05/02/2006 - City Council Regular (2)AGENDA
EAGAN WINDOW SIGN TASK FORCE
EAGAN ROOM AT EAGAN CITY HALL
TUESDAY, MAY 2, 2006
4:30 P.M.
I. WELCOME AND CALL TO ORDER
II. NOTES FROM APRII.18, 2006 MEETING
III. CONTINUED DISCUSSION OF OPTIONS AND ISSUES
IV. ALTERNATIVES FOR RESOLUTION
V. COMMUNICATION OF TASK FORCE CONCLUSIONS/AMENDED WINDOW SIGN
CODE
VI. INFORMATION AND DIRECTION FOR FUTURE MEETINGS - If necessary
VII. FUTURE MEETING SCHEDULE - If necessary
VIII. ADJOURNMENT
Auxiliary aids for persons with disabilities will be provided upon advance notice of at least 96 hours. If a
notice of less than 96 hours is received, the City of Eagan will attempt to provide such aid. Please contact
City Administration at 651-675-5001 with requests.
WINDOW SIGAGE TASK FORCE MEETING
APRIL 18, 2006
In attendance: Councilmembers Maguire and Fields, Ruthe Batulis, Jack Johnson,
Dave Perrier, John Curlee, APC Members Gladhill and Hansen, City Administrator
Hedges, Community Development Director Hohenstein, and City Planner Ridley.
- Jon Hohenstein provided brief opening remarks.
- Councilmember Maguire proposed the following:
1. Agree on a percentage for window signage.
2. Arrive at a conclusion on grandfathering most, if not all, existing signs.
3. Discuss permits and explicit information about enforcement and
interpretation, i.e. product placement.
- Jack Johnson agreed and stated there are four issues business owners and
Ruthe Batulis had discussed at a meeting since the Task Force last met:
o Grandfather existing signage.
o Nix a permit fee for existing signs, although the group had not decided
whether a permit or fee should be charged for new (currently not existing)
tenant signage.
o Interpretations -The group believed interpretation and enforcement need
to be better defined.
o Percentage of window signage -Their group would like no restriction on
percentage, but understood that a percentage between 25-100% needs to
be established.
- Mike Maguire asked Dave Perrier if he operates with slotting fees regarding
vendors and their signage. Dave responded that he did not.
- Cyndee Fields asked if grandfathering would cover all painted and poster type
signage currently in place. There was no consensus reached on that.
1
- John Curlee opined that if all business owners in town were surveyed, 99%
would question why window signage would be regulated at all.
- Cyndee Fields responded that there are regulations for many things and the
purpose of this group is to strike a balance. As an example, she stated the City
regulates the number of pets people can have.
- John Curlee stated that it was his assertion that very few business owners would
utilize 100% of their window for signage and that most, if not all, signage would
be tasteful.
- Jon Hohenstein requested clarification that the discussion was based on the 4-6'
clear-zone being removed from consideration. The group stated that was
affirmative.
- Jack Johnson mentioned that with all of the people in businesses he spoke to,
the predominant amount of window signage necessary, in their minds, is at least
50% or greater.
- Jon Hohenstein offered photos ranging from: 1) existing signs that do not appear
to meet the present 25% requirement, 2) a group that appears to meet the 25%
requirement although not the 4-6' clear zone, and 3) those that appear to meet all
current window sign standards.
- An audience member clarified issues on slotting and advertising for convenience
gas stores and that there are slotting fees for tobacco sales, as far as he knew, in
every convenience gas operation.
- Ted Gladhill shared photos he had taken and spoke about equity and the impact
of varying amounts of window signs on neighboring business within the same
strip center.
2
- Ted stated he believes every business would like to maximize signage capacity,
(he referenced portable trailer signage) but also believes there needs to be a
limit. He stated he understands the grandfather clause argument, but that just
because signage currently exists, that does not mean it is appropriate signage.
- Ted went on to say that he didn't believe the grandfathering clause would be fair
to a new business being subject to stricter standards than a competitor just
because the existing business had pre-existing signage.
- John Curlee explained that the group was just talking about window signage and
not portable trailer signage, etc. He went on to state that if his tenant space was
next to a space that utilized 100% of its window signage, it wouldn't make a
difference. He stated traffic is the key and that the two critical issues to any
business are aesthetics and location/space.
