HomeMy WebLinkAbout07/21/99
MINUTES OF THE LAKE ADVISORY COMMITTEE
June 16, 1999
I. CALL TO ORDER
The Lake Advisory Committee (LAC) was called to order on Wednesday, June 16, 1999, at
6:34 p.m. Members present: Marianne Breitbach, Tom Kearney, Doug Larson, Roger
Soderstrom and Rick Warner. Members absent: Kate Haggerty and Paul Trapp. Others
present:
-
NAME
Lani Leichty
Pat Lynch
Dave Moran
Dale Braddy
Dave LaPorte
ORGANIZATION
City of Prior Lake
DNR
PLSL Watershed District
Prior Lake Association
Citizen
II. CONSIDER APPROVAL OF MAY 19,1999, MEETING MINUTES
Warner asked that his name be removed from the second sentence attributed to him on
page two of the May 19, 1999. Apparently this statement was made by someone else.
MOTION BY WARNER, SECONDED BY SODERSTROM TO APPROVE THE MEETING
MINUTES OF MA Y 19, 1999, AS AMENDED. MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSL Y.
III. COMPREHENSIVE LAKE MANAGEMENT PLAN (CLMP)
The evening began with a debate on where we are currently in the planning process, how
we got here and what is expected from the Lake Advisory Committee. The question was
asked, "Do we have a plan for educating City Council members?"
Leichty: Explained how we got to where we are currently, that Council approved the
process that we are following, the issues that were identified and the time schedule that
was developed.
..-..
Kearney: Question for Pat Lynch, "Due to runoff from development in the watershed we
find that 18" isn't enough bounce on the lake, let's say that we want a two foot bounce, is
that something that is feasible to be looked at?"
16200 Eagle Creek Ave. S,E" Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372-1714 / Ph, (612) 447-4230 / Fax (612) 447-4245
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
Lynch: Permit rules say that for land-locked basins an outlet may be allowed up to 18"
below the Ordinary High Water Level (OHWL).
Kearney: Is it possible or feasible to get a little more bounce on the lake, to lower the
outlet to 902.0?
Lynch: The rules don't permit that.
Kearney: If the City determines that 904.0 is where the wake is detrimental to the lake and
more bounce is needed, is this possible?
Breitbach: You mean lower the lake down so that you have two feet of storage instead of a
foot and one-half!
Lynch: There was somewhat of a variance given for that on Prior Lake, during the months
of March and April based on the conditions of the watershed, the outlet could be opened at
902.0.
Leichty: Would it be possible to expand that window into May?
Lynch: I don't know why we wouldn't consider that.
Kearney: Who came up with those dates, March and April?
Lynch: Possibly Hickock and Associates, the engineering firm, probably came up with this
time frame window.
Kearney: Why is March in the time frame window?
Lynch: For spring snowmelt conditions.
Moran: You can't remove the outlet gates with ice on them. Along about the first of March
the engineers for the watershed do soil saturation and snowpack analysis to determine the
amount of potential runoff. During this time of year there would be no infiltration from
runoff, I believe that is how they came up with the March/April time frame.
Kearney: Is that the only reason that the gates aren't opened in March because of ice?
Moran: Yes, it's hard to remove them physically.
Warner: Do we know what the new weir would do for managing lake levels?
Moran: The models haven't been ran yet, the engineering calculations need to be
completed. By constructing a new weir, it will take Prior Lake out of the FEMA regulations
as a man-made outlet vs. a natural outlet. The flood plain elevation could be revisited.
Lynch: A fixed structure will remove a lot of the emotion debate from the issue of managing
lake levels.
Larson recapped the June 14th, 1999 meeting between the City and the Prior Lake -
Spring Lake Watershed District. In summary, the messages given by the speakers were
--.------r----
as follows: Steve Woods (BWSR) - Do not jump to a solution, but seek a solution that is
the best long term bang for your buck. Pat Lynch (DNR) - If you think you're going to
change the Ordinary High Water Level (OHWL), dream on' Paul Nelson (District
Administrator) - We need to make some changes to the existing system and we think we
have some designs that may be effective, but there are costs associated with these.
Soderstrom: The time frame was an issue. This January they said they would have the
study completed and it's a five year program from this January forward.
