8-27-12 Agenda PacketAGENDA
GOLDEN VALLEY ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION
Regular Meeting
Golden Valley City Hall, 7800 Golden Valley Road
Managers Room, Monday, August 27, 2012
7:00 PM
1. Call to Order
2. Approval of Regular Meeting Minutes — July 30, 2012
3. Section 10.32 Study
A. Discussion with Karla Rose and Jacqueline Day from Edina Realty
B. Additional Ordinance Information
4. Program/Project Updates (Staff)
a) TMDL
b) 1/1
c) Private Development Update
d) Decola Ponds
e) Recycling Update
f) Wetland Management
g) Bottineau Transitway
5. Commission Member Council Reports (Commissioners)
6. Other Business
7. Adjourn
F
This document is available in alternate formats upon a 72 -hour request. Please call
763-593-8006 (TTY: 763-593-3968) to make a request. Examples of alternate formats
may include large print, electronic,. Braille, audiocassette, etc.
GOLDEN VALLEY ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION
Regular Meeting
Minutes
July 30, 2012
Present: Commissioners Tracy Anderson Rich Baker, Dawn Hill, Jim Stremel,
Damon Struyk, Debra Yahle; Jeannine Clancy, Public Works
Director; Eric Seaburg, Graduate Engineer; and Lisa Nesbitt,
Administrative Assistant
Absent: Commissioner Lynn Gitelis (attended via conference call),
1. Call to Order
Baker called the meeting to order at 7:00 pm.
2. Approval of Regular Meeting Minutes — June 25, 2012
MOVED by Hill, seconded by Anderson, and the motion carried unanimously to
approve the minutes of the June 25, 2012 meeting.
3. Section 10.32 Study
Guests Office Keith Streff from the Animal Humane Society and Todd Carey of
the St. Paul Animal Control, shared their experiences in animal control and
enforcement. Mr. Carey said that a permit is required for any St. Paul resident
wishing to raise chickens. To obtain the permit the applicant is required to get
permission from 75% of the neighbors within 150' of their property but that does
not include properties across the street. He recommended that if the City adopts
a similar permitting process that they require the permission of the property
owners on either side of the petitioner. St. Paul currently has active 100 permits
for harboring chickens.
Officer Streff spoke of the importance of having an ordinance that is enforceable.
Q&As from the discussion are listed separately.
4. Program/Proiect Updates
Summary on -file. Additionally:
Private Developments - Distrubia in Suburbia has withdrawn its application for a
Conditional Use Permit.
Decola Ponds — The City of Crystal made a formal decision not to participate in
the study. Staff is exploring options.
5. Commission Member Council Reports
None
6. Other Business
None
7. Adiourn
MOVED by Hill, seconded by Stremel, and the motion carried to adjourn.
The meeting adjourned at 8:40 pm. The next scheduled meeting will be
August 27, 2012 at 7 pm.
Officer Keith Streff (S) and Todd Carey (C) Q&As
Hill
Q. Does permitting make it too subjective e.g. my neighbor can do this but not me just
because they are a better writer than I was on my application?
A. S. I don't see it as subjective but rather realistic arbitration. If someone has a four
acre lot and requests more animals the consideration is different than a person on a city
lot or next to a school.
Clancy
Q. Todd, is the permit approved by staff?
A.C. Yes. An animal control officer goes to the property to perform an inspection.
Q. If the permit is denied, is there an appeal process?
A.C. Yes. The appeal goes to the downtown office in the Dept. of Safety & Inspections.
A.S. — That can also be handled inside at the municipal level.
Strunk
Q. You mentioned Minneapolis and St. Paul have good workable ordinances. Would
you say St. Paul has a model ordinance or do you have other cities in mind?
A.S. — You can't really compare some of the cities. The reason St. Paul has a good
ordinance is because they deal with it the most. They deal with more permits in three
months than Golden Valley would in an entire year. Plymouth also has good language.
Baker
Q. In turning Damon's question around, are there examples of bad ordinances?
A.S. — I wouldn't call them bad but any city experiencing growing pains e.g. Bethel, E.