- Mike Maguire stated that while aesthetics are part of this discussion, the public
safety factor is still relevant.
- Ruthe Batulis stated that public safety could be a voluntary compliance issue.
She gave an example of a retail operation experiencing a crime of some sort, a
follow up with that business owner after the fact could encourage voluntary
compliance where visibility in and out, would be an option.
- Mike Maguire stated that he would rather be proactive on public safety, provided
it is balanced.
- Mike and Cyndee both stated that the 4-6' clear zone is impractical.
- John Curlee stated that he has issues with Piccolo's and the Italian Pie Shoppe
in that both retailers have very attractive and appropriate signage that might not
3
meet the 25% coverage standard and certainly doesn't meet the 4-6' clear zone
even though in both cases the signs are see-through to a point and don't block
view in and out.
- Dave Perrier questioned why are we even doing this? He stated he understands
the 100% on certain garage doors or any other "over the top" type signage, but is
concerned that with most of the pictures shown, you can't see the signs or what
they say unless you are 30' from the space and, therefore, wouldn't be visible to
the public passing by on a public right-of--way.
- Mike Maguire stated that he believes the group has the issues boiled down to the
right ones.
- Ted Gladhill stated that window blockage vs. signage is different.
- John Curlee stated that he would like clarification on aesthetics in that he
believes aesthetics is a slippery slope and he can't think of a business that would
put up questionable signage.
- Mike Maguire stated the 50% window coverage is very high compared to other
the communities surveyed and provided on a matrix to the group.
- Cyndee Fields clarified that whatever direction this group goes, she and Mike are
only two of afive-member City Council, which includes the Mayor.
- Jon Hohenstein stated that the hour was getting late and explained what he
understood the City Council wanted and gave direction back in 2004. Fields &
Maguire concurred.
- Cyndee Fields stated that she would prefer to exclude permanent wall signage
from this discussion and focus on window signage and the percentage of same.
4
- Ted Gladhill commented that Tires Plus, with numerous large garage doors vs. a
business with a window or two and a door, presents an unfair advertising
opportunity.
- Jack Johnson stated that windows don't drive a business decision; it is traffic in
the door that matters, and he wants to use the window space only in a
reasonable fashion.
- Cyndee Fields asked if the group is simply down to window percentage at this
point?
- John Curlee stated percentage and permits.
- Mike Maguire added grandfathering.
- Cyndee Fields suggested a no-fee permit.
- Mike Maguire remarked that incorporation of the permits was a way to assist City
staff in tracking signage throughout the community.
- Maguire stated that he was pleased with the outcome and ground covered in this
meeting and suggested that for the next meeting, business representatives come
back with a proposed percentage of window signage between the 25 and 100%.
He requested that staff prepare information relative to enforcement and
interpretation.
- Ruthe Batulis suggested that from the grandfathering standpoint, people who
have already spent money to install window signage should not have to incur a
cost by replacing that signage.
5
- Jon Hohenstein clarified that permanent wall signage was excluded from this
discussion and the focus was merely on window signage and the appropriate
percentage in addition to the grandfathering discussion earlier. The group
concurred.
- Jon proposed that the next meeting be at 4:30 p.m. on Tuesday, May 2nd. The
group agreed.
CD/Jon HohensteinlSignage/Meeting Notes/Meeting of 4-18-06
6
One and All,
This is to confirm that the next Eagan Window Sign Task Force meeting will be on Tuesday, May
2 at 4:30 p.m. in the Eagan Room at Eagan City Hall. An agenda and background materials will
be emailed to you by the end of the week. Progress was made at the last meeting in narrowing
some of the issues. Councilmembers indicated a willingness to remove the 4-6' exclusion from
the ordinance and an openness to grandfathering of existing signs in some form. They restated
their interest in a percentage approach to regulating window signs for new signs or as signs need
to change over time.
Members expressed an interest in attempting to have a draft conclusion on key points at this
meeting. To that end, the City Councilmembers asked that business representatives give
consideration to a percentage for window signage that would still permit promotion, branding and
flexibility for businesses and serve the City's interests in uniform standards, public safety and
esthetics/limitation of visual clutter. At the Councilmember'sdlrection, staff is preparing a memo
outlining implementation issues that would need to be addressed with a simplified ordinance -
how to manage grandfathering, clarification of general interpretations, etc. We will include that
information together with the agenda and meeting notes with the packet distribution.
