
tree loss and promote greater green space preservation and expansion for new and expanded
development.
CEDAR/HWY 13 AREA TASK FORCE REPORT
During 1997 and 1998, a series of meetings were held by the Cedarvale Service District
Committee, consisting of business owners and merchants,with City staff to discuss the need
for a Greater Cedarvale Area study. It was agreed by the business group that once the
TH77/TH13 interchange was constructed - the community built new commercial nodes at
Cliff Lake Center and the Promenade/Town Centre, and the population concentration was
moving east in the community - the viability of retail at Cedarvale substantially changed.
There was general agreement that a portion of the Greater Cedarvale Area was being
underutilized and had changed to a destination use, i.e. the bowling alley, barber shop,
veterinarian clinic and other similar uses. The Cedarvale Special Service District business
owners group made a recommendation to the City Council that a study be initiated that
would review the viability of retail for Cedarvale and consider redevelopment options for
the Greater Cedarvale Area.
An RFP was prepared during the summer/fall of 1998 and distributed to several consulting
firms who submitted proposals to be hired for the redevelopment study. Following the
interviews, conducted by a twelve member interview team, SRF Consulting was hired in
January, 1999 to begin their consultation to the City. The City Council had also initiated the
formation of a Cedar/13 redevelopment study group, consisting of a fifteen member task
force, to oversee the study. Meetings began in the spring of 1999 and the work was
scheduled to conclud in late September/early October; however, the task force requested a
fourth scenario which required City Council action to allocate additional resources for SRF.
This additional study delayed the Open House and generated the need for additional time to
prepare the draft report.
A moratorium was initiated on May 11 to expire November 11. Due to the needed
extension by SRF to complete the study, the moratorium was extended for 90 days at the
November 1 City Council meeting and will now expire in early February, 2000.
The fifteen member task force, chaired by Margaret Schreiner,has held seven meetings and
one Community Open House to complete the Cedar/13 Study Area Report. With the
assistance of SRF and staff input under the facilitation of Assistant City Administrator
Verbrugge, the task force will be presenting the Village Plaza Redevelopment concept for
the Cedar/13 Area Report at the work session on Tuesday.
Enclosed without page number are copies of the Village Plaza report that include the
information that was requested by the City Council of SRF and the study task force.
SPECIAL NOTE: A special congratulations and thanks again for the efforts of the
Cedar/13 Redevelopment Task Force.
V2
s
ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED:
To receive the report from the task force and place the item on a future regular City Council
agenda to direct implementation of the concept scenario which is outlined on pages 17 and
18 of the report.
SALARY COMPENSATION STUDY
As a part of the 1999 budget deliberations and compensation review by the City Council in
late 1998, it was determined that a compensations practices review covering non-collective
bargaining unit positions was needed. In order to bring greater equity in the City's overall
compensation program and to establish a fair rate of compensation to retain and attract new
employees, it was the City Council's action to hire a consultant to perform a compensation
study for all non-collective bargaining unit positions.
The study is complete and ready to present to the City Council. Mr. Rod Kelsey,
representing Riley, Dettman &Kelsey,will be present at the special City Council meeting to
provide a brief overview of the salary compensation plan and answer any questions the City
Council might have regarding the study.
DIRECTION TO BE CONSIDERED:
To review the compensation plan and place the item on the December 20 regular City
Council meeting for formal approval
OTHER BUSINESS
At this time, there are no items for other business.
EXECUTIVE SESSION
Staff is proceeding with negotiations to acquire land from Duke Weeks Realty for the
Community/Central Park. The November 16 motion included, as an alternative,
condemnation for the acquisition of the property. Since condemnation may be an
alternative, the City Council can discuss options that are available for acquiring the land in
executive session. The City Attorney, Director of Parks & Recreation, Director of Public
Works and City Administrator will outline various options that are available to the City
Council at the executive session on Tuesday. Also, the City Administrator will present an
update and ask for direction on various collective bargaining groups' proposals.
/S/ Thomas L. Hed2
City Administrator
TLH/vmd
1
APrC Proposal for consideration by December 6, 1999
the Eagan City Council
Background.
