HomeMy WebLinkAboutKINGSTON WOODS PUD SECOND FILING PRELIMINARY - 58 91B - SUBMITTAL DOCUMENTS - ROUND 1 - DRAINAGE REPORTSHEAR
ENGINEERING
CORPORATMN
PRELEVIINARY DRAINAGE REPORT
for
KINGSTON WOODS P.U.D. 2nd FILING
(Previously Tract C, Stonegate Drive and Block 1, Horsetooth Commons P.U.D.)
Ft. Collins, Colorado
Prepared for:
PROGRESSIVE LIVING STRUCTURES, INC.
4190 North Garfield Avenue
Loveland, Colorado 80538
Prepared By:
SHEAR ENGINEERING CORPORATION
4836 South College Avenue, Suite 12
Ft. Collins, Colorado 80525
Phone: (303)226-5334
Project No: 1005-27-92
Date: July, 1992
4836 S. College, Suite 12 Fort Collins, CO 80525 (303)226-5334
I
• PAGE
'
k \ yV �S��aJ � �� � S �
0len,\1 :%N 1 o �OAS ws
Y PREPARED BY niEU
1olfS -z_7 —at Z.
2
3
4
IS
S0m;—, V6 SCO
s
6
_ 13,1,E + 3,6 7:
8
= 6 •Zz
9
, 0
Z R P 1( vt_ 3. Z
12
13
14
,s
tit= Zou i? hG = 3,5 :.
s
� 16
r.
17
18
19
'Tub`its. S�o�
20
11
CC = O,SU �L�w�)
CC = G,�,S
Rope\s�bv;�er' )ew
21
Cm (ZOO) ��'
13, Z
22
1,1 l3
+
-Two 1V CNr Ror
23
r1
Tr—, CZ40= I,�d7l 1•�- G,S� Z
= 4,�1 1e1in)
I = ZJ .Z m I-N
24
'
25
\'t
26
L1,4Z 13
+
27
( 1�
executive�28
1 •I.Z �>;
• PAGE
'
I` �N S5� �N uQ (�S
\0 S
C� e�•,�\. g_t�z rslou u C
won, 11"a is lit,
PREPARED BV
DATE ��blgZ
toe5-21-qZ
2
_
Ioo r S�UC„�
3
0 ,5)
O A-3 L-�w
C 1,25)�O,tis� 1,14f1
s� 1 C v�}v �Sle�
6
7
9
<13
r Sion.;
103
m,1r\j
11
r
1, 6f
12
13
I,1Z 3
14
15
11 1
a >�S l /
„ 3-
16
17
20
Z.I, 2 cis
2,
22
29
ONC, V L
1
24
,
25
26
27
execrilive 28
• PAGE
k \ yV ��j 1 �!J W V WN
yi� \S j� �O�IJ\\1 1qf\)$
ti�\ 5�`t— I La t,J G
PREPARED BV m�G
DATG %IIeI�1Z
O>`^. aJ4SlwsTeel[
2
s
t\
4
G
C -lup,3c�
6
_
9
,o
=- 370 .0 C = 7,� s = I•� 7 �u
-0 u-0,r,� �tiss<J
12
13
15
1 - 1"n �1.1 -G,3_ .. 3UU) z. _
Z�.
16
17
OU S�Ur
18
20
' Iz
21
I,i� rl3
22
23
�1VTh1\ Zn1'1CN5.T ��/
24
L = 1,• �'1 ,N hr Lion =
2s
28
27
0,36) 0-7 / �.22�
U C0.3S1 3.3
cxeeufrac 28
_
• PAGE
NO.
1
Yy L}$
r-\UW
IiU Y`j W OU V1S ��
LUes„O t..Y\$UIJ *C lC�l
, PREPARED BY (�
'
once�-Z-
lub5 -Z�-SZ
2
3
0,30 0,3
4
QevCau e�1
0,So 0.63
2.1,Z
s
6
I`I
U�OUS �ihlrUc S I �U�
U� 1�Ot5�fOuTh
7
C.orn e �s
�'v� c�tt 5hal�ar 1�`d
ec r� 1r) v, Red ehl;
6N e_ h\ -;LS 'C Z s U - 0
I s 4- C- -ff Orr.,
9
10
Ou�S
t
SL�f. �%ehrs tc-,)e_ Sra
11
f \ \r
Y?",J si.{ 3 of `1
3 6 Drse �aol
12
CUW�b-no1�15
PUYJ sub-,- ,-,S1 rJS � � C- G,6e.1S '
13
5 I Y"1
f
I
14
e,4
15
L
3,US 0,$`�s
�6,to afSs
16
17
\\ ``
r(( efse.�oo��}1 Cor�.tr\\or�l5 �U� CJ1cvL`
\
eJ. INS
18
"7H�n.� �015
1e.1r\
�Z UtJO�C?�CS d' Ltd.. Y'tnn•.,N��-�
�U\\ �e h'lU�,'�Sm,� ..