As always, if you have questions, please contact Mike Ridley or me. Thanks.
Jon
Jon Hohenstein
Community Development Director
City of Eagan
3830 Pilot Knob Road
Eagan, MN 55122
651-675-5660
Fax 651-675-5694
jhohenstein(a.cityofeagan.com
City of Ea~au demo
To: Mike Ridley, City Planner
Jon Hohenstein, Community Development Director
From: Mary Granley, Senior Code Enforcement Technician
Date: April 28, 2006
Subject: Issues with Implementation and Enforcement of Window Signage
As with any new Code adoption, the devil is in the details when it comes to application.
The following points hopefully will help frame interpretation and enforcement.
Permit Apalication Issues
We understand the need for the ordinance and its interpretation to be as simple as
possible; basic percentages of azea aze the easiest for staffto calculate, communicate and
enforce. We also understand that businesses have expressed concern about the new
permit form's length and complexity.
Information provided by the applicant on permit forms is used to verify compliance with
several variables inherent in the window sign code. While lengthy, the window sign
permit application was condensed to require the minimum amount of information needed
in order to determine if the applicant's request meets the 2005 Code amendment
standards.
Regardless of the percentages that arise out of the Task Force work, a simplified code
would still require square footage information be submitted on the application. However,
building square footage, window square footage, and sign square footage are the basic
information needed to process an application on a code that is based on square footage
requirements.
Notwithstanding the debate on pernut fee, we have found the most effective way to
efficiently track (and enforce) signs of all kinds is via a Sign Permit. Other approaches,
such ascase-by-case enforcement of standazds, are feasible, but present challenges of
their own, in terms of establishing a baseline and other issues discussed below.
Measuring Sign Area
Since the ordinance should generally be content neutral, it is important to have a common
understanding of how the size of a sign or the message part of a sign's area is calculated.
According to sign code requirements as listed in Sec. 11.70, Subd. 28.A.3.(k), sign area
is defined as "the gross area, exclusive of supportive frame, which contains copy or
identifying features such as a logo, character or identifying figure. The gross area shall
be calculated as an enclosed area bounded by no more than 12 straight lines."
A simple sign design that can be enclosed within a square or rectangle will be calculated
by drawing 4 lines around the azea and calculating the size. Amore complex design that
may have text and pictorial graphics of a complicated design would be enclosed by a
series of lines not to exceed 12 in number. While the idea of 121ine enclosure seems
complicated, it actually permits greater coverage for complex designs than a strict use of
a square or rectangular area.
A simplified code would not need to change the way in signs are measured for area.
Grandfatherin~ Ezisting Suns
To grandfather existing signs, it will be necessary to establish a baseline of current signs
in the City. The way I understand the idea of grandfathering in the existing signs, any
change to any sign on or within the window area, (once a baseline is established) would
require all window signage for that business to become compliant with code
requirements regarding window signage.
If we do not have a permit process and choose to grandfather existing signs, we will need
a way to create a baseline of the current signage for future changes. Again, staff would
submit that permitting is the most feasible way to efficiently establish a baseline. That
may be done by having businesses get permits (with or without a fee) for existing signs
including any variance from new standards.
In order to establish a baseline of the existing current signage to be grandfathered in,
without a permit, a site visit by staff would be required to obtain the current site
conditions by way of inspection, documentation and measurements to determine what
size the existing signs are.
By whatever means grandfathering would occur, it would be important to clarify whether
there would be a timeline within which non-conforming signs would need to come into
compliance or whether compliance would need to occur at the time that the sign is
changed because of deterioration, business decision or business change.
Seven of the City's 24 strip malls were visited by staff thus far. Photo documentation of
existing window signage was obtained for each tenant space at the 7 malls, which
accounted for 66 businesses recorded. A letter regazding window and temporary signage
along with permit forms was given to each of the 66 businesses; however, measurements
of the existing window signage were not made.
A simplified code regarding grandfathering in existing signs would require staff obtain
measurements of the existing signage for the 24 malls and any other retail buildings,
including those already visited, as well as obtaining photo documentation of the
properties not yet visited. Consideration would need to be made for those businesses that
have already paid for and obtained window sign permits.