Bethel, Ham Lake, Nowthen. These are all developing cities so they have old versus
new. There are established homes and then newer developments coming in right next
to them. There are large lots with animals and a new home is built next door with a deck
that faces the animals. It creates a clash. The worst cities are those with no language.
Strunk
Q. Permits for sure though, correct?
A.S. — In my opinion, yes.
Hill
Q. Do your permits cover more than just chickens?
A.C. — Yes. There are a lot of animals you need to have a permit to keep.
Baker
Q. I was struck by the long list of prohibited animals in your ordinance. Did this list
evolve over time? Was it in place for a long time?
A.C. — It has been in place for a long time.
Q. What tends to be the nature of the complaints you get regarding chickens?
A.C. — Roosters, people with fighting birds, or ones that crow. Roosters aren't allowed.
Clancy
Q. How much time do you spending on animal issues for the city and of that how much
is related to chickens?
A.C. — It varies. We have 100 chicken permits and one person is dedicated to that. A lot
of time is spent on inspections.
Baker
Q. Would you say he spends 100% of his time on chickens?
A.C. — He spend about half of his time on this.
Strunk
Q. Do you think St. Paul needs more teeth in the ordinance?
A.C. — I don't think so. It seems to be working the way it is written now its just that
chicken seem to be a fade right now so we have a lot of people with chickens.
A.S. — St. Paul is a large metropolitan area with a very diverse population so everything
is relative. Their docket is going to be much greater than what would be in Golden
Valley. The same holds true for what is tolerated in St. Paul compared to Golden Valley.
Hill
Q. So in St. Paul you inspect for the permitting process and then inspect again to make
sure the structures meet the building codes?
A.C. — After someone obtains a permit we go back once a year to inspect. The building
code folks have enough to do so they don't want to do it.
A.S. — Most of the time inspections are done on a complaint basis.
Baker
Q. Have you seen any ordinances that distinguish between rental properties and
homeowners?
A.S. — No
Clancy — In Golden Valley all permits must be signed by the property owner.
Strunk
Q. What happens if permission is revoked because someone new moves in and doesn't
give their permission?
A.C. — If the petitioner loses the required number of signatures at any time then the
permit can be revoked. The same holds true if someone gives permission but then
changes their mind due to complaints then the permit can be revoked.
A.S. — I think that should be grandfathered in and declared at the time of sale.
Hill
When you tell people to get rid of the birds, do you give them the names of places they
can bring them?
A.C. — There are rescues that take them.
A.S. — They are a commodity and have a value.
Hill
Q. Do you see slaughter rules?
A.S. — I see it in third ring areas. It is regulated within your own zoning and often has to
do with the discarding of refuse.
Q. In St. Paul where there is a large Asian community where they slaughter and eat
their own chickens. Do you allow it, overlook it?
A.C. — It's allowed.
A.S. — Sometimes slaughter falls under your nuisance laws.
Struyk
Q. Consent to inspect the premises could be a part of the permit process couldn't it?
A.S. — Yes. If a complaint is made that there are more birds on the property than are
permitted and the homeowner refuses to let you inspect the property then the permit
could be revoked.
Hill
Q. In St. Paul, are your permitting fees designed to cover all the costs (animal control
officer, administration, etc.)?
A.C. — The fee is $72 for the permit and the renewal fee is $27
Baker
Q. What do you think is the number of chickens that is workable vs. non -workable?
A.C. — On a city lot I would say 3-4 at the most. You also want to make sure they are
confined to that property and not allowed to run loose.
Clancy
Q. Have either of you heard of complaints from property owners nearby regarding an
increase in rodents, raccoons or other animals that would prey on chickens.
A.C. — We hear about an increase in fox in the area but most of the time those
complaints come from the person that owns the birds.
Q. Coyotes are a concern in Golden Valley. Are chickens an attraction for coyotes?
A.S. — Yes.
