Loading...
072087 CC Sp AgP BADGER PARK TO GLEN ROAD VA TERMAIN PROJECT 87-4 CITY OF SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA FRONT FOOTAGE AND AREA ASSESSMENT OSM COMM. NO. 1744.73 7-20-87 FRONT RATE I FOOTAGE AREA RATEI AREA NET TOTAL NAME FOOTAGE FOOT CHARGE (AC. ) (AC. ) CHARGE ASSESSMENT ASSESSMENT ~i. LCCA( cf.,.'" ~{C((C, , 1. CAR WASH 131 $27.23 $ 3,567.15 0.45 $2,808.81 $ 1,263.96 $ 4,831.11 - 93.90 $ 4 .737 . 21 2. MTKA. TRANS. 65 27.23 1,769.96 0.34 2,808.81 954.99 2,724.95 * 4,000.00 3. HEILAND AUTO 65 27.23 1,769.96 0.34 2,808.81 954.99 2,724.95 * 4,000.00 4. VILLAGE PUMP .~ 240 27.23 6,535.23 1.70 2,808.81 4,774.97 11,310.20 .:) - 219.82 11 ,090.38 5. CITY 610 27.23 16,610.38 5.34 2,808.81 14,999.03 31,609.41 - 614.36 30,995.05 6. MTKA. COUNTRY CLUB 300 27.23 8,169.04 3.00 2,808.81 8,426.42 16,595.46 - 322.55 16,272.91 7. ICO 100 27.23 2,723.01 0.34 2,808.81 954.99 3,678.01 * 4,000.00 8. AMERICAN LEGION 195 27.23 5,309.88 1.12 2,808.81 3,145.86 8,455.74 C.,---(.- )(.- C'{.--'''''-'(- ". / ~-;e..A - 164.35 8,291. 39 9. TOM THUMB 150 27.23 4,084.52 0.70 2,808.81 1,966.17 6,050.68 - 117. 60 5,933.08 10. COMMERCIAL 230 27 .23 . 6,262.93 1.00 2,808.81 2,808.81 9,071.74 - 176.32 8.895.42 11. MINI-STORAGE 50 27.23 1,361. 51 5.00 2,808.81 14,044.04 15,405.55 - 299.42 15,106.13 12. OFFICES (BORCHERTS) 220 27.23 5,990.63 1.10 2,808.81 3,089.69 9,080.32 - 176.48 8,903.84 13. SHOREWOOD PLACE APTS. 220 27.23 5,990.63 2.40 2,808.81 6,741.14 12,731. 77 - 247.45 12,484.32 14. NSP 305 27.23 8,305.19 5.10 2,808.81 14,324.92 22,630.11 - 439.84 22,190.27 TOTALS 2,881 27.93 $156,900.00 $156,900.00 * Minimum Assessment $4,000.00 MTG. ~M , .- - ~. 5b. ~-r: ~... AL. -re.t<.. ~ Ar Te. ~ J r ~T&. f2.0cM. ~ 4-4~ ~ it A~W. '-"- r .. ~ ~ - · ) I \ \ ~ flU! \...CI6-r ~./~. u-ru..l1Y tIP. (iL.SJ.IL ~' -..,. . l~. ~i ~ ~ I WV-. ':;,j'; ~ At- -mltNA1li .z ~ -u.' ~ I' " , 3~C ! , ." Il f I- ~' ~ M1&. ~~ - - -- - .... ---q -/---- -- r- , I l ~IN. ~.~. FIN. ~12. - -3 - GL...tII* ~ ~. / 1:J6l,. " ~ r I I U11U1'( f\.~. Pf-PtIT'f ,,~~-r: I CL.Ji1ZJ' . ~~ n>>l. '~Qf=":1G& vN-.~-r: t t AL1l:!te.t-1All: lJrlA ~ ~' ~ . ~"}"'1't',' %>lfjlj, AL.-rE:raN~-re ~ I - ALiS.JlN~TE: ~ · NoR.T~ t- A1-1'~A"&' .. 2 A No~ I5iU!V~T'cN .tI" ALTfEfZ.N~n:: *2.A W~T IELSYA11cN " Al--"Iirz-N~TIf I ~"", c2~- SMt-r 'Ii L..&i V A-TI 0 N A.t-"-I!f,zNt-r-rr Z L 'Z." f$"~ e:iL-EiV ~T/oN CITY OF SHOREWOOD MAYOR Robert Rascop COUNCI L Jan Haugen Kristi Stover Robert Gagne Barb Brancel ADMINISTRATOR Daniel J. Vogt 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD . SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA 55331 . (612) 474-3236 MEMORANDUM TO: ~~YOR AND CITY COUNCIL FROM: BRAD NIELSEN, DAN VOGT, JIM NORTON, GLENN FROBERG DATE: 17 JULY 1987 RE: WATER ASSESSMENT POLICY Some time ago the City Council directed the City Engineer to prepare a feasibility report for extending watermain from the Badger Well, up County Road 19 to Glen Road. An integral part of that report, or any feasibility report, is a determination as to how the project is to be assessed. Having prepared the cost estimates for the project, the Engineer then met several times with the remainder of the staff to review alternative methods of assessing the