Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutStaff Report 2 04/25/2005April 25, 2005 Item 2 City of Petaluma, California Memorandum Public Facilities & Services Department, 555 DleDoivell Boulevard Nortb, Petaluma CA 94954 (707) 778-4303 Fxc(707) 778-4437 E-mail: pubfacilities@cipetaluata.ca.as DATE: April 15, 2005 TO: Mike Biernian, City Manager FROM: Gene Beatty, Interim Director, PF&S g . „ SUBJECT: State of the Streets Report As stated in the Enhanced Street Maintenance And Reconstruction Program (Attachment A), level -of -service (LOS - the flow of vehicle traffic), vertical alignment (profile or overall ride -ability), and pavement condition (a measure of the integrity of the street surface and its underlying sub -base) must all be considered when measuring street quality. The level -of -service, if right-of-way allows, can be improved with the reconfiguration of existing lanes or inclusion of additional lanes, and profile/ride-ability can be improved to provide a smoother ride at the time of construction. Pavement condition, the focus of this memo, refers to serviceability or condition of the surface and/or sub -base, and can only be improved by maintenance treatments or rehabilitation/reconstruction strategies. The pavement condition index (PCI), developed by the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC), utilizes a scale of 0 to 100 as a measure of condition or serviceability. Zero represents an unpaved dirt path while one hundred represents a newly constructed or rehabilitated street. The City of Petaluma was in the lower tier of Bay Area Cities with a PCI of 40 three years ago. In determining the PCI, the known and estimated condition of the City's street system, circulation, congestion, and condition of service are factored, as well as the impact of solid waste collection vehicles. In addition, the relationships of these factors as they apply to street maintenance and rehabilitation/reconstruction are considered along with the City's entire infrastructure needs as well (including underground work to first be completed). Due to the number of streets in poor condition when we first embarked on this program three years ago (an average PCI rating in the low 40's), it was imperative to develop consensus on how to proceed. A Citizen Advisory Committee (CAC) was formed and worked with staff to develop a comprehensive street repair program, along with proposed funding solutions for Council action. As a result of the CAC's work and subsequent report, the relevant questions of defining the City's ideal average PCI, achieving a balance between the spot maintenance, annual State of the Streets Report April 15, 2005 Page 2 street program and the capital program, and funding of the chosen projects were achieved. As a result of additional funding, we have achieved a PCI in the 70+ range, as well as a balance between annual maintenance and capital programs. For your review, I am enclosing updated information on street improvements we have accomplished since 2003 (245 street segments), and those currently proposed or under construction. As a reference, Attachment B represents the annualized cost for those streets scheduled for rehabilitation over a 10 year period, while maintaining a slurry seal program for streets with a PCI above 70. Using the recommendations of the CAC list to develop these estimates, we have projected that the total cost for rehabilitation (not including slurry seal streets) would be $31,228,227. Completing the rehabilitation program over a 10 year period would cost $3,122,823 per year. Accounting for 5% inflation, this yearly cost escalates to $4,844,523 in year ten. In addition to rehabilitating these "poor" streets, we propose to slurry seal 20% of all City streets each year at a present cost of $996,521 per year. Therefore, the present cost of both rehabilitation and slurry seal is $4,119,343 per year. In year 11, 12 and beyond, the rehabilitation cost drops off and we are left with only the slurry seal cost. The total cost for rehabilitation and slurry coating is estimated to be approximately $51.8M over a ten year period (assuming 5% annual inflation). Unfortunately, a ballot measure prepared to provide funding to implement the above schedule was defeated by the voters in 2004. Therefore, without other additional funding identified, the City will not be able to maintain the desired PCI of 70 into the future with the current annual $1M in street repair and $1M in street maintenance. MTC/SCTA (P -TAP 6 funding) has placed a request for street overlay projects, so we have submitted Ely Blvd., from East Washington south to Frates Road. The