Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutcoa.lu.su.General Info.1975 ,A ~" ." \/ ~, 1"""\ ~ . MEMO TO: MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBERS FROM: DAVE ELLIS ~ ' DATE: April 10, 1975 RE: Revisions and comments on Proposed Subdivision Regulations (Ordinance 22 - 1975) A separate list of revisions, additions and corrections is attached. The major changes included are: 1) the provision for exceptions by the City Engineer from design standards in Section 20-17; 2) the addition of paragraph 20-18 (a) (4) to determine open space dedication for mixed development and 3) the deletion of the Planning and Zoning Commission's perogative to modify design standards under Section 20-19. Also included are revisions to the landscaping and surveying requirements. The balance of the changes are to improve the clarity of ~~aning or to correct typographical errors. Paragraph 20-17 (a) (5) requiring the conveyance of a one foot strip alon~ streets on the perimeter of the subdivision has been retained. The provision would guarantee that a subsequent development could not utilize any improvements or utilities installed by the City or an earlier development without paying its proportionate share of the cost. The provision is also a guarantee against any new development occurring along a new street without review. Although the definition of subdivision is expanded considerably, non-condominiumized commercial development and multiple single family or duplex construction does not fall within the definition. One last item is the open space dedication requirement. As written it incorporates the ratio of 0.005 acre/resident which was adopted by Council as a part of the "Comprehensive Development Plan/ParkS and Recreation Department" (January 1974) I would like to alert Council to the fact that the dedication, as a percentage of the total acreage used for density, is 24.3%(ave.) for R/MF and 19.4% for R-6. The percentage decreases substantially in the less dense residential districts although the absolute dedication is the same on a, per resident basis. Dedication for any dwelling units included in commercial development would be the same as in R/MF. There is a serious question as to how this degree of land dedication would affect availability and price of permanent resident housing and accessory dwelling units for employees. A table of comparative figures is attached using the acreage of recently subdivided tracts at the new zoning density and the new ratio for land dedication. cc: Sandy Stuller Mick Mahoney John Stanford Ted Armstrong . .. .: /' I""", ,-. aspen.c PEN hox v MEMORANDUM DATE: March 26, 1975 TO: Kathryn Hauter F~9~ndra M. Stuller RE: Subdivision Regulations My hesitation in concluding that the'adoption of the subdivision regulations may have to comply with state public- ation procedures rested on a vague memory that the state statutes required three publications for adoption of city subdivision regulations. On rereading the statutes (Article 23 of Chapter 31) it becomes clear that: 1. Section 31-23-112 gives cities authority to re- view subdivisions within the city limits and for three miles 'outside the city limits with reference to control to implement a major street plan adopted by the city. 2. It is only in order to effectuate an adopted street plan outside its corporate limits that a city must (a) prepare and make available its subdivision regulations in pamphlet form, or (b) in the alternative, publish the regulations in three editions. We do not have an adopted street plan and do not assert jurisdiction over county SUbdivisions within three (3) miles of the City limits. In addition, we do make the regulations available through the Building Inspector's Office. Consequently, I think we can go ahead and pUblish pur- suant to our Charter provisions and ignore these statutory requirements. SS/pk ~\ ~ RECOMMENDATIONS TO ASPEN CITY COUNCIL 1. Adoption of Subdivision Regulations 2. Adoption of interim land dedication requirements for a period of 60 days. 3. Interim Land Dedication Requirements - Retain the concept of requirements based on population. Retain 6% dedication in Office and Commercial Uses. Change .005 acre per person to .0025 acre per person. All new and existing proposals which are condominiumized are subject to the .0025 acre per person rule. All new and existing duplex thru four-plex proposals not condominiumized (ie. rentals) are exempt from the .0025 acre per person dedication. 