19
Y ¢s��¢N QS
k\tl 5� ld5 \5 15 f0
OS"d\ C,\5
20
21
htc, GEC �C:Cr�1
\
��5 c. 10 or
22
23
24IAN
C
25
rscioa�
0.3U 0,3rf 0,56•7
26
27
e esul�o,�t�. 2 se, 5 ,..r
'� re, r• 1 �S �r� -
—execttfive' 28
• PAOE
N0. a
Cl
i
K �S�Orl
J
p1ilJ1 j
PREPARED (iY t G
DATE ;
1
2
3
4S. C,Orn�b�rvh�lOiJ (J�
\\
1�U1���4m�\
\\ \\ \ \
OTV \tXf.S HNfI� rV I fi.l
5
���uc c:• �1, c o�YS� v�� W
e !Wt` NN\ •T eN4\\ t
s
�ti„s u rec%oLt �)�e
c�evo\o �e low
7
�J a �)Q"$
C Geu
(�
6
Y.1 siOrJ Wo0AS IL
050 0,63
- i
4 S,4 Lz,
i�uise�(Oo(� Cem� nr1S
O,S6 O.iU
�,69 5 •4 Z2 S ,7 ' 3. S
10
11
1 _ �e i,ssdv»e_
tti,ti� il�—
\ 1l
T(m�
t2
13
O �o. 6vr or
uS2 �1`
14
(�tJ2�o c»e N
2va.1 Lhov tie. Crc., -�or SubbNS
15
n�1 \\ucn<AGA, co""v-,oNs VI Otr r5)) f\),q 0
1s
17
,
19
20
21
22
a
23
24
25
26
27
executive.' 28
No Text
(COS-2l-'-)Z
RECOMMENDED TYPICAL CROSS SECTIONS
FOR NEW DEVELOPMENT
IwJ wJ
L 50' _I
O
O
z
z
x
a
a
J
Q
O
Q
J
J
pp
J
3
N
N
w
U, W
w
U
3
ww
O
w
Q
m z 0
Q
w
Z
w
Y
Un
m
a
m
-i
cn
4
5'
6'
13'
12'
13,
6
51
4
Cpmo►.io 'D2lvl
68' RIGHT OF WAY
COLLECTOR
INTERSECTION/TURN LANE
(BIKE LANES, NO PARKING)
wJ wJ
50'
z z
x a a x
J J
Q J J Q Q
3 N w w N
z y Q Q w Y O W
Q Q — m m Q Q
In J a. m F- I-- m a J UI
4 5 8 1.
_6 11' 11 116'1-8 __5' 4'I
68' RIGHT OF WAY
COLLECTOR
(WITH PARKING AND BIKE LANES)
D-2
4.2.3 Major Storms
The determination of the allowable street flow due to the major storm shall be based on the
following criteria:
• Theoretical capacity based on allowable depth and inundated area.
• Reduced allowable flow due to velocity conditions.
4.2.3.1 Street Encroachment
Table 4.2 sets forth the allowable street inundation for the major storm runoff.
Table 4-2
MAJOR STORM — STREET RUNOFF ENCROACHMENT
Strewt Classification
Local (includes places, alleys,
marginal access & collector)
Arterial and Major Arterial
4.2.3.2Theoritical Capacity
Maximum Encroachment
Residential dwellings, puouc,
commercial, and industrial buildings
shall not be inundated at the ground line
unless buildings are flood proofed. The
depth of water over the crown shall not
exceed 6 inches.
Residential dwellings, public, commercial
and industrial buildings shall not be
inundated at the ground line unless
buildings are flood proofed. Depth of
water at the street crown shall not exceed
6 inches to allow operation of emergency
vehicles. The depth of water over the
gutter flowline shall not exceed 18 inches.
In some cases, the 18 inch depth over the
gutter flowline is more restrictive than the
6 inch depth over the street crown. For
these conditions, the most restrictive of
the two criteria shall govern.
