Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout58-01 RESOLUTIONRESOLUTION NO. 58-01 r A RESOLUTION TO APPROVE AND ADOPT THE HYDROLOGIC AND HYDRAULIC STUDY FOR CMN BUSINESS PARK II BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS: Section 1. That the City Council of the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas hereby approves and adopts the Hydrological and Hydraulic Study for the Design and Analysis of the proposed Steele Boulevard and Mall Avenue Bridges in CMN Business Park II which is attached as Exhibit A. PASSED and APPROVED this / day of May, 2001. ,. Y E T jp,`/ ATTEST- eather Woodruff, City Cler APPROVED: €9»' DAN COODY, Ma `r NAME OF FILE: Resolution No. 58-01 CROSS REFERENCE: 05/01/01 Resolution No. 58-01 Exhibit "A" (Copy of Hydrological and Hydraulic Study for the Design and analysis of the proposed Steele Boulevard and Mall Avenue Bridges in CMN Business Park 1I 05/01/01 Staff Review Form 05/09/01 Departmental Memo from City Clerk NOTES: 04/16/2001 10:38 5014434724 Garver, Inc, Eonlnesr3 lar, Usury Seaal rt: ism So 60, Bock, Nkensaa 72203-0050 SO1476.3S33 PJ( 301.372.8042 www.9ervefinc.com MILHOLLAND CO PAGE 02 • • August 4, 1999 Mr. Tim Conklin Planning Director City of Fayetteville 113 W. Mountain Street Fayetteville, Arkansas 72701 Re: Proposed CMN Business Park 11 Steele Boulevard and Mall Avenue Bridges Fayetteville, Arkansas Dear Mr. Conklin: GARVERI ENGINEERS We are submining for your records, one copy of the Hydrologic and Hydraulic Report for the proposed bridges across Mud Creek associated with the CMN Business Park 11 Development Garver Engineers performed the hydraulic analyses and prepared the subsequent report and supporting documents. Those analyses were performed in coordination with the Little Rock District Corps of Engineers and their ongoing re -study of Mud Creek and other streams in the City of Fayetteville. The results of our analyses indicate the following: The construction of the proposed Steele Boulevard and Mall Avenue bridges across Mud Creek within the CMN Business Park II will not increase the I00 -year flood height nor extend the 100 - year flood boundary beyond that reported for the 100 -year flood discharge in the 1991 Flood Insurance Study for Washington County, Arkansas and Incorporated Arms, As a part of our study, the effects of proposed low-water crossings immediately upstream of the two proposed bridges were evaluated. The low-water crossings are to be removed following the completion of the Steele Boulevard and Mall Avenue bridges and prior to the filling of the flood plain up t, the proposed floodway. Our evaluation indicated the following: Any temporary !,crease In the flooding potential along the reach of Mad Creek through the CMN Business Park II resulting from the construction of the temporary lows -water crossings to facilitate the construction of the Steele Boulevard and Mall Avenue bridges will be confined to the CMN property and will not adversely bnpact adjacent properly. Respecttbity submitted, Garver A. Tom Larson, PE 4021 Associate Enclosures (99-2000) cc: file, CMN, Glynn Fulmer rp;As 'it .r.re ppl. .p FF,1n Eli - r, .471N!!,1 TOM L. Mt Atf . Brentwood. TN • Fayaavale, AP • huntsvlSe. Al • JSCkSOn. MS • Ortle ROLA AR • LOatsvme. KY • Tulsa, OK PREPARED FOR EXHIBIT A NANCHAR, INC. & Marjone S. Brooks Fayetteville, Arkansas PROJECT CMN BUSINESS PARK II HYDROLOGIC AND HYDRAULIC STUDY For the Design and Analysis Of Steele Boulevard and Mall Avenue Bridges And Associated Features PREPARED BY: GARVER ENGINEERS Garver, Inc. Engineers 1010 Battery Street P.O. Box 50 Little Rock, Arkansas 72203-0050 501-376-3633 FAX 501-372-8042 Exl Hyp Hyt SECTION TABLE TABLE 1 TABLE 2 TABLE 3 TABLE 4 APPENDICES APPENDIX A APPENDIX