engineer's estimated cost would be around $750IC to $800K. Also, I'm re -including the following list of proposed work for 2005, which also follows the CAC list. Six of the top 13 streets have been completed already. Some are still pending due to incomplete underground water utility work. 1. Ely Blvd. was eliminated this year, but the funding remains for early next year. PF&S will need to wait for Water Resources to put a water service contract out to bid. S\administration\reports & budget papers State of the Streets Report April 15, 2005 Page 3 2. So. McDowell Blvd. - funding to be in October or earlier, through SCTA. Street Rehabilitation - all of Maria Dr. (#13 on CAC list) and other CAC streets, as money is available. 4. Maintenance - slurry seal 82 streets in the northeast corner, crack seal, and possibly a maintenance bond coat for Caulfield from Hwy. 101 Bridge to McDowell. Also all of Crinella Dr. (#9 on CAC list). Payran St. from Jefferson to Madison is being surveyed now. A consultant has been retained to provide design this year. 6. Petaluma Blvd. is scheduled to start early summer. With the completion of the aforementioned work, the City's Average PCI will have risen from the low 40's in 1999, to 70 by the end of the 2005 construction season. Significant work has been completed over the last two years to improve the condition of Petaluma's street system. Approximately $14 million has been expended to date on street rehabilitation and maintenance efforts covering 245 street segments in the City (108 rehabilitations and 137 slurry/crack sealings). A list of those projects is attached. For 2005-06, we are programming $4.4 million in street work ($2.6M in CIP projects, $1M for On -Call street programming, and $800K in pot -hole repairs performed by city crews). A specific list of anticipated street work will be provided once an update is completed of new damage cause over the winter rain season. In closing, the City has made great strides towards improving the street system, and our staff remains available to work closely as a team with the CAC, Redevelopment and other associated committees, and will continue well into the f mare to maintain and provide for improvements to the City's street infrastructure. Attachments A. Enhanced Street Maintenance And Reconstruction Program B. Rehabilitation And Slurry Costs Per Year C. State Of The Streets 2003 And 2005 D. 2003-2004 Street Project List S\administration\reports & budget papers ATTACHMENT A City of Petaluma, California Budget Paper No. 2 ENHANCED STREET MAINTENANCE AND RECONSTRUCTION PROGRAM Executive Summary This report provides an overview of the known and estimated condition of the City's street system component of the City's transportation network. In examining street conditions, factors such as circulation, congestion, and condition of service, as well as the impact on roadways of solid waste collection and other heavy vehicles must be taken into consideration. Each of these factors has a unique, yet similar connection to the others, and the impact on street conditions and an enhanced street maintenance and reconstruction program. Due to the critical condition of the streets (PCI -30) and the extraordinary amount of money required to address the conditions, it is recommended that the City create a process and a critical path to establish a comprehensive street maintenance and reconstruction program, with financing alternatives, for action. Background Petaluma is subdivided by natural and man-made barriers such as the Petaluma River, Northwestern Pacific Railroad, and U.S. Highway 101. There are three main arterial streets within the City: Petaluma Boulevard which runs primarily north/south; Washington Street which is an east/west street and dissects the community; and McDowell Boulevard which parallels U.S. Highway 101 on the easterly side of U.S. Highway 101. Based on the information from the City's GIS mapping system, the City of Petaluma has approximately 171 miles of streets, comprised of 28 miles of arterial streets, 24 miles of collector streets and 119 miles of local/residential streets. Many of the streets on the east side of U.S. Highway 101, were constructed 30 years ago, while many of those on the west side are 50 years or older. In the City, based on the present mix design standards, an asphalt street has a life cycle of 15 to 20 years and a concrete street has a design life of 30 to 50 years. The predominant surfacing material within the City is asphalt. Like most communities, the larger proportion of thoroughfares are low volume residential streets. However, while smaller in number of miles, arterials