HomeMy WebLinkAboutWK February 25, 2003
CITY OF ANDOVER
'0 1685 CROSSTOWN BOULEVARD NoW.. ANDOVER, MINNESOTA 55304. (763) 755-5100 .
FAX (763) 755-8923 . WWW.CI.ANDOVER.MN.US
Special City Council Workshop
Tuesday, February 25,2003
Conference Room A
1. Call to Order - 7:00 p.m.
2. Consider Community Center RFP Selection Committee Recommendations - Administration
3. AHYHA Update - Finance
4. Other Business
0 5. Adjournment
/ ,
0
,
CITY OF ANDOVER
CJ 1685 CROSSTOWN BOULEVARD NW. . ANDOVER, MINNESOTA 55304. (763) 755-5100
FAX (763) 755-8923 . WWW.CI.ANDOVER.MN.US
Special City Council Workshop
Tuesday, February 25, 2003
Conference Room A
1. Call to Order - 7:00 p.m.
2. Consider Community Center RFP Selection Committee Recommendations - Administration
3. AHYHA Update - Finance
4. Other Business
, ~
'---/ 5. Adjournment
'--.J
@
CITY OF ANDOVER
\ 1685 CROSSTOWN BOULEVARD NW. . ANDOVER, MINNESOTA 55304. (763) 755-5100
J
FAX (763) 755-8923 . ~.cJ.ANDOVER.MN.US
TO: M,yn< md Co=ciIm=b", "~
'-,
PROM: John F. Erar, City Administrator ~.,~~
SUBJECT: Community Center Interview Panel Corl'sultant Recommendations
DATE: Pebruary 25, 2003
INTRODUCTION
The Community Center RFP Interview Committee received 39 proposals from qualifying firms who
desired to provide architectural and construction management services. Of these 39 proposals,
seventeen firms were selected for an interview by the Committee. Of the seventeen firms, five joint
proposals were selected, seven architectural proposals and five construction management proposals.
The committee spent approximately 17 hours interviewing firms, and ahnost 10 hours deliberating
and debating the merits off the various proposals.
DISCUSSION
\.
'- /
This report will serve to provide Council with an overview of the process, selection considerations,
committee votes and recurring proposal themes. In addition, the committee will provide its
recommendations on the project delivery method, preferred consultant firms and information on
establishing a realistic project budget.
Committee Considerations - Committee members articulated 21 considerations regarding factors,
which supported their recommendation for preferred firms. These considerations are as follows:
1) The firm's knowledge and experience relative to eliminating early design and code
compliance problems and avoiding resultant change orders. Acknowledgement that with
such a tight project budget, change orders will need to be monitored very closely.
2) Knowledge of market conditions and realistic cost factors affecting the project budget.
Extent of firm's knowledge of market conditions affecting facility construction costs.
3) Willingness to participate and contribute to pre-design services for City fund-raising efforts.
Assist the City by providing technical assistance during the capital campaign.
4) Best Product for least amount of money.
5) How prepared the firm was in addressing the City's concerns and questions. How well the
firm responded to the RFP criteria.
6) Experience level and commitment of the firm's team that would be working on the City's
project.
7) Market data supporting the firm's project budget numbers. Data that supported cost
\ projections and responded to City concerns of constructing a quality facility.
V 8) How well the firm understood the City's needs and vision.
Mayor and Council
Community Center RFP Recommendations
Page 2 of 6
9) "Pay me now or Pay me later!" The importance of incorporating quality materials and
\ systems into the building today, to avoid excessive long-term maintenance, operational and
,
-- system costs over the life of the facility.
10) The importance of high quality heating, ventilation and air conditioning systems in the
facility. This was also a recurring theme that the Committee heard from many of the
proposers regarding the importance of air quality for facility users.
11) Knowledge and experience in addressing code compliance issues.
12) Putting more money into the construction costs rather than professional service fees.
13) Consultant fees were an important factor.
14) Programming will drive design issues in terms of the YMCA and other stakeholders who
would use the facility.
15) Will be working with selected consultants for next two years, firms must be a good fit for the
project; too large a firm may not be the best fit.
16) Finn integrity - Truth in Marketing.
17) Ability to deliver the "goods".
18) Time frame for delivery/phased occupancy.
19) Larger firm may not be the best fit.
20) Finn experience/whose actually doing these types of projects.
21) Warranty - after the project is delivered, will they be there to take care of warranty issues;
Reputation.
Proposal Themes
The majority of the proposals suggested the following facility themes:
\ ../ A realistic budget for this project with a reasonable level of architectural appeal, quality
'_.I materials and durable finishes is in the $14,000,000 price range. Many firms indicated that at
$14,000,000, the facility would be feasible, but would be a moderately priced and designed
facility.
../ A strong majority of proposal submittals indicated that a $10,000,000 budget scenario for
the facility is essentially unfeasible. At $12,000,000, a strong majority indicated that the
facility would most likely fall below City quality standards or would require the City to make
considerable compromises in programming design.
../ Many proposers stressed the critical importance of air quality systems. Environmental
systems need to be designed with equipment that would ensure an uncompromised degree
of air quality handling capabilities for a broad spectrum of facility users. This type of facility
would be susceptible, if not properly addressed to air quality conditions that encourage
mold, condensation, and other undesirable air quality issues.
../ Recommended energy management systems that would include automated heating and
cooling systems, heat recovery options and high quality system components to ensure air
quality system integrity. The Committee discussed thermal energy systems, off-peak energy
and rebates which the City could take advantage to reduce energy consumption.
../ Facility must have a reasonable level of architectural appeal to create a warm and inviting
, environment that in turn will attract and retain membership. This would be especially
\. _.J important to meet the City's vision of a financially self-sufficient operation.
Mayor and Council
Community Center RFP Recommendations
Page 3 of6
./ Facility location at the intersection of two higWy traveled roadway will make this a
J prominent community landmark that will need to complement existing facilities and will be a
higWy visible symbol of community values and building standards.
./ Phased occupancy of the Ice Arena would be feasible, but would require close attention to
critical life safety system issues, appropriate site management controls and facility access by
the public during construction of the remaining facilities. Parking would also need to be
addressed.
./ "Pay me now or Pay me later!" The solution to avoiding excessive long-term maintenance,
operational and energy costs is intrinsically connected to incorporating high quality building
materials, durable finishes and building systems that will meet life-cycle challenges.