project. This is to bring you up-to-date with what has been done thus far, in preparation for a work study session between the staff and City Council on Monday night. Early in our study sessions it was determined that the project would be very difficult to assess. The project has much going against it, including the following factors: 1. Most of the project is single-sided. That is, only property on one side of the water line can be assessed. Approximately 1300 feet of the line is bordered by property in Tonka Bay, which obviously can not be assessed. 2. Nearly 750 feet of the line is bordered by City property. 3. The project is relatively small. In a larger project, the costs associated with the two preceding factors can be spread against a greater number of properties, mitigating the impact on individual sites. It was immediately apparent that the assessments would be high when we simply divided the estimated cost of the project ($167,500) by the number of properties to be assessed (13). This is shown as Method No.; 3 in the Engineer's Preliminary Report and Estimate of Cost. dated 22 June 1987 (see Exhibit A. copied in yellow). The result of this method is an assessment of A Residential Community on Lake Minnetonka's South Shore Re: Water Assessment Policy 17 July 1987 $12.884.62 per property. This method was dismissed since it does not take into consideration size or use of property. However. it demonstrates that a relatively high assessment must be lowered for some (i.e. I.C.O. and Heiland Automotive Sales). but the difference will have to be borne by other properties (i.e. car wash. apartments. the City?). One of the next methods (see Method No.1) considered was to try and compare water assessments to Sewer Availability Charges (S.A.C.). It was assumed that some relationship should exist between water used and sewer generated. Since the S.A.C. system has been in place for a number of years. we assigned units to various activities on the properties to be assessed and divided the cost of the project by the total number of units. The S.A.C. system was modified slightly by imposing a minimum charge of $4000 per property. As can be seen in the Engineer's report. this method shifted the majority of the assessments to the car wash. the Country Club and the proposed apartments. Staff highly questions whether the Country Club or the car wash would increase in value by the amount of the assessment. This will be discussed in more detail further on in this report. One of the reasons the S.A.C. system works for regional sewer charges but not for local water assessments is that S.A.C. charges are collected after a specific use has been proposed for a site. whereas the future use of several properties along the watermain is subject to speculation. Also. S.A.C. charges are distributed over an enormous number of properties within the regional system. resulting in relatively low dollar amounts for individual properties. Finally. S.A.C. charges are subject to increase or decrease depending on changes in land use. Having reviewed other methods. the staff arrived at an assessment method which is somewhat commonly used by other cities (see Method No.2). wherein the assessment is divided by area and front