and collectors carry most of the City's traffic from light vehicles to heavy tractor -trailer trucks. The quality of any street system can be measured in at least three ways: (1) Level -of - service (LOS), which measures the flow of vehicle traffic; (2) the vertical alignment, which addresses the profile or overall ride -ability of the system; and (3) the pavement condition index (PCI), which measures the integrity of the street surface and its underlying sub -base. The level -of -service, if right-of-way allows, can be improved with the reconfiguration of existing lanes or inclusion of additional lanes. The profile/ride- 1 ability can be improved to provide a smoother ride at the time of construction. The condition (PCI) of the street refers to the serviceability or condition of the surface and/or sub -base, and can only be improved by maintenance treatments or reconstruction. This paper addresses only the street conditions (PCI). PCI is a system developed by the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (San Francisco Bay Area), which utilizes a scale of 0 to 100 as a measure of condition or serviceability. Zero represents an unpaved dirt path while one hundred represents a newly constructed street. Most Sonoma County cities seem to achieve an average PCI of 70 to 75. Data provided by the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) shows that the majority of our area, such as Santa Rosa and Rohnert Park, do maintain this standard, based on an average. PCI Rating by Jurisdiction — MTC's Report Jurisdiction Current PCI Target PCI Cloverdale 46 81 Cotati 70 76 Healdsburg 67 81 Petaluma 30 80 Rohnert Park 75 81 Santa Rosa 72 82 Sebastopol 66 78 Sonoma 74 83 Windsor 81 84 Sonoma County 45 80 Some communities have a preventive maintenance schedule to maintain the streets in better condition at a sustainable level, as shown in Exhibit A, entitled "Why Pavement Management? Impact of Deferred Maintenance". It is more cost effective to apply pavement treatments, such as slurry seals, when the streets are still over 70 PCI, than incur the expense of overlay or reconstruction after the pavement has deteriorated below 70 PCI. According to the survey, the average condition of Petaluma's arterial and collector street system has fallen from 38 in 1998 to an average PCI of 30 (see Exhibit B, Figure 1). The City received $935,100 in gas tax in 1998 and in FY 01-02 received $1,050,600. To date, Petaluma has focused its pavement condition surveys and improvements on arterial and collector streets only. However, Section 2018.1 of the Streets and Highway Code requires that all cities evaluate their entire street system, to include arterials, collectors, and all residential streets, every three (3) years in order to retain a certified pavement management program. If the City fails to remain certified, the City may be ineligible for state or federal funding for street improvements. Statement of Objectives Through state and federal grants, MTC develops a street condition rating program (Pavement Technical Assistance Program), including software and training, available free to participating cities. To the allowable limits of this program, the data used is collected by pavement condition surveys, and input into the City's pavement management software program. This program then provides an array of repairs and/or maintenance options, cost of repairs, and a priority list, based on various levels of funding. The goal is to direct expenditure of funds toward improved safety, ride -ability and appearance of Petaluma's street system, as well as an extension of pavement life. However, achieving this goal requires establishing the average or minimum level PCI standard the City wishes to adopt and maintain. If the City chooses to maintain an average level PCI standard, this would indicate that the City aclmowledge that some streets would not be improved; rather, only a certain percentage would be improved in order to bring the average to the standard set. Only a limited percentage of streets would need improvement in order for the City to meet an average standard. Those improvements would have a positive effect on only a portion of the population. A niinineu n standard would mean that all streets would be improved, if necessary, to a certain level. For example, a minimum standard would mean that all streets below that standard would be brought up to at least that level. All streets that are at the standard or better can be maintained with overlays, while those falling below the standard require reconstruction (see Exhibit B, Figure 2-11). Proposal and Alternatives Any active pavement