4. Interim status to be for 60 days during which the Planning Office and the Planning and Zoning Commission will review in depth and make recommendation. If no recommendation is forthcoming within 60 days, original subdivision regulation land dedication requirements goes into effect automatically. 1"""\ ^ REVISIONS, ADDITIONS, AND CORRECTIONS FOR SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS ORDINANCE 22 ~ 1975 Page 3 Insert new paragraph after paragraph (d): "Drive,yay. That portion of the sidewalk area 'which is improved, designed, or ordinarily used for vehicular access to property abutting the street." 3 Insert new paragraph after paragraph (h): "Paved or Paving. The term shall include any asphalt concrete, seal and chip, concrete or similar impervious wearing surface." 3 Delete paragraph (k). 3 Paragraph (1): delete "public" 4 Insert new paragraph after paragraph (m): "Sidewalk. That portion of the sidewalk area which is paved with an all-weather surfacing for use by pedestrians. 4 Paragraph (n) should read: "Sidewalk Area. That portion of a street between the curb line, or the lateral line of a roadway, and the adjacent property line intended for the use of pedestrians and inCluding the terms border area, parkway, park strip, planting strip, or like designations." 4 Paragraph (0), second line should read: "including roadway and sidewalk area, being" 5 Paragraphs (4) through (10) should be numbered (3) through (9). 5 Paragraph (r): delete "public". '6 Paragraph (c) second line: "no" should be "nor" 16 Paragraph (f) fourth line: should be (10%). 17 Paragraph (i) should read: "Location, size, and type of existing vegetation and other natural landscaping features and the proposed limits of any excavation or regrading. Also the accurate location of trees with a trunk diameter of six (6) inches or more measured four and a half (4%) feet above the ground and an indication of which trees are proposed to be removed. Where large groves are to remain undisturbed, single trees need not be located." 1 Paragraph (m) should read: "Site data tabulation listing acreage of land to be subdivided; number, type and typical size of lots, structures and/or units; number of bedrooms per dwelling unit; ground cove~age of proposed structures and improvements including parking areas, streets, " sidewalks and open space acreage and the amount of this applicable to Section 20-18 (a)." Paragraph (a) fourth line: after "Section 20-15" add "along with the fee required by Section 20-20." Paragraph (g): add "The Colorado Coordinate System may be used." 23. Paragraph (5) should read: "Any subdivision agreements ,as required.by Section 20-16." 26 Paragraph (3) should read: "The subdivider shall guarantee by a maintenance bond or other suitable means the repair of any existing improvements damaged during the construction of new improvements." 26 Paragraph (f) should read: "Agreement for Delayed Construction of Required Improvements. When the City Council deems the construction of a required improvement untimely due to existing conditions or future plans, the subdivider shall. . ." 27 Section 20-17 should read: "Design Standards. The following design standards are adopted as minimum standards for all subdivisions; provided, that where it can be shown that strict compliance with these standards would result in adverse site conditions because of unusual topography, size or shape of the property, existing vegetation, or other exceptional situation or condition, the City Engineer may vary, modify, or waive certain standards. Any such variance, modification, 'or waiver shall not weaken the intent or purpose of these standards, be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other property in the area in which the SUbject property is situated." Page 17 19 22 ~ .-.., 2 1"""\. """ Page 31. Paragraph (2) should be paragraph (20). 31 Paragraph (24) first sentence should read: "One street tree of three (3) inch caliper for deCiduous trees, measured at the top of the baIlor root system, or minimum of six (6) foot height for conifers, shall be provided. . " 31 Paragraph (24) last sentence should read: "For all other districts within the City, trees, foliage, and landscaping shall be provided in accordance with the adopted street landscaping plan for the City of Aspen." 33 Paragraph (5): "drive" should be "driveway". 33 & Paragraph (d) should read: 34 Survey Monuments (1) The external boundaries of all subdivisions, blocks, and lots shall be monumented on the ground by reasonably permanent monuments solidly embedded in the ground. These monuments shall be set not more than fourteen hundred reet apart along any straight boundary line, at all angle points, and.at the beginning, end, and points of change of direction or change of radius of any curved boundaries. (2) All monuments shall be set in accordance with the provisions of C. R. S. 1973 38~5l-10l unless otherwise provided for in this chapter. (3) Range points and boxes meeting City specifications shall be set on the centerline of the street right-of-way unless designated otherwise. 34 Paragraph "(3) Utilities" should be "(e) Utilities" 34 Paragraph (2) under utilities: add phrase "unless the length of the line is less than 200 feet, in which case the minimum size shall be six (6) inch. 35 Section 20-18 should read: 35A 358 " 3 I"""> ,'-' Section 20-18 Public Dedications and Easements (a) All land submitted for subdivisiori approval shall be subject to the following land dedication or cash payment in lieu thereof for the purpose of pro- viding parks, school playgrounds, active recreation facilities and similar public use open spaces. (1) The subdivider shall dedicate to the City for public use,purposes land in the ration of five (5) acres for everyone thousand (1,000) residents of the proposed subdivision, i.e., the number of res- idents multiplied by five thousandths (0.005) of an acre per resident. The number of residents shall be calculated on the following basis; Type of Dwelling Unit Number of Residents/Dwelling unit Studio 1 Bedroom 1.0 1.3 2 Bedroom 2.7 3 Bedroom 4.0 Single Family or Duplex 4.0 (2) At the option of the City, the subdivider shall in lieu of such conveyance make a cash payment in an amount equal to the current market value of the undeveloped land required for dedication by sub- paragraph (1). Undeveloped shall mean without buildings or structures, but shall include other improvements or utilities if installed prior to subdivision. (3) In the case of commercial development, the subdivider shall make a cash payment in an amount equal to six percent (6%) of the current market value of the undeveloped land. (4) In the case of mixed residential and commercial development the open space dedication for the residential uses shall be determined as in subparagraph (1) and the open space dedication for the commercial uses shall be determined as in subparagraph (3) using as the undeveloped 4 1"""\ .,-.." land area the total land area less the minimum land area Fequired for the proposed dwelling units. (5) In the event a.cash payment is to be made and the City and the subdivider fail to agree on the current market value of the land, such value shall be fix~d and established by a qualified appraiser acceptable to both ~arties. (6) The proceeds of such payments shall be . deposited in a separate City account and shall be used only for the acquisition of land for park and active recreation purposes and for improvement of such public use open space. (7) ,If the area required for such public uses exceeds the amount hereinabove required for the subdivider's contribution, the lands needed in addition to such re- quired contributions. shall be reserved, for purchase by the City of Aspen for not more than five (5) years from the date of approval of the subdivision. (b) .Whenever a proposed subdivision embraces any part of an existing or planned street or transit alignment designated on an adopted plan, it shall be the responsibility of the subdivider to cause the right-of-way required by such plan to be platted and dedicated to the public. (c) Whenever a tract to be subdivided includes any part of a bikeway, bridle path, cross country ski trail or hiking trail designated on the Aspen Trail System Plan, the' subdivider shall plat and grant public easements in compliance with the plan. These easements shall be in addition to, and shall not be included in, the computation of.the public open space dedication required by, sub-section (a) above. (d) Whenever a tract to be subdivided includes any part of an existing or planned public utility ,or drainage system designated on an adopted plan, the subdivider shall plat and grant public easements in compliance with the plan. . 5 Page 36 38 ,"""', ,~\ Paragraph (a) fourth line: after "chapter" insert " other than the design standards in Section 20-17," Paragraph (c): delete "Section 20-19 (a) and" 6 ~ .. ,-" ,-, fe.......,~4.:,,../. ~;~'-~;>~~.. C~.<~ ??<'7~ d' 0 - /'7 ( L'-j I. Section 20-2 - states purposes of subdivision revie~ 1. First series of purposes are technical and represent the historical and traditionally accepted rationales for subdivision review - PURPOSES a. To encourage well planned subdivision by setting standards for subdivision design and improvements. b. To improve land records and survey monuments by establishing standards for surveys, plans and plats. c. To in sure that adequate utilities and access .:b.s- /t; h. .' "r....__ supplied. d. To safeguard the interests of the public and the sub- divider and provide consumer protection for the purchaser. 2. LATER, in the law of subdivision development, a new area of concern evidenced itself, and THE IMPACT of a development became the subject of review - these objectives are recited also in Section 20-2 where the intents and purposes of the regulation include a. To assist the orderly, efficient and integrated development of the City of Aspen. b. To insure the proper distribution of population and coordinate the need for public services with governmental improvement programs. c. To acquire desirable public areas. II. The definition of subdivision has expanded over the years to show lots for purposes of development. b. Later, condominiumization was included, the implication being that ownership (rather than rental) of units results in different demands on the community. c. Finally, apartments and other multi-family structures (and, in Pitkin County, hotels and lodges) were included in the definition of subdivision, because of the obvious impacts of multi-family structures. , , 1"""\ I"""; What happened here is that, if 700 Hopkins Apartments had not condominium- ized, they would have enjoyed a type of nonconforming status and been requir- ed to pay no fees, but by condominiumizing a. There was presumed a change from rental to ownership status, and an assumption that residents require more governmental services, including parks. h. 700 Hopkins lost the non-conforming status of the apartment house, and they, to enjoy the benefits of sub- division approval, are asked to contribute to the park fund. III. The theory of loosing the immunity of a non-conforming status on the owner's election to improve his property or enjoy a privilege afforded hy the law is not new .""e>,c -<=o0'.<>7/-".c.. f)l' /, <'"s/- a. Those who wish to alter or repair an old building ex- 1\ ceeding 50% of the value of the building, in order to /,;;>WI- have a building permit issue for the renovation, bring /\ the entire structure into conformance with the building code as if new. b. Those structures which are non-conforming or house non-conforming uses according to the zoning code, must be brought into conformance with the zoning if (1) They are abandoned for a year or more. (2) They are substantially damaged or totally destroyed and not rebuilt within two years. IV. There is no caselaw directly addressing itself to the question of whether subdivision dedication requirements are properly imposed on the condominiumization of existing buildings. a. However, none of the state or local regulations specifically exclude conversions. b. .1\nd, it has been historically the practice to impose them. V. Bruce argues that the Courts will not support the imposition of this fee because cases have said either (1) that a subdivider can be assessed -2- " " . ,-, r", only those costs specifically at~ibutable to his subdivision //;."'-7 X//,1'/V'h) 0.1/"" Y activity, or (2) at a ~Hrimum, he must be asked to assume the costs /I to a community created by the introduction of ~ residents into the area. Let me summarize what specific action has been taken by the Courts on the question of the validity of specification dedication requirements: a. Two states, Oregon and Connecticut, have taken the "I),,(!.' position that a cash dedication requirement was invalid c.o~)S because the land purchased with dedication fees were not earmarked for the direct and exclusive benefit of the subdivision residents. b. The states of California, Kansas, Montana, New York, Rhode Island and Wisconsin have generally approved the Do cash-in-lieu-of-land requirements and dTd not require that the park areas purchased with dedication fees be used exclusively by the subdivision residents. c. There are no Colorado cases on the subject, and no cases at all on the question as to whether dedication fees are illegal because applied to a conversion of an existing occupied building. T/i;S d. The closest we have come to a discussion of tbe issue is in a 1971 California Supreme Court case of Associated Home Builder v. Walnut Creek, in which the Court discussed the validity of a subdivision dedication requirement exactly like ours and said that it is not necessary, in order to impose the requirement, to show that the particular ~ /It)I)/'r/(},vdL /~,el<:.. />'$-....)'S" subdivision creates the need for 'bl,e ded-ication. The Court said that the dedication requirements can be justified on the basis of a general public need for recreational facilities: "Manifestly, governmental entities have the responsibility to provide park and recreation land to accommodate human expansion despite the inexorable . decrease in open space available to fulfill such need." -3- 1"""\ r, VI. 700 Hopkins Apartments seems to argue that the assessment of the fee, without corresponding direct cost to the City by reason of e, /.r",-:.~ the conversion, is potentially unfair 'or illegal. They have no authority for this; and I do not think that it patently unfair. It is a cost of their development business. VII. Bruce cites the Stroud case for the proposition that any fees imposed must directly benefit those assessed. I disagree with Bruce's prediction on how the Supreme Court would view our requirement because: in 1961 in Western Heights v. City of Fort Collins, the Supreme Court upheld a PIF fee (used for general maintenance, upgrading and enlargement of the City's water plant) even though the fee was not assessed to cover costs directly attributable to new service supplied. The Court approved the approach used by the City of imposing a connection fee constituting a contribution to the overall maintenance and development of the City's water system. There is a parallel here to the park dedication requirement. VIII. ',Ie must look, also, at the specific type of review this appeal is brought under. Section 20-19 (b) permits you to review and determine (when there is a question) whether the proposed activity is within the definition of subdivision. /A:0?''''; /O?A.., a. This was designed to deal with those land related 11 0/$ .t.~ 1..,/,,~t->.fUt'h. activities that are so minor as to not be within the ^ scope of the defin,ition of a subdivision of land rj ,z 'T'-''- ,J')i--',AlPt..'J<:i.S C)/'" S?/JihVlJON KEL:"t-'~Arlo:v e.g. minor boundaryadjustments. b. Condominiumization is specifically defined as a sub- division in Section 20-3; it would be difficult to ex- t>;/s /i!Tlv/r v /.?,y //H<"-1:/'-<-< 't-1r '0tV' clude 4e by interpretation. c. 700 Hopkins has gone through full subdivision review; recorde a plat and executed an agreement - if they wanted to challenge the application of the definition of subdivision to their proposed condominiumization, they should have applied under this Section 20-19(b) two years ago - I think that they have waived any argument that their -4- " .,.--... 1"""\ r\ condominiumization was not a subdivision. /9L ,5' "" d. (F'inallv if you look at their subdivision agreement you will see that it addressed itself to other areas of concern IX. Finally, (e.g. sidewalk and street improvements) other than merely the payment of a dedication fee. so O?7&eK.- Of]J""~{'-'''-J ()," CON1/', .70 "'''/t< ".JI}Olb'J"J."';,1 /'!' -;"c" ,<.t'v,/~ u' . . ,Dr ~-t71 d ,p",.. '?/E.::.r: I th1nk an element of contract law should be d~scussed at this . point a. As part of., its subdivision agreement and in consideration for subdivision approval, 700 Hopkins agreed to pay the City the fee it has been paid. b. Since that time (1) the plat has been recorded, (2) one-half the units sold, and (3) the landowner and subdivider have enjoyed the financial benefits of subdivision approval and condominium sales - it is very unlikely that we can reverse these effects. c. Prior to final approval the subdivider knew the exact amount of the fee and at all times knew that payment of the fee would be required. d. Basic contract law principles tells us that a landowner d......).~or may- Challenge the subdivision fee requirements after he has received the benefit of his bargain; and the Colorado Supreme Court so held in Colorado Springs v. Kitty Hawk. ;; -1. I "-:<<:j1)--?'~~.&;':,_. A, ~;;' ) '. /' \.~'u.-v~-~. .~ ~~c,c ,{.'_/~(. '~/o1"C~~-v'~~"?-?-, /~..;ZJ-:?-iP?'2e.e. Sandra M. Stuller Pebruary 23, 1976 ,k ,4/",.e. '7/"/",,,. ./I. .dz-~-/'c;~ ~" ":?''?'~/-:v ,,:',u v," -:r'''''--~''''--''?-- .5'c/P7<t- Or ~ A/9/;.t.-O '.i;J,-,.,-?.f ./il /J...... /:9" ..:;"7-~-'P ~e::> .t?~e.'~''::'~ "':? ~-~-..'- ?J ;{;;;:) ~A"";-~;"':":;)..?~!''>- /-'UZ<"''"'''"' . . lfl r- '" ..... - ..... ..... .<:: U l-l III :8 CIl Z ~ 0 H H ~ E-I 6 ...:i ~ H CJ 0 ...:i [iI ~ 0 CJ [iI ~ ;iJ H P. ~ CIl Z ~ [iI ~ p. 0 0 CJ .--. . .. .. C 0 ''; .jJ III ..-l ::l 0.. 0 0.. '0 C r- lfl M "" M r- ,,:1"" lfl III . . . . . . ~I~ . \D '<I' .... co M \D '" co '" co co co co co co - ~ N \D N co N ..-l ..-l N co "" N.-l III Cl S .-l , 0 0.. 0 ::l \D co N \D '<I',N N \D N \D N \D N \D l-l 0 .-l "" N \D .-l N \D .-l M '0 Cl co \D "" lfl M r- N "" lfl l!l . . . . .' . . . . M N M "" .-l co '" co "" "" co co co co M '" co - .-l M .-l "" .-l .-l .-l co "" .-l .-l Cl U III , 0.. "" co "" .-l M N \D N \D .-l M N \D N \D (I) CIl N .-l M N \D ..-l M C M co M '" Cl . . . . 0.. . M \D ,'" \D M \D I '" co "" 0 S N lfl N r- N ..-l N N l-l '0 '0 Cl .0 l-l "" N '" r- "" N N \D " ''; M .-l "" ..-l lfl .-l ::l tl' co '" .-l "" '" "" .-l '" Cl . . . . . . I . p:; . r- "" r- '" r- co '" co r- S N \D N co N .-l N N - l-l III '0 .jJ .0 ''; ""CO M \D r- "" M \D C N Nio:::t' M \D .-l ~ ';1'"' "" lfl r- \D \D lfl r- 0"> . . . . . . C . NM N .-l N lfl M \D N ''; S N'lfl N r- N .-l N N .-l l-l .-l '0 Cl .0 ~ .-l .-l lfl lfl N N lfl lfl 0 .-l "" "" lfl lfl .-l ..-l I Cl r- \D co 'I co r- .-l . . . I . " , . .0 .-l N .-l '" .-l lfl ..-l \D , .-l III 0 N lfl N \D N .-l N N ~ ''; 0 '0 ..-l ::l .-l .jJ N N '" '" lfl lfl \D \D ~ CIl lfl lfl \D \D ..-l .-l I , Cl 0"> ~ III 4-l ~ ~ .. Cl, <Il 4-l 4-l l-l III III ClU 0 ..-l~ 0 0 0 .0 co ""0 r-o co 0 0 N III Cl 0 '" "" - 00 MO r- \D "" lfl Cl.jJ N lfl Mlfl N - .-l - N r- :8\D.-l lIl',; . . ..-l .", . \D . . I I I ::>CIl .-l .-l o~ o~ o~ lfl N p:;p:;p:; . I I I ~ C "'; 0 Cl Cl Cl '0 "'; U U U .0 . . . III III rrJ III s:: ::l III III lIl",; 0..0..0.. OCll 0 0 o ~ CIlCllCll III '0 '0 '00 llll-l 0, 0 s:: C C l-l 0 0 C s:: C Cl 0 ::> ::> 0 0 o 0.. ::> ~ Cl Cl Cl P:;4-l P. P. CJ CJ CJ.jJ p. P. 0..0..0.. 000 "- "- "- "- "- "-0 "- "- .jJ. .-l 4-l4-l4-l cO"> 000 Cl s:: .-l l-l,,; "" "" "" "".-l lfl lfl ()J ()J ()J l-l C , ~ ~ "" \D ~ res .-l ..-l tr>tr>tr> .~ ::l 0 I I I ~ I E I I III III III CJN p,; P:; p,; p';C/l P,; P,; .jJ.w.jJ C C C ()J ()J ()J U U U .jJ " III l-l l-ll-l C ()J .w ()J ()J ()J ()J H ,,; 0 P<P<P< S ()J H H l-l > >'l ()J o...w ::l ..-l ()J ()J ()J O'N (fJ (fJ 0.. " >< '"0 tr>tr>tr> ..-lCll rrJ III <Il i!> .w C rrJ III oJ ()J ..-l ..-l ~ '"0 ''; ,10 l-l ~ ~ H ~ .-l .-l >< Co CJ C QJ 0J ()J ()J ()J ,,; 'N m .c: m 0 >- >> Q > > >'l C/l N t3 :~ ~~n: .jJ ~ m''; . I""""! c. S ssso..::l o 000::l0"> o oOO'OC .... $4 $.-I H ~ 'r-! 0''0 '0 '0'0 l-l.-l "'; ()J ()J ()J ()J O.-l '0.00.0.0.0 ()J ::l",; "" " 4JM'O.-lNMCIl'O tIl"-::l"-"-"-"- C "-4-l.jJ(fJ(fJ<Il<ll 0 .....lIllllCCCC <Il III "-0000 l-l OCtIl(fJ<Il<ll ()J OM 0 l-ll-ll-ll-l 0.. O\OtIl()J()J()J()J "- o -l-l 0.. 0.. 0..0.. U "'M Q) CO r-t A.Mr---OO b"lS..-l..-lN"""" CO "'; 0 lIll-l ::l'O ()JC '0.00 llJ l-lN'O ::l"-()J b"l4-l tIl ''; III rrJ 4-l ". .0 o lIlO <Il .jJ..-l',; ..-t - CN C ::l 0 .....r-! O">S.jJ COrrJ '.-\ 0 l-l ..-ll-lllJ ..-l'O C llJ ()J Cl ~.o t!l '0 ..-lC llJ"-O ..-l4-l..-\ .o<Il4J rrJ rrJ ~O..-l ' o lfl ::l ..-IN 0.. r1. ...0 ~..-lP< .-! N CIl [iI E-I o Z >< .w '.-\ <Il C llJ '0 k o 4-l '0 0) <Il ::l 0) b"l rrJ llJ k U ~ .-! rrJ .jJ o 8 <Il , rrJ '0 ()J ()J U .jJ rrJ 0) rrJ 0...jJ l-l CIl'.-\ 0) CIl C C ()J ()JCl t!l o....-l 0.0 C rrJ 0 'O()J '.-\ ()J <Il .jJ l-l~ rrJ '.-\ ..-l ::l4-l ::l tl'0 0.. 0) 0 P:; d-,o P< <Il .jJ '.-\ C ~ g' '.-\ ..-l <Il ..-l0) S 0)'0 0 :3 0 0 QCJ l-l '0 0) ~ ()J ..-l ()J l!l .oZ III 4-1 ~ H 0 o ()J .....-Irci ..-l C 0 -<::> Z .. .. .. lfl o o o x s:: o '.-\ .jJ rrJ ..-l ::l 0.. o p. " Cl b"l rrJ Cl k U ~ llJ U rrJ 0.. CIl C ()J 0.. o M