B APPENDIX C APPENDIX D APPENDIX E APPENDIX F APPENDIX G • • TABLE OF CONTENTS TITLE PAGE TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION STUDY SUMMARY STUDY DETAILS HYDROLOGIC ANALYSIS HYDRAULIC ANALYSES i 1 1 2 2 5 TITLE PAGE ORIGINAL FLOOD INSURANCE DATA 3 CURRENT AND EFFECTIVE CONDITIONS ANALYSIS 7 LOW WATER CROSSING ANALYSIS 8 FLOODWAY ANALYSIS 9 TITLE CMN BUSINESS PARK II BRIDGE DESIGN PLAN: MUD CREEK — Original FIS PLAN: MUD CREEK — Revised FIS w/norm.dp PLAN: MUD CR —.Rev. FIS/Steele&Mall brdgs (Effective Existing Conditions Model) PLAN• MUD CREEK w/Steele-210-Mall-180.REV/LWC (Low Water Crossing Model) PLAN: LVEFLDWY-steele-210-mall-180-REV. (Floodway Analysis) MUD CREEK PROJECT FILES 1 • • HYDROLOGIC AND HYDRAULIC STUDY 1 For the Design and Analysis Of ' Proposed Steele Boulevard and Mall Avenue Bridges And Associated Features 1. INTRODUCTION ' The proposed CMN Business Park II is located in the northern portion of the City of Fayetteville, Washington County, Arkansas. This development will require the construction of two bridges across Mud Creek in the City of Fayetteville. A Vicinity Map is included to show the reach of Mud ' Creek evaluated in these analyses. The downstream crossing is proposed at what will be Steele Boulevard and the upstream crossing is proposed at what will be Mall Avenue. The following is a summary of the hydrologic and hydraulic evaluations that have been performed to develop the hydraulic design of those bridges. In addition, a proposed revised floodway was developed in coordination with an on-going re -study of the Mud Creek floodplain by the Little Rock District, Corps of Engineers. The effects of proposed temporary low water crossings above each bridge ' were also evaluated. I1. STUDY SUMMARY The following bridge openings were developed based on the analyses of this study: Steele Boulevard The proposed bridge at Steele Boulevard is a three span continuous composite W -beam unit, 1 212' long Channel improvements for this site will consist of a 70' flat bottom channel with 2:1 side slopes. A transition from the natural channel to the 70' bottom channel section will ' begin approximately 440' upstream of the Steele Boulevard bridge and match the improved section approximately 290' above the bridge. The transition from the improved channel section to the natural channel section will begin approximately 175' downstream of the ' Steele Boulevard bridge and match the natural channel section approximately 285' downstream of the bridge. A drawing of the Steele Boulevard Bridge is presented in Appendix A. 1 Mall Avenue 1 The proposed bridge at Mall Avenue is a two span continuous composite W -beam unit, 162' long. No improved channel section is planned at this site. However channel and overbank I clearing and cleaning is planned. A drawing of the Mall Avenue Bridge is presented in Appendix A. 1 Low Water Crossings are proposed to be constructed upstream of each bridge for the construction purposes. The crossings are proposed to be composed of 4- 60" CMP Culverts with approximately ' 3 feet of cover. The evaluation of the proposed crossings indicate a rise of the computed 100 -year flood profile near the crossings of approximately 3 feet. The increase flooding potential, however, should not threaten property other than that owned by CMN Properties. The increase flooding ' potential rapidly diminishes above each crossing. These temporary crossings should be removed prior to any significant filling of the floodplain outside of the computed floodway limits. 