management program needs to maintain a balance between three activities. These are: 1. Spot Maintenance by City crews (i.e., pothole repair with the blow patching unit); 2. Annual Street Program Maintenance by contract services (e.g., slurry seal, micro surfacing, or overlay, etc.); 3. Capital Improvement Program (e.g., full or partial street reconstruction). For Petaluma, the relevant questions include defining the average and/or minimum PCI the City wishes to maintain, achieving a balance between the spot maintenance, annual street program and the capital program, and funding the chosen activities. The level of funding required will often determine the "desired" PCI and the balance between annual and capital programs. Limitations The information in this paper is dependent upon MTC's software for pavement sufficiency ratings. However, since these ratings do not factor in streets with a sufficiency rating (PCI) of 25 or less, this paper contains some hand calculations, blended with MTC's report, in order to represent, as closely as possible, a complete picture of the street conditions. In addition, until all the local streets are comprehensively inventoried, the assumptions to date are not reflective of the complete mileage or cost for the street system! Before progressing beyond the scope of this paper, the following elements should be addressed: • Complete the inspection and prepare a report on the combined local, arterial and collector street conditions. • Consider the need for an exacting, enforceable trench cut ordinance, with revised maintenance patching standards, in order to halt deterioration due to unconstrained utility activities. Limited maintenance money has been diverted to repair water and sewer breaks (due to a 100+ year-old water/sewer system), and failed utility trench cuts. • Compile an overall cost for design and bid documents, construction, construction management and inspection, and City administrative overhead. • Prepare several budget and construction cost scenarios for various street PCI ratings/serviceability levels. • Adjust for accelerated deterioration of streets due to longer/heavier refuse trucks and/or multiple trips for split collection practices. • Include additional miles as a result of new development streets. • Include additional cost for underground utility, curb, gutter, sidewalk and/or driveway replacement. • Consider the exponential loss of opportunity cost with continued deferred maintenance of streets. By actively maintaining its pavement management program and working to perform maintenance and reconstructive wort: in accordance with the predictions provided by this model, the City will effectively be implementing an "Asset Management" approach to its roadway network Asset Management is one accepted way of complying with the new financial reporting standards set forth in the Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB) Statement 34, which requires governments to report infrastructure assets as part of their financial reporting requirements. 0 • Bring current the insufficient standards for pavement design/thiclmess for today's traffic volumes and loads. • Complete a Long Range Transportation Plan with truck routes and a new traffic model. Assumptions The assumptions are based on MTC report: 1. The entire street system is at an average PCI of 30. Some streets, however, may be in better condition. 2. Reconstruction costs, plus public input and total overhead expenses, are estimated at approximately $156.5 million over five years, based on the MTC report. Budget Scenarios Assuming a five-year reconstruction program, Exhibit B, Figure 2 illustrates two budget scenarios. The first involves committing enough money to bring the entire roadway system up to an average PCI of 75 within 5 years. The second involves continuing at current levels of funding which is minimal. A budget scenario somewhere between the two extremes, based on the results of a completed pavement management program, would be potentially more achievable. While the $29.24 million/year expenditure required to achieve an average PCI of 75 is beyond what the City can achieve, if maintenance continues at the current trend of deferral, the cost of bringing the streets to an acceptable standard will likely increase by 42% over the five year period. Many communities have to rely on long term financing for street reconstruction. Novato has conducted a successful 30 -year bond issue in 2000 for $11.9 million for streets, $1.2 million for sidewallcs, $1.2 million for drainage, and $600,000 for curb and ramp replacement and repair. This provided for 34 miles of street repair, or approximately $350,000 per mile. This appears to be a maintenance program with the money used to finish a 1989 bonded project. Another nearby example of a street maintenance program is Santa Rosa, which has spent over $2.5 million on average during the past five years on street maintenance with over $3 million in FY 00-01. However, Santa Rosa maintains 516 miles of streets, and has added almost 50 miles of streets during the past five years. 