footage. In Method No.2. the trunk charge was associated with acreage and the lateral charge was associated with front footage. This method. while bringing the cost down for many. shifts much of the burden to the City property. This method was further refined (see Exhibit B) by dividing the trunk and lateral charges more equally. This is based on the City's current policy of allowing up to $2000 lateral credit against a $4000 connection charge. It should be noted that the estimated cost of the project has been reduced by eliminating lines Band C. A fourteenth property - the Legion Club - could be brought into the assessment rolls if the City's current policy was changed to include any commercial property within 200 feet of a watermain. ~ One final refinement which is proposed is that no property will be assessed less than $4000. Consequently. the three proeprties which are currently less than $4000 will be raised. and the others will be lowered proportionately. The end result of all of this is that the project is only feasible if the City is willing to assume its fair share of the cost. Anything else will result in assessments which the staff feels will be easily and successfully challenged. - 2 - Re: Water Assessment Policy 17 July 1987 As the Administrator has stated in the past. the assessments can not exceed what the property will increase in value. In this regard. the City Assessor has been asked to comment on the proposed assessments shown in Exhibit B. Hopefully. his input will be available for Monday night's meeting. While it has been the intent of this memo to provide some background into the staff's work to-date. it must be realized that it is very difficult to consolidate the results of lengthy and numerous study sessions into one short memo. If there are any questions relative to this report. please do not hesitate to contact any of us prior to Monday night's study session. Otherwise. the staff will be prepared to discuss it in more detail at that meeting. BJN:ph cc: Dan Vogt Glenn Froberg Jim Norton - 3 - PRELIMINARY REPORT AND ESTIMATE OF COST OF BADGER PARK TO GLEN ROAD WATERMAIN PROJECT 87-4 CITY OF SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA JUNE 22, 1987 I. TYPE OF WORK This project covers the Installation of Watermain and Appurtenant Work. I I . REASON FOR PROJECT The purpose of this project is to serve the property abutting County Road No. 19 and Smithtown Road with watermain from the Badger Well site. III. DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT The proposed project extends watermain from the Badger Well site westerly through the City Hall parking lot to Country Club Road and northerly along the west side of Country Club Road and County Road No. 19 to Glen Road. Also, this report covers the extension of watermain westerly along the north side of Smithtown Road from County Road No. 19 approximately 450 feet. IY. FEASIBILITY From an engineering standpoint, the project is feasible and can be accomplished as proposed and need not be in conjunction with any other project. From a financial standpoint there are many questions about the project feasibility and the method of assessment. Y. The estimated cost to the City of Shorewood for the proposed project is as foll ows: LINE -A- Estimated Construction Cost. .