1 1 1 1 III. STUDY DETAILS Using the Effective Existing Conditions model of Mud Creek, which included the bridges described above, floodways were computed with widths ranging from 500 feet at the west boundary of the project site to 260 feet approaching Steele Boulevard. It continues at 260 feet wide to just below Mall Avenue where it reduces to 240 feet. A 240 -foot floodway is required to approximately 470 feet below the downstream bridge at U.S. Highway 71 where it reduces to 160 feet. More detail information is provided in the floodway analysis discussion in the Study Details and shown on the Floodway Layout drawing included in Appendix F. Floodway widths are tentative and may be modified upon the review and final modeling by the Little District, Corps of Engineers. 1 1 1 1 HYDROLOGIC ANALYSIS This reach of Mud Creek is included in a detailed Flood Insurance Study (FIS) for Washington County and Incorporated Areas and has an existing floodway defined on the Rate Maps issued for that study. The original Flood Insurance Study data is presented in Table 1. The approximate floodway line is shown on a Floodway Layout drawing enclosed in Appendix F. The existing FIS boundary was drawn by personnel of Milholland Engineers from the appropriate Rate Map. The proposed floodway boundary will be discussed later in this report. Currently, Mud Creek is part of a re -study being performed by the Little Rock District Corps of Engineers. Close coordination with the Corps has been maintained to minimize conflicts with their findings as they complete their work. The progress of their study, however, was such that only limited information was available for these analyses. 1 Personnel of the Little Rock District, Corps of Engineers have completed their hydrologic analyses of the watershed of Mud Creek and provided revised discharges applicable to this reach of Mud Creek. A comparison is shown below between the original FIS discharges and the revised 1 discharges resulting from a more detailed hydrologic analysis of the watershed. 1 1 1 1 2 1 GARVER ENGINEERS 1010 BATTERY ST. LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS INCREASE ORIGINAL OVER FLOODWAY 100 -YEAR WIDTH TABLE 1 - ORIGINAL FLOOD INSURANCE DATA SECTION STATION DISTANCE (FEET) A(FIS) 0.460 (SURVEYED) 0.742 1489 STEELE D.S. 0.817 394 (SURVEYED) 0.829 66 STEELE U.S. 0.842 66 Low Water 0.843 4 Crossing 0.853 56 B(FIS) 0.950 512 (SURVEYED) 1.011 322 1.019 40 EXISTING 8" 1.020 1 SEWER 1.020 3 1.021 1 MALL D.S. 1.246 1180 (SURVEYED) 1.257 56 MALL U.S. 1.268 56 Low Water 1.269 4 Crossing 1.279 56 (SURVEYED) 1.448 894 (SURVEYED) 1.545 500 (CORPS SURVEY 1.617 380 1.630 86 HWY 71 C(FIS) 1.640 53 1.650 51 FIS FIS ORIGINAL STREAM 100 -YEAR FIS PROFILE FLOOD FLOODWAY ELEVATION ELEVATION ELEVATION 1165.4 1181.10 1181.20 1169.7 1184.50 1185.00 1170.9 1184.88 1185.43 1171.0 1184.93 1185.49 1171.2 1184.98 1185.54 1171.3 1184.99 1185.55 1171.4 1185.03 1185.60 1172.9 1187.00 1187.80 1173.8 1187.67 1188.46 1174.0 1187.76 1188.54 1174.0 1187.76 1188.54 1174.0 1187.77 1188.55 1174.0 1187.77 1188.55 1177.5 1190.24 1190.95 1177.6 1190.35 1191.07 1177.8 1190.47 1191.18 1177.8 1190.48 1191.19 1178.0 1190.60 1191.30 1180.6 1192.47 1193.12 1182.1 1193.51 1194.14 1183.2 1194.31 1194.92 1183.4 1194.49 1195.09 1183.6 1194.60 1195.20 1183.8 0.10 340 0.50 0.55 0.55 0.56 0.56 0.57 0.80 340 0.78 0.78 0.78 0.78 0.78 0.71 0.71 0.71 0.71 0.71 0.66 0.63 0.61 0.60 0.60 240 Flood Insurance Data shown in BOLD. Other data shown is interpolated from FIS data 4 • • 1 MUD CREEK DISCHARGE COMPARISON ' ORIGINAL FLOOD INSURANCE REVISED FLOOD INSURANCE 1 DISCHARGES (CFS) DISCHARGES (CFS) IFROM WEST BOUNDARY TO LINE "B" (See attached Floodway Layout drawing) 10 -YEAR - 9500 9738 t 50 -YEAR - 12000 13605 100 -YEAR - 13000 15544 500 -YEAR - 15300 21165 1 FROM UPSTREAM OF LINE "B" TO HIGHWAY 71 1 10 -YEAR - 9500 9080 50 -YEAR - 12000 12707 I 100 -YEAR - 13000 14526 500 -YEAR - 15300 19688 1 HYDRAULIC ANALYSES I