City of Bloomington - Allowed
Chapter 12
PUBLIC PEACE AND SAFETY
Article IV. ANIMAL CODE
Added by Ord. No. 2010-28, 11-1-2010
Division D. Chickens, Farm Poultry and Farm Animals
SEC. 12.115. Chickens. II - - - - - - - - - Comment [SE39]: No Permit Required
(a)Limitation on the Number of Chickens. No person shall keep on any single-family or two-family
residential property more than our (4) total hen chickens. This is in -addition -to the_maximum of four (4)------
Comment [SE40]: Maximum of 4 Hens
domestic animals or pets.
(b)Three or More Dwelling Unit Properties. Chickens are not allowed on properties with three or more
dwelling units.
(c)No Roosters. No person shall keep roosters, or adult male chickensj, on any property_ within the City_ _ _ -
Comment [SE41]: No Roosters
(d)No Cockfighting. Cockfighting is specifically prohibited within the City.
(e)No Slaughtering. The slaughter of chickens is prohibited) on residentially used or zoned properties. _ _ _
Comment [SE42]: slaughtering is Prohibited
(f)Ownership Occupancy. The owner of the chickens shall live in the dwelling on the property.
(g)No Breeding. The raising of chickens for breeding purposes is prohibited on residentially used or
zoned properties.
(h)No Chickens in Dwellings or Garages. Chickens over the age of four weeks shall not be kept inside
of a dwelling or garage.
(i)Shelter and Enclosure Requirements. Chickens shall be properly protected from the weather and
predators in a shelter or coop, and have access to the outdoors in an enclosure or fenced area. The
shelter and/or enclosure shall meet all of the following requirements:
(1) Applicable building and zoning requirements of Chapters 15, 19 and 21.
(2)Setback for shelters and enclosures for chickens, is a minimum of 50 feet from any lot used
residentially or platted for future residential use.
(3)The shelter shall be situated closer to the chicken owner's dwelling than to any of the
neighboring dwellings. - - -
Comment [SE43]: Coop must be closer to
(4)Shelter and enclosure must not be located between the owner's dwelling and an adjacent street
principal dwelling unit than any neighboring units
unless setback at least 50 feet from the property line adjacent to the street.
(5)Screening from abutting residentially used properties and streets in the form of a solid privacy
fence of at least dour (4) feet in height; constructed according to the fence standards of _ _ -
Comment [SE44]: 4' Privacy Fence Required
Section 21.301.08 shall be provided for the shelter and enclosure.
around coop
(6)A shelter shall not exceed 1120 square feet in size and shall not exceed six (6) feet in height.) _ -
Comment [SE45]: shelter Requirements
(7)An enclosure or fenced area for chickens shall not exceed 20 square feet per bird and shall not
exceed six (6) feet in height and shall have protected overhead netting to prevent attracting
predators and other animals running at large.
(8)An enclosure or fenced area may be constructed with wood and/or woven wire materials that
allow chickens to contact the ground.
(9)Constructed in a workmanship -like manner to deter rodents and predators.
(j)Prevention of Nuisance Conditions. Owners shall care for chickens in a humane manner and shall
prevent nuisance conditions by ensuring the follow conditions are met:
G:\Environmental Commission\Chicken Study\City Ordinances_Guide.docx _18-
(1)The shelter and enclosure are maintained in good repair, and in a clean and sanitary manner
free of vermin and objectionable odors.
(2)Feces and discarded feed is regularly collected and stored in a leak -proof container with a tight-
fitting cover to prevent nuisance odors and the attraction of vermin until it can be disposed
properly.
(3)Chicken feed shall be stored in leak -proof containers with a tight -fitting cover to prevent
attracting vermin.
(4)Feces, discarded feed and dead birds shall not be composted.
(5)Chickens shall be secured inside of a shelter from sunset to sunrise each day to prevent
nuisance noise and attracting predators.
(6)Chickens shall remain in either the shelter or enclosure at all times and shall not run at large.
(7)The shelter shall be winterized to protect the chickens in cold weather.
(k)Sale of farm poultry or eggs. Owners cannot advertise the sale of chickens or eggs and must comply Comment [SE46]: sale of Eggs is prohibited
with all requirements and performance standards for home enterprises in Section 19.63.09 and all
Minnesota Department of Agriculture requirements for the sale of eggs.