Manning's equation shall be used to calculate the theoretical runoff -carrying capac-
ity based on the allowable street inundation. The equation will be as follows:
Q =1.486 R 213S' 12 A
n
Where Q = Capacity, cfs
in = Roughness Coefficient _
R = Hydraulic Radius, A/P
S=Slope, feet/feet
A = Area, feet
Appropriate "n" values can be found in Table 4-3. Any values not listed should be
located in the Geological Survey Water Supply Paper, 1849.
Table 4-3
MANNING'S ROUGHNESS COEFFICIENTS FOR STREET SURFACES
Surface Roughness Coefficient
Gutter& Street...................................................................... 0.016
DryRubble........................................................................... 0.035
Mowed Kentucky Bluegrass ................................................. 0.035
Rough Stony Field w/Weeds................................................ 0.040
Sidewalk & Driveway............................................................ 0.016
MAY 1984 4-5 DESIGN CRITERIA
4.2.2.1 Street Encroachment
The encroachment of gutter flow on the street for the initial storm runoff shall not ex-
ceed the specifications set forth in Table 4-1. A storm drainage system shall begin
where the encroachment reaches the limits found in this table.
Table 4-1
INITIAL STORM — STREET RUNOFF ENCROACHMENT
Street Classification Maximum Encroachment
Local (includes places, alleys, No curb -topping. t Flow may spread to
marginal access) crown of street
Collector No curb -topping. t Flow spread must
leave at least one lane width free of water
Major Arterial
No curb -topping. t Flow spread must
leave at least one-half (1 /2) of roadway
width free of water in each direction
T Where no curbing exists, encroachment shall not extend over property lines.
4.2.2.2Theoretical Capacity
Once the allowable pavement encroachment has been established,
gutter capacity shall be computed using the following revised Manning
for flow in shallow triangular channels:
O = 0.56 Z S"2 yera
n
theoretical
s equation
Where O =Theoretical Gutter Capacity, cfs
y = Depth of Flow at Face of Gutter, feet
n = Roughness Coefficient
S = Channel Slope, feet/feet
Z = Reciprocal of Cross Slope, feet/feet
A nomograph based on the previous equation has been developed and is included
in Figure 4-1. The graph is applicable for all gutter configurations. An "n" value of
0.016 shall be used for all calculations involving street runoff.
4.2.2.3 Allowable Gutter Flow
In order to calculate the actual flow rate allowable, the theoretical capacity shall be
multiplied by a reduction factor. These factors are determined by the curve in Figure
4-2 entitled "Reduction Factors for Allowable Gutter Capacity". The allowable gutter
flow calculated thusly is the value to be used in the drainage system calculations.
MAY 1984
4-2 DESIGN CRITERIA
10000
9000
8000
7000
6000
5000
4000
3000
2000
1000
900
600 i
700 -1
600 i
500 a
O
400
300
�Q
4
200
100
90
6o
70
60
40
40
30
V4411
IH]
From BPR
2.0
T- —
L
EQUATION: G•0.5B (A)S1 JR^
11 1) ROUGHNESS COL/rICILNT IN MARRING
.10
FORMULA APPROPRIATE TO MATERIAL
IN
BOTTOM OF CMARNEC
08
1.0
L IS RECIPROCAL OF CAMS SLOPE
REFERENCE; N. A. B PROCEEDINGS 19N6,
.07
PAGE ISO• [OVATION 1141
.80
O6
.70
EXAMPLE (SEE DASHED LINES)
U.
.05
Poo
.60
Q INLAI A 0.03
,^
TO
\
1 • EA
. 1100
50
.04
RIB
.50
IS • .OE
U
50
J • 0.+E
2O
lL
FIND. 0 • E.0 CIS
_—_
.03
.40
10
Z
__ _------
Z
5
Z
_ 30
_
—'--_
:_
.02
T
T
�
..
5
.2
W
INSTRUCTIONS (7
.1
J
.01
.0T
w
I. LONN[CT 1I11 RATIO WITH SLOP[ IS) Q
.05
Z
AND CONNECT 011CHARG[ 401 vwIT. =
05
Z
.GOB
DEPTH IJI THEE TWO LINES MUST U/�
OI
AQ
.007
INTERSECT AT TURNING LINE TON (n
T
COMPLETE SOLUTION. Q .01
lil
V
.006
+. row SHALLOW005
J
�
V•SN1PL0 CNNNMLL
O
AS SHOWN USE NOMOGRAPH
.004
ALT. + • `
T
w
n-
O
TO DETERMINE �
ri
J
.003
DISCHARGE 0, IN
°
N
PORTION 01 CHANNEL 1 _ �1, 11
RAVING WIOT. E' I A�
DETERMINE DEPTH J FOR TOTAL DISCHARGE IN .002
ENTIRE SECTION IF THEN USE NOMOGRAPH TO
DETERMINE ON IN SECTION O FDA O[PT.