Project Delivery System Preference - The committee, after considerable discussion and debate,
voted 4-3 in favor of using separate contracts for architects and construction managers for the
project, but did not feel strongly enough to exclude joint proposals altogether. Committee members
had the discretion to split their one vote between both service delivery systems or could cast their
full vote for one of the preferred systems. However, as there was not a supermajority vote of
support, greater than a simple majority, the committee chose to make recommendations on both
types of project delivery systems.
It was noted by several members of the committee that fees for joint service proposals were actually
higher than using separate contracts for architectural and construction management services. Actual
fee calculations are provided under the Firm Selection section of this report. Many of the joint
, ,. proposals included several firms who teamed together to propose on the facility. Overall, the
committee was very impressed with the caliber of the firms who submitted proposals.
Finn Selection Process - The committee took several votes throughout the process of choosing a
preferred firm to ensure that each member had an appropriate voice in the selection process, but
took precautions to balance each committee member's views by operating on a majority vote
structure. Committee deliberations went beyond the normal voting structure by providing each
member with additional opportunities to express their views between each round of voting.
Joint Service Proposals - Project Delivery Systems included both joint service proposals and
separate service proposals. The committee went through several rounds of voting and identified 4
joint service firms for interviews: Ryan Companies (5 votes), DLR (5 votes), McGough (3 votes) and
E&V /TKDA (3 votes).
The fifth firm selected for an interview was evenly split between BRA/Mortenson (2 votes),
Opus/Klutz (2 votes) and Witcher/Kodet (2votes). After further discussion and another round of
voting by the committee, the votes were evenly split between BRA/Mortenson and OPUS/Klutz at
three votes apiece, with Witcher/Kodet garnering 1 vote. In light of the Council's direction that
OPUS be selected for an interview, OPUS was chosen as the fifth firm over BRA/Mortenson for a
committee interview.
The next step in the process included approximately one (1) hour interviews with each of the
selected firms. Each firm was allowed a IS-minute presentation, with 30 minutes of questions and
J several more minutes of follow-up questions by Committee members. Following the interviews, the
Committee met on Thursday, January 30, 2003 to rate and evaluate each of the five firms. After a
Mayor and Council
Community Center RFP Recommendations
Page 4 of 6
considerable amount of discussion, the Committee's next step was to narrow the list of five firms to
:J two semi-finalists through a process of elimination. The Committee recorded the following votes to
eliminate: McGough (5-2); E&V (6-1); OPUS (4-3).
The Committee recorded the following votes for Ryan Companies (7-0) and DLR (4-3) as the two
semi-finalists. Considerable discussion ensued with certain Committee members expressing strong
interest in keeping OPUS in the running. Based on this input, the committee allowed OPUS to
remain as a semi-finalist.
The committee had additional discussions and evaluated the three remaining firms and took a final
vote. The final vote of the committee was as follows: Ryan Companies (6); OPUS (1).
Separate Service Proposals - The Committee interviewed 7 architectural firms and 5 construction
management firms. Following the interview process, the committee met on Thursday, January 30,
2003 to evaluate and rate each of the firms interviewed.
Architectural firms interviewed included: Ankenny-Kell, HGA, RSP, Rozeboom-Miller, DLR,
BWBR and TKDA. After a considerable amount of discussion, the Committee's next step was to
narrow the field of firms through a process of elimination resulting in 3 semi-finalists. Voting by the
committee eliminated four of the seven firms listed, with three remaining semi-finalists as follows:
Rozeboom-Miller (5-2), DLR (4-3) and Ankenny-Kell (4-3). The committee again reviewed and
discussed the three semi-finalists, and took a final vote in favor of Rozebloom-Miller (5-2).
'\ Construction management firms interviewed included: Kraus-Anderson, Shingobee Builders, RJM
0 Construction, M.A. Mortenson and Knutson Construction Services. After a considerable amount of
time, the Committee's next step was to narrow the field of firms through a process of elimination
resulting in 2 semi-finalists. Voting by the Committee eliminated 3 firms, leaving the firms of RJM
Construction (6-1)and M.A. Mortenson (4-3). The committee again reviewed and discussed the
two semi-finalists, and took a final vote in favor ofRJM Construction (6-0-1 abstention).
The table below includes the three proposals with related fees:
Joint Service Proposal Fees
Ryan Companies Construction Management $504,000 plus reimbursables
Moody-Nolan/Col- Architectural Services 6.5% plus reimbursables
laborative Design
Group
Total Fees Based on a $14,000,000 Project Budget $1,477,630 includes all best guess
reimbursables.
Total Fees Based on a $12,000,000 Project Budget $1,322,970 includes all best guess
reimbursables
Separate Service Proposal
RJM Construction Construction Management $508,983 includes reimbursables
Rozeboom-Miller Architect Services 6% plus reimbursables
Total Fees Based on a $14,000,000 Project Budget $1,326,983 includes all best guess
reimbursables
0 Total Fees Based on a $12,000,000 Project Budget $1,239,191 includes all best guess
reimbursables
Mayor and Council
Community Center RFP Recommendations
Page 5 of6
0 Project Budget Scenarios - The committee received 39 proposals from architectural and
construction management services firm for the community center project. An analysis of the
proposals as it pertains to the project budget scenarios for a $10,000,000, $12,000,000 and
$14,000,000 indicates the following:
FIRM RESPONSES TO BUDGET SCENARIOS
$10,000,000 Budget $12,000,000 Budget $14,000,000 Budget
7 Joint Service 5 Finns - Not 4 Finns - Does not 5 Finns - Feasible
Proposals Feasible appear to meet City 2 Finns - Unclear
1 Finn - Did not quality standards
respond 2 Finns - Unclear
1 Finn - Below 1 Finn - Not Feasible
Benchmark
Recommendations
13 Construction 5 Finns - Not 3 Finns - Not Feasible 3 Finns - Feasible
Management Proposals Feasible 2 Finns - Question- 6 Finns - Did not
6 Finns - Did not able respond
Respond 6 Finns - Did not 2 firms - Did not
2 Finns - Did not Respond address Feasibility
address Feasibility 2 Finns - Did not 1 firm - Not feasible
address Feasibility 1 - Other
19 Architectural 11 Finns - Not 2 Finns - Not Feasible 11 Finns - Feasible
"J Proposals Feasible 9 Finns - Question- 8 Finns - Did not
8 Finns - Did not able/Below City respond
Respond Quality Standards
8 Finns - Did not
respond
The Committee discussed project budget scenarios at length and came to the following conclusions,
with qualifications:
1) Architectural appeal is a very subjective feature, but in general a reasonable standard of
architectural design will be necessary to market the facility to potential users, and attract and
retain customers.
2) A reasonable standard of durable finishes and quality materials will be needed to avoid long-
term maintenance and operational costs.