What Defines a Window Simon?
Whatever percentage or regulation is determined, it will be important to determine
whether it would apply to anything other than signs applied immediately on the window.
(The following information does not apply to the exemptions 2 square feet for store hours
and open/closed status, exemption for safety, security, or general information signs, and
exemption for civic or Chamber of Commerce signs. You may note that exemptions do
make reference to content. This deviates from the general effort to focus on physical
dimension and not content, but this approach is primarily to benefit the property
owner/business and to minimize the need for interpretation.)
The City Code defines signage as follows:
• A sign "means any surface, facing or object upon which there is printed, painted
or artistic matter, design or lighting".
• A business sign "means any sign upon which there is any name or designation
that has as its purpose business, professional or commercial identification and
which is related directly to the use of the premises upon which the signs is
located".
• A product sign "means any sign upon which there is any brand name, trademark,
logo, distinctive symbol, designation or advertising which has as its purpose the
promotion of any business, product, goods, activity or service".
Several questions have come up regarding specific, unique placement of sign banners or
placement of product at or near windows, and what would be considered signage and
what would not. This becomes a matter of determining whether the placement of the sign
or product is clearly visible from the traveled portion of the site (sidewalk or pazking lot)
and whether the placement meets the definition of a sign, business sign, or product sign.
On the basis of the definitions and visibility factor, as staff began its informational .
discussions with businesses, the following interpretations were used in an attempt to be
equitable in the application of the new code:
• Signs applied directly to the window surface would be subject to the code
requirements.
• Other signs located immediately inside, but not applied to the window (neon
signs, placards, etc.) would be subject to the code. Generally, such signs are
placed within 18 inches of the window surface.
• A banner hanging within the tenant space, parallel to the window, and on or in the
window and clearly visible from the pazking lot, was determined to be subject to
the regulations of the sign code. But a banner hanging 36" from a window (clear
aisle walking space according to building and fire code) would not be subject to
the sign code. If the direction is to continue to apply the window sign code to
objects not applied directly to the window, it would be appropriate to define the
distance from the window within which the code would apply.
• A banner hanging in the window, but perpendicular to the window would not be
subject to the sign code, as it is not clearly visible from the parking lot.
• Whether products displayed in windows constitute a sign is perhaps one of the
most challenging interpretations to make. Staff s interpretation to date is not
intended to interfere with product display or the general ability of businesses to
manage stock and lay out their store. The determination that was made was that
stacks of product placed at or neaz a window and cleazly visible from the parking
lot, with a specific, identifiable product name or logo, which would tend to make
a reasonable person conclude the product placement is meant to attract attention
as to the brand of product offered, was determined to be subject to the regulations
of the sign code. The bright line between general display and display intended to
act as a sign is difficult to draw. One cleaz example of product used as signage is
when alternating colors of packages are used to spell out a message in the stock
stored by a window. On the other hand, the mere fact that product stocked by a
window displays the name of the product on the package, may not be considered a
sign. The input of the Task Force to help draw a cleaz distinction in this regard
will be helpful.
A simplified code regazding distance setbacks for signs or product in window azeas
would help staff and businesses make a determination where signs or product within
window areas could be before they aze classified as window signage.
Conclusion
It appears that simplification of the window sign code may simplify some matters of the
application for both businesses and City staff, but basic square footage information on the
building, the windows, and the signage would still be required. The method of measuring
the sign azea would not need to change with code simplification. Grandfathering existing
window signs via free or paid Sign Permit would be the most efficient means to
document what is currently at each site, as well as to process permit fee returns to those
businesses that have already paid for window sign permits. Any code simplification
would benefit both staff and businesses if it clarified sign or product placement on or
within the window, and where sign and product placement is allowed without a sign
permit.
0
0
0
N
L
U
(0
C
N
.~
~ ~
a~ ~_
oU
U ~
rn~
m °'
c ~
rn
UJ
c
~
p
d
~' ~
C y a!