• r0 DIE r[AYIN[ DIs[xARc[
r'
IN COM/OSIIE S[Lf10N+• J O i
FOLLOW INSTRUCTION S I `• I ,001
r0 OBTAIN DISCHARGE IN
SECTION G AT ASSUNEO IN IJ•J'I
DLPFN J ; OBTAIN 0' FOR
SLOP[ RATIO is AND DEPT' i THEN 0, • ON' OL
Figure 4-1
NONOGRAPH FOR FLOW IN TRIANGULAR GUTTERS
(From U.S. Dept. of Commerce, Bureau of Public Roads, 1965)
I- .20
F-
Z
O
a
I—
V) .10
W
a .08
W
W .07
06
O 05
m
Cr .04
M
U
0
MAY 1984
4-3
DESIGN CRITERIA
BMW
kyj I WA
1.0
.9
.8
.7
V
z .3
w
n.
0
IL
0 .25
c�
w
N
15
10'-NPE. IULIET AT CWC.. T-b«►T
12
10
II 8
10 6 F
� w
0
9 04
U- w
i
Ir 3 z
8 w -
n. L
2�
� n o
7 S406
z scBoP/ tcJ
L
4W6 z
� .90c z
Part a • o.
CL
5.5 0
`� .6 u_
LU 0 0
5 zz .4 =
z w U
4.5 z o 3 w
u-
0 .2 0
4 =
0 ~ o
z
z z
3.5 w w
o_ J .I cr
0
w wo .08
3 0 1-- 0
F 0 .06 0
= 0 z
c� w -
w Cr .04 tr
2.5 = d 03 a
r 3
�- w
a
.02 0
a
2 a �
U tL
w
.01 �
L LL
0
0
4Yo a
- 1.5 --- -- -- -- cr:
0=2h
1.2
5
4
3
2
1.5
.9
.8
.7
.6
5
.4
.3
.25
.2
15
I[e]
1005-zI-92
Figure 5-2
NOMOGRPAH FOR CAPACITY
OF from o OP NING INLETS BIN SUMPS,
Nomograph
EPRESSION DEPTH 2"
A
5-10 DESIGN CRITERIA
MAY 1984
11 IZGP ® 0.40'/; CAPACLTY aMew _L a Tux.)
HYDRAULICS OF SEWERS
1.0) t40o Op04 0.3 OA
z= ows 0.3
1.000 1= OAM .02
e00 0=7
too 1 °0° o ooe 02
eo0 too 0409 0.1
�0 0 l o t :am
WO
30o 5o0 os 0m
Ons
400 w 0a
200 300 20 OA2 0.03
200 15 a 0.02 VG
300 v 0.03 G
eo 10 a is 0.01
100 t a 0.04 o ooe
w so % s S 0.104s1 0
6a
40 60 72 6 dot LOOS 2 0.004
3o sogg 6o s waa 0000
40 x 14
'0 4m as
• 4e 4 $ 41 r 0noz
42 c nmi
CAP AN - _ 20 a 3` \ iw S 0 4 3 01 0.001
a 27 Q D \ • 1004 li' 8 o.000e
5 e c o d— 244 ` c 0..o0i LZ � � 0.0006
6 10 m E 21 I%�D pl �: \ 4 ` 00M
s e c le 3 0.3 � 0b003
25 4 6 S 13 e
s 0.4 onoo2
3 u
4 OS
2 3 10 0.6 6 OM01
e 0.7 040006
7
2 0n0006—
_ _ 6 lA a 0.000os
a00004 .
L
9 00000
1.0
]
US
0.6 OA 4 c 10 0.00002
0.4 04 2
0,3 O3. D 0.00001
CIA 3 0.000008
az w
15 O.o00006
4 0400005
0.13 0.sle
z 0.000004
FIGURE 22. Alignmeut dart for M■nninformula for pipe Sow.
Gravel
li Pits :A-
3
5 4
C
Cd
I
Christma Field
M HU
J
.8-M... L
W nil
Ili ajd' 11 7o;
wqr!