Moran: It's a six year program, as money becomes available. The issue of the outlet box
does not stop at the outlet channel, it extends all the way to the river, this issue must be
looked at in the whole context. Past Prior Lake, the contribution of water is divided
between Shakopee and Prior Lake. The water exiting Prior Lake is small in comparison to
the surface water runoff to the channel below the outlet during large storm events. The
three agencies need to work on this issue.
Kearney: What size is needed to expand the channel beyond County Road 16?
Moran: The modeling will tell us this. How to stabilize the channel downstream is a major
issue. The talk of putting a pipe in from the outlet to Pike Lake has been discussed. One
design would be to have a pipe installed with a channel above it. The problem with the
channel now is that it was designed for 50 cfs, but it carries two to three times that when
the outlet is open and a large rainfall event occurs. The outlet has also been open a lot
more than it was ever intended.
Lynch: The hydrologic balance of the channel has been disrupted, it wasn't naturally
designed for what it's carrying now.
Moran: The channel by the YMCA camp is in terrible shape.
Warner: It sounds like the best approach to dealing with these water management issues
is to work with the District on what they come up with and review their different
approaches. The District is doing everything that we would have to do.
Soderstrom: If this is a two pronged approach, what can the City do to help a property
owner whose property is eroding, what can be done about this? There are other things
that can be done such as buyout, ordinances, shoreline protection, etcetera, rather than
dumping the water into the Minnesota River.
Moran: This program we're embarking on won't solve or guarantee that there will never
again be water problems.
Larson: The farther south development occurs the more runoff there will be.
Soderstrom: How far out are they projecting the new facility to be adequate?
Moran: We intend to develop a plan and program to be good for 20 years. We don't want
a plan that will become obsolete before it's implemented.
Larson: We need to anticipate future development in Spring Lake Township. We see one
home per forty acres ghost developed in Spring Lake Township, one thing the City needs
--------.--
to recognize is that sometime in the future some governmental unit will want sewer and
water extended to those areas and full development will change runoff dramatically.
Moran: That's why we're working closely with the County, to see what will be developed in
those areas. For new development the current rules address rate control, but not volume.
The new rules will address volume in the future.
LaPorte: Are there barriers that the City can help overcome to quicken the plan?
Moran: I don't think that asking for funding is appropriate yet, modeling hasn't been done
to answer the financial cost question.
LaPorte: What does the City do to manage the water, if they control that, isn't there
something that they can do?
Kearney: The City really doesn't have any jurisdiction over these issues, it's managed by
the watershed.
Warner: The City can put in plans and ordinances impacting how much water the City
does put into lake from streets and surrounding developments. This could be another
objective that we could look at, investigate ways that the City could impact water levels.
Leichty: What would it take to get the time frame window for opening up the outlet at 902.0
moved or extended into May?
Lynch: An amendment to the Joint Powers Agreement would need to be worked out
among Shakopee, Prior Lake and the District.
Larson: I think that with each of the objectives on this issue we should recommend joining
with the District in reviewing water level management options and investigating ways that
water levels can be affected. I don't think that we can reasonably expect the City to leap
into this on their own, without holding the hand of the Watershed District. One of the action
steps to be recommended is that there be some engineering time devoted to these
purposes, that City staff assist the District in these efforts.
Moran: I asked Mr. Witt, of FEMA, about paying over and over for houses in the flood plain
that have been flooded. If someone files a claim, FEMA will pay the first claim, then the
second claim won't be paid, they'll be bought out at market cost and the property turned
into park land. I asked Mr. Witt about land-locked lakes, if this money would apply to this
kind of situation, he hasn't gotten back to me yet.
Kearney: How about revising the Joint Powers Agreement to move the two month window
in which the outlet can be opened at 902.0 from the beginning of March ending in April to
say March 15th to May 15?
Moran: With the political climate due to recent high rainfall, Shakopee would probably not
be receptive to this. We would probably be opening a can of worms.
The following water level management objectives and actions were developed and
approved by the committee.
ISSUE: Water Level Manaaement
Obiective 1. Review and co-present with the Watershed District water level
management options.
Action Step 1. City staff involvement with the Watershed District.
Action Step 2. Analyze low water level impacts.
Obiective 2. Joint effort between the Watershed District and City Staff on ways the City
can affect water levels.