(9
~
O
p •C fA ~ V L
m . 'C O ~' O
~ p~
m .C
"' ~' 3 a~ ~
fA N V d w t m r0. fA C L O ~ O U ~ +L.. O
3 °~ c ~ :a ~ ~ v c m ea rn a ~ ~ > c ~ ~ ~
~ w N Q W .m :a ~ O a N O V •~
C O L N ~ ~ E
c o c °' ~ o 'a ~ R = •9 ~° a~ ~ m ~ 0 0
o c " o f a m ~ °
` ~ ° o o ~ ~ X °
c c c F v ~
N •p ~ \ O
~ O m 0 O ` O c d N +..• ~ ~ O •~ O N 3 p
m w m N O c d o '° ; ~ c .~ ~ o ~ ~ ~ ~ ry ~
" ~ Cf O
L ._
3 C Q. to ~ 'a A ,~ QI V N l0 (0
~
~
V
'?
w
'
3
m
m
R
O
ta
=
O
X
O
N ~
_
'v N
~ ~' v C L y O
a~ a
~
r vi
3
C
=
-
r+
~
~
~
~
~
~
3
~
~
~
O
C
C U
~ ~ ...
~ C
~ ~
C
~ C ~ _~ L ~ ~ O
`'-
a
~
~
l0
Ri
~
p
la
C
m
=
~
c
R
~
N ~.
~
N
L
~ N
Q
Y
~ C
C
N
0 ,
~. G ~ L
~ ~-
~ C Q
' d t V ~ C
; ~
' u
~
YI ~ y ~ ~ ~ C
~ 0 ~ T ~ _
•~ _
fl.
v, o
~ ~
y
fp
~ a
L t
+~ ~. ~
d
~ y c
O ~--
O ,~
O m
N _
U ~
~
N c .~ c
f0
3 o
N ~
-p
U
C ~
i •~ ,a
C A W c •~ O ~ ~p
~ `
~ ~,
~ ~ N ~ E 3 C O ~ N O C C -
m ev e eo . o Of
. ~ 3 'a 0
c 0
L mo w. o ~ o ~ -°o ° ~' - w 3 rn •
m :°
30 l0 ~ -d ~ y O m o~ C d C~ d C N .._ .C ~ O L Q O N O N
Q ~ aQ+ ; O O O Q O N •C O U
U ~ H ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Z ~ w Q o a 3 c ~ a~ n ~ c ~ 3 ~ •~ 0 2 .3 0
c
o
~
L
N N
o O
~
fl
t
. Y
3 o
~
~ ~'
.~ L
o E
o
o
c ~.
~ _o
c c
> 3 ,~
v ~
T • ~ ~
N ~ C U
fn
~
U
U O
(~ .-
.a
~
3
O O O a $ N (~ ~
O O
C
C_ d `_'
C ~ ~ N
• C (U
Q p •
~j R{ ~ ~ rn ~ ~ ~ N
p ~ U
•'_ =1 ~
'd ~
~' .
N
~ C
Q ~
O
C ~
C
L= C1
• N ~
> ~
~ U
N V
~ O
C 'C
O
N
~
O >
C
O
C
K
•- r
+
X
~ Q Z Q ~ to vi 3 N
_N O
.-.
~
~ ~
c
•
C N ~
~' Gf Q- O
U W Q m
co
O
O
N
L
U
(6
C
m
E
N
.~
m
~ ~
v •`-'
o U
U ~
a~ a~
m °~
C ~
rn
O
.a
C
7
(O ~ w 3 L
3 L > C s o ~
° o 0
c L ~
o m d ui ° m °
c
o
~
~
`°
~
~
~ c
:
~ o
~ .
N
C _
~
o
m
~
~
a
i D o
s 'C ~ ~ c c ~ > ai v •> ai -C m f° ~ m ~ 3 Y o
O v N L O C O Y N C ~ N
~ Y ~ C 'd :_.
o U 'O
N ~
~ L
Y `~
C C 'O
C ~ C w ~
C ~ N ~ '
O Q
~ ~
\ p
w-'
~ C
O t0
7
N U
~
O
O
y
f0
E
E
`
O
O
~
N
O
~
O
N
p
~
Q
U
C Q Y ~ ~ X .
C
Y Y N
~ a~
~ ~ coi n
p ~
c v c
~ °' ~
c ~
~ c
`o a ~
v .o c
s o
N 0 0 0 ~ o
a~
~ ~
c x
N ~ _
O c
. _
0 ~
0 `a Q O E
O ~ o
c `_ c9 j c ~ c O N L..