SEC. 12.117. OWNER RESPONSIBLE.
The owner of any farm animal or farm poultry shall be responsible for the conduct and control of any such
animal irrespective of whether such animal has escaped from a shelter or enclosure.
SEC. 12.118. PROHIBITED CONDUCT.
(a)No person shall use a farm animal:
(1)upon a public sidewalk or sidewalk easement;
(2)upon the public streets and rights-of-way of the City except during daylight hours;
(3)in public places and places of public accommodation;
(4)upon private property of another without the permission of the owner of the property;
(5)in a careless manner or in disregard of the rights of others.
G:\Environmental Commission\Chicken Study\City Ordinances_Guide.docx _19-
Feedback Forme: Raising Chickens In Golden Valley [#53}
City of Golden Valley <nO-reply@wufoo.cOm>
4D If there are problems with how this message is displayed, click. here to view it in a web brwrser.
nth Fri 7,'2712012 6:46 PM
Nesbitt, Lisa; Seaburg, Eric
Name * Diane Moncrieff
Address 2465 Xylon Avenue North
*
City * Golden Valley
Comments *
I live in Golden Valley and would like to have the right to raise chickens for eggs on my property.
I strongly believe that our city has an obligation to evolve with changing social and environmental demands. What may
have seemed like an ordinance that made sense many years ago may no longer make sense in the context of living today.
To be more specific, there is a movement today toward growing and eating one's own food, and so we must reexamine the
ordinances that are getting in the way of allowing citizens of our city to do so.
Please take the time to consider these points that support the idea of backyard chickens and debunk a few common myths
regarding the issue...
1. Chickens are not loud and disruptive. Roosters are noisier, but it is not necessary to have roosters to have hens that lay
eggs. Roosters could be prohibited in a well crafted ordinance.
2. Chickens are not messy and smelly when cared for properly. Six chickens produce the same amount of waste as one
medium dog. That waste can be composted and used as fertilizer. I will point out that cities do not commonly prohibit
dogs, cats, house birds, rodents, or snakes because of waste disposal and cleanliness concerns.
3. Chickens do not attract vermin when food is stored properly and kept in clean, enclosed, well maintained conditions.
4. A well thought out ordinance can prohibit the slaughtering of chickens on residential property.
5. The Minnesota Department of Health cites NO health hazards or concerns regarding backyard flocks.
6. There are no permits required for backyard chickens from the state Ag Department, Health Department, or Board of
Animal Health in MN because they involve such a small number of birds intended for home use.
Many cities, including large urban ones, allow backyard chickens, and the movement is growing.
For an interesting list of such cities, check out this site http://tinyurl.com/64wcava
It is my hope that you will acknowledge the changing needs of our populace and our place, that you will not hang on to
outdated ordinances that no longer make sense, and that you will work to tear down barriers that prohibit people in
Golden Valley to pursue growing and eating their own food, in this case keeping backyard chickens.
Please create a new, carefully constructed ordinance that would allow citizens of Golden Valley to raise chickens.
Thank you,
Diane Moncrieff
2465 Xylon Ave. N.
Golden Valley, MN 55427
(763)546-8884
Feel free to contact me.
Feedback Form: Raising Chickens In Golden Valley 1#541
City of Golden Valley <no-reply9wufoo.com>
*If there are problems with hovi this rness age is doplayed, dick, hereto view it in a v,,eb broPrser.
Thu 8/2/2012M23PM
Nesbitt, Lisa; Seabuirg, Eric
Name * Sonkaley Nelson
Address 2505 Florida ave N
City I Golden Valley
Comments I
To whom this may concern I am a Golden valley resident who was shock by the practice of keeping chickens in
a. urban area, but that was due to ignorance. One of my friends who live in Robbins Date (where they are
permitted to keep up to 6 hens) recently took advantage of that privilege which he enjoy as a resident of
Robbins Dale. His chicken are quiet and were I not permitted on his property I would never had know he kept
chickens. Also common sense regulations like not permitting people to own cock reduce the risk of
maltreatment of the animals. I would love to see this policy implemented in Golden Valley as well not only
because of the joy and warmth that chickens have brought to my friends property, but also because it makes
no sense for Golden Valley resident to be limited on liberties that other citizen living in the metro area enjoy.