Action Step 3. City Staff involvement with the Watershed District.
Action Step 4. Run Computer models with the Watershed District.
Action Step 5. Expand March/April window for opening the outlet gates at 902.0.
Action Step 6. Initiate discussions with the DNR to lower the Normal Water
Level (NWL).
MOTION BY WARNER, SECONDED BY BREITBACH TO APPROVE THE WATER
LEVEL MANAGEMENT OBJECTIVES AND ACTIONS AS DISCUSSED BY THE
COMMITTEE. MOTION PASSED UNANlMOUSL Y.
IV. NEW BUSINESS
There was no new business.
v. ADJOURNMENT
MOTION BY KEARNEY, SECONDED BY LARSON TO ADJOURN THE MEETING.
MOTION PASSED UNANlMOUSL Y. MEETING ADJOURNED AT 8: 15 P. M.
Respectfully submitted,
~~ng Secretary
MINUTES OF THE LAKE ADVISORY COMMITTEE
July21, 1999
I. CALL TO ORDER
The meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m. Members present: Marianne Breitbach, Kate
Haggerty, Roger Soderstrom and Paul Trapp. Members absent: Tom Kearney, Doug
Larson and Rick Warner. Others present: Dale Braddy and Lani Leichty.
II. CONSIDER APPROVAL OF JUNE 16, 1999, MEETING MINUTES
Minutes were not approved at this meeting since no quorum was present from the June
meeting. June minutes will be considered for approval at the August meeting.
III. REVIEW COUNCIL DIRECTIVE REGARDING NO-WAKE RESTRICTION REMOVAL
There was discussion about how many times the lake had reached the 904 no-wake level,
when the original ordinance went into effect and how the 3-day waiting period was arrived
at for lifting the no-wake period.
Soderstrom: I don't think the three day waiting period was a magic number. Council
probably didn't want the off/on-again confusion to the public in case it rained right after the
no-wake was lifted. I would recommend that the no-wake be lifted immediately once the
lake drops below 904.0 with the discretion of the City Manager. Weather forecasting, for
the short term is pretty accurate, the City Manager could remove the no-wake or deny it
depending upon the forecast.
Trapp: Now we're making the City Manager a weather forecaster, there needs to be a
number to go by in determining when to remove the no-wake.
Braddy: It seems like Dave Moran mentioned that it takes 3 days after a rain before flows
peak coming into Prior Lake from the south, that's probably where the 3 days comes from.
Trapp: We explore where the 3 days comes from, look at lake levels and past storm
events. Maybe it's not necessary to wait for 3 days before removing the no-wake.
Soderstrom: Maybe the intent is to get the lake back in use again as quickly as possible.
If you look at both elevations above and below 904, what's the negative of taking the no-
wake off immediately when it reaches this level? You'd just end up putting the no-wake
back on again.
16200 Eagle Creek Ave, S.E., Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372-1714 / Ph, (612) 447-4230 / Fax (612) 447-4245
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
I .
Leichty agreed to research the past history of the no-wake ordinance, lake levels
associated with it after it was taken off and when the ordinance was adopted.
IV. COMPREHENSIVE LAKE MANAGEMENT PLAN (WATER QUALITY)
Braddy: We should invite someone from DNR Fisheries in to talk to the LAC about water
quality, fisheries and what they're doing in Prior Lake.
Trapp: A second objective could be milfoil. The University of Minnesota is studying the
weevil, we should invite them to do testing here in Prior Lake. An action step should be to
contact the University of Minnesota to see what research they're doing in the area of
milfoil.
Braddy: Is there is a plan to do dredging on the lake in areas of need?
Leichty: Yes, by the Green Heights channel area there is a sediment build up, there are
plans to dredge out this area.
Trapp: Once you start dredging a lot of nutrients, heavy metals, etceteras are stirred with
construction.
Breitbach: Winter salts, is there a way that we can determine the impacts this has on
water quality?
Trapp: There's a lot of information out there on this area that we can look at and study.
Maybe another objective is to come up with a monitoring plan to see the results on water
quality in the long run. A monitoring plan should be detailed enough outlining the
parameters to be monitored.
Haggerty: An action step under Objective #1 should be to enact a no-phosphorous
fertilizer ordinance.
Braddy: Maybe we need a monitoring plan that is coordinated with the other governmental
agencies.