While reviewing several development proposals in recent months,the APrC has encountered an
increasing number of situations where developers' proposals and the city's off-street parking
requirements are creating a more noticeable reduction in effectiveness in tree preservation and
mitigation in the few remaining undeveloped parcels.
The Commission is hearing from developers that their large parking areas are caused by the City
of Eagan's requirements which creates a larger"footprint"than the off-street parking requirements
of other cities. Other cities allow 9'stalls whereas our policy requires 10'stalls.
The Commission has also noted strong resistance to consider underground parking and multi-
story building construction to further reduce the"footprint"effect.
Last September,the APrC directed a study group of four Commissioners from its Natural
Resources and Acquisition/Development Sub-Committees to do a preliminary review of our off-
street parking, our tree preservation and mitigation ordinances,development/redevelopment
issues, and make recommendations to City Council if appropriate. The study group has met with
staff in October and November to:
• review comparison data collected by staff;
• generate ideas for alternative and/or supplemental approaches to reduce the impact of
development on trees, natural areas and greenspace;and
• to determine if additional study is appropriate.
Issues:
The study group concluded that our current tree preservation and mitigation ordinance is overall
probably the best from our comparison sampling which included other local and national cities. It
has served us well since its approval in 1996.
However,much of the remaining undeveloped land is not easily developed in many cases and will
require substantial alteration to the terrain without creative project designs that complement the
land.
Furthermore, redevelopment in the older sections of Eagan will likely provide new challenges and
opportunities.
As a result,we believe creative supplemental approaches in the City's ordinances and/or policies
will be required to enhance our ability to avoid excessive tree loss and promote greenspace
preservation and expansion. This has to be in concert with meeting planning and development
needs.
Pro osal:
We propose that the Eagan City Council authorize the continuation of the APrC study by a joint
work group comprised of designated representatives from APC,APrC,and city staff.
Final recommendations should be.provided to the City Council by April 30, 2000.
Submitted by:
Lee Markell, Chair-APrC
Terry Davis, Chair-APrC Development/Impervious Surfaces/Tree Preservation Study Group
SPRINGSTED
Public Fftww Advisors
CITY OF EAGAN, MINNESOTA
VILLAGE PLAZA REDEVELOPMENT
CONCEPT
PRELIMINARY FINANCIAL
VIABILITY ESTIMATE
December 9, 1999
City of Eagan, Minnesota
Village Plaza Redevelopment Concept
Preliminary Financial Viability Estimate
The City of Eagan has under consideration a redevelopment concept for the Cedar
Avenue/Highway 13 interchange area (the "Cedarvale Area"). Redevelopment, by its nature,
can be costly and the City is interested in determining the financial viability of the project. This
report establishes a groundwork for addressing the financial aspects of the project and
provides a preliminary perspective on the cost of redevelopment in the Cedarvale Area.
Redevelopment involves the acquisition by public or private parties of previously developed
properties, the clearing of outdated structures, updating/upgrading of public infrastructure, and
the construction of new facilities. Acquisition costs will depend on the location of the property
and the financial viability of the existing building uses. Public infrastructure costs will depend
on the age and adequacy of existing infrastructure and the design parameters for the
redevelopment area. In the end, development will be driven by the developer's assessment of
the viability of the location and its cost compared to comparable alternative sites. One way to
conceptualize the financial viability of a redevelopment project is to determine the all-in
estimated cost of assembling and preparing the property, add the infrastructure costs that the
developer will be assessed and compare the resultant square footage cost to other similar
sites within the City.
All-in cost of assembling and preparing the property. There are three primary components of
this cost element. They include purchase of the subject property, demolition of existing
structures, and relocation of existing users. Broad assumptions can be made regarding the
relationship between market value and ultimate purchase price of properties and demolition
and relocation costs will vary significantly from parcel to parcel depending on the nature of the
structure(s) in place. To provide the City with preliminary information we have assumed a
standard write-up of land costs of 1.5 times current market value and a 2.0 times write-up of
market value for each building. We have also used a flat$5 against building square footage to
provide some allowance for demolition and relocation costs. Obviously, the level selected for
any one of these standards can significantly affect the estimate and the City may choose to do
a more in-depth analysis of all or portions of the Cedarvale Area as a second phase study to
provide more concise information regarding property acquisition costs.