Feedback Form: Raising Chickens In Golden Valley [#551
City of Golden Valley < no-replyComufoo.corn >
0 If there are. problems �xith how this message is displayed, dick here to vio,,i it in a vveb browser.
Fri 8,11012012 12:56 PM
Nesbitt, Lisa; Seaburg, Eric
7PTI-am
Lisa Lindesmith
Address * 3343 Lee Ave N
City *
Golden Valley
Comments I am in support of allowing hens as pets and,or egg producers in
Golden Valley homes, Adult roosters could be disallowed and there
should be a tin -tit on the number (I'd say 5-10). Common sense
regulations about cleanliness would be appropriate as well.
PROGRAM/PROJECT UPDATES
TMDL
No updates
1/1
No updates
PRIVATE DEVELOPMENTS
Proposed Development — 9130 and 9220 Olson Memorial Highway
The City was recently approached by the Dunbar Development Corporation regarding
the possible development of an apartment complex at 9220 and 9130 Olson Memorial
Highway. The properties, located near the northeast corner of Highway 169 and
Highway 55, currently contain a small office facility and a former bowling alley.
The developer is considering plans for a six -story, 142 -unit market -rate apartment
building. The proposed name for the project is "The Tiburon." The Tiburon would consist
of studio and one bedroom units, and would include recreation amenities for residents.
Dunbar Development Corporation has developed similar products in Maple Grove and
St. Louis Park.
The General Land Use Plan Map currently guides the two properties as "Commercial-
Retail/Service." To achieve a multi -family residential development at this location, the
General Land Use Plan Map would have to be amended to guide the properties as
"Residential -High Density." The properties would also have to be rezoned. The rezoning
process and the General Land Use Plan Map amendment process is occurring
concurrently. The Planning Commission unanimously voted to amend the General Land
Use Plan Map and to rezone the properties. The matter will go before the City Council in
September.
Following the General Land Use Plan Map and Zoning amendments, the developer will
need to obtain a Planned Unit Development (PUD) permit for the project. This PUD
permit process involves four public hearings. More detailed information about the
proposed development, such as stormwater plans, tree preservation plans,
environmental reviews, etc., would be requested during the PUD permitting process.
DECOLA PONDS
The cooperative agreement for the Phase 2 DeCola Ponds, Medicine Lake Road study
was forwarded to the cities of New Hope and Crystal for their consideration. New Hope
approved the agreement, but the City of Crystal did not. Staff is currently evaluating the
next steps in advancing this study.
RECYCLING UPDATE
Mighty Tidy Day
- Saturday October 13th until 2pm. New this year: Courage Center will be there to
take clothing donations and well as collect all fabrics people want to get rid of.
Fall Leaf Drop
- Saturday, October 27
8am-1 pm
- Friday, November 2
8am-4pm
- Saturday, November 3
8am-1 pm
- Saturday, November 10
lam -1 pm
WETLAND MANAGEMENT
The City received a wetland report for the proposed Golden View development located
at 1540 and 1550 St. Croix Circle. The development will combine properties with two
existing homes and subdivide them into three new lots. The City and other agencies are
reviewing the report and will soon issue a notice of decision. There are no impacts
proposed to the wetland which is adjacent to Sweeney Lake.
BOTTINEAU TRANSITWAY
No updates
try of
go ldenly
va ey
7HINUOII
Public Works Department
763-593-8030 / 763-593-3988 (fax)
Date: August 17, 2012
To: Golden Valley Environmental Commission
From: Eric Seaburg, Graduate Engineer
Subject: U.S. Mayor's Climate Protection Agreement — Energy Consumption Update
As part of the U.S. Mayor's Climate Protection Agreement that was adopted by Council on
January 22, 2008, staff began collecting energy consumption data for Golden Valley's municipally
owned facilities. In addition to collecting consumption data, staff has been actively implementing
energy-saving projects to help reduce the City's carbon emissions as a whole. These projects have
been accomplished by using a combination of City funds and state and federal grant money.