N
L v o v y n. 3 ~ ,~ . ~ ,~ o c 3 m ~n >, o -a •~ c
O
~ 'a
(~ N o
> N
~ N t6 Y
Q ~ ~ ~R
•y Y
O ~ ~
n 'O lp N
' N lp M
' C Y
~
Q N
U N
fa O -C w . O
~ w - - ' N O O V
N d O ?~ U
>
~ ~, Q ~
' p O N C ,
,
fl O
O N L • p N
p ~ `
~ ~ N N O
~ ~ t0
N
~ ~. N t0 7
o O c .0 X ~ -
~ . X U ~ - C
• X N N X ~ U
~ ~ o c i
c ~
• ~ ~ 3 a
i .~ y c coi rn 3 ~ ~ ~ `m °~ p OC ~ c
O
c O
m
iv °-
~ -a
o O
o
rn O
aai C
•co C
m •-
~
N X
O c
•o ~-
m m
•N e
' 'N N
~ O
c ~
rn O
c a
N O
c -a
m -
m
aj N
~
'm
-
m > .~
v~ Y 3
p C
c f0
~ ~
o Q L
Y ~
c U
o N L
,..., ~
c
3 N
~ 3
o
o -
(9 tll
• -
tB L -
~ L
o L
N > -
(O
'C
N o
O
N ~
O
`~
N
O
U
L
N L
O
•
C
"~
Q
~
N
C
'd
O
t0
~
C
L
to
~
L
N
L
U
L
N
~
p o
L
(A C
'D
w L C
rn Y ai w m "- m `
a~ O 5 c m O ~ C
. c 3 o
~c, rn ~
o m ~ m N
-a ~
ca N
a v~ •
c U
O 'U ~ U
O c c rn c +-~ ~
O ~ rn
3 ~
A ~ ~ ~
m
Z' N c L c 3 c ~ c o c ~
rn
•
a~
3 U
x
`t rn
•N rn
•N C
: rn
•N ~ .
+ N
L to
o
m N
L Y
c
co
~ Ol
• U
~ rn
.
c
•- rn
• O D1
'V +•'
m ~
•-
v
y
o
O
°~ ~
N o
. ~
0 Y 3 'a ~
o .... m m
a ~
o c
~ m
3 N td ~ l
c Vl o
3
O v 3
0 3
0
~ 3
O 0 0 0
? o c
c0 .
0 a
N 3
O 3
O 0 3
O s 3
O 3
O ~
-c ca C
•- (A
~n N
~n v ~ v .O N :D ~ ~ N "~ E 3 E m v ~ v .O v U ~ ~
_ ~ ~
c ~ ~ ca _m c_ c_ >,
c •c c
._ c
~ N
Y •-
3 L c
~ w
~ ~ o ~ X _c ~ _c ~ c_ o
~ C •~ C a~
~
. c~ Q
. °' °' ~ ~
. `° ~
. 3 ~
. O ¢
. Y ~ o a
. ~ ¢ o ~ `° ~
. 3 ~
. ca ~
. ~ ~
.
N
O p m N ~ N
v a~ o °~
- m 3 ° c
o ~ 3 N ~ o
L
LO O
~..
H C O N_ ~ > ~
y ~ ~ _
C C U C
(B N
tq O
~ ~
O N
7
O !_'
~ 7
Q" O
Q N
~ ~ > ~ 7
N
~
~
N
C O
L C
•- ~ C
L
Y C ~ ~ 'N O C (0 "'
~ "~ C C
p U
~ ~
O O O C
N O
~ ~
N
' O N
~ m
O O N p p
O N C O O O fl 't ~ _ O
O O L ' :~' !_' ~' . 7 O L }'
O) N ~ ` O C C C C M O I"' C
~' ~ E - v a v •N V v .~ -oa
~ o •~ a~
~ ~
(II v
V~ v
V~ v
~. ~ ~ x
~ ~ ~ ~
4~
L
O
~ ~
O ~
O
~
- N
U
U
U ~
C
N
L
~p Q
_ (~
-
U
E ~
C ~
C U
C ~
(B Q
N ~.