To assist in estimating acquisition costs we relied on information provided by the City which
includes in part a parcel map of the Cedarvale Area, a listing of current property valuation
information for the parcels and buildings, and the draft Village Plaza concept plan. Using the
plan, we identified which parcels are the subject of the redevelopment concept. Using the map
and listing we were able to determine the owner, size and current value of land and buildings
on the redevelopment parcels. In the case of two parcels, the City currently owns the property
and no additional land cost nor recovery of initial cost was assumed for the proposed
redevelopment. The result of this part of the analysis is summarized on Exhibit A. The parcels
are sub-totaled based on whether they are included or excluded from the redevelopment
concept as outlined in the draft Village Plaza concept plan. Certain parcels have been
identified as needed for designated public areas and are similarly sub-totaled.
Using this methodology, the acquisition/demolition/relocation cost of the subject parcels is
$6.04 per square foot.
Infrastructure Costs. City staff has indicated that the public infrastructure costs will occur
primarily southeast of Highway 13. The total estimated cost is $3,365,000. Preliminary
funding sources include the use of MSMA funds (estimated in an amount of $1,610,000) and
special assessments. Given this preliminary information, the additional cost to properties
within the Cedarvale Area affected by the infrastructure improvements will be $1,755,000. We
would advise that the City develop a finance plan for the public cost side of the Cedarvale
Area that addresses all public costs, including open space and recreational areas, public
structures, and street and utility improvements. It should identify available resources and how
any unfunded costs will be provided for. The viability of the project should be looked at both
from the perspective of affordability for the developer, and knowing that there is an affordable
plan for the support of the public cost of the project. Not insignificant in these estimates will be
the cost to acquire land for public areas and structures such as the ball fields, park amenities,
community center, and transit hub.
Comparably priced development alternatives. Land costs will vary from area to area. Using a
variety of sources, we would estimate that the market could demand $2.50 to $4.00 per square
foot for developable land with the proposed level of public amenities and allow projects to
Page 2
develop and be financially feasible. For the purposes of this overview, we have assumed a
market price of $4 per square foot. Any costs in excess of that level would need to be offset
by incentives.
Levelinq the development field. As discussed earlier, the ultimate land cost within the
Cedarvale Area will need to be comparable with the land cost in similarly improved areas that
are developing without incentives. If the comparable cost figure is $4 per square foot for this
area, the incentive cost can be calculated as follows:
Total for Area Private Development Public Areas
Acquisition Cost $26,804,850 $22,827,600 $3,977,250
Demolition/Relocation Allowance 2,515,490 2,242,465 273,025
Plus Infrastructure Cost 1.755.000 1.495.000 260.000
Gross Cost $31,075,340 $26,565,065 $4,510,275
Assumed Square Footage 4,440,299 3,633,155 807,144
Net cost/square foot $7.31 $5.59
Required Incentive Cost 12,032,447 $12,032,447
Adjusted Net cost/square foot $4.00
Resources available to offet required incentives can include grant funds, tax increment, tax
abatement, and other economic development tools.
It should be evident that the estimates provided above include a large number of assumptions
which need further verification and refining to provide a more accurate assessment. This
information should, however, provide an order of magnitude answer to the initial question on
financial viability. It would appear based on the assumptions outlined above that a significant
level of incentive will be needed to cause the redevelopment of the Cedarvale Area to occur. It
may be helpful to the City in its deliberations to also focus attention -on the development
gained at this cost. Increasing density and attractiveness of the area can reap rewards for the
City. These should be quantified and measured against potential costs.