5 Financial Impact Onetime Impact In 1999, the estimate to bring the arterial and collector streets from a PCI of 41, up to a PCI average score of 75 was $47.2 million dollars including 40% overhead. As of the date of this report, the current year 2001 construction cost to raise the PCI from 30 to an average of 75 is estimated to be 60.0 million including overhead. With the current annual funding, spending $150,000 - $200,000 amorally on maintenance, the streets continue deteriorating at a rate faster than repairs can be accomplished. In regard to residential streets, the cost to improve this system in its present condition to a sustainable condition of 75 is estimated to be $96 million, as calculated below. Calculation: Utilize a ratio based on an average 6" overlay for arterials and collectors versus a 4" overlay for local streets, and multiply by the mileage difference between the arterial/collectors and local streets. The percentage cost difference would be approximately 70% and the mileage differential would be 119 - 52. This equates to an estimated cost for the local streets as follows: ($60 million x 70%) x (119 miles of local streets 52 miles of arterial and collector streets) _ $96.2 million. The total one-thne cost impact for is $146.2 million ($60 million + $84.6 million). Recun- ne Imnact MTCs' estimated projected annual cost to maintain a PCI of 75 throughout the City's arterial and collector street system is $3,500,000. The estimated maintenance cost, based on our present information, to keep the residential streets in a sustainable condition is projected to cost $4,600,000. This amounts to a total annual cost of $8,100,000 to maintain all of the city streets after a PCI average of 75 is reached. No City could afford this level of maintenance in a comparable situation. Source of Funding The concern is how to fund repairs at a sufficient magnitude to halt/or reverse the degradation of the system. Alternatives include: 1. "Fall Back" approach: Rearrange priorities and reduce the scope of activities performed by the street crew in order to allow better utilization of existing funds, providing for limited spot repairs. 2. "Critical Priority" method: Provide a small funding increase to selectively repair sections in extreme need of maintenance. I Utilize an increment of the City's gas tax money to finance a large one-time expenditure with the State's "Pothole Pool" program (see Exhibit Q. This would jump-start the program. If the City could commit $200,000 annually to debt service through the pool, it could leverage a one-time capital fund loan of about $2.3 million towards the $8.1 million annual maintenance need. This essentially uses future funding capabilities to fix the current problem in limited areas. 4. Add a surcharge to the monthly refuse service bill (e.g., $10 per month surcharge would net $2,000,000 annually). This may be justified because of the impacts on the streets of the refuse vehicles. Reduce the level of service for our residents sufficiently to accomplish needed repairs and upgrades to the streets on an annual basis utilizing some General Fund money. 6. Assuming a 5 -year reconstruction program, provide for an alternate source of funding. This could include General Obligation bond issue, special assessments for street improvements, local options such as a motor vehicle fuel tax, or a sales tax increase for improvements, etc. Based on 20,000 households, an annual street improvement program of $29.24 million, equates to an assessment over 10 years of approximately $731 per year per household. This would be in addition to maintenance expenses and new increases coming from water/sewer, natural gas, electricity motor fuels, and possibly refuse collection. 7. Evaluate private funding options which can also offer 5-20 year maintenance options. 