Trapp: I suggest that we recommend that a lake manager be hired full-time by the City
under a separate objective.
The following water level management objectives and actions were reviewed by the
committee:
ISSUE: Water Qualitv
Goal: Protect and improve water quality by reducing point and non-point source pollution.
Obiective 1. Reduce nutrient loading to Prior Lake.
Action Step 1 a. Install water quality ponds or structures where feasible in all
subwatersheds that drain to Prior Lake during street
reconstruction projects or when possible.
T
Action Step 1 b. Protect the quality of upstream waters from the harmful effects
of serious erosion, either during or after construction of all
development to ensure that runoff from these sites is of good
quality.
Action Step 1 c. Implement a no-phosphorous fertilizer ordinance banning the
application of phosphorous based lawn fertilizers (unless soil
tests show a deficiency of phosphorous).
Obiective 2. Manage to the extent possible Eurasian water milfoil to limit spreading
and to allow recreational use of the lake..
Action Step 2a. Keep abreast of the latest discoveries in Eurasian water milfoil
control and eradication.
Action Step 2b. Continue working with the Watershed District in managing
Eurasian water milfoil.
Obiective 3. Develop a permanent water quality monitoring program.
Action Step 3a. Develop a plan to implement the water quality monitoring
program.
MOTION BY HAGGERTY, SECONDED BY TRAPP TO HA VE LEICHTY FORMALIZE THE
WA TER QUALITY OBJECTIVES AND ACTION STEPS AS DISCUSSED BY THE
COMMITTEE AND BRING THEM TO THE AUGUST MEETING FOR FURTHER
DISCUSSION AND APPROVAL. MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSL Y.
V. NEW BUSINESS
There was no new business.
VI. ADJOURNMENT
MOTION BY SODERSTROM, SECONDED BY BREITBACH TO ADJOURN THE
MEETING. MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSL Y. MEETING ADJOURNED AT 8:22 P.M.
Respectfully submitted,
-------.--.---.-----.... ._--_...._-~---_.__..--_..._-_.._._....
CURRENT GOALS, OBJECTIVES AND ACTIONS STEPS
FOR THE PRIOR LAKE CLMP (7-21-99)
1. Shoreland Preservation
Shoreland Manaoement Goals:
A. Promote natural approaches for shoreland preservation.
B. Promote restoration of altered shorelines.
Obiectives:
1. Assist residents in stabilizing and maintaining natural shorelines.
2. Educate lakeshore owners on DNR and City lakeshore practices.
3. Assist DNR in preserving natural shoreline.
4. Inform lakeshore owners who have altered shoreline not within DNR
regulations.
Action Steps:
a. Conduct shoreline inventory.
b. Distribute DNR pamphlet, The Water's Edge, to alllakeshore residents
via a volunteer group.
c. Notify lakeshore owners of shoreline inventory.
d. Educate lakeshore owners on rules and regulations from the DNR and
City.
e. Educate lakeshore owners on erosion control.
f. Publicize lakeshore owners who have made adjustments for natural
shorelines.
g. Provide names of shoreland consulting firms to lakeshore owner's.
h. Review City lot variance criteria.
i. Conduct annual lake surveys by the Lake Advisory Committee.
j. Publicize lake and water quality information in the Prior Lake
American.
2. Surface Water Use Management
Surface Water Use Manaaement Goals:
A. Manage lake use for safe enjoyment of diverse public interests.
B. Establish parameters for lake use.
Obiective 1. Review current surface water rules and regulations.
Action Steps:
1 a. Collect information on minor/adult boating and snowmobile
requirements.
1 b. Collect data on other lake regulations in the state.
Obiective 2. Reduce number of surface water use violations.
Action Steps:
2a. Collect number of tickets and warnings given by the County
Sheriff and the DNR on Prior Lake for both summer and
winter activities.
1 ~
Obiective 3. Improve and emphasize responsible surface water use
practices/awareness.
Action Steps:
3a. Provide education to the public through the Prior Lake
American, License Bureau, Postings, Clubs and classes by
the DNR/City.
3. Water Level Management - Goals:
A. Work with the various agencies and public in managing the water level.
B. Educate the public on water level management.
Obiective 1. Review and co-present with the Watershed District water
level management options.