Page 3
r
0
U)
>
M
U
m
X
r
O
CL
a�
_W N M N O W m m O
N O V m m 1n m N O cJ p m 0 0 c7 m O N V m < O O a M O N� OMM N m V
Ci W N � m N n n W C V cq r O N « V O W 01 7 P] c N N N N ? O n LL') O) N « iN0
ch c7 N « W m N °) o') N m m N N m m < r r m coN N « N n r « V « « N N
« « T
m v,
m (R O O V m O W O O) N m o
O 10 h C m N f` m °) N N R c') N � m 0 7 � W r O u') C u") u7 N t\ u] V O O V O n N N N O Q) Nal « O « m O c7 O
N O N O o N N O O O N N m 0 N N N N N N N N N N N N N N O O O N N
Z cA E9 f9 EA fA cA c9 fH f9 fA di FA FA(A f9(A fA fA 69 fA�(A 69 lA Vi fA fA fA M EA fA fA Vi FA(A(A V!(A fA Vi fA cA fA cfl fA(fl EA fA cA to co
9
C
J �
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
O O O o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O o 0 0
OO O O W m m R O m N N O V n m O S « m N a n c'7 N O O c`7 O N O W m p O O LQ LQ cD « « O R O )[1 V m V N a 0 0
u'i O O c7 N m N�m m V N m m W O W M N W W 7 7 W m � 0 r` C o m m N O o V m m o m t` m N�W o m m N
W O WI N « W m « h m m W W m 0 « O N m o m m m � N f` m N N m O N m r N c7 W n O m « W O « N
o) c7 C N « N r m ch a V « « « N « N « r « « « N r a « M
a N F N N
O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O
O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O
p N N O V m N N O On O N a 0 N m W o m tl�v m t` O r` m t` V m N� N V m n (`� N N
O a1 C N O W N m N 117 O m C7 N m f` W V m N N O W V 0 0 10 R N « m R O N t` m
N O 'O tW'1 tm0 c'7 n N O N « N O1 W N m m N N m Nm
c7 r.7 W m M m m [f m c7 m N a N
w cc E m
Q
w cc
0 0 0 o O o o 0 0 o O O o 0 0 0 0 0 o O o o O o O o 0 0 o O o O o 0 0 0 o O o O o o O o 0 o O o 0 0
W W O N mw W O N m O in O V r to cc h c7 r m c\!v:r` C') N W m c7 n n N N m m .- c7 N aD nV« m (O c7 O O O R NO « m om
N O Oi c`7 N m 0 h m K 6 1 N c) m R N N m N m m m N 0 0o m N m v m W m ) m m V n m m o O r o W
F
go
C rf n C « ° O1 N m m 0 m N Oo « « « N W m O N m N M N W t2 N N W m f V N W N m
Q
IL N J «
« N
F' Z
z LU
W 2
d m N W to M N N M N N m O N m to W at )O N` NO m N m N « m co « m m m c7 m m o 0 N N m m O O
OW N m M O m (O m N V aJ m « O m O R O O R m C7 m m n t0 O O m m N N c7 t` •- O O V O « O m t` a W W m t` m 0 CO
JN ch W 1c1 W R N m l'J c'J m m N N V N R« N m N N t` N V m W m N N r O m N Nm m W M N N v m m m m v
W m LL N N N N N N m V 7 c7 N « « c7 NN N O N « « (7 « •- N m c7 « N N f\ N O N c0 m N 7
> W Jm
W Q
0 w
W =
W LL ~ �f
«N
w
u7 m 0« m m W O « O m h .- t7 c7 N « « O r O « « N .- N r m m th O h V p W m n ch N f` ` W O m c7 c0 NO
J � rn `° rov <ccco � o � � � 00000ri � 00000000000000000000 � 000o � � « ovoi � o .-
Q W J Q
> 0
U)
Q Z_
0 N
W -� o v
W U c
' C C C C N T n
Q Q W O O O O) d a) E () °
4. m c » 7 '° n `m U n E oC m U
F0 4) « m a) X U d o
E o U 2' 2` a `o — c Eat �' v c cU , 42 n o
d > > > m T 6 o m d 0 o f v m w m o c, > o)c 12 d
X K U H o 0 o U U U a ° 6 U U 'a c � y m is
w — 0 a a m m ns a� d c o d Y m o 3 3 3 in o y m
W m D o °m w y y m `m_ i o 0 d U c a ; m o y m o m aU `o Z n m a ¢ m
a`1 'D c c c c c E m 'E c c =? y n>¢ U m c '; N = 3 h V) o m y > M. o N