No existing hydraulic model was available from the original Flood Insurance Study. For the hydraulic evaluation of the impact of the proposed bridges on the flood elevations in this reach of Mud Creek, a new model was developed using HEC -RAS. Field surveys were performed by I Milholland Engineers. Cross sections were obtained at each proposed crossing and several additional locations along the flood plain. The location of those cross-sections are shown on the Floodway Layout drawing, enclosed in Appendix F, and labeled Line "A" through Line "E". An 1 additional section was surveyed near the West Boundary of the development.. The field surveys were tied to a FIS Reference Mark at Highway 71 to insure compatibility to FIS datum. Survey information was obtained from the Corps of Engineers at the Highway 71 bridge near the eastern ' edge of the proposed CMN Business Park II and was incorporated into the HEC -RAS model. Personnel from Garver Engineers performed a field and photographic survey of the flood plain of Mud Creek within the CMN Development, as well as reaches above and below the development. 1 Site information provided by Milholland Engineers was used by Garver Engineers to develop the necessary hydraulic models to evaluate the proposed bridges and associated features Since a Flood Insurance Study is currently in effect for this site and a current re -study is being performed, the I existing floodplain was evaluated for the original FIS discharges and the proposed revised discharges developed by the Corps. 1 5 • • 1 As can be noticed from the comparison shown above, the original FIS utilized a single set of I discharges for the total reach studied It is apparent from a review of the data tables and plotted materials relative to Mud Creek in the FIS that only limited cross sections were utilized in the backwater analysis of Mud Creek. The availability of survey information in this reach of Mud I Creek allowed a very good hydraulic model of the flood plain located in the proposed CMN Business Park II. A current conditions model was produced for this reach in HEC -RAS, the current modeling tool used to perform backwater analyses for various stream situations. The current I conditions model developed was used to evaluate the 10-, 50-, 100-, and 500 -year flood events using both the original FIS discharges (Plan MUD CREEK — Original FIS) and the revised discharges (Plan: MUD CREEK — Revised FIS w/norm. dp). For the original FIS discharges, I starting water surface elevations were interpolated from the information provided in the FIS. For the revised discharges, starting water surface elevations were developed for "normal depth" at a slope of 0.003. This was in agreement with CORPS personnel involved in the current re -study. ' Using the Current Conditions model, the hydraulic designs of the proposed bridges were performed through several iterations of HEC -RAS analyses of various bridge configurations. The final bridge 1 configurations were modeled with the proposed revised discharges to produce an Effective Existing Conditions model (PLAN: MUD CR — Rev. FIS/Steele&Mall brdgs). Since the proposed bridges would essentially be in place prior to the completion of the Corps' study of this reach, it was agreed 1 with Corps personnel that the Effective Existing Conditions Model would include the Steele Boulevard and Mall Avenue bridges. The summary results of an HEC -RAS analysis of that plan are included in Table 2. A comparison is presented between the 100 -year water surface profile ' - resulting from the HEC -RAS analysis of the Effective Existing Conditions model, with the Steele Boulevard and Mall Avenue bridges in place and both the original 100 -year FIS water surface profile and the current conditions 100 -year water surface profile, without the bridges. 