8. If it is determined that the community is taxed/assessed to its limit, the City may want to explore the development of an alliance to petition for state aid on a one- time basis to fund the street improvement program. Schedule of Implementation We would recommend implementing the City's program as pari of a 5-7 year CIP with the Imowledge that this would allow the City to define and measure a very specific program to preserve what is left of its existing investment and resolve the worst problems. Through the PMS and CII' updates, the City would have a continual program to address, not necessarily solve, street maintenance. Performance Measures How do we define success? Success is defined by adopting an approved average or minimum PCI standard and approved budget/funding scenario for the street management program, with allocations or provisions for ongoing maintenance. This would include implementation of increased performance maintenance requirements for new construction from the current I -year minimum to 7 years, or preferably a 10 to 20 year minimum. How do we lntow when lve achieve success? We will know when we have achieved success when the Council has defined its PCI standard and adopted and approved a budget/funding scenario. If the approved scenario requires voter approved funding, success will further be defined through the public input and ultimate approval process. Recommendations Establish a Task Force Committee to work with the community to evaluate the street system, as well as all available revenue streams. This committee could advise and make funding recommendations to the community and Council. Conclusions and Action Steps The City does not have sufficient funding sources or leverage options to generate enough money to stem the continued decline, let alone improve, the condition of City streets. Whatever solution(s) is chosen, a significant amount of money will be required to improve the system, as well as provide for continued maintenance, if we are to achieve a sustainable level of sufficiency. Action steps could include: 1. Appointing a task force which will provide the necessary outreach to the community as well as recommendation(s). A multiple approach may be necessary to address the total infrastructure needs of the City. 2. Developing funding and a schedule for an annual maintenance program, i.e., crack seals, slurry seals, micro surfacing, etc., for streets with a PCI of 70 or better to protect the sustainable sections of the existing system). 3. Completing the PMS surveys of the local streets through MTC's Pavement Technical Assistance Program to gain a true condition/financial picture of our system. This is a grant -type program, so there would not be an immediate need for budgeted funds. 4. Returning to Council and the Committee with more refined budget scenarios and funding solutions via the Task Force. 5. Using the additional studies and committee work to establish a dialogue with the commmiity regarding improvement and funding needs, which will build a base of support for any initiatives requiring voter -approval. E: ATTACHMENT B REHABILITATION AND SLURRY COSTS PER YEAR `1'11 1.63 $ - 7,118,004 $ 1,623,227 11 $ 1,623,227 $ 996,520.53 12 1.71 $ 7,118,004 Cost Cost of 1/10 of the $ 1,704,388 $ 996,520.53 YearX 1.80 $ - 7,118,004 $ 1,789,253 YearX $ 1,789,253 Escalation remaining 1/5 (20%) of 5% Per Rehabilitation Total Area Slurry Cost @ Total (with 5% Year Year Work (SF) per year $0.14/SF* Year escalation)** Present Value A B C=B*0.14 D=A+C D present $ 31,228,227 35,590,019 With Escalation 1 1.00 $ 3,122,823 7,118,004 $ 996,521 1 $ 4,119,343 $ 4,119,343.22 2 1.05 $ 3,278,964 7,118,004 $ 1,046,347 2 $ 4,325,310 $ 4,119,343.22 3 1.10 $ 3,442,912 7,118,004 $ 1,098,664 3 $ 4,541,576 $ 4,119,343.22 4 1.16 $ 3,615,058 7,118,004 $ 1,153,597 4 $ 4,768,655 $ 4,119,343.22 5 1.22 $ 3,795,810 7,118,004 $ 1,211,277 5 $ 5,007,087 $ 4,119,343.22 6 1.28 $ 3,985,601 7,118,004 $ 1,271,841 6 $ 5,257,442 $ 4,119,343.22 7 1.34 $ 4,184,881 7,118,004 $ 1,335,433 7 $ 5,520,314 $ 4,119,343.22 8 1.41 $ 4,394,125 7,118,004 $ 1,402,204 8 $ 5,796,330 $ 4,119,343.22 9 1.48 $ 4,613,831 7,118,004 $ 1,472,315 9 $ 6,086,146 $ 4,119,343.22 10 1.55 $ 4,844,523 7,118,004 $ 1,545,930 10 $ 6,390,453 $ 4,119,343.22 Total Years 1-101 $ 39,278,528 11 Total 1 $ 12,534,128 1 Total 1 $ 51,812,656 1 $ 41,193,432.16 `1'11 1.63 $ - 7,118,004 $ 1,623,227 11 $ 1,623,227 $ 996,520.53 12 1.71 $ 7,118,004 $ 1,704,388 12 $ 1,704,388 $ 996,520.53 YearX 1.80 $ - 7,118,004 $ 1,789,253 YearX $ 1,789,253 $ 996,520.53 *Cost includes Crack Seal at $0.02/SF **This is only the Construction Cost and does not include City GO (5%), Admin (5%), Design (1-10%), Construction Management (2-10%) or Contingency. It is expected that the overlay and slurry designs can be performed in-house ,and the full reconstruction design will be done by outside consultant. It is anticipated that CM can be done in-house. CFebruary 2005 � 'O O m 6. C. m 0 0 G 0 ER R, G P. O O 0 0 0 0 D U U U U U U v c ) o C