$120,440.00 . .$ 36,460.00 + 30% Indirect Cost. . . . . . TOTAL PROJECT COST. . . . . . . . . . . . . $156,900.00 LINE -B- Estimated Construction Cost. .$ 19,880.00 + 30% Indirect Cost. . . . . . . . $ 5 ,920 . 00 TOTAL PROJECT COST . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 25,800.00 - 1 - ~~h'l b.,t A LINE .C. Estimated Construction Cost. . . . . . . . . .$ 8,100.00 . .$ 2,500.00 . .$ 10,600.00 + 30% Indirect Cost. . . . . . . TOTAL PROJECT COST. . . IV. PROPERTY TO BE ASSESSED All that property Abutting County Road No. 19 lying within the northeast 1/4 of Section 33, T.117, R.23 in the City of Shorewood and described as follows: ON FROM TO County Road No. 19 County Road No. 19 Smithtown Road Country Club Road Glen Road 700' East All that property abutting Smithtown Road from County Road No. 19 to west 470 feet. All that property abutting Country Club Road from Smithtown Road to south 350 feet. VII. ESTIMATED ASSESSMENTS Included in this report are three methods of Assessment. One is assessing on a unit basis and one is a front footage method with an area trunk watermain charge and the third method is just dividing the cost equally to the number of properties being served. The true test of the assessment is whether the value of the property is increased by at least the amount of the assessment. METHOD NO.1 UNIT BASIS ASSESSMENT* LINE .A. & .C. ($156,900 + $10,600 = $167,5001 1. Car Wash 3 Units/Stall; 4 Stalls NO. OF UN ITS 12 11 @ $2,115.38 = $ 23,269.24 1 @ $4,000 = 4,000.00 ASSESSMENT NAME UNITS BY SAC CHARGE $ 27,269.24 - 2 - NAME UNITS BY SAC CHARGE NO. OF UNITS ASSESSMENT 2. Village Pump Major Auto Service with 2 2 Service Bays ~Uf~ 1 @ $2,115.38 = $ 2,115.38 1 @ $4,000.00 = 4,000.00 $ 6,115.38 3. Heilands Auto 2 Sales 1 @ $2,115.38 = $ 2,115.38 1 @ $4,000.00 = $ 4,000.00 $ 6,115.38 4. Minnetonka Trans. Major Service 1 (14 Employees or less) 1 @ $4,000.00 = $ 4,000.00 5. lCO Gas Pumping Only 1 1 @ $4,000.00 = $ 4,000.00 6. Tom Thumb Convenience Store 1 1 per 3,000 Sq. Ft. 1 @ $4,000.00 = $ 4,000.00 7. Mini Storage None, but living area 1 1 @ $4,000.00 = $ 4,000.00 8. Commercial Prop. 5 ,000 Sq. Ft. 2 1 @ $2,115.38 = $ 2 , 115 . 38 1 @ $4,000.00 = $ 4,000.00 $ 6,115.38 9. Offices 2 (Borchert's) 1 @ $ 2 , 115 . 38 = $ 2,115.38 "- I @ $4,000.00 = $ 4,000.00 $ 6,115.38 - 3 - NAME UNITS BY SAC CHARGE 10. Shorewood Place 80% of 18 Units Apartments 11. Mtka. Country Club 12. NSP 13. City Hall 18 Hole Golf Course 280 Cap./Day @ 2.5 Gal/Cap f 274 = Din.ling Room 30ci"cap. /Day @ 9 Gal/Cap (Twice) x 2 :- 274 = Bar (23 People or less) 1 Per 2,400 Sq. Ft. Assume 7,500 Sq. Ft. Garage Office Maint. Garage TOTALS TOTAL PROJECT COST. . 13 Units @ $4,000/ea. REMAINDER . - 4 - NO. OF UN ITS 14.4 ASSESSMENT 13.4 @ $2,115.38 = $28,346.16 1 @ $4,000.00 = $ 4,000.00 $32,346.16 2.5 1.5 @ $2,115.38 = $ 3,173.08 1 @ $4,000.00 = $ 4,000.00 19.7 1.0 20.7 @ $2,115.38 = $43,788.47 $50,961.55 3 2 @ $2,115.38 = $ 4,230.77 1 @ $4,000.00 = $ 4,000.00 1 1 @ $2,115.38 = $ 2,115.38 $10,346.15 67.6 $167,500.00 . $167,500.00 $ 52,000.00 . . $115,000. 00 COST/UNIT: . TOTAL NO. OF UNITS. 1 Unit/Property . REMAINING UNITS . . . . . . . . 