1 During the course of this study, low water crossings were proposed above each bridge for 1 construction purposes. The construction of such crossings would produce additional backwater effects on the water surface elevations for the flood events on Mud Creek within the study reach. ' Therefore, a HEC -RAS plan (PLAN: MUD CR w/Steele-210mall-180 REV/LWC) was developed to evaluate the effects of the proposed crossings. Since the proposed low water crossings are temporary and would be removed prior to floodplain filling to the proposed floodway limits, the ' crossmgs were evaluated with the Effective Conditions Model. The summary results of that analysis are presented in Table 3. A detailed output table and plotted water surface profiles are included in Appendix E as well as a table and plotted profiles showing the 100 -year Low Water ' Crossing profile versus the Effective Existing Conditions 100 -year profile. A review of the analysis reveals a significant increase in the 100 -year water surface elevation immediately upstream of the bridges. However, the resulting 100 -year flood elevation only poses an increased flooding potential ' to the CMN properties and does not extend to other property. Plotted cross sections are provided in Appendix E that show the computed 100 -year water surface produced by the low water crossings and shows the location of the CMN property boundary. 1 1 6 1 TABLE 2 - CURRENT AND EFFECTIVE EXISTING CONDITIONS ANALYSIS A(FIS) (SURVEYED) STEELE D.S. (SURVEYED) STEELE U.S. Low Water Crossing B(FIS) (SURVEYED) EXISTING 8" SEWER MALL D.S. (SURVEYED) MALL U.S. Low Water Crossing (SURVEYED) (SURVEYED) (CORPS SURVEY) HWY 71 C(FIS) NO BR 100 -YEAR STATION FLOOD 0.46 0.742 0.817 0.829 0.842 0.843 0.853 0.95 1.011 1.019 1.02 1.02 1.021 1.246 1.257 1.268 1.269 1.279 1.448 1.545 1.617 1.63 1.64 ELEVATION 1181.71 1182.39 1182.91 1183.09 1183.29 1186.39 1186.62 1186.84 1188.70 1188.79 1188.96 1189.03 1190.92 1191.44 1193.44 1193.78 WITH BRIDGES STEELE BLVD. - 210' W/IMP. 70' IDGES MALL AVENUE - 160' W/CHANN INCREASE OVER ORIG 100 -YEAR FLOOD Flood Insurance Study Data shown in BOLD. • -2.79 - 2.49 -2.07 -1.90 -1.74 100 -YEAR FLOOD ELEVATION INCREASE OVER REV. 100 -YEAR FLOOD BW CHANNEL EL CLEARING INCREASE OVER ORIG. 100 -YEAR FLOODWAY 1181.71 0.00 1182.08 -0.31 1183.08 0.17 -1.28 1184.59 -1.80 -1.14 1186.6 -0.02 - 0.93 -1.54 -1.68 - 1.52 - 1.57 -1.55 - 2.07 - 0.87 - 0.71 1186.82 1188.71 1189.41 1191.54 1191.93 1193.3 1193.31 -0.02 0.01 0.00 0.62 0.62 0.49 -0.14 -0.47 Other data is Interpolated or computed. 7 - 3.29 -3.35 -2.46 -3.87 -1.94 - 1.73 -2.24 - 1.77 - 1.58 - 2.21 - 1.62 - 1.78 1 • • ' Using the Effective Existing Conditions Model, several HEC -RAS Method 4 and Method 1 t analyses were run to develop encroachment stations for a proposed floodway with the bridges in place. A Floodway Model (PLAN: LVEFLDWY-steele-210-mall-180-REV) was developed with the proposed floodway modeled as levees along the floodplain. Summary results of that analysis ' are presented in Table 4, including the proposed revised floodway widths. Detailed output tables and plotted water surface profiles are included in Appendix F showing the computed water surface profiles for the 10-, 50-, 100-, and 500 -year flood events with the proposed encroachments and a comparison of the 100 -year Effective Existing Conditions plan and the Floodway plan. The proposed floodway is also shown on the Floodway Layout map enclosed in Appendix F. TABLE 4 - FLOODWAY ANALYSIS WITH BRIDGES AND FLOODWAY AS LEVEES INCREASE INCREASE INCREASE OVER 1 100 -YEAR OVER 100 -YEAR OVER 100 -YEAR FIS 100 -YEAR PROPOSED STATION FLOODWAY FLOOD FLOOD FLOODWAY FLOODWAY ELEVATION W/ BRIDGES W/O