Action Steps:
1 a. City staff involvement with the Watershed District.
1 b. Analyze low water level impacts.
Obiective 2. Joint effort between the Watershed District and City
Staff on ways the City can affect water levels.
Action Steps:
2a. City Staff involvement with the Watershed District.
2b. Run Computer models with the Watershed District.
2c. Expand the March/April window for opening the outlet gates
at 902.0.
2d. Initiate discussions with the DNR to lower the Normal Water
Level (NWL).
4. Water Quality - Goal:
A. Protect and improve water quality by reducing point and non-point
source pollution.
Obiective 1: Reduce nutrient loading to Prior Lake.
Action Step:
1 a. Install water quality ponds or structures where feasible in all
subwatersheds that drain to Prior Lake during street
reconstruction projects or when possible.
1 b. Protect the quality of upstream waters from the harmful
effects of serious erosion, either during or after construction
of all development to ensure that runoff from these sites is of
good quality.
G&O&AC.DOC
r -
1 c. Implement a no-phosphorous fertilizer ordinance banning
the application of phosphorous based lawn fertilizers (unless
soil tests show a deficiency of phosphorous).
Obiective 2: Manage to the extent possible Eurasian water milfoil to
limit spreading and to allow recreational use of the lake.
Action Step:
2a. Keep abreast of the latest discoveries in Eurasian water
milfoil control and eradication.
2b. Continue working with the Watershed District in managing
Eurasian water milfoil.
Obiective 3: Develop a permanent water quality monitoring program.
Action Step:
3a. Develop a plan to implement the water quality monitoring
program.
5. Land Use Practices - Goals:
A. Minimize the transport of nutrients, sediment and runoff from city
streets and lands which impact the Prior Lake watershed.
B. Maximize flood storage upstream of Prior Lake.
6. Public Education - Goals:
A. Increase awareness of concepts that are critical to managing Prior
Lake through information and education.
G&O&AC.DOC
Water Quality
Goal:
A. Protect and improve water quality by reducing point and non-point
source pollution.
Obiective 1:
Reduce nutrient loading to Prior Lake.
Action Step:
1 a. Install water quality ponds or structures where feasible in all
subwatersheds that drain to Prior Lake during street
reconstruction projects or when possible.
1 b. Protect the quality of upstream waters from the harmful effects of
serious erosion, either during or after construction of all
development to ensure that runoff from these sites is of good
quality.
\ e:... ' No-p~~~s or~~
Obiective 2:
Manage to the extent possible Eurasian water milfoil to limit spreading
and to allow recreational use of the lake.
Action Step:
2a. Keep abreast of the latest discoveries in Eurasian water milfoil
control and eradication,l I
,
2b. Continue working with the Watershed District in managing
Eurasian water milfoil.
'lL-
.>>t
~'0*^'e. 3'J Oevekp Q p.tflr'a,r..e.r:c~:';w-.~ rr.,rll-m I
i1-Cb..,.,. ~_ A .;- O~tr. .. ~I-. -tz, 'r/I-.;C & ~r,g,
,--Acb~ 5l-e{1'. -Annu:d ,~~.tfJ t-E~',.. ~ 5r"ij i...k~
, ,-
A P>~f)\)T
7=. "} R. hi.
D..L. I ~-
PR.e3l:/L1T
m..t3. J P'r../IO{
OX> - J R~s.
!- At MEUlAJ6
7-2/-?9
Re5e.aJ~ Q04) l-lmJ ~ -b~~ htlt~ ;c \eachJ 90+.S\1a-.
19\AAo.nC<-- went 'miD f\a-ca.. \ hllW j(jflj <9C~"l ;:c ~ wa~ r&
hlTYe.c~ ~ 904 I ~~. ;;t-'uaef n ~? wA~ w~ KJ- aJrtd-?
S~~J R~s.. ~ /IJp ~j't;#1 ~1 ~ w,.x ~ rr!o~f ~~SIM J Ih ca.se /c fa-,0"
vJ oXtS' ~trol , We- CevJJ rn~e- ir J,r-sod1~
-G~&\~ C&w~ '71JD pm
rl s.... ~~~ -1u M~. It\t- %'4 I wi J[6C-' ct c~ ;n~J.(, uedlu-f:ft v> rat
CtUM! ~ I he.. ~ \ fr It-j or ~ A~ -Gre-.a;t- ~1 -{;r M ...