67.6 13.0 54.6 Assessments Per Unit = $155,500 f 54.6. . . $ 2,115.38 * A unit as defined as a SAC Unit in the Reserve Capacity Charge Manual prepared by the M.W.C.C. METHOD NO. 2 FRONT FOOTAGE AND AREA ASSESSMENT (LINES A & Cl FRONT RATE/ FOOTAGE AREA RATE AREA NAME FOOTAGE FEET CHARGE ~ AC. CHARGE ASSESSMENT 1. Car Wash 131 $48.72 6,382.42 2. Village Pump 330 48.72 16,077.85 3. Heilands 65 48.72 3,166.85 Auto Sales 4. Mtka. Trans. 65 48.72 3,166.85 5. ICO 100 48.72 4,872.08 6. Tom Thumb 150 48.72 7,308.12 7. Mini-Storage 50 48.72 2,436.04 8. Commercial 230 48.72 11,,205.78 Property .45 $884.93 398.22 = $ 6,780.64 1.7 884.93 1,504.38 = 17,582.24 .34 884.93 300.88 = 3,467.73 .34 884.93 .34 884.93 .7 884.93 3,467.73 5,172.95 7 ,927 .57 300.88 = 300.88 = 619.45 = 5.0 1.0 884.93 4,424.65 = 6,860.69 884.93 884.93 = 12,090.71 1.1 884.93 973.42 = 11,691.99 9. Offices 220 48.72 10,718.57 (Borcherts) 10. Shorewood 220 48.72 10,718.57 2.4 884.93 2,123.83 = 12,842.40 Place Apts. 11. Mtka. 300 48.72 14,616.23 3.0 884.93 2,654.79 = 17,271.02 Coun~y Club 12. NSP 300 48.72 14,616.23 5.1 884.93 4,513.15 = 19,129.38 13. City 790 48.72 38,489.42 5.34 884.93 4,725.53 = 43,214.95 TOTALS 2,951 Ft 26.81 AC $167,500.00 - 5 - METHOD NO.3 EQUAL ASSESSMENT PER PROPERTY (LINES A I ct PROJECT COST: LINE "A". . TOTAL COST. . . . . . . . . $156,900.00 10 ,600 .00 $167,500.00 LINE "C". . . . . Number of Properties 13 EQUAL ASSESSMENT PER PROPERTY: $167,500 f 13 = $12,884.62 Line B Costs and Assessments could be included in the Project if the job were to proceed. I hereby certify that this plan, specification, or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Registered Professional Engineer under the laws of the State of Minnesota. J6~ -P1j~ James P. Norton, P.E. Date: June 22, 1987 Reg. No. 11606 .. 6 - BADGER PARK TO GLEN ROAD VATER MAIN PROJECT 87-4 SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA LINE A COST ESTIMATE June 22, 1987 2520 L.F. 12" D.I.P. $ 20.00/L.F. $ 50.400.00 40 L. F. 8" D.I.P. $ 15.00/L.F. $ 600.00 110 L.F. 6" D.I.P. $ 14.00/L.F. $ 1.540.00 4 12" Butterfly Valves $ 800.00/Each $ 3.200.00 1 8" Gate Valves $ 450.00/Each $ 450.00 10 6" Gate Valves $ 400.00/Each $ 4.000.00 5 Hydrants $l,OOO.OO/Each $ 5.000.00 9 2" Corporation Cocks $ 100.00/Each $ 900.00 9 2" Curb Stops and Boxes $ 200.00/Each $ 1.800.00 130 L. F. 2" Copper $ 10.00/L.F. $ 1.300.00 150 S.Y. Street Replacement $ 12.00/S.Y. $ 1.800.00 250 S.Y. Driveway Replacement $ 8.00/S.Y. $ 2.000.00 3000 S.Y. Sod $ 2.00/S.Y. $ 6.000.00 1 Acre Seeding $3,00U.00/Acre $ 3.000.00 75 Tons Class 2 Gravel $ 10.00/Ton $ 750 . 00 3 Trees Removed $ 200.00/Each $ 600.00 40 L.F. Auger Casing Pipe for 6" D.I.P. $ 125.00/L.F. $ 5.000.00 5000 Lbs. Fittings $ 1. 20/Lb. $ 6.000.00 1300 L.F. Remove & Replace Bike Path $ 7.00/L.F. $ 9 .100 .00 1700 S.Y. Parking Lot Replacement $ 10.00/S.Y. $ 17.000.00 ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COST +30% Indirect Cost TOTAL PROJECT COST $120.440.00 $ 36.460.00 $156.900.00 BADGER PARK TO &LEN ROAD WATER MAIN PROJECT 87-4 SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA LINE B COST ESTIMATE June 22, 1987 460 L. F. 12" D.I.P. $ 20.00/L.F. $ 9.200.00 20 L.F. 6" D.I.P. $ 14 .OO/L. F. $ 280.00 2 12" Butterfly Valves $ 