3) The Joint City-YMCA Resolution called for construction to occur in "a cost-effective,
aesthetically pleasing, attractive manner consistent with value that incorporate high quality
workmanship, durability of design and material, a reasonable level of attractiveness, usability
and efficiency."
4) Cost data suggests that construction materials, labor costs and recent examples of similar
projects suggests a facility cost on average of between $120.00-$125.00 per sq. ft. not
including a budgeted contingency of 10% of the total construction costs. For a facility of
110,000 sq. ft. the average cost per square foot at $10M = $90.91 sq. ft.; at $12M -$109.09
\, sq. ft.; at $14M = $127.25 sq. ft.
,
\.J
Mayor and Council
Community Center RFP Recommendations
Page 6 of6
5) The vast majority of proposals suggest a project cost of between $13.5 to $14.5 million. RJM
c' 'I Construction Services, the CM firm recommended by the Committee, indicates a project
'-J cost of $14,513,363 based on its analysis of recent project data.
Upon reflection of this information, the committee identified a range of between $12,250,000 to
$14,000,000. A strong majority of the committee, 5 members, felt that project cost would be
between $13 to $14 million. Two members identified costs of $12,250,000 to $12,500,000 for the
project.
To assist the Committee in its deliberations, proposals were analyzed and prepared in the form of a
matrix. This matrix is attached for Council review.
ACTION REQUIRED
The Council is respectfully requested to take the following three actions:
1) Determine Couhcil's preference regarding project delivery consultant services as either a
Joint Consultant Services Agreement or Separate Consultant Service Agreements.
2) Subject to the Consultant Service Delivery Approach selected by the Council, appointment
of the firm or firms recommended by the Community Center RFP Interview Committee.
3) Establish a project budget for the Community Center and direct staff to prepare a project
,J cash flow analysis and begin preliminary negotiations with the YMCA regarding a Lease
Commitment Agreement.
Respectfully submitted,
John F. Erar
City Administrator
Cc: Michael Mulrooney, 13868 NW Crane, Andover 55304
Phil Nyvall, YMCA General Manager of Properties and Facilities, 30 S. Ninth Street, Mpls,
55402
Harold Mezille Jr., YMCA CEO and President, 30 S. Ninth Street, Mpls 55402
Pat Lynch, YMCA Senior Vice-President, Planning and Development, 476 Robert Street N.,
St. Paul, 55101
Dave Almgren, Chief Building Official
Dave Berkowitz, City Engineer
Jim Dickinson, Finance Director
\
,.J
RYAN COMPANIES US, INC. ~YAN
\ 50 South Tenth Street, Suite 300
) Minneapolis. MN 55403-2012
'- WWW.RYAKCO:YIPANIES.CO:YI
612-492-4000 tel BUILDING LASTING RELATIONSHIPS
612-492-3000 fax
Februaty 5, 2003
John Erar
City Administrator
City of Andover
1685 Crosstown Boulevard
Andover, MN 55304
RE: City of Andover Community Center
Dear Mr. Erar:
On behalf of Ryan Companies US, Inc., I want to express our gratitude for the opportunity to be considered for this
important project for the City of Andover. We have watched this project evolve over the course of the last year and the
City can be proud of the effort and diligence put forth by its staff.
We have assembled a "best of class" team forthis project. Moody-Nolan, Inc., our design partner, is one of the premier
designers in the country when it comes to sports and recreational facilities. The team includes a former City Parks and
Recreation Director committed to being part of the planning process as, together, we plan your facility. Ryan
Companies is nationally recognized as a leader in the delivery of construction services. We have proven expertise in
\ leading pre-construction activities and processes that ensure certainty of cost and schedule.
'- )
We know this project is a substantial investment for the City, and that it must have sufficient revenue streams to support
itself. This team is built to respond to that need by evaluating the needs of all constituents and stakeholders. We will
assist in preparing a project proforma with the objective being to deliver a first-class facility the community will be
thrilled with, at a return on investment that meets all City objectives. We have vast experience working with
public/private partnerships. I would encourage you to contact the Port Authority of St. Paul, Minneapolis and Roseville
to name a few. I will be happy to provide contacts.
The question of the nature of contractual relationship for design and construction management to the City has been
brought forth. We have proposed a single source contract for these services between Ryan Companies US, Inc. and the
City. We believe this approach offers the greatest benefits and accountability to the City. However, we are flexible and
/ should the city deSire separate contracts, for whatever reason, this team will respond positively to that request and
contract with the city accordingly.
~,/' G n", ,u.impo_' ,",i,ioo of reI";o, <h, ,~ '0 1""' "" proj~ will b, mod, Mornhy........" I~b. _ P,,",eo
;J- ^ and Mike Fanner from Ryan will be in the Council chambers before the meeting and during deliberations. If you have
~ questions regarding our team or approach, they will be available to answer those questions or feel free to call.
~ ~ Once ag' thank you for your consideration. We look forv..-ard to this opportunity to work with the City and to make
~ this pro' ct a resounding success.
( " S' ly
Ince t
"\ Patrick G. Ryan
'. ) President
cc: City of Andover Council Members
Mayor Mike Gamache
John Erar, City Administrator
Jim Dickinson, City Finance Director
1212/14/21211213 14:121121 RYAN COMPANIES ~ 97637558923 NO.683 GJl2l1
RYAN COMPI\Nl"ES US, INC. IVAN
\ so So,,,h T'nrh S"'''', Suire 300
'---- ) Minnupoli<. MN 55403.2012 . I
WWu/.llY^N,~OMrANIES.COM
612.492.4000 III eUILllu" Wl1~ 11I....,.IOfIISWI'S I
,
6]2,"2.3000 tD'" I
February 14, 2003
John EIIIr
City Administrator
City of Andover
1685 Crosstown Boulevard
Andover, MN 55304
RE: City of Andover Community Center
Dear Mr. Ernr:
We axe e.;-;cited to leamthat the proposal from Ryan Companies and Moody-Nolan is still being
considered by the City of Andover for the design and constnlcrion of the proposed Community
Center.
As you consider our proposal, we would like to offer a fee adj1tStment for design services. For
\ setvices contemplated in OllI proposal, we will offer a .25% reduction. Adjusted, the new design fee
, J
percenmges arc 6.75%, 6.5% and 6.25% respectively based on the total conttnct value of the work
(refer to tab 9 of proposal dated 1/13/03).
Once we axe able to establish a dialog and completely review dle services we expect to perform,
there may be opportunities to redllce OJ: eliminate some of those scxvices. Should eidlCI a reduction
or elimination of sClvices occur, an appropriate fee ad,ustmenrwould follow.