I-
5,91 a a
F9 II II
I--
r: Ll
tj 20
'A
7E),
3
-Of
L
7,
00A A S
17 UNIVER I
j FEE 11
NM "VeiT
l' Dr, 1i va�,
nyon
'14
nyon
Dam
. . . . . . . . . . . . .
r
Kingston Woods PUD 2nd,—
MIr gg 1��' Grav I
M.
V
-2- -,—P't�
R apt
Lake 3 Ak'
A
Spring Canyon Gravel
Dam Pit
4)
%
ra-
lJ6.AL
S( "t
we
1510
jt
e La dL
15 'o
8� 9
N BM14954
............
J11111 -11 F
Jt
Theati
•
1
'KII
jw"',ib
Fit
N,
Zz,:
pxl
...........
Omep H6#9
50 d
/549
34 35 4991 5;
36
Mc Clellan(414IL_
Cem
-b
to o
C,
It
SITE LOCATION
Figure 1
PRELIMINARY DRAINAGE REPORT
KINGSTON WOODS P.U.D. 2nd FILING
PROJECT NO: 1005-27-92
L GENERAL LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION
A. Property Location
1. Kingston Woods P.U.D. 2nd Filing is located in the Southeast Quarter of Section
27, Township 7 North, Range 69 West of the 6th P.M., Larimer County, Colorado.
It is immediately east of Kingston Woods P.U.D. currently under City of Fort
Collins Planning review.
2. More specifically the site is located on the northwest corner of the intersection of
Horsetooth Road and Richmond Drive. The site is currently designated as Block 1
and Tract C of Horsetooth Commons P.U.D.
B. Description of the Property
1. The site has an area of approximately 5.47 acres.
2. The site is currently vacant and has native vegetation. Utilities are stubbed to the
property. However, previously designed drainage appurtenances intended to serve
the site were never installed. ty
3. Kingston Woods P.U.D. 2nd Filing is bounded on the south by t, on
the east by Richmond Drive and on the north by Casa Grande P.U.D. The property
to the east is currently undeveloped, but is under plan review at the City of Fort
Collins as Kingston Woods P.U.D.
II DRAINAGE BASINS AND SUB -BASINS
A. Major Basin Description
_ 1. Kingston Woods P.U.D. 2nd Filing (previously Tract C and Block 1 of Horsetooth
Cotntnons) is currently a part of Basin "G" of the Foothills Drainage Basin as
identified in the 1981 Basin Master plan by Resource Consultants, Inc.
2. All storm drainage from this site is currently designed to be conveyed to an existing
36" RCP storm sewer located on the west side of Shields Street adjacent to
Horsetooth Commons P.U.D and the Market at Horsetooth Commons P.U.D. This
storm sewer conveys stormwater across Shields Street to Cunningham Corner.
B. Sub -Basin Description
1. Redpeak Engineering of Windsor, Colorado prepared a drainage study for
Horsetooth Commons P.U.D. addressing the area which will now be Kingston
Woods P.U.D. 2nd Filing.
a) In that study, the area south of Patterson Place originally designated Tract "G"
(Lots 1-9, Block 2), was considered for multi -unit development and a site
specific detention pond was proposed.
b) The area north of Patterson Place (Block 1) was considered for 18 single family
units with no site specific detention. Stormwater would be conveyed to the east
under Richmond Drive to a future commercial tract.
c) Interim detention would be provided on Lot 3 of the Market at Horsetooth
Commons P.U.D. until Lot 3 of the Market at Horsetooth Commons P.U.D.
develops. The proposed detention pond for Lot 3 of the Market at Horsetooth
Commons P.U.D. would then consider Block 1 of Horsetooth Commons P.U.D.
in final detention requirements.
d) All developed condition storm runoff would concentrate at inlet R-S at the
Southwest corner of the intersection of Shields Street and Richmond Drive.
III DRAINAGE DESIGN CRITERIA
A. Regulations
1. This preliminary report and the preliminary Grading and Drainage Plan for
Kingston Woods P.U.D. 2nd Filing were prepared in accordance with the
requirements of City of Fort Collins Storm Drainage Design Criteria and Erosion
Control Criteria.
2. This preliminary report considers the recommendations made in the approved final
drainage reports for Horsetooth Commons P.U.D. and the Market at Horsetooth
Commons P.U.D.
B. Development Criteria Reference and Constraints
1. Shields Street is constructed to full arterial standards adjacent to the south boundary
of the project. Richmond Drive is fully constructed adjacent to the east of the
project except for sidewalk. Casa Grande P.U.D. is completed adjacent to the north
boundary of the project. Kingston Woods P.U.D., immediately west of the project
is currently under design. Design coordination is necessary between Kingston
Woods P.U.D. and Kingston Woods P.U.D. 2nd Filing.