o n 3 3 aXi c_ c_ c_ d y d m m aLi �' aci > m m E o 5 a) aZi o mm N m ° m m = m
(n c7 wHFH (L (S) (La000 QY > Ja (7 Z ¢ ° (nm F- W 0000
N
N O m W R V V V O O m m m (� m N� m W W m m W m m m W _N N N N O « « m — O
O O O O N N O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O o O O O o O O O O O
O_ _« _O O _O O _O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 «_ O_ N O r 0 0 0 M N •- 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 _O O _O O O_ O O N O_ � N _O O_ d
QI O O O O O O O O O O O O O_ _O 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O OO O O O O O O
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O N O O O O O O N O 0 0 0 U
O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O W W N N m m W W W tt) O O O O O O O O O O O O O N N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 U
a m n n m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m W W W m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m n n m m m m n m m m c
ao m N m m m m m m W m m m m m m m W co
T o n n o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o 0 0 m m 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 .6
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
D1
C
( La Q
d r A f o:o a- ELas oa
c o, c m Y s° > j y U o 0 0 o G Q
_O n. m r • ¢ a°i 33 oa — 'm m v) ao) mo o o o � ' acct aci o) ` D
'( W E o
L • T T d d ` N N U C _ C C C C C C FJ TJ cu
CI) N N .3 O U N N U w !�)
J O Q N C i6 d U U U W W N W W W W N N t6 t6 U U NO L L aI U c O U O T N fa U L U
J c � d ya1 w W lLmm y y 2 2 2 2 c c � J � � O ° � " 0 cn o > m o °' `°° -6a�iU a
L Y (6 t0 «a to RS c6 i0 m N (0 (6 f0 m O ¢ . R)
m 'o e-ac Eas ¢ ¢ o «o o ¢ ¢ Co dada @ � . 2 TJ > = o T� (� Y � J o, o,
Y N o O` ° a) to N y N N N N L L L (n (n U U U U L T— _ �` C C O O O o
c"a E a a�—i m e °a as � � c c c y y is La Ln i` i` 'L` `t` y y c c > aai d Q
Cr d °)c o 'oo� m e .� d
L a) L = L J A m m 0 0 C_ C_ C T ?� R f6 A c7 a) aS tp A a1 E E O O O O d 0 F- a) U y C_ C d 0 E O N LO °O N N N O
Um W () () ¢ SUUoCD222 32 � m2222QQIo -o (AI ¢ m (.70 -� (A � 0 �3: P S , � JJJOaI
cad 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N N N c'> N O « N m 't N m C N O O O o o o 0 0 o 0 0 0 0 o 0 0 0 o 0 0 o o o o
0 0 0 0N N O> o N m C LL') m n m m o V m N m m 0 (V CJ v m m
= r' _ _ _ _ •' « « « N N N N N N N N N N N c7 M M M m m m m M m K 4 V Q 'Q C 10 to 1n N W N m
r
0
U
m
X
7
r
O
a
N
om m ommvm m o 10 'IT mvco m y
t!) m m C'7 O N m O 0 N m O m C7 C7 0) O m CD m
v N N N n C7 Cl) CO N o0 (7 M m v m
m
M OD M m O O CO 'v O O O N O O N m t0 O t0 (A o) N m D)
M (7 m O m t0 m O O N o) m O C7 (`D O
wM fA ON fA OM to 64NM fA 609 0 69 di di 69 69 E9 6N9 ) W
a
C al
J ad
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o 0 0 o o O O O O O O o o o 0 0 0 0 0 0 O
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 coo O O O O O O 0 O Oo O O 00 c0, �O O _O Om O 0 O
o N t) O N O m O tC7 co O o) N m m 0 n O
m N m o n N m m (D o) n to N co
T O W
[P m O 0 n v
d N 1n N m Oi
049