John, this is an import:mt projcct fOt the City and the team of Ryan and Moody-Nolan. J feel the
tight chemistry is thCl"C to make the pmcess of delivering the best possible facility to the community
an tmjoyablc and 'lfery successful e.,>periencc for all involved. We look forward to hearing from you.
Thank you.
Sincerely,
~eO;4:: me
Guyc;f
nnsen
V.P. ConstrUction
,
", )
FEB 14 2003 14:05 612+492+3000 PAGE.01
pr.o F E 5 5 I 0 tJ A L C 0 tJ 5 T Rue T ION 5 E r. V ICE 5
() February 20, 2003
~\":""T '
Mr. John Erar I' \~/'
City Administrator \ '. i
City of Andover ..,,\ .,) ,
1685 Crosstown Boulevard mI;~3ii1U~im~]
Andover, MN 55304
Re: Andover Community Center Project
Dear Mr. Erar:
Congratulations again on an exciting project!
RJM Construction and Rozeboom Miller Architects look forward to joining your team. As
stated in the selection process, we have the resources, capacity, and experience to work
with you in turning the City's Community Center vision to reality.
As separate entities, our contracts and main responsibilities will be directly to the City.
The lines of responsibility are clear; we work for you. At the same time we recognize
that all parties bring special skills and responsibilities to the team, thus creating the
desire to become partners in a project where the team as a whole has the responsibility
for budgetary, design, and construction decisions. By defining lines of responsibility and
__ communication, all redundancy is eliminated and the project is always moving forward.
( "'
V Other strengths of using the CM and architect as separate entities are listed below:
1. Independent checks and balances are continuous.
2. The City will always be a part of any value added or value engineered
reviews and decisions. These decisions affect both long term operating costs
as well as immediate construction costs. This approach is usually much
more open than the design/build process.
3. In our approach, any option is open. We encourage the architect to explore
multiple options with the City team. For example, rather than stating that a
two story option is unaffordable and don't pursue it, let's look at it
conceptually and price the options so that the City can make an informed
decision.
4. In Minnesota, the design/build approach is seen more in the developer
market for commercial projects, not for institutional, public buildings. The
driver is usually cost and not design.
5. The team of RJM and Rozeboom Miller have designed and constructed many
like projects. We will not use the City of Andover as our training project.
These are the type of projects that we excel at.
a 5455 HWY 169 PLYMOUTH MN 55442
763.383.7600
FAX 763.383.7601 BID FAX 763.553.9670
RJM IS AN EQUAl OPFORTUNITY EMPlOYER
p r.. 0 F E 5 5 I 0 tl A L C 0 tl 5 T r. U C T I 0 tl 5 E r.. V I C E 5
,........~ Page 2 - Andover
\,j 6. We have a past professional relationship with our projects while with other
companies.
7. We have past experience with the City and this specific site.
8. RJM and Rozeboom Miller have extensive work with publicly funded projects.
Our success ratio for passage of referenda is 95%.
9. Historically, combined fees for stand alone contracts with a CM and an
architect are less than those for a design build team. This allows more
project funds to go toward quality and square footage.
If you have any questions, please call either Ted Rozeboom or myself. We look forward
to joining the Andover "team" for this exciting project.
CS"oornIY, ~~
Craig Kronholm
RJM Construction
763/383-76
I \
r
......1
Ted Rozeboom
Rozeboom Miller Architects
612/332-2110
r-"'
\. )
../
/ ) I \
\ C >00 f8 ~ ~~ m ;;:: "- JJ ~~ "T1
r- ~ -"0 ~ B . ~ ~.
:0 g.CDc:
::.:ffi'(f1 ~tC' (l) ::::J 0 ",g. z
Gl "'::JZ I/> <go @. ;;:: '" '"
0 a ;>< 0 ll"'- '"
~~g ~D1o ~ 3
~ ~ 0'" 3 :;; S c: ;><
~or 0<"0 iil8. '"
0 5>-:IE a."'''' ::J < Gila
- or", '< ::J ,.. :0
> '" I/> Z iij" '" C a
~c: I!!. ::J Gl
::J 0 0 ~ .a
a. .. fg'
0 2"
~ en ::J ;><
~ 0
~ iZ"
0
0 Z Z Z Z Z Z Z e
::J 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~
::!l 0 0 I/> @' 0 ic5' ~.
a. 1<9' !!1.
.. .. .. .. o'
::J ~r 3' ::J ::J 3' ::J ::J
~ ;;; ;;; ;;; ;;; ::J
!: I/> I/> ~ ~ I/> ~ ~ :I:
a a a a in'
in' in' in' in' ~
I/> I/> I/> I/>
c: c: c: c:
'" '" '" '"
I/> I/> I/> I/>
Z Z Z -iZ Z Z Z 00
0 0 0 '" 0 0 0 0 '"
:I: :I: :I: 3 5' :I: :I: :I: <
in' in' in' ~. ~ in' in' in' S'
~ ~ ~ !:!.c ~ ~ ~ ~
o ::J
::J - 3
I/> '"
-< 5'
!!1.
o'
::J
~ ~o ~ -<0 ma.;;::o :OOO~ ;;::>>Z i=-
~~ m;;:: ~ 0 x';;:: 5'1 Zg.5.g s
'" '" , CD (')CO I ,.. '" >
::J ~;;:: ::J j ~. Q. ::J "U",2'"
I/> ~!!l I/> -< ~.~w~ I/> g.n en ~ ol
:C' ~. '" ;. ~. ::J
'" m'" !'! '" g.{l "'c: - '"
, g ~ 00-' ll~ '"
~8. ;::;:iD c: cnl!.. ~
m '" :IE ~ Z
llo 0
, 0 "T1
m co ~ -<0 em> ~ ~ :!!~
~ !!l.;;:: :.~ ~. Ii g. "'=
'" '" ' '" '" I/> 5:e
::J a.Z ::J -< (j)~;: ::J :1:"
I/> -. 0 I/> I/> o to
~. C:"U ~. '" 0. ;C' 0- ~. c: m
!'! '" c:
r;n .E, .. ~ I/> )C
-<'" ~ o!!!. "'j
"'ll m ;;:: "- ()
I/> I/> ..
::J 0
-<0 e~> "
m co m m Z ~.. s::
~ !!l.;;:: ~ m;;:: ~.'" g. ~ 0
'" '" '" ::J c: <-S::
'" ' , '" !!1.
::J a.Z ::J -;:J;::;: ::J
I/> -. 0 I/> -< ~ ~.~ I/> r- &j' Qc
:C' ~"U :C' '" ~. in' zz
'" '" .II! '" c: 1[
'l' .2. ~ .. ~ -1-
-<'" O!!!. (")~
'" II m ;;::
I/> I/> ::
- );()
cz C:Z "U-< ::;:z "UCIl ~:o -<-<-< ^ m
1/>0 I/> 0 ~.m 00 ~.~ ;;::;;::'" ~~z
<- !D"U !D"U '" -. 8.iil '" '" 08 (')(")~ -n::c-l
0 a. .2. Q. .2. llOO lliil >00 >>00 "U-c
a C"r- lll-m
'" '" I/> '" R* I/> - "0 .. 0 g.1: ~-I;:o
c:ai ::J-< 0 e:c:
"U II II '" "0- "'0 om
a I/> I/> I/> ~ -(,!; 0;;:: !'! -~ It> ih~;:O
_Ill !DO
"0 "'- ;;::> ~!!l.
0 a. a.> ::c"T1
I/> ~m
'" ~ !!l.~-o
ii> Z 0' ;0 CD tD Ole: Z Z CCDCC Z
::l. r en
5>- ::::J C'D CD CD ~1i 5>- 5>- ::J .0 '" 5>- 0 x C
"T1 en 8 g 0 "T1 "T1 it S. ~ "T1 ;;:: UlIlJ
3 or :IE o '" ~ CD
'" ::J '" '" '" '" gjs::
'" 3 3 I/> ~ '" '" C'3Q '"
I/> i'z I/> I/> I/>
C' '" '" C' C' CD"g-<, C' <-
is ::J:<- 0 is is is o~
a. ::J .U!
!!1. , m;to
CD'S!20o~ e: Ole: 0 Z 00'00 ol;;:: '" Ulr
~ l>> fii 3 CD ::J ~1i c: 5>- Iii 3 lill5 85' '"
Q. '" r
o:5.=mC/l '" o '" !!l. "T1 ~CDC/I~ 33' ;;:: en
-Q)~ ::::J !!l ::J '" o' '" CD ::::J -. 3!!!.
CD.., - 0 ~.:'! '" -00 lD -l
a. 0_ t5~ ::J I/> ~Q;~ '" .
~ ~~ '" C' ::J ::J c:
C" is :::I~"O g 0.0 a.
o "0 T is g. 1il JT! '" - '"
- '" a. ..
'" a !!l ~
~ '"
I/> "
.., C OlC .., .., :0;;::> CD:I: ","
'" '" '" ~::J
::J ~a ~r."O E.US' ....
... " ::: '" c: ~i a: or
I/> is I/> ;;::"-
C' 0'" C' C' ~. Q ~ -.'" S
'" ::J '" .5;;
is ~ ~..""! is is
ais: 3-<_ c:
'" 0
::J ~
T en -<
00 CD'" "'''' Q
o"'~ ~~
E'::::J,:-I' "'''' or
",g.", ",0 ~
g38 "'I/>
0.0
~g g~
!? 0"
.. ~
~~
00 a
o~ '" "" .. ." '" 5'
"#. "#. "" "#. (Q
iil I/> '"
~~ ::J
~
000000 0... CIlCllCll
ggg. ::::Jcf. flflfl
:-:'~-6't CD + :"':"'titil't
c:a.
"'.... ~~ I:t:~ "T10
'"'"0 '"
~.?'? '" '" '" "'0 :g;;::
'" !" egg (Q ~::J .01"0'0 I/>
'" a. 000
U. Ol g~R e 5' 000
0 0 (Q 0.' .. '"
"#. "#. 0 "#.
0
... CIlCllCll >
~~ ggo e: g.
e> Ol ... ~~m ::J "T1 _.
Ole> Q. '" -
"#. "#. ~. "#. i::o<O~ '" '" '"
o ... ... O)-:~ I/>ll
.. 0 '" !!l c:
!I: 0 cf.~+ ~
"#. + +.,
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 "Uo
c: c: c: c: c: c: c: ~~
'" II) '" '" '" '" '" ~
"U ? ~ !!l. ? g ~ % 0"0
'" o' g;![ ..
(Q il ~. ::J ~. ~. il .5 j;;;
'" II) -'" 0
~ C" 0
is '"
) )
,- .nO" 0 00:;:: 0 cn::o :;cn :;:: )> m '-- OOJ O":E :!1
CDg~'" gg > )> mc.... o=: 8 =: QO Q~ giiJ ;:+ 3
~.t/Jur~ t/lf/J' :1: ~.s:: <5 0 0 < -g1G ~5 g.
Q lil2"o- ~2":;:: lilbl g..s; ~ Ola2;i. ~ ~
.:< II> Q. " ,;;1' Q. g. II> " ,,~ "" - Q." 3
o o' ~ c)" CD ~ (1) g 5'~ CD
~ =' "'C=' ~ 2 CD j(j1
~ ~ g g ~ g
C. ::J 0 CD
o CD =' U1
< iil _
"
~ z z z z z z z z Z Z ;o;ocnz Ula.c: r-:
o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 <fi' 0 0 0 ';;. ~" ,~
o :I:::I::::I::I::I::I::I::I:~.!!!. a a 3 :I: ~ en Sl ~
S. iir iii' c;i' (n'iir c:;r (ii' iii' IrQ' 1tQ' crGl CD iii' tiI='~ ~
a. ............................::J:::J :Jo.:I:- 0.., 0
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ R ~ ~ ~ . ~ ~~ i ? ~
tt :J :::J -. _""1 a. ~ en
DJ .... .... z'< .., CD -
- iii' Cii' 0:1: CD:::J Q
en en -. en.... '<
c c ~~ UI';:
CD CD:::J 'E ::::3
en Ch CD f/J S
~ - ,
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ;I~~;t ~ ~ g>
:I: :I: :I: :I: :I: :I: :I: :I: :I: 3:i" 5:0:I: :I: S.
![ ![ !! ![ !!r ![ ![ ![ ![ 5' <5 ~ CD![ ![ Q
~ ~ R ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~[a.~. R ~ ~
en OJ a ::s
-< o' -.
~ ~
o'
"
Z Z Z Z Z -< OZOOZ Z 0 -< "tI-< Z 0
o 0 0 0 0 CD CD Q) goo 0 s::: CD ,9! CD 0 CD
." ." ""C ." ." en ag~~." "'0 I U) CD~ ." )>
~. ~. ~. .g.~. ~ ~ 1i 2 ~. ~. -< 5~. (i)
CD CD CD CD CD - 0 n CD CD CD 51 (I) :J
Q. Q. Q. Q. Q. cn~=:Q. Q. II> Q. Q. '"
U) (/I CI) (II en -g 0' g VI (II g, (I)
![ !e: ~ ![![ a"'![![ OJ![
m CD (D CD CD CD CD CD
a. a. 0. a. 0. a. 0. a.
-< m-< Z Z Z -< -< -< 20 0 -< -< -< "T1
CD ::::J CD 0 0 0 CD CD (1) 0:::1 s:: (1) CD CD ii'
en ~ ~ "'t1 "'tJ "'tJ en fA en (6' CD I en en en a:
-< ~ a. a, a. 51 ~ -< 5=
o lil '7;i' 'iji' ~. ~ 3 m c i} ()
,,- Q. Q. Q. CDiil 8:0 0
3. en en <n a.f/J =
~ ![ ![ ![ c' g ;;:
~ ~ ~ 3 II> s:
>10-< Z (ilCO!!!-< Z -< Z Z Z 0 Z -< -< :!>~ Cz
CD 0 ::::Jc.:c-CD 0 CD 0 0 0 s::: 0 CD CD ~"C
Oen ~ 0 (1)0.(1)....., t/J ..... :::I::J :::J f/) Ul C:CD O-
ur.' ~ < :3 ~ 0.' ~ ~ (1) CD I CD ~ ~ ~
~ &. "'a-o'S'~ Q. Q. r- r- -< r- 0'" Q
:5. 'cD. ~ CD.oJ CD" CD" iii' en' CD iii' CI);:' ~
3 Sl g~~UJ~ Sl Sl CD CD CI) CD ~ ~C1
3 en ~2:=< en en c. c. c. "em
:;' en' :::::!. ~ ~ (5' en' (ir lCJ1 0 Z
CQ.-+ C' CD=: .-+ .-+ r-..:::r.
[ CD Q. [ [ "g--t
~ Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z "tI::o-<z Z "tIijf~ -n-< -< lll"",m;:o
10., 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 a CD !: 0 0 a .-+ ~ cu CD !: _::::.
g "tI"tI"tI"tI"tI"tI"tI"tI lii'30" "tI lii'~o ~II> 0 Q III
en ................................ nO)> CD .... n -. _ =: -l )> en:J:::C
- jil. flil. jil. flil. jil. flil. g. ~. ,..a. C ~. "'z- arc lll."
!: (1) CD CD CD CD CD m CD ~ en CD en c: "tJ 0 a S::<<l
co Q. Q. Q. Q. Q. Q. Q. Q. 5' CD Q. C3a _. 1ll~"U
.... en en en en en en en Ul co c. en !e. m (D' ~ ~ en
en' en' fi)' (ii' en' en' en' fir fi)' ~ a Sl ~ X g> C
[ [ [ ~ [ [ [[ [5 5. OJ
CD'cuO....O....O Z ....0 Z Z CD'cuO....O z z....O ilI't os:
cu8:e: me: me: ~ me: g. ~ cu8:e:~e: ~ g. ~e: 0 m-
a=m:3 19:3 g:3 "T1 '8:3 "T1 "T1 6:(iJ:30:3 "T1 "T1 0:3 :!: =1
_.enO:::JO:::JO m :::JO CD CD _.enO:::JO CD CD:::JO ......
.~ en'-+ c.'-+ C. .-+ D) C. .-+ r>> Q) I;:;: en .-+ c. - m Q) c. - ."".,
.... 6: 6: 6: ~ 6: 6: r
CD CD CD CD CD C
CD'~g (iJg n;g Z iDg z z CD'~giDg 0 0 n;g ilI't ~
"'a.a. cJ!.!a. Jea. a Jea. a a "'a.a.Jea. c C !I! a. '"
6: d):::J I(S:::J o:::J CD' o:::J CD' CD' ~. d) :::J o:::J m m 0 :::J s: m
_, en 0 :::J 0 :::J 0.... :::J 0.... .... 2: en 0 :::J 0 ~ ~:::J 0
.~ en - c. - c. - en c. - (j) en l~ en .-+ C. .-+ 0 0 C. - c:
:'< -. -. -, r< :::J:::J Co
2: 2: 2: ~ ~ ~
CD CD m _ _ _
"" (Jl
~~2 ~g ~g ~ n;g 5 g' a-~g~g ~ ~ ~Q ~~
~, ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ m ~. Q- ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 2! ~ ~ il
2: CD 0 '0 0 0 0 a 0 0 CD g. 2: (I) 0 0 0 a a ~ 0 s: :1-
I~ ~ - :::J - :::J - - a .-+ m ~ I;:;: ~ - :::J'-+ - -::J .-+ 0
i< a. a. <D 6: ~ r< c. <D CD C. en
'"
~~ '" '" ~~ Q
"'" a. ............ . ...... ~
~Dl _",".N ;=~ ~
~~cS ~ ~ N
~ CD to) '"""" 0'1
o II W m "0
o ~ ~ ~
I--
r bl
::: n; 0 a
><" .!!! c: ... "
)_ v '~v 0.,) v v ~o ~ ,~ ,~ v IcQ
,.".... :::J c (D
Ul "0 ~
m a.-
m
><"
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ g:-" ~ tl ~ en' a :tt~ "T1
'"""" to) 0 N (0 0 co ~ :::J~ (0 '"""" (J) m-m_~m
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ b tf!. ~ tf!. ~ ~ b Co :;'-g z en
I 0 '"""" ...., I co 0 ao 0 ~ 0 ~~g
~ 0 0 ~ ~ ~ 0 0' - 0 0'1 0 g. <' I
~ ~ :::J ~ CI)~
><" ><" g "c
II> S.O
- @m
II>
o g'S-CUl(;CO UlS-CO 0 0 UlS-CO UlS-CO Z "tIO
~ CDtDe:~tDe:~ ~tDe:~ ~ ~ ~tDe:~ ~tDe:~ g ao
~~ "c""c"~~ "c"~~ ~~ ~~ "c"~~ "c"~~ ' ~3
Q)a.oQ)a.o Q)a.o Q)c.o Q)c.o CD 0"0
:::::!,CQ - :::::!,CQ - -. :::::!.CQ - -. :::::!,CQ - -. ::J,CQ .-+ _, en en CD
cS ~~m~~m~ ~~m~ cS ~ ~~m~ ~~mcS ~ !om ~
~ -g -g -g -g -g~. .,.
CQ :::J:::J:::J :::J:::J < i\3
CD a. a. a. a. a. <D 8:
~ w
r \ , "\
) C )>:%l CD :%l I )>)> " ~ ~ ) -C -<)> ."
:o- r g.2 :i: en Cl ~~ " - .. o ~ ~.
~ " ;. c g.
.. :%l -C )> m c: a.
II> -... CD 5' ~ii
)> -0" :%l )> -" )> ~ )> 0' z
i. .. 0 .. " '" II>
0 S ao ~ S a,< S ~ 3 QO c a 3
~ '" 3 "'" )> Vi' en
ii ;: ;: S ~ -:%l ..
e;- .. e;-
9. a ;: ii a = a ..
a '" '" '" e;- a IC
)> '" ~ a '" 0
" '" a +
a. '"
0
<
co
~ Z Z Z Z Z Z "'I 0 Z C Z Z r
0 Z '"
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .. -. " 0 0: 0 0
0 ='" .. .e'
" I I I ~. ~. ~. I (DO I " ~. I ~
::!I in' in' !a: in' 3-< !!!. in' !a in'
a. ~ ~ " " " ~ CD=: C ~ " ~ o'
co ~ 3i :;; :;; " '" ~ ;;; :;; "
" fil fil fil Uiar 2 fil I
- o'
!!: ;1. ;1. ;1. !'l- " ;1. in'
0 ~
in' in' in' " " in'
'" '" '" 0 f'- '"
c c c e;- c
.. .. .. a. ..
'" '" '" '"
z z z z z z z z z z c z z en
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0: 0 0 ..
I I I I I I I I I I " I I <!
in' in' in' in' !a: in' in' in' in' ~ !a in' in' @.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ g ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
..
< 2
0 3
" 5'
f'- ~
o'
"
@c;;: c;;: -< -< ;:-< ~ \r z z -< z z ~$].g>@
.. .. 0" ~ 0 .. 0 0
)>.!I! '" '" '" a.~ .. ~ '" ~ a g.a")>
" " 5. 2. c;;
i:2 @'ti' '" '" ~. ~. ~. .;;:.
,,'< <' <' .. .. .. .. --"
II> 3 =(i1 .. .. a a a a ~ II>
0 o !a- '" '" '" '" '"
c r in' in' in' in' :%l
5' II> 5'
"" e;- e;- e;- e;- ""
!' a. a. a. a.
-< -< -< -< fJC;;: -< \r -< -< -< z c;;: -< ~i
.. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ~ ..
'" '" '" '" " '" '" .. '" '" '" '" '"
at:.:. " ~. " I
~ II> '" ~o"'"
cC <' .. _.c ..
.. a 3~~
!!. '" 0
in' ;:; 0
e;- CD
a. .. s::
-< 11>-< -< -< gsen fgsen -< -< ~ m s::
-< -< -< m z i
.. .. .. .. " .. .. !l. .. 0 ;. -. ~. ;. -. ~. .. .. c
'" '" '" '" a.'" '" .. '" ~ '" '" c
oen " In (II a 3 (If a 3 ~ ~ Z
:T :T '" !l. ,g. =03 =03 1r CD
II> 0 <' .. !e. Q ::r (,I) 0 -. " ~~
.. -~"
~~ .. " a ~:e~ ~:::~ S ;0
'" '"
II> _. ,,' 0
.. in' 2l.0 2l.0 ::-;::cO
:e .. .. 0 .. 0
e;- .., -~ "'Pf ~=tm
a. mZ
2~;;: z ~~ <;:-< ~~c;;: )>-< -< z -<-< z z z z -< -nO-l
0 11>.... ;;; .. .. ~ ;:.. 0 0 0 0 ;:
i3.!h "!l 3.!'! =_cn urn!'! II>!!' !!' ~;;, ~ tg ~ ~ ~ D>-tm
U1~o ~. ~CD ~a:<: )>en -<;: m .g. ~. ~. g. ~. n.C;:o
=-<(1) -<iil -<;:;: en"- ;:11> II> II> -c ~~;:o
.. ;:" 0 !a- .. !a- .. .. ..
)> ~~i a ;: 5' o-c oiil a a a a a .g.
S ~ng '" 0" oie:)> c II> )>:T -< '" en '" '" '" '" s:'T1
)>a >~s. :r6. ~ ;: 0: .. D>Xl-U
)>:T in' in' in' in' in' in' a
it + e;- Z 0 e;- .. e;- e;- e;- e;- '" S";ocn
a a. )> a. a. a. a. a. ><:S;c
'" C Z ~ Z Z Z Z C Z Z C C Z ~
0: !a !a !a !a !a 0: !a !a 0: 0: !a OOJ
0 ms::
" ." ;r ." ." ." ." " ." ." " " ." ;:
!a .. .. .. .. .. !a .. .. !a !a lD CIl_
II> II> II> II> II> II> II> II> II> ~
;;; '" '" '" '" '" '" ;;; '" '" ;;; ;;; '"
g C' C' C' C' C' C' ~ C' C' g 2 C'
10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10
0 0 r
" " " "
a. a. 0. 0. C
c en:eo en:eo en:eo en:eo enCDO z c. Oll>-C 0"'0 C C Z ~ cn
0: gni ~Qffi gQffi g Qffi ar!2.ffi !a 0: c: ~a 3S'c 0: 0: !a '" -l
" a~~ " ~CD< ~~~ " " ;:
g.-< ~ g.-< ~ g.-<' ~ Q. -< 2:- ." ~ ,CD 0: ."
!a aog" a Q ~r .. !a .. .. c.G)!:!: !a !a ..
~ 00 aog ~ 00 II> -0 II>
;;; o.c" o.c" '" ;;; ~oe: (;'" ;;; ~ '"
'" C II> '" C II> "'':<11> ..
2 '" II> II> !!!.O" "'11>11> !!!.O" C' 2 lI>:eo II> II> g 2 C'
_0" _0" o~ 10 aQi _0" 10
0 ~.~ ~~ ~~ ~~ c.. 0 @?! 0
" CD CD CD CD II> " 11>':<", " " CD
a. c. ",en c. 0.
.. .. .. .. ~ a "'- C C
0" 0" 0" 0" '" 0 0" ~
"
(;Jg ." ." ." ." ." ." iQ ." ." iQ iQ ?; <II it
<D <D .. .. <D <D :. <D :;
~a. II> II> II> II> II> II> ~a. II> -2c. r2a. II> II>
o " '" '" '" '" '" '" o " '" '" 0" o " 5' ;: n
" 0 C' C' C' C' C' C' " 0 C' C' " 0 " 0 II> CD
0.- 10 10 10 10 10 10 a.- 10 10 a.- 0.- D" "
II>
10 ::L
~
0
5'
~
8 0
0
... .... a... ;1.
..., ..., ." U. :.. '" ." 2~ "" ..., ." ~.
'" *"
*" *" as. ..
o' Q
"
.... ~S.Q~~ ~3'~ "'''' .... ~:%l:-' O'!J> '" '" 8i8Y'81'" :%l'" :%l'" ."
N ... 12. w~ N ..", S;~ u. *" cn ~C:OjCO ..:.. ~. ~ ..
'" en -c :J 0 "'''' 0 &i:r.~ *" + 3'~ ..
s' 0 (I) ~ ~ ;:co - (I)~cn~ g.~
~ c.'" ~if:. ~ ;;; !~2~2~ '"
:J Q. 2' ~ 9!. tD ::r !.11 0 !:!: cg + co, + D"o
+ ' Qa~ ~~ 3' ~ + ~ +
fC~gag. C IC 0 ;;; ;;; ~mQ:-g;
< a. 0 . ~i1!g 3' o' ~r 3' !" o 0 0;::;: C' C'
_. _:J .. -. !" " + D" 0" Q::J :::JCD 10 10
!il@~ -3 + ~ C 15' 8 8 '" '"
'" ..a.
'" U. Cl' ~ -'IC 0. '" '"
3 !!. 11>- ~Ci!
~ ~ 0 -Y!
-
en-cc 0 0 0 0 0 0 en-cc 0 0 ~z en-cc 0 -co
Qaa: C C C C C C @ao: C C ~g @ao: C ~ 0
II> II> II> II> II> II> II> II> ~ 3
=' (1;" :J ? ~ ~ ? ~ ? :J(D":J ? ~ o .!, ::J (D' ::::J II>
~.Sl 2- ~.u 2- ~.Sl 2- ~ 0"
'" .. g:[
~ ~ m ~. ,5 5 s ,5 5 o CD ~ ii' .g' II> '" ~ g'm 5
~"
"'c" 0 -..
c." a.'" " a."
ICo ~-g '" ICo
~a -" ,,' ~a
a. ..
c; - c; ~
0
-c ...
II> ~
IC
.. 0
- 0
'"
\ /~
} Gl=" . ~r- -i m :!i "r-
, a&. -. a ca' =" en ~E!i
~~ 03: ~ Gl III
lil'~ " " "'m
.. "
0 r-" ~ ~ ll",
~ ~~ ct~ "' -.
"',- ;: '" "
s= .. ..
!l. 0 II II ..
II ~ "' "' OJ
)0 "
c: "' ..
" ~ 0 "
a. " a.
0
<
..
~ z (D =:-< Z O:I: Z en;:
0 0 OJ !!lm 0 aren' 0 .. -.
0 :I: ;+.... :I: ~p; :I: :="
" ~ 0.- -0
.. ~
::!l .r :E~en 0;' ..-<1 0;' ~Q
a. g 0"" g So g
CD >l-'" .. C'D ~.
" a.~ ~ 0'3
..
!: -. 0 iil:I:
cS~ ci5'
!!l. ~~
c: o'
!!l. " :g,-:<l
o'
" 0
"
z z z c z z
0 0 0 is: 0 0
:I: :I: :I: " :I: :I:
0;' 0;' 0;' a 0;' 0;'
$ g g iil $ j
2
0
"
!'>-
oen,,-< -< -< -< -< " -<
g~ g.~ .. .. .. .. " ..
.. .. .. .. a...
~ 0.;:4:> g~
;::;~a:3
~ "'2- c: "
.. ..
.. .. .. ..
0
"
,..
..
~ -< ~ ~ -< -<
.. .. ..
.. .. .. .. .. ..
"1l -< ~ "1l genco -<
0 .. 0 " en c: ..
0 .. .. 0 ~ (1))>(1) "'
<if <if ~ g.)> ~
;:; -..0 0
.. c:"
" ....
- -<T
iLnr
..
..
-< z -<-< z z -<-<
.. 0 ;:.. 0 0 ;:..
.. tg o!" -g Sl ()~
~. ":E ~. g. " III
.. 0 .. a;
" II 8- II II 0;'
.. .. .. a.
~ <T ~
0;' c: 0;' 0;'
it CD -<1 CD CD
II a. a. a.
.. Z C Z C C c
a is: a is: is: is:
." " ." " " "
.. a .. a a a
" ..
.. iil .. iil iil iil
0' g 0' ~ 2 ~
iD iD 0 0 0
" " " "
a. a. a. a.
0 C 0 C C C
c: is: c: is: is: is:
.. " .. " " "
!!l. ..
o' a ,5" a a a
:J ~ " iil iil iil
.. .. "
<T 2 <T .g g ~
iD 0 iD 0
" " " "
a. a. a. a.
." ct1Q ." iilQ tag iilQ
.. ..
" 20. " -20. 20. -20.
"' 0" "' 0" 0" o "
0' " 0 C' " 0 " 0 ,,0
iD a.- iD a.- a.- a.-
.-.) .., .., .., .., ..,
... ... ... 0'" ... enal?!"
0. t w o. *" @:~ *
0 0 " '" +
*" *" !e~
0. 2 , ;0 CD ::J :J +
0 .. ~~AJ
0 ll... 3'
+ cr m _.ra (t)
iil " '" ?" ~ 0 :i"
*" -"<T
3' So o'
?" ;:
0 en"Uc 0 en"Uc en"Uc en"1lC
c: ~aa: c: Qac: ~ .2. a: Q .2. a:
.. ..
~ " .. " ~ ".. " ".. " ".."
~. !l 2- ~.!l 2. ~. Sl 2- ~.Sl g,
6 g ~ m 6 g~m g ~ m g g'm
a." a." a." a."
"'0 "'0 "'0 "'0
!!a !!a !os. !!a
6" 6" 6" 6" ~
"U ...
.. i'3
'" 0
.. 0
'" '"
CD
"\
)
CITY OF ANDOVER
1685 CROSSTOWN BOULEVARD N.W. . ANDOVER, MINNESOTA 55304. (763) 755-5100
FAX (763) 755-8923 . WWW.Q.ANDOVERMN.US
TO: Mayor and Councilmembers
FROM Jim Dickinson, Finance Director
SUBJECT: AHYHA Update
DA1E: February 21,2003
At the February 18, 2003 Gty Council meeting the Gty Council discussed the Andover Huskies
Youth Hockey Association (AHYHA) proposal and directed the Finance Director to go through
point-by-point with the AHYHA the responses provided to the Council at the meeting. The
detailed point-by-point review will be provided under separate cover to the Council on Monday
February 24th.
, I apologize for the delay.
, )
...