The projects listed on the next page have been implemented within the last five years by staff
and have been instrumental in decreasing the City's overall energy consumption. By comparing
calendar year 2011 with calendar year 2007, the City has decreased its overall electricity
consumption by approximately 17%. This results in a net savings of approximately $31,000
annually.
See the attached "Energy Consumption Analysis" spreadsheet for detailed information on each
facility.
c:\users\lnesbitt\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\Temporary Internet Files\Content.Outlook\K62B97PO\EC
MEMO.docx
FACILITY
RETROFIT TYPE(S)
City Hall
Ballast Retrofits, High Efficiency AC Unit
Roof Replacement —Increased Insulation
Fire Station #2
Miscellaneous Lighting Improvements
Roof Replacement —Improved Insulation
Golf Maintenance
Ballast Retrofits, High Efficiency Lighting
Roof Replacement — Improved Insulation
Brookview Comm. Center
Miscellaneous Lighting Improvements
Roof Replacement —Improved Insulation
Park Maintenance
Ballast Retrofits, High Efficiency Lighting
Public Safety
Ballast Retrofits, High Efficiency Lighting
High Efficiency Roof Unit
Motion Censored Lighting in Locker Rooms
Street Maintenance
Ballast Retrofits, High Efficiency Lighting
Vehicle Maintenance
Interior Lighting - Ballast & Bulb Retrofits
Energy Efficiency on Demand
Utility Maintenance
Energy Efficiency On Demand Hot Water System
Roof Replacement —Improved Insulation
Lions Park
Improved Roof and Insulation
All City Buildings
Exterior Building Envelope Projects (Last 5 Years)
Caulking, Sealing, Window & Door Replacement
County & City Traffic Signals LED Lighting Retrofit
State Traffic Signals LED Lighting Retrofit
Attachments
N
H
J
a
z
a
z
_O
H
d
N
z
O
u
C7
W
z
W
z
LAJ
W a
Z�
Q
V
_z
W W
W (9
Z iH
Q
x
V
W
z
J Q
W W
H 5.
Q
m
a!
ul
in o0 C N p t00 m 00 W m ti c6 N N a
N W N LD 00 w d' N N N M
V! V1 VT VT VT NV* N V} t/1 V? V! VT N V? -
4A
Nl a) m oo OI OI I co F,
in OI CSI cn col col oo O
-zrry 0 Ln t�D O N t7 lD lD ton w
W O rj D7 w OM1 000 O N n n 1n N N co
w to .-i 'zP Q O M 01 Qn 01 R lD V7 Fl
�p VT c-1 M r -I N V} N VT VT i�/f N V! V!
t^O) -It00 c) 00 00 rI cn m rn cn til NI Ul Cq coil � MI M
O0 0o 0 0 a 0 0 0 0 0 N O O O O 0
OoO0O0O 0 O OO 0
N N N N N N N n N00N 0N
u0000000000000
N
lD00 V1 lD N Ln O lD
n^ W N M I' C C' o6 ry N M O M o6
V� V,
N I N I N I N I N I N I N N I N I N I N I N I N I N
NI NNNI NNNNNNNNI NI I I I NI I I I I I '
v
W
W
m
V)
C 'O
F
06 c
H
�-
0
Ln
>of U
�
O
'
�
cc�
.4
J -
@
3
as
Oa
z
Oa
oLf
Y
O
O
H
a
R
a,
a,
a,
d
as
as
as
0a
as
$
=
dJ
O
O
O
O
a0
Q
a0
Oa
a0
3.