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 cc O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O
O O O O O O cc O O O O O O O O O p O O O O O O O
N O O 7 V m N m m C`D to g n C7 m W m
O d C�N U) n N m m m O n C m N O m O) CI
N O ;O n N n m m r O) N N N m0 W m < a m too M m C9
Q N N
�' d 7 Co m � N N I-
w d E m `n w 44
Q
o 0 o o o o o coo o o 0 o o o Q o o o o o o o o o o o o 0 o o
o 0 o o o o o coo o o o o o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o
W n v Cln O M O C7 (7 CD N (p m N m W n 0 t0 O m C7 N C7 N �- m N o N
.7 o n m m O m O m m to(7 v m n N CO v N m V n o) m m W m
m o) n
���I/� WT O CI m CSD m V N to mm N N n� N Q 7 Co m O N ' CA m t0 N t0 (7 a
Q a O W m m F' m N r CA
U)
Z N J 6 Z 69
W
W 2 CL
a o n N n n n n o) t0 O O r b N O (') N Cl m to n O n N t7 0) O a v n
n O m O O O J m m m O m o� (D N O (7 (7 (A
Ii J V m m to m 0 m O N O O m y N v M M n N n t!7 N CA m N n O O m
N n N N O o, V O .- N m m N W Co m N ap N .- tt) M n m N n to O
O > N LL O n v O n ' C7 O O O tD m O f�m> (d M Co m to C') m 0 m m N v h
WW y v O ('� N N N O t7 Cl) N N a � Q M R m m m m C'7 .- (7 N m L7
> Q o 0 V tri W
W w J Q
Q W W
W
LL N W LL
W dM C) D ID , rnm n m m °? u) ao p O
p (/1 N m o N N m m m N n O m N m N
J Q O O O O O v 0 o n m O O O m N w O m 17 O o 0 o O N .- N
0 J Q
Q
D Cn in
U1 p W
U w W
U W W E
( CrU
d W N m
c
Q Q m cc Q m
CLI 7 'N d a) W Q W U D
_m
2 .E m w mc m o o rn ? a a o
o d
# YO (D 5 EJ S m J m (WA ¢ 0)
W W Q E m 5 a W and y W m m
c d W c o
d o D U 0 O m d U Z d C
W d O T
u) J O m O O)d > C X a C a
m mU c%J � HU U 'O
a N
r _ (`
W O m m m O 0 a O
0 0 0 0 0 0 O N _O O O O O _N —O _O o 0 _O 0 0 0 _O _O O
0 0 0 0 0 O O N t7 O 7 Q
N o o m n oD (7 n a n o U O O O O O N N
Q O O O O O O O O O O O O i0 O O O O
O o 0 o 0 0O O O O O O
a U O O O O O O O O N O O O
0 0 0 0 0 0 cc O O O O
n n n n n rn n rn rn rn m rn W m m m m rn rn rn rn n n n to rn n
ch M O t7 ch O
0 0 0 0 N N N m m m m m m m m M 0 0
C
T n n n �
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 r 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
V C �
d
C .0 m d CD C y
O W V C c C d C E' Q
d U J Q 9 O G C 0 U U d Ci 0
J iq o U T
as
E N d W d ca
J O d � N 'N d C 3 0 N C C tp d
C C J J C C 3 Y Y = W d (T W J J y W 0
d °a c4 W W . . 0 m E a c Zmm c " m '' 2 d ro
-� '2 W O U a m m m c m m d E.7 .q d ii d - Q d o c m ° 'Wo a¢i O-
L = (dna Ra `o oa yUU daW a Q W N .� 3U mm aci � � U aoci aci NU v Q d
A m c E J �_ J c > > 3 c J H y Q r = a > c E a d d = c
(n m m Y m m U U U d d J Q m O Z Q S =U - U c -O5 J J O S LL O
W 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O U V (� V • O N O O O O N O O o o
(Dto(ND (ND (ID (0D W m O N N C+1 v L i0 2 ch �2 .�- v O V 7LoN
yy
l
s�� C
ti
�ry�r
o� I
4id '
:S
� � � r� � � �• � r IY rp
.�' i6 Y8_vA14R • ►j . s-'F� ����Sa♦4 r�"'�1.._�L'
e w �� �, , •rte.,,..:--'=_-•- I
ill i' s ` �.
d
IE7j/�, •. �« �` ��a, c�• ,,,,rte fai�• �IyEgs
s
• \iii t
�.,
i( / • ";
...<: y. ate. . �=,_3•„� -.w._3 -e.6t:,+S.tY3* '>;:._.a: m-.'.-�. .__'..., a::�e€�':.-.. .z.�{'tn ... _ ;x::�'r .k r.:x--k al..t.,o.�^'3 .Y.c s...,: