Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout10F - Ryan Contracting CUP 16200 Eagle Creek Avenue S.E. Prior Lake, MN 55372-1714 CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT MEETING DATE: AGENDA #: PREPARED BY: JULY 18, 2005 10 F JANE KANSIER, PLANNING DIRECTOR CONSIDER APPROVAL OF A REQUEST FOR AUTHORIZATION OF A SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT AND APPROVAL OF A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT FOR THE RYAN CONTRACTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AGENDA ITEM: DISCUSSION: I ntrod uction The purpose of this item is to authorize a settlement agreement in Ryan Contracting vs. the City of Prior Lake, a lawsuit filed with respect to the Conditional Use Permit approved by the City in 2001. If the City Council authorizes the settlement, the City must then enter into a development contract with Ryan Contracting to cover the work on the excavation site. This development contract was required as part of the original CUP. History In 1999, the City received an application for a Conditional Use Permit from Ryan Contracting to allow the excavation of sand and gravel on 13 acres of the McKenna and Kinney properties located north of CSAH 42, and north and east of McKenna Road. Just before the City Council was to consider this CUP, the Council received a petition for an EAW for the project. The City Council ultimately agreed to prepare an EAW. This process was completed in December, 2000. On February 20, 2001, the City Council made a negative declaration on the need for an Environmental Impact Statement. On February 27,2001, the City Council adopted Resolution 01-19, which approved a CUP subject to 37 conditions (see attachment #1). Fifteen of those conditions needed to be satisfied before the CUP would become valid. Eight additional conditions needed to be satisfied before Ryan could begin work. Fourteen additional conditions needed to be satisfied by Ryan on an on-going basis. In addition, the CUP could be valid for only one year, and was subject to renewal upon application. The need for Ryan to seek renewal of the permit after one year gave the Council the ability to consider the information regarding Ryan's performance and environmental impacts of the project that would be created during the first year of operations. In 2001-02, the SMSC challenged the City's negative declaration on the need for an Environmental Impact Statement, which included a request that the Court should either prevent Ryan from mining or impose additional conditions on its operation, beyond those already required in the CUP. In its first ruling, www.cityofpriorlake.com L:\99FILES\99CUP\99-075\7-18 cc re~~~R2~52.447.4230 / Fax 952.447.4245 the Court upheld the City's negative declaration, finding that no further environmental review was necessary, based on the mitigative nature of the conditions incorporated into the CUP. In 2002, following a trial, the Court denied the SMSC's request to prevent mining operations, but imposed several additional conditions on Ryan's operations to mitigate potential environmental impacts. A separate City Ordinance authorized the City to cancel Ryan's CUP if Ryan failed to make substantial use of the premises pursuant to the CUP with in a one-year period. This provision is similar to provisions in the Building Code and in Minnesota Statutes. The City tolled the commencement of that one- year period until the appeal period in the SMSC Litigation expired. After the litigation and appeal period expired, the one year time period on the CUP began to run. In January 2004, after staff concluded that Ryan had not satisfied the preconditions to the validity of the CUP within the one year period following the litigation, the City cancelled the CUP. Ryan disagreed with the City's conclusions and procedures, and sued the City. Ryan also contended that the City lacked statutory authority to impose a one-year term on the CUP or a requirement that an applicant use a CUP within a one-year period. The SMSC intervened in that action and aligned itself with the City. In May 2005, cross-motions for summary judgment were argued, and soon thereafter, a settlement dialogue began. The SMSC's counsel initially participated in those settlement discussions, but when the potential for a settlement appeared to be possible the SMSC dropped out. Several hours before the City Council was scheduled to consider authorizing the execution of the draft Settlement Agreement, the City Council received a copy of a petition requesting the preparation of a revised environmental assessment worksheet on June 20, 2005. The City received official notification of its RGU status from the Environmental Quality Board on July 1, 2005. Current Circumstances The City Council is scheduled to make a decision on the 2005 EAW petition on July 18, 2005. Should the Council determine an EAW is not required, the Council may also wish to authorize the settlement agreement and enter into a Development Contract. The attached memorandum from John Baker of Greene Espel, the attorney representing the City in this matter, outlines the agreement. ISSUES: The concept behind the draft Settlement Agreement is that, if Ryan were to satisfy within a specified period all of the preconditions to Ryan's ability to use the 2001 CUP set forth in that CUP, the City would reinstitute the 2001 CUP. However, the City would hold Ryan to the same conditions imposed in the 2001 CUP, plus the conditions imposed by the Court in its 2002 Order. As part of the draft Settlement Agreement, Ryan would waive its ability to challenge the legality of the terms of the 2001 CUP and the draft Settlement Agreement, including the one-year periOd of validity. The draft Settlement Agreement also created a mechanism for Ryan to report to the City at specified intervals the status of its efforts to comply with the conditions, and for the City to respond to L:\99FILES\99CUP\99-075\7..18 cc reportDOC ,.. .. ...... .." -"'r-""- ~ Ryan within a specified period with its reasons for any dissatisfaction with Ryan's performance. The proposed development contract is consistent with the provisions of Resolution #01-19. The contract is similar to the City's standard Development Contract for a subdivision in that it stipulates the required improvements, the amount of the letter of credit, the time of performance, the definitions and remedies for default, and so on. FINANCIAL IMPACT: Authorization of the proposed settlement agreement will eliminate the existing litigation. Further, approval of the Development Contract will allow the City to recoup some of the costs of administering this contract. ALTERNATIVES: The City Council has the following alternatives: 1. Authorize the execution of the Settlement Agreement and adopt a resolution approving the Development Contract. 2. Deny the Settlement Agreement and the Development Contract. 3. Defer action and provide staff with specific direction. RECOMMENDED MOTION: The staff recommends Alternative #1. This requires the following motions: 1. A motion and second to authorize the Mayor and City Manager to execute the Settlement Agreement. 2. A motion and second to adopt a resolution authorizing the Mayor and City Manager to sign the Development Contract. Reviewed by: L:\99FILES\99CUP\99~075\7-18 cc reportDOC 16200 Eagle Creek Avenu~~.OLUTION OS-XXX Prior Lake, MN 55372-1714 RESOLUTION OF THE PRIOR LAKE CITY COUNCIL APPROVING DEVELOPMENT CONTRACT FOR THE RYAN CONTRACTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND SETTING FORTH CONDITIONS TO BE MET PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION MOTION BY: SECOND BY: WHEREAS: On February 27, 2001, the City Council the conditional use permit for the Ryan Contracting mining and excavation of the property located north of CSAH 42, and north and west of McKenna Road, subject to conditions identified by Resolution 01- 19; and WHEREAS: On July 18, 2005, the City Council approved a settlement agreement in the matter of Ryan Contracting vs. the City of Prior Lake which reinstates the approval of the CUP; and WHEREAS: The City Council has approved the development contract required in Resolution 01- 19. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PRIOR LAKE, MINNESOTA: 1. The recitals set forth above are incorporated herein as if fully set forth. 2. The CUP for the Ryan Contracting mining and excavation is approved subject to the conditions set forth in Resolution 01-19. 3. The Mayor and City Manager are hereby authorized to execute the Development Contract on behalf of the City. Passed and adopted this 18th day of July, 2005. YES NO Haugen Haugen Fleminq Fleminq LeMair LeMair Petersen Petersen Zieska Zieska Frank Boyles, City Manager 1:\99fi1es\99cup\99-075\dev contract resolution.doc www.cityofpriorlake.com Page 1 Phone 952.447.4230 / Fax 952.447.4245 GREENE ESPEL MEMORANDUM PROFESSIONAL LIMITED LIABILITY PARTNERSHIP SUITE 1200 200 SOUTH SIXTH STREET MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55402 (612)373-0830 FAX (612)373-0929 TO: Mayor and Members of the Prior Lake City Council C: Prank Boyles, Jane Kansier, Suesan Lea Pace, and Joseph Schmitt PROM: John M. Baker, Greene Espel P.L.L.P. DATE: July 13, 2005 RE: Request for authorization of Settlement Agreement and Development Agreement (if Council denies EA W Petition) Our Pile No: 2043-261 Mayor and Members of the City Council: Requested Action: Ifthe Council denies the Shakopee Mdewakanton Sioux Community's Petition for an Environmental Assessment Worksheet, we recommend that the Council adopt a motion providing as follows: 1. The Council authorizes Mayor Haugen to execute a Settlement Agreement with Ryan Contracting Co., following the execution ofthat agreement on behalf of Ryan Contracting Co.; and 2. The Council further authorizes Mayor Haugen to execute a Development Agreement with Ryan Contracting Co., following execution of that agreement on behalf of Ryan Contracting Co. Background: The SMSC's Petition for an Environmental Assessment Worksheet was filed several hours before the Council's last meeting, on June 20 2005. Until that Petition was filed, we anticipated presenting a request to the Council at the June 20 meeting for authorization to execute a settlement agreement between the City and Ryan Contracting. Because of the Petition, we have deferred making this request until after the Council has an opportunity to decide whether to grant or deny the Petition. A copy of the draft Settlement Agreement is included with your agenda materials. If the Council reaches this item, which should only occur ifthe Council denies the EA W petition, and then authorizes execution of the Settlement Agreement, we anticipate that Ryan will sign it in the form that has been submitted to you. -- ..------,----- ...-..-.-,......'..-. -..--.... -- '......,..,..._-....._,. ,...".. Progress has been made in negotiating a development agreement with Ryan. It is possible that by the July 18 meeting, we will have resolved all differences relating to the terms of that agreement as well. If those differences have been resolved by the meeting, we would request the Council to also authorize execution of the Development Agreement. If those differences remain unresolved at the time of the July 18 meeting, we will then provide a recommendation to the Council on how it might proceed. 2 . .---..--.'-.-..-.'-' .,.,,'..,.,.,. ----..,.. "---.--r---....- ~".--._--....,-,-...--_...---,-..".,'" ,,'..---..--..--.., ..,._.,._-,~ SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT AND RELEASE Ryan Contracting Company ("Ryan"), and the City of Prior Lake ("the City"), hereby agree and covenant as follows: 1. The parties to this Agreement wish to avoid the time, expense, inconvenience and uncertainties of litigation. Accordingly, without any of the parties admitting any liability or admitting the validity of any claim, counterclaim, cause of action, or defense asserted in this action, the parties wish to resolve and settle all disputes, claims, counterclaims, cause of actions, and defenses arising from the events that were the subject matter of the lawsuit described in Paragraph 2 of this Agreement. 2. The parties to this Agreement desire to dismiss with prejudice the lawsuit entitled "Ryan Contracting Company v. the City of Prior Lake and the Shakopee Mdewakanton Sioux Community," Case No. 2004-05618, in the Scott County District Court of Minnesota ("the Action"). THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing, and the mutual covenants and conditions contained in this Agreement, the parties agree as follows: A. This Agreement is entered into in good faith for the purpose of settling completely those disputes of the parties to this Agreement with regard to the matters involved in the Action. B. The parties agree that the City will rescind the cancellation of the Conditional Use Permit after Ryan completes the preconditions listed in paragraph C of this Agreement. After the City rescinds the cancellation, the Conditional Use Permit Resolution 01-19 ("CUP") (attached as Exhibit A) is valid and may be recorded by Ryan. Prior to the commencement of mining activities, the resolution approving the CUP must be recorded on all affected properties and proof of such recording presented to the Planning Department. The one-year term set forth in Section V of the CUP will begin running when the CUP is recorded. C. If, , Ryan completes the following items before November 30, 2005, and City staff reviews and approves them, the City will rescind the cancellation of the CUP: 1) The landscape plan must be revised to indicate a one for one replacement of trees removed (42 caliper inches) as part of the reclamation and staging plan. The plan must also indicate that plantings are to be installed upon completion of each phase. 2) The landscape plan must be revised to include landscaping of 1 tree per 10 lineal feet of berm as per item 7 on Recapitulation of CUP Application submitted by Ryan Contracting, and to include an additional 10 perimeter trees as shown on the proposed landscape plan. 3) The plans must be revised to identify a 24' wide paved driveway from the public street to the parking lot, a paved parking lot, and a paved fueling pad. -.---.----------.--.'-----.~-------1"---"'-... 4) The parking area must be buffered by screening with additional plantings. This is to be shown on a revised landscaping plan. 5) Drainage and storm water rate calculations and plans for engineered drainage and storm water controls must be submitted to the City for review and approval. 6) The plans must be revised to eliminate the permanent above-ground fuel storage area. 7) Utility plans indicating electrical line locations must be submitted, if there is to be electrical equipment on the site. 8) The plans must be revised to identify a monitoring well at the northwest comer of the site. The exact number, location, depth, and specification are to be based on recommendations from a certified independent consultant approved by the City Engineer. 9) The applicant and property owners must enter into a Developer's Agreement with the City. The Developers Agreement includes provisions dealing with right of entry and indemnification. Treatment of the required Irrevocable Letter of Credit is also detailed within the Agreement. 10) An Irrevocable Letter of Credit, on a form prepared by the City and approved by the City Attorney, is to be submitted prior to the recording of the resolution. (a) The amount of the LOC is for $420,500 (approximately 125% of the following costs) and ensures the following: (i) McKenna Road maintenance ($100,000); (ii) Paved driveway and parking area ($37,200); (iii) Landscaping costs ($11,687.50); (iv) Dust control ($5,000); (v) Reclamation (final site restoration, grading)($75,000); (vi) Monitoring of the wetland and ground water (monitoring well)($7,500); (vii) Any environmental contamination, including groundwater pollution, wetland diminution or destruction ($100,000) (viii) Any fees incurred by the City in the enforcement of the Conditional Use Permit. (b) If the City must draw upon the Irrevocable Letter Of Credit, the applicant shall be responsible for bringing the irrevocable letter of credit back to $420,500 within 15 days of any draw down. 11) The applicant is responsible to pay the City for all related costs per City Code Section 1109.902. These costs will include, but are not limited to, fees incurred by the City for the preparation and recording of the Developer's Agreement, inspection costs, attorney's fees, and retaining of consultants. 2 ""'--'-.,--..., "--""-1'-'''-''-~-'-''-''-' ----...,.. These costs do not include any costs related to the litigation regarding the CUP in 2001 - 2002 or in 2004 - 2005. 12) Prior to beginning work, the required PCA permits must be obtained, and copies provided to the City. 13) The required Watershed permits must be obtained, and copies provided to the City prior to beginning work. 14) An Assent Form, as required by ordinance, is to be signed by the applicant and all property owners. 15) A wetland delineation report must be prepared and submitted to the City to determine if jurisdictional wetlands are present on the site, and is to include, if necessary, wetland replacement or mitigation plans. The monitoring well is to be installed at the site. Baseline water quality analysis of the DNR protected wetland is to be completed and results submitted to the City as prepared by an independent laboratory approved by the City. Testing parameters and frequencies are identified in N (e)6 and 7 in the CUP. 16) The operation of the pit cannot result in drainage or other degradation of the DNR protected wetland. Ryan Contracting is to submit to the City for review and approval a work plan to evaluate the potential effect of the proposed mining operation on the DNR protected wetland and any other jurisdictional wetlands on the site. The work is to evaluate potential impact from the mining below the perched elevation of the wetland or by reducing the catchment basin size of the wetland. At the completion of the work, a report is to be submitted to the City that summarizes the findings and provides a wetland replacement or mitigation plan, if needed. 17) Proposed traffic signs require approval from the City Engineer and must meet MN Uniform Traffic Control Devices standards. Signs must be installed prior to beginning work. In addition to those proposed, "Trucks Hauling" signs must be placed on McKenna Road south to CSAH 42. 18) A secured gate and 6' high perimeter fence is to be installed prior to beginning work. The property must be signed as private property. 19) The driveway from the public street to the parking lot, the parking lot and the refueling pad must be hard surfaced (paved) and installed prior to beginning work. 20) The parking area and parking lot screening must be completed. 21) Prior to beginning work on the site, the City will inspect McKenna Road and document its current condition. Once work has commenced, the City staff will inspect the road on an ongoing basis. Repairs required as a result of this use must be completed no later than October 31 st. D. Ryan must complete the preconditions listed in paragraph C of this Agreement before November 30,2005. 3 .. "...-------'-------,..-..-- ~--"" ". .. .,_...," .,-.-.'"~-'_~---..".-"-~_~.,_.,______op__.~.-~--....'-'.M-.--"-_,....._".._. 1. From July 15,2005 until November 30,2005, Ryan will provide to the City written reports by the 15th of each month updating the City regarding the status of its completion of the preconditions. 2. At any time but no later than November 30, 2005, Ryan may request the City in writing to meet in order to conduct an inspection and review for the purposes of determining whether the preconditions listed in paragraph C of this Agreement have been completed. a. If Ryan makes such a written request, the City must convene this meeting within 10 days of the request. b. Ryan's satisfaction of these preconditions will be deemed sufficient 10 days after the meeting date unless the City notifies Ryan in writing by that date of which conditions have not been satisfied and lists all ofthe ways in which they are not satisfied, and the actions Ryan must take to satisfy the conditions from the City's perspective. 3. Ryan will have the opportunity to request a reinspection for the purposes of demonstrating that it has cured the deficiencies listed in the City's notice until November 30,2005. a. If Ryan submits such written request for reinspection to the City by November 30,2005, the City shall conduct a reinspection within 10 days of the request. b. Ryan's satisfaction of these preconditions will be deemed sufficient 10 days after the reinspection date unless the City notifies Ryan in writing by that date of which conditions have not been satisfied and lists all of the ways in which they are not satisfied, and the actions Ryan must take to satisfy the conditions from the City's perspective.. 4. Notwithstanding the process and schedule described above, Ryan must cure any deficiencies identified in the City's notice of deficiencies by November 30, 2005, subject to subsection 5 below. 5. Without limitation, the deadlines in paragraph D shall be tolled if an injunction is entered that directly or indirectly prevents activities pursuant to the CUP or completion of one or more of the paragraph C preconditions. Such tolling shall end upon the vacating of all such injunctive relief. The deadlines are also tolled by litigation commenced by one of the parties to this agreement to determine or enforce the rights and obligations of the parties pursuant to this Agreement, which tolling shall end upon completion of the litigation. If an action is filed by a third party to challenge this Agreement but no injunction is entered, the parties agree to meet and confer regarding whether it would be appropriate to toll the deadlines. 4 .._._.,________...., . -------,.----'0---'--'.-,.--.,---,--- ""'" E. Ryan waives its right to challenge all conditions set forth in this Agreement and the Conditional Use Permit Resolution 01-19 ("CUP") (attached as Exhibit A), including the one- year term in Section V of the CUP. This agreement does not in any way impact or prejudice Ryan's right to apply for a renewal ofthe CUP. F. Ryan agrees to conduct its mining activities in compliance with the CUP, and further agrees that it must comply with all conditions imposed by the Court's Order of November 16, 2002 in State of Minnesota by Shakopee Mdewakanton Sioux Community v. City of Prior Lake and Ryan Contracting Co., File No. C-OI-05286. G. Prior to the parties' execution of this Agreement, the City will have: (1) reviewed pursuant to Section N(c)(I)-(8) of the CUP the plan revisions Ryan submitted in December 2004, (2) drafted and submitted to Ryan for its review a Development Agreement for this project that the City is willing to approve after City staff approves Ryan's plan revisions, and (3) provided Ryan with a Letter of Credit Form and an Assent Form. The City will review the work plan Ryan is required to submit pursuant to Section N(d)(2) of the CUP, and provide Ryan with written feedback about whether the City approves the work plan or the actions that Ryan must take to obtain the City's approval, within three weeks of its receipt by the City Planning Director. The City will inspect McKenna Road prior to beginning work on the site and document its current condition pursuant to Section N(d)(8) of the CUP, and provide Ryan with that written documentation of the road's current condition, within three weeks of Ryan's execution of a Development Agreement with the City. The City will inspect the road on an ongoing basis once work has commenced pursuant to Section N(d)(8) ofthe CUP. H. The parties agree that the one-year term set forth in Section V of the CUP does not require Ryan to complete within that one-year period all the cleanup and restoration required by the CUP or by the Court's Order of November 16,2002. If the City does not renew a CUP for Ryan's operations, Ryan is allowed 24 months after expiration of the CUP to complete its removal of any stockpiles. I. The parties agree that specific performance is an available remedy for any violation of paragraphs C, D, F, or G ofthis Agreement. J. Except only for the representations or obligations of the parties under this Agreement, Ryan and the City and any and all of their beneficiaries, employees, agents, representatives, successors, assignees, transferees, joint ventures, attorneys, and insurers, hereby release and discharge the other, and their past and present officers, directors, partners, elected officials, board members, employees, agents, representatives, affiliates, divisions, successors, stockholders, assignees, transferees, joint ventures, attorneys, insurers, and risk pools (including the League of Minnesota Cities Insurance Trust) from all manner of claims, demands, actions, causes of actions, suits, debts, dues, sums of money, accounts, bills, covenants, contracts, rights, obligations, controversies, agreements, promises, and demands whatsoever, whether in law or equity, they ever had, or now have, or hereafter may have, whether known or unknown, against each other, involving the matters involved in the Action. K. All notifications and reports required or provided for under this Agreement shall be made by fax and U.S. mail to the parties as follows: 5 .,-", ".."---..---,..,.,.----,--,----. _..-..__..---..--,------~'- a. Notice to the City of Prior Lake shall be provided to the following two individuals: 1. Suesan Lea Pace, Halleland Lewis, 220 S. Sixth Street, Suite 600, Minneapolis, MN 55402, fax no. (612) 338-7858 11. Jane Kansier, Planning Director, City of Prior Lake, 16200 Eagle Creek Ave., S.E., Prior Lake, MN 55372, fax no. (952) 447-4245. b. Notice to Ryan Contracting Co. shall be provided to the following 2 individuals: 1. Tom Ryan, Ryan Contracting Co., 8700 - 13th Avenue East, Shakopee, MN 55379, fax no. (952) 894-3207. 11. Steven J. Weintraut, Siegel, Brill, Greupner, Duffy & Foster, P.A., 1300 Washington Square, 1 00 Washington Avenue South, Minneapolis, MN 55401, fax no. (612) 339-6591. L. Each party will bear its own costs, expenses and attorney fees that it has incurred in connection with or arising out ofthe Action. M. This Agreement shall be binding upon the successors and assigns of the parties, whether by way of merger, consolidation, operation oflaw, assignment, purchase, or other acquisition. N. All questions with respect to the construction of this Agreement and the rights and liabilities of the parties to this Agreement shall be governed by the laws of the State of Minnesota. O. This Agreement effects the settlement and release of claims and defenses, which are denied and contested by the parties, and nothing contained in this Agreement shall be construed as an admission of liability by either party. P. Ryan and the City will dismiss with prejudice the Action upon execution of this Agreement. Q. Each party represents and warrants that it has not assigned or transferred, or purported to assign or transfer, any of the claims released pursuant to this Agreement to any other person and that it is fully entitled to compromise and settle such claims. Each party shall indemnify the other against all costs, expenses, and judgments, including all attorneys' fees incurred, in the event that any third party shall assert any ofthe claims released pursuant to this Agreement based on a purported assignment or transfer of rights by a party to this Agreement. R. This Agreement and its attachments and addenda represent the entire agreement between the parties with respect to the subject matter of the Agreement and supersedes all prior and contemporaneous oral and written agreements and discussions. Each of the parties covenants that it has not entered into this Agreement as a result of any representation, agreement, inducement, or coercion, except to the extent specifically provided in this Agreement. Each party further covenants that the consideration recited in this Agreement is the only consideration 6 '--'-~-"'-""~"-'''-'''''i for entering into this Agreement, and that no promises or representations of other or further consideration have been made by any person. This Agreement may be amended only by a written agreement executed by all parties. S. This Agreement is the result of arms-length negotiations among the parties. All parties have participated in the negotiations, have had an equal opportunity to participate in the drafting and revision of this Agreement, and have had the opportunity to review this Agreement with their counsel. No ambiguity shall be construed against any party based upon a claim that the party in question drafted the ambiguous language. T. This Settlement Agreement may be executed by the parties by facsimile and in identical counterparts, each of which shall constitute an original for all purposes. WHEREFORE, the parties have executed this Settlement Agreement and Mutual Release effective as of the date first above written. RYAN CONTRACTING COMPANY Dated: By: Tom Ryan President, Ryan Contracting Company THE CITY OF PRIOR LAKE Dated: By: Its Mayor 7 -----,.-------'-.--'r ". "..~,.."...._~_H+~._;_M_~_ "~"_"---"_ '_N ... ','_"._",.~,~. _,~~,..... .~~,_"~_,..,.., .__.._.......__.... ~,."_~,~,_._._.,,