O F x o� � v Y o� m y •� � H r CJ d r y N td L> o 0 rN-'i uO n c w c o g c, 0 a 0 uOp p J N h 19 n W � y H o 4 $ o [�] L O 0 0 0j p U U U w N z z z .a E y U N + b O O ¢x o a v 3 is m F C C q U y yJ C C 0 0 n C U U C W c A A p y P" G I v F i b p N P D\ b b � d V W W O\ T O <} U U U a rn rn rn m y O O O O O O O O O N N O O N 12 O LL m E N N N O a >> C C> C O N u)a o N °o E ° ° 0 0 g �� 0 O (U " "� > N c Y W i= c � � 0— 0 L) � c � � ac � c � � D p � ° cn0Um2�cn� 2� 0.. J J�_I�0UW�Y�U m m O L LY a C N > > N > > p .O > Q N m� ° E QQ �a�N� m �� C >> 3 0 -- ° > c >, c> o c L O 0 N N c `1 p 1 ..Y. L O �' > c� +, m p Z Z N cA N Y N CD c E .r a) 3 N ca 00-U))(L 0-�w �� U YCdY�Y2Uly0U2�i� 0 O Z N L Cf)o ) m > U - in 0L m > w C p L N L L >>> cn cn L = a 0 U) c 0 U" m E a N ° U Y c E O 7 7 J z> >..0 Cl) .O c O` � N O C (a T N �_ (U C , O O Y -L U) U) C/) 'm — m m 0 7 N O O N -O 0 7 p (U .p., —.0 7 m N N O O m Oa W L-QmUUo S2'2O. LY U) m0YY00M o UUUUUUU-UU U U UUUUUUUU Q Q Q Q Q Q Q ao Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q L> L L L L L L L U) L L� L,� L� L, L� L, L, L L L L L L L L 0 L p 0 0 0 0 0 0 O P L L p L L p L L L p 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 �UUUFUM) )j00U���UUUUUUUU -CN mmmmmmmUmm m m mmmmmmmm O Q m ,-a MMMMMMM'IT 7It V It -It Mc1'V d'MMMMMMMM mo 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 x N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 I 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 >' I.L N N N N N N N N N NN N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N � O CV CV CV CV NCV N(V NNNCV NNNCV NCV NNO CO CO 6 CD CO 66 O` I,- ti��rl- I,- r- r--r--till� rl. ti N r r.- I,- r- ti 00 m m wN m m W m CL rnrnrnrnrnrnrnrnrnrnrnrnrnrnrnrnrnrnrnrnrnrnrnrnrnrnrnrn ° CO ti M (A 0 r N M 'ci' lO f0 t` 07 (P O N M d' LO CO � M Z rr r�-rrr rrr N N N N N N N NN ILI 0 N Y N d Q N > C D >. >> 2-1 N S 3 J Mn 9 U .D m > M N m U) > m 07U N > N 07 C C 'O O m N �- ` '00 ¢ m O a Cl) ,3C N Em �•�E Q > mem 3ooCamiomomo �u)cn °c�oUiiYC�cn > S-ocntn�cniiu. Ecn E E❑ oz E�vrY �UUU) _1UU)J2ECUO-MWUU:JUU)U)JUU' of2U)U)U��U)mLu J ` U) U) to dj 3 'O 'O "O'O 'O -O � Qj � Co TU_ N¢ > > > mm comm �,QQ_ ;_mmm U) mcl ¢iq_ 00o.Y�o�omi0 ��� oYoo`�°an00000� E�ami>o E m E o 0 y L) (u o > " 0 U� o o 0 m 0 0 0 ami o UK�2iY_32U)2EW�U-2UY2iY2i2U)-j� 2i�(LUU)d: 7i N > c > > a m m C C m m 3 o > � mm Q) m >> m m m m� coo m m coU�QQU >1 �> O m > r mUU 0 C v ofa U 3 ¢�jU o:rn iov0 m Na m m � m' C m m N C O O m N L >� >+ > N N m' `m m C C m C— C C C N O C N> Ol C C m C m� Y Y_0_0 -0 -0.0 N m', m N N C O O m cp NN QO`7 -� (0 N. U 00 N fN0 C N C C EO EO C) Co m m U U U 01 m m ++ m m ��I-�QQmmU W W u CSS -�YY-J-i2i:I22222of W U)U)U W U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U UlU U U U U U U U U (j (j ¢¢QQQ¢¢¢Q¢QQQQ¢¢aQaQ¢¢¢aaaQaQQQ¢¢aa 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 OL 0 0 0 0 LO 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 L0 0 0 UUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUIUUUUUUUUUUU mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmlmmmmmmmmmmm 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 NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN N N N i (O M CIM i O O (O D O D O CO O O O M M M O 0 D O O O M O D C0 1 0 O 0 0 r r V V 7 V V V •q' tt V' d' � V V V d' •d' V' V' V 7 V V V V' d' ti' d' 7 d- V V 7 V r r 0]o7 o�N NcO W o�aO OJ W W W NW W W�o�aO W Mo�o]W o7N a0 o]N W MNOO CA O O [A O CA CT CA CA O 67 (P O Cfl CA CA 0 (A CA O O CA m CA m O O CA O C3) O) O O N N UU 0 O r N M d' M M Ih M M O r N M t1- M M h M M O r N M It In O[I- M m O r N M N MMM M M M M M M co d' d' V 1t It It moi' 1�t V''IT (o M Lo M m m m m to Lo O M cpm w.. N m� 0 0 0 0 U N y O O L mYUU0-i(7 W o 0 Q W m E =0 �m ->v� U, m o o U Q m 0 30 m m E 0 U M E a) cn m _ C j YO -0 y m N 7 m i > m m — UIL W E S<<<m<QQ Q Q Q Q Q Q Q QQ Q(n Q Q Q Q Q C15 L m �O O z U jj _O 2 U '> 7 CO m _ U (n m fn U > m U () C _ fn U J a� Cu a� m m m U U in m o D D Co U mL U _ > C O N>> C C C OEn n d p C O' Y f� Y Lh G O O Cf) C= C m N U) u0 >`„ma. oLCN-mEoma�p�3�p:=3...2 ic`ncnOd Co m ��'m (D aim E'ntn o n m.`.