N d
N N
E ..
r C
~ N N
'-
" Q
m
~
•3
.3
rn
a ~
•N ~ O
o o 0 o g o O C o
¢ m m c N z z z a ~ ¢ rn o z
N O
.` C N
~
" Q
t0
~ O
~
N
Q
>
N ~ a
N c •> m
c c
m U W W l~ ~ ~
N
m
0
0
N
L
U
f9
-~
~~+
c
a~
E
N
.~
a'
a' N
a~ ~_
o U
U ~
m m
m °~
c ~
rrn
VJ
O
C
J
>+ \°
o .r
N
2
C (0 (E -p ch N w-
L
0 .., N
~ cv N
a d 3 a~ -a ui
N ai .
Oc ~ ui o _
~ c0 ~ ~ c ~ U U ~- -Op
~ m «
~ v, o a~ o ~ o 3 •N a ~ o N o
uvi a~i '° rn ~ o ~ ~ ~ ~ °' E
p o a~ ° o X
N ~ ~ O N O S O to ~ d C .
. M O "'' OO N
N ~ ..p E «6 -p j 0 0 0 N O N N ~ C O
'~
~ N ~ C
~ N .
O V ~ O U
N ~
~ ~ .Q
a+ N
- V .N m ~ O
~
C
°o `
~ c ap d
y t6 axi c~i `o ~ c ~
°- aci p
M axi o .° L
~ -a •
v ~
: ~
~' +L-'
•~ t~ >
m t0 n N O
c ~
c
rn p c
o ~ O ~ O
cn 7
~ ~
~ (n N
3 N
o ~
'm
3
~
c
~ o
~ ~ ~.
c
:
ca a~
rn
~ c~ ,.,
3
~
~°
E rn
.
° c
' ui
..
o
~
rn 3 . ~ ...
o
c
m
m ~ ~
~
.x ~
m v
C
.
~
~
C
O
.N
C
~
C
r
N
~
~
.N
O
fl-
~
~
~
o
O
~
~
~-.
m
O
~
N e
3 _ ~
3 ` 3 m
3 a~ ~
o
c O
a~ •..
3 ~ -a c
o
>, o :a O O
~a t ~ 3 >
o o >,
co 0 3
o o
~ c
o rn >, x
a~ m
~ v ~ c ~
• a~
~ ' _
`° ~ c ~
° y ~ L N
~ 3 rn w Q- m ~ y ao ~ ~ n o c
o c
a 3 o a~i o
-p ' c o N C .c ~ ~ o ~ v a> N m c6 -a ~ ~
....
N o o c o a~ o f t N
. ~ ~, O ~ c c ~_ 3 s m ~ ~ 3
O ca _ ~ ~ ~ _ 3
.., m ~
O m m
~ E m e ~
3 m o c o o m m 3 ~ -
~
~ ~
,,-' `
O- O
cn
c a O L D
m y
~a ~
~ ,~ C
o N
x D N p
3
~ t •~ U ~
~ ....
°
~` C
~-
~,
c •~ ~ c rn ~
o cn
c ~
~ w
o .S o co O
-a c a~ o
c.~ ~c
m -° ~° rn
= ~
v c
rn 3 c ~ 3
_rn
N rn
C co ° 'u~ ~
N ~ ~
~ ~
'D c
~ o
` ° 3 w m T rn
C a~ 'v~
~ ~ o a~
~
N V M f4 N 7 V O f0 N `' M m , O ~
•~= Q (~j N ~ ~ ~ ~ O C N L L l0 N C 3 a C ~ ~ L +f6+ a0+ U
X O C H O C `~ S O N ~'' 3 '~ ~ N '~ N ~ C O ~
~ C C
w
. O w
N O
z
. ~
. ~-
. n ~
. co Q
. s ~
. o O
.,- O
z
. C
O
. v, m ~
. "' O
" O
z O
a
. ~
. w
o w a
. o ~
0
L F
p
O ~
C
• ~
~ C
,~ U
O ~-'
O O
.C
~ U ~
.
p
L ~ ~
C C C C +..
~
O O
_ O O c ~ .
Q
~.
C .
:
C ~
C ~.
C O
~ 'd
c N
t
a
~
v
-te N
X
3
0
a
U U
w U
~ U
w Q C N
O
N
fl. Q Q Q 'y
"-' ~
O
m m m to >.
Z Z Z Z Q Ofl..
~
~ N
a
z.
yp o c ~ ~
i
a c
n
c ~ Q a' °
~
~
~ a
i
~ o
~
ch