N .0
.0
as
m
m
m
m
z
N
U l7
O
z
Y
a
ti
N
N
F
N
N
N
ti
N
N
N
Z
O O
a
0
O
0
O
0
O
0
O
O
0
O
O
O
O
0
O
O
O
O
a O
Z
N N
N
N
N
NN
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
Q
O0 0o 0 0 a 0 0 0 0 0 N O O O O 0
OoO0O0O 0 O OO 0
N N N N N N N n N00N 0N
u0000000000000
N
lD00 V1 lD N Ln O lD
n^ W N M I' C C' o6 ry N M O M o6
V� V,
N I N I N I N I N I N I N N I N I N I N I N I N I N
NI NNNI NNNNNNNNI NI I I I NI I I I I I '
v
W
W
m
V)
C 'O
as
06 c
H
�-
0
Ln
>of U
�
O
'
�
cc�
.4
J -
@
3
as
Oa
oa
Oa
oLf
Y
O
O
H
a
R
a,
a,
a,
d
as
as
as
0a
as
$
=
dJ
O
O
O
O
a0
a0
a0
Oa
a0
3.
N .0
.0
as
m
m
m
m
U l7
O
z
Y
a
1A
1-
N
F
N
F
N
F
N
N
J
Q
z
Q
z
O
a
N
z
O
U
C7
W
z
W
W
Q N
U N
O
Q
0
C7
vNi
a
a
a
z
Z
W W
� Q
Z N
Q �
V
LU
00
a
O
N
M
v1
n
O
N
N
N
V1
N
^
n
DD
p
n
O
O
n
O
n
O
N
N
W
t0
a0
M
N
n
V
Dnp
O
Lq
ry
O
N
G
N
OLm
ry
00
d'
W
p
N
N
W
l!1
0
'n
n
O
N
n
a
a
00
O
m
�•'�
O
01
w
N
1!1
01
O
t0
00
V'
V
00
�p
M
^
00
^i
�"1
O (�
yA.
M
N
n
Vf
V!
V!
n
00
Ol
M
N,
'�;�
W
th
W
m
w
N
N
In
M
cn
W
y
Vf
t/f
a/f
1T�
N
U
Q
Lz
W
W
.W^
oo
ZD
6)
m
N
a'
w
oo
N
oo
Z
z (n
0
m
N
n
CT
n
V
in
01
v
4
Ol
co
coo
CP
co
01
C
N
m
N
m
m
N
n
N
0
n
01
M
M
rn
01
w
-Zr
M
M
n
R
00
o
00
m
N
-trM
M
v
N
m
m
N
M
M
ao
N
0�0
00
d'
Q �
Z
V
F
z
ui
a
C W
N
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
Q
0
V
W
n
O
N
O
n
O
n
O
n
O
n
O
n
O
n
O
n
O
n
O
n
O
n
O
N
O
n
O
n
O
n
O
n
O
00
O
n
O
n
O
n
O
n
O
n
O
n
O
n
O
n
O
N
O
W Ly
p
O
p
p
p
p
p
p
p
O
O
p
O
p
O
p
p
O
p
O
p
p
p
p
p
O
p
IA
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
5.
oa0
0
a
L
V
ep
m
c
�o
W
"3p
'W
Z
Vl
X
N
A
V
E
m
Y
Q
V
N
N
V1
X
O1
�+
41
c"+
WI
J
m
eMl
C�
GLm
?in CL
r
C
In
L
J
a7S
ati
o3
aii
=
2
i
«
3
o
w
ad
o3
m
c
3
3
v'ni
'"
v'^i
m
°o
S
00
00
w
aiJ
z°
atf
a=e
o7i
aiJ
c
w
c
•N
3
'0p
atf
3
o7f
a7i
o.
°�
«
ad
N
,
o.
dd
Y
03
Y
03
c
c
c
c
CC
=
w
of
i
i
7
7
m=
w
v
E�.
E
m
m
7
W
w
W
w
c
C
o
>
>
>
>
�3p
3
y
J
J
c
L
L
C
c
O
L7
l7
t7
l7
l7
L7
C7
V'
l7
C7
C7
J
J
r
J
O
a
oC
VI
3
3
X
1A
r
N
r
N
r
H
r
N
r
N
r
N
r
1A
r
N
r
V/
r
(n
N
N
r
V1
r
N
r
h
r
N
r
h
r
N
r
h
r
N
r
0
r
N
r
Vl
r
N
r
N
r