` o olo mL•c m o m m m 2 0 m m -i ..0 -IL< mm 0]mmmmm`m`000oaLd W LL LLIA..U22Y�� a¢aaaa0... a....... mmmmmmm in m �rlr"ZrIrvd-vvNry-It Ir't14-d'"Pd-It<tIt Itdtvd -It -Itd-Irlr'IT vv -It -It d- 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 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N 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 0 444"1rl 'd"d"d' 0000000000000000000000000000 O O O O O O O m m m m 0 CO m m (0 m 0 to m 0 m m m m m (O Co (0 m m m m m m O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 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 OOO 000 nl0(OLb 0(O In m m m 0m m Lo M m 0 L M In m Inm m nm 0 N N N N N N N U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U UUUUUUU mmmmmCD���rrr`r°���00mwmwwwwmmwmmmmMMMMm 0 cu cu o >, > >, o U oU Ucc ooc coo c c° o cry Cl m 2 m O otn mcn-o S �m E CU M Y `> co m QLL1Uco>�wQ2U2HU a a1- ac m ` > > -0-0 ` J V, Q m m *' m a)a) O m `o `m °U 3 3 ° U) a� o> d m >, U cn c-�= m m -o= co m rnmm N C Ln=3 Mm Q¢aQQQQQa QQQa¢Q =a(n W (n m>U` 0 W mco m U���¢(n W� C: UU U °° 0 U v U r c�i a cn a`_) E a` ) m o >, _ a) E w U ° U a o U in `m ro a7 m a� a� �naE��rn ca Z->>.S��oEa�cEmc Q: (6 E N 'E N a3 E> N N N L •n C_ O O C 'O O zn.ddadwKUUUUUUHm QQ'.Q¢¢'mmm000UUUmmm a ¢a¢aQa¢¢¢aQ �a �a L L L L L L L L L L L L >=cccU�UUUUUUUUUUU202U v�(ncn�n(n<nincninv�cnwv��nv�cnv��n�(n3: 3: �: �: �: �: �: 3: �: �: �:U?:Cl) 3: m mmmmmmmmmmm m m It It ��-It �����-It It ItI-�����4-�'t'r't't���t't�;+'t�� 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 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N 0 00 0 0 0 0 O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0{ i 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 V V V 4 4 4 4 7 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 CO 0m CO(O M m M (0m m 00 mm OCO CO O O 00000000000 OOOO O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O T T r r T T T T T T T T r T T T T O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O T r r T T T T T r T T r T T T T LO LO 0 LO 0 LO 0 Ln In m M LO In M to m M M 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U MOr NMti M M h M M OTNMV-tn M Il- LD M O T N M'It M M t` CO MO T NM M O O O O O O O O O O T T r r T T T T r r N N N N N N N N N N M M M M w r C O N L L 2 w p o > p ❑ N O 0 U) C N N co —_ tD w w O O m O. C W N N C CCo NU... 'O N NN'O C"O O o N N 0� r > > 0 0 O o a) U) o c Of o ly IT. N v -0'0 oaNv E Ear `> �ainY-oY c� mN m N Ep >1>,�_o w w coy w o w w� a a w w 3 w `0 ¢L �> U> O w U 2 d CL S° _ O L L 2 2 p p > > L �> -0 > -0 a a cr,p o 0 DL c m� 3�NN �� oiomc`o�in '> O N Y C U O O¢O VN > 0> O0 O N> , pO fo ❑ONN>EY0 pYpT T T �>N cu O O co O O CN L m O m U N m N U m U_0 00 U JQlywap2coLLLL�w§-10>aLL2>Jmo2>O>2EUO2U2i m m L m O C O J --I co Co C >T> 0 U .O L O UNU".ONU mJJ� mNQU a'0U 0 0 O> �U� OU 0 o mU 0ml +. L_ O y .0 N C >, >, >, E :.. N� N L U N cq m C +� L O U 3> U N U N "O C >' N E m 0 0 0 0 N N "j C C c M O N O >, O N .D N N O O N O. W W W W W W LL LL UI 2 2 2 2 - -� J J J������ z a aQ� of 2C� w co U) U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U UIU U U U U U U U U a¢aa ¢a¢aa ¢aaa¢ ¢ a¢aaaa OL OL LO>OL�L >OL OL >OL >LO >OL ULO LO OL LO0L OL L0 OL LO OL 0L LO L0 OL LO OL OL 0L LO Oa¢¢a¢a¢a U V\ V) V U Vl 0 UU U V1 V UV U U U V U V U U U U V U U > >>> >>>L mmmm mmmmm mmmmm m mmmmmlm mmmmmmmm <t CD000a 000 ct 0000 ct 00 CD V' C) 00 C C:),� d' d"d"d' * V V"ctd'd- 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 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0'0 0 0 0 0 o O o 0 0 0 N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N T T T T T T T T{ T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T 11 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 O 0 O 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 O T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T 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 N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U d' M O�- M M O T N M d' LO Mt'- W M O T N M 'It LO M I— M M O T N M V 0 M�- N m m m m m mV d It It '' d' V V <, 'IT "t O LO LO LO 0 m m 0 LO LO (D m O O O co m co m T T T r T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T r T T T T T T T T T T 0 0 U) U_ C U 0 E 0 (0 m :D N U W W W U > K -0a r r T T T T r T T T r m mm m �Q � i (0 = Sin 3 —G 3 0 0 0 0 N❑ O � O O � > m ,5; T U 2<¢Q¢�¢= m O O N N ry� J Y O C > L 0 O 0 0 N -'.,4 N O CO 0 LEr°n-UOoo3oC U) mwcC: J. 0 t)Cn(Dh--�§->��� Q Q r r T T T T r T T T r T T Q Q �Q � i O 44444444444 V 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 r T T T T r T T T T T T T TT T T r T T T T T r T T mmmm m O O N N m mm UU ca in v It <t 'I d It �t �r 't It v <t It 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O o o 0 o 0 0 o o 0 o o o 0 0 N N N N N N N N N N N N N r r T T T T r T T T r T T Q 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 � i O 44444444444 V v V N 00C)Q000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 000 cc:) r T T T T r T T T T T T T TT T T r T T T T T r T T L 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N N N N N N N N N N N N N O O N N ca UUUUUUUUUUU UU ca MOr NM It LO M r MM OT O �- t` r� rl- t` �- r� rl- rl t` co co T T T T T r T T T T r T T