800.00/Each $ 1.600.00 2 0" Gate Valves $ 400.00/Each $ 800.00 2 Hydrants $1,OOO.OO/Each $ 2.000.00 2 2" Corporation Cocks $ lOO.OO/Each $ 200.00 2 2" Curb Stops and Boxes $ 200.00/Each $ 400.00 30 L. F. 2" Copper $ lO.OO/L.F. $ 300.00 150 S.Y. Driveway Replacement $ 8.00/S.Y. $ 1.200 .00 1200 S.Y. Sod $ 2.00/S.Y. $ 2.400.00 30 Tons Class 2 Gravel $ 1O.00/Ton $ 300.00 1000 lbs. Fittings $ lo20/lb. $ 1.200.00 ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COST $ 19.880.00 +30% Indirect Cost $ 5.920.00 TOTAL PROJECT COST $ 25.800.00 BADGER PARK TO GLEN ROAD WATER MAIN PROJECT 87-4 SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA LINE C COST ESTIMATE June 22, 1987 180 L. F. 12" D.I.P. $ 20 .OO/L. F. $ 3,600.00 10 L.F. 6" D.I.P. $ 14.00/L.F. $ 140.00 1 12" Butterfly Valve $ 800.00/Each $ 800.00 1 6" Gate Valve $ 400.00/Each $ 400.00 1 Hydrant $l,OOO.OO/Each $ 1,000.00 1 2" Corporation Cock $ 100.00/Each $ 100.00 1 2" Curb Stop and Box $ 200.00/Each $ 200.00 20 L.F. 2" Copper $ 10. OO/L. F . $ 200.00 280 S.Y. Driveway Replacement $ 3.00/S.Y. $ 840 .00 (50 Tons Class 5-100% crushed gravel) 200 S.Y. Sod $ 2.00/S.Y. $ 400.00 350 Lbs. Fittings $ 1. 20/Lb. $ 420.00 ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COST $ 8,100.00 +30% Indirect Cost $ 2,500.00 TOTAL PROJECT COST $ 10,600.00 1 1 CO~TRY CLUB RD. 4 ,.. 50 22 ,25) ( R (/) ~ -4 ~ % (.6_/0<, 24 /~..~,-...--,,' '.- ... 23 ~ o . " .-" ~ C''? ;(1488) I\.',(! ~ ~ "': LINE Ma- LINE -A- EXISTING 12" LINE ( 1479) r:7\ ~ ( 1ITl) 150' ~ I 1 "'-4 -c: 10 ~ ..... Cl 9 @ 4(". v EX.12'~ (68aJ) , I ~ ORR. SCHELEN. MAYERON ()811 &. ASSOCIATE~. INC. __ __ lOll UST MU"IP'" AWl. SUIT! n. v::.J:.J ::::~~~~'~';;::TA:~~~~L ;~~:;).~: 26 ~ ~ B 0:1\ \V (9220) 22.0' c .- BADGER PARK TO GLEN RD. 19 20 21 22 (9210) ~ \V s. A (325) rD\ ~ IJ,) o o I I , I-~ , i ! I I ---/-1 / : 5 ~ ~.w" .,; Oat. ~ ! c...... No. t,/dd/87 17..,4.7.3 7 5 S HOREWOOD TONK A BAY y NO. 482 TON KA BAY SHOREWOOD 3 2 Dr.wi". Titl. I I / WATER MAIN PROJECT 87-4 SHOREWOOD MN. , I t-; r s....t No A - . FRONT FOOTAGE AND AREA ASSESSMENT . FR<<JtT RATE I FOOTAGE AREA RATEI AREA NAME FOOTAGE FOOT CHARGE (AC. ) (AC. ) CHARGE ASSESSMENT 1. CAR WASH 131 $27.23 $3,567.15 0.45 $2,808.81 $1,263.96 $ 4,831.11 2. MTKA. TRANS. 65 27 .23 1,769.96 0.34 2,808.81 954.99 2,724.95 3. HE! LAND AUTO 65 27 .23 1,769.96 0.34 2,808.81 954.99 2,724.95 4. VILLAGE PUMP 240 27 .23 6,535.23 1.70 2,808.81 4,774.97 11,310.20 5. CITY 610 27.2 16,610.38 5.34 2,808.81 14,999.03 31,609.41 6. MTKA . COUNTRY CLUB 300 27 .23 8,169.04 3.00 2,808.81 8,426.42 16,595.46 7. ICO 100 27 . 23 2,723.01 0.34 2,808.81 954.99 3,678.01 8. AMERICAN LEGION 195 27 .23 5,309.88 1.12 2,808.81 3,145.86 8,455.74 9. TOM THUMB 150 27.23 4,084.52 0.70 2,808.81 1,966.17 6,050.68 ~ 10. COMMERCIAL 230 27 .23 6,262.93 1.00 2,808.81 2,808.81 9,071.74 11. MINI-STORAGE 50 27.23 1,361.51 5.00 2,808.81 14,044.04 15,405.55 ~. -- rr: 12. OFFICES (BORCHERTS) 220 27 .23 5,990.63 1.10 2,808.81 3,089.69 9,080.32 - E- -+ 13. SHOREWOOD PLACE APTS. 220 27.23 5,990.63 2.40 2,808.81 6,741.14 12,731.77 ~ C'\ 14. NSP 305 27 .23 8,305.19 5.10 2,808.81 14,324.92 22,630.11 t 0 ry ~R [. ~ TOTALS 2,881 27.93 $156,900.00 '"'C -~. r . i...J , ,. . ~ ,/ .. - . ~ . ~ .,,~ '"""