R T - ~ t4w weft, ~ (/)1 ~ r,J~ k Q.Sto J t4Je- n~ tp be a (J~ ~ )' ~,
08-> ~s ~ ~ ~ U l~'~ 3k;~ tiii*r t{ r~ ~ f~ ~ PI- rIP
P~1 ~ ~b. ~t tk- '3Jy~ ~! .~ ~
fT- -1' CtrLrr,-, 'ffv J ~~ o\t/~ I WeJ;-ct ~ ~~ ~ j,Jc, ~) ~k- n;t ~ ~
f4 It- Or. .
/Z s ~ 7 ~t,p k ~ r; -t.J Id J lk h,.J" 'to 14St- ~ q<; f~ ~~ to s~jlk,
V0Gfld~f'm ~ J,<,if'ib~ ~)/hL \/~, Gt~~?t'#~
f.~ -> J1:- Y>>v U @ VI( ~ ~ ?ttJv/ ~ '/It Hj~ l iJ.M, ~t- offJ'yhtJt~ ~ it ~ 9/J'1-1
y#J ftM';:t; bh ~ 40cJr-,
. 00- Ph 07fh M&t6 h-d - D(J-,~ QL.
:c.~~~ ON(<. ~ ~~--J, ~ ~'M5 ~ ~/ 5/mJJ ~ U / tK'io P /FJ~,
Wt ~ ~ UL /YI~ pr6Jfthr\ ~ ~N'vY)k"
; 5W~~e5S ~ (fcwlTOW)
Db-->-uM '\V 5taft~~, ~~ ~,~. U'1 ~WA.
~ ~k so~~ \r~ 0f\1 rt ~~~rh \\ ~ co. Ute h\~ t. tG1t'^- ~ Lfwtu- ~~ I~J~({t'tf,
w\..t~'tt ~ i" ,./... c:tc.
- T
PI- ~ ~ j~.., /Jy~-;-> jI/J? /3> 6~ 1;evIl/ ~/?<t ~t-,I1--L- ~ cd:; I~;(;e.-
70/1p Iv bl- kt-h02- .
IJ~ ~*Y- ~ ~ j//J1 p7;> ~ hlkr 12~ ~'~ ~ ~ /}, ~
t:V4t- of- /J?;(t/J.
o 13 ~ Is 7/; if~ A ~ ~ 4k- jtd- J7~ )v~1j) ?
LL -~ ;;~ '7 <:9Fe-,.. ~ ~ :!5~ P" ~-
11= ~ t9~ y~ Jc ~'3 ~ 5'~ JPSY,- 0/ ~ .hJeM/ ~tc-
/fJ~-> kft)'r<r ~ / /~ tWt(., ~ ~ tfwt" we ~ M-~ 7'1t- /~ -/4-, ~~
tHI wa:li:-r 1~ ~
ff ~ vives 4 IlJ -t t9{lI'n~ od ;/ae: ~ t:M t:kc (/G ~ I~ ~ j 5~-
7pp /'~Wn~ ~ :to It-I ~k-~tf.u tJ~/~ /5 ~Q-.
0/ w/tt1 a )r)~~ t'~ ifJ, :see- k 1Z- /'t!';/~,
~
O~edJJ(,
W(fu~~~
P\~ R ~L wrvlJ k ~~ ~/~ tk F~ +0 ~ ~rtNeJ~
l<H. ~ S~ Ie -) ~h/;1 (Jp~~ of ~<<--t:u. /If)f-~iJ- ()I'd,~
Ot)~ ~l we- nett fA ~ -tv ~NJt ~/ '#t- ~ ~s "Mt-
fT"'7 5~ M we- f~ ~ "t.tv.. '""'Y" Ix. ~J.- tytik e;b; tA-iJ.r fA
S~Ji1 f~m~-Q-4\' ~bJ~-:J? ~
KH ~I Pr ~ -7 ~ -K, ~C1~~ 00) tc~~ , !I ~ f ~~ ~ IIV)d- ~ - Pl6td.;
~a}OW"\' ~5 ~I fYJ0 G J.o ~ g-;Zl,f/y\
~~""--'T'
'""-r