BRIDGES ELEVATION WIDTH t 0.46 0.742 1182.51 0.80 0.80 -2.49 500 ' 0.817 1182.98 0.90 0.59 -245 260 0.829 0.842 1183.84 0.76 0.93 -1.70 260 ' 0.843 0.853 0.95 ' 1.011 1185.16 0.57 -1.23 -3.30 260 1.019 1186.48 -0.12 -0.14 -2.06 260 1.02 11.02 1.021 1186.82 0.00 -0.02 -1.73 260 1.246 1189.69 0.98 0.99 -1.26 240 ' 1.257 1.268 1190.18 0.77 1.39 -1.00 240 1.269 1.279 1.448 1191.83 0 29 0.91 -1.29 240 1.545 1192.6 0.67 1.16 -1.54 240 ' 1.617 1194.3 1.00 0.86 -0.62 160 1.63 1193.77 0.46 -0.01 -1.32 160 1.64 tStudy Data shown in BOLD. Other data is interpolated or computed. 1 1 9 I • • I APPENDIX A 1 1 CMN BUSINESS PARK II BRIDGE DESIGN 1 - Steele Boulevard Bridge 1 - Mall Avenue Bridge 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 VW MAP PIo DWG 907000a 5-76-99 �29+00 Sta. 29+93.00 30+00 O 6'-6' Sidewalk Paropet It * yA A r S04201 o• nn o n n �n0w +mm ane aa" 8 • C O eS?A arc O ' o1R w' • �. 'n C • 3r 13:19. -n 0 so. na u a 0 00 +� E3 mm 8 lc "to n S0 n O • Ts 0• 0 n n nn C5 -n S $ n E to * w in i gggs m 1 POOH utgsOO I Uestri , • m p AO T3 2 AWN no • M sono. w.. "•^ g n s N al O V . 0 MOOD INSURANCE RE—STUDY Iuo a.wT o n� **WATER SURFACE ELEV. �5, n O (n 4 m it N 2 0 Sr z 2323 P u 0 o K I?, Ea w ***WATER SURFACE ELEV. N J 31+00 32+00 IMNCINR IMC. • MwbrM 5. Brooks FAYEREVII[ ARKANSAS Owns W Aw I N .. 1 0•^ M Iw In AWN no .... M sono. w.. "•^ DA11Y91IE_11'. IMO Sotto, •. _-_ LNtwk til (Atm eft yyr Nal /RN!' I AIWT DWG 9921300e 3-2a 9R * * iF Q$9 ZI$ 3. g. g. o aon Zaam a n n w ale CO o wn V 46619 flic N •jj E0geA a X ai 4 arc* S gt m 3 mon xLT o a X 3.ew M Cr Q N e +O 1 b nb . gw5 O • 51, v? s aqq $X O a o. 1 Basis Flood I Design Flood 0 14 fy 0 mi rt -3 g Mn CIV; 1► ow an b FREQUENCY N aO• a n 0 Lo ET t R 0 Z a) 1183.84 mn Obi g **WATER SURFACE ELEV. ni U 1 N 0 i 0 EXISTING FLOOD INSURANCE STUDY 1 gk O1n 0 t * **n 0I3 U RA1 y joFt — toto V L 8 UCE• 1• 2- S.S. c 12- S.S. r 18" F.Mp TRI CARiF (SWEPCO) IZ CIL 53._ 23+0L 2• EXT SS n Ir Sto. 24+10.00 MUD CREE + 8~ IC Sta. 24+90.00 5• w Porap Clear Roadway 71'-6" Parapet Out to Out Flood way -• aN 8 26+0C • CMN BJSRCSS PARK o, ROSE I STEEIE BLYO..0VER MUD CREEK i NNICIwR. RC. a liatjarlo 3. books EAYETRVLLE MV SIS ora- Lf Cil an F.. Mn CIV; 1► ow an ^- a -. --- - .a.w . w saalw wnetaMN w ,b �.A111 1 NSMS 414as\A.n — IL— — aim r_ — NES 1 1 • • 1 APPENDIX B 1 1 PLAN: MUD CREEK — Original FIS (Current Conditions Model w/Original FIS Discharges) 1 - HEC -RAS Output table 1 - HEC -RAS Plotted Profiles 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 • • • ' 1 ' O "0 I =0 0 0 . 0 O O 10 n 0 0 !0 0 0 T NCO03 N ▪ N IN 0 00 IA Nm kw ^l o 0 In ih 10 0 0 m 0 0 0 0, n 0 0I 0 N 0 N co h co N O 0 4, Q O O; N 0 l fD co ' 0• 1 fl011le In 0 0l0' O'0,0 0 0 0 0 0' 010;010 i0 0 0 0 I O ; O O 10 i O I O O O! I I CO 10 - ca 1, O O O •0 I0 0 10 O O Iel elO 0 10 O :O 0 S O r dad N m n I O 0 10 CO m in el 0) e- 8 O F1 O O C 0;0 O O 0 0 X ,- (0,00,10N C,N 0.0 • m •0 0 lel NI 0 0 m n m 0 n 0 ptri 0 d ' 0 10 CO T 0 N i0 0_ CO I • ^• 0 m N • I 0 N 0I N m' 0 0 0 ro o 1 cc K 0 0 0 8 0 o S w E c 0- N • n Y a y s- V ✓ rtd;. T-.:1 -- SAD COPIES mIf- ±± @ e, >t%® e°® 2K%^\s� a: al «>: T \ 2 d 2a •, t / 711 $ . • }: 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0.92 0.58 0.56 0.58 0.58 0 02t'= . 13:::. 1138.98 1 I 1134.55 ---1389.41 -_._ 1469.81 0 N m Li O p .11 S. I g 0e ^ r w IN a CNI N i^ m m yU YG -p0 t' 0 I n 1- N N10 N; r' 0I0 00 oT:ice_ 0 r0 .0 IG i0 :G iG _ N '.:.� m, ,n:_ OI VI 4_ r; r b!dl0 CO ,C0 I N 010'0 N �0 !O CO 0) W '- 4!}i: - O : •'. -1-- - `• � N IN IO N N IN 10 N co rO :co az I I 0l'4611 44.Lial flfi.- N 0 r! m r 0 0 I� O ^ . l%::'. G O Z. -Fl^ 1180.58 j 1180.58 1180.58 N 0 co r -_ O 0 -.2..w o .- CI 0 V m 0 0 0 0 0 H I 8 0 01 8' 0 0 1 11 1 1 i ,j;_: "PIE' • •