2. The design of Kingston Woods P.U.D. by Northern Engineering of Fort Collins, is
currently considering alternative detention pond release scenarios in conjunction
with Casa Grande P.U.D. improvements. This may affect the final drainage for
Kingston Woods P.U.D. 2nd Filing. However, design considerations and details
had not been worked out by the date of preparation of this report, so original
Horsetooth Commons approved drainage concepts have been considered here.
C. Hydrologic Criteria
1. Runoff calculations are based on the "Rational" method.
2. Interim detention pond requirements will be based on the "Cumulative Runoff
Method".
D. Hydraulic Criteria
1. Storm sewer inlet design is based on the inlet curves provided in the criteria
manual.
2. Storm sewer design is based on Mannings Equation with Mannings coefficients as
suggested in the Drainage Criteria Manual.
IV DRAINAGE FACILITY DESIGN
A. General Concept
1. The drainage design concept for Kingston Woods P.U.D. 2nd Filing will remain
consistent with that for Horsetooth Conunons P.U.D. as proposed by Redpeak
Engineering.
2. Interim detention on Lot 3 of the Market at Horsetooth Commons will be provided.
Interim detention pond outfall will be provided to the existing storm sewer located
at the southeasterly corner of Lot 3 of the Market at Horsetooth Commons P.U.D.
B. Specific Details
1. Onsite detention is not considered for Kingston Woods P.U.
storm runoff will be conveyed to Lot 3 of the Market at H
P.U.D. (currently undeveloped) where an interim detention pond
2. Storm runoff from Kingston Woods P.U.D. 2nd Filing wi
Richmond Drive and travels in a northerly and easterly dire
generated from the site will be intercepted in Richmond Drive
turn, conveyed under Richmond Drive via a 24" RCP storm se
interim detention pond.
3. Detention pond outfall will be
the southeast corner of Lot 3,
D. 2nd Filing. All
orsetooth Commonswill be provided.
11 be conveyed to
ction. The runoff
by an inlet and in
wer to the proposed
directed to the existing 15" storm sewer located on
Market at Horsetooth Commons P.U.D. This storm
sewer system is a part of the Foothills Basin.
4. Erosion Control measures will be taken for the protection of downstream facilities.
V. CONCLUSIONS
A. Compliance With Standards
The grading and drainage design meets the City of Fort Collins storm drainage
design criteria. The design remains consistent with the drainage concept for this
portion of Horsetooth Commons as submitted by Redpeak Engineering and
approved by the City of Fort Collins.
VI REFERENCES
A. City of Fort Collins storm drainage design criteria and construction standards.
B. City of Fort Collins files for Horsetooth Commons P.U.D. and The Market At
Horsetooth Commons P.U.D.
C. Foothills Basin (Basin G) Drainage Master plan, by Resource Consultants, Inc.
D. Drainage Study for Horsetooth Commons Tract D (The Market At Horsetooth
Commons); Redpeak Engineering.
VII APPENDICES
A. Appendix A
1. Historic storm drainage calculations
2. Developed storm drainage calculations
3. Preliminary Drainage and grading plan (stuffer envelope)
". 9 90al 0 0.14M
PAGE
NO.
1
�1NSS�evV W�0�5
Vf�., �,S1cv�S�1n*JS
ew 6ro (Iss),-� S h oA
17welo
PREPARED BV m�U
DATE %ILI(RZ
�^ �o
2
3
4
= C),SC1 = 63
5
��
lir..e.
1 1Gioo Ta,
�T
oT Co Nc.eNlftiT,er� 1 = I
I.I- o,S 20��
i I
13,Z..
N CTc,Oovti1\� 7au�oG
7
-15 aio Ala
s t,i 4
9
13
1
(two r
10
lI Z
s
11
13
12or
13
14
1
15
16
17Io
5
r
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
execulivef' 28
PAGE �
NO.
'
j 1 `Oje �
TV �<J�
tor" S --
-
flow �o a roe-, jb btis„3 TJ�
PCCPASEDBV
DATE
- t oo� 21-ti7?—
2
3
C
a
Tc =
MIN s Ibrn1,�
S 3
5
Lthh
IN /
7
=
,e\% Jf �C1c�S
8
7
7p/
�
ADS
1
9
S11
y�
AYJS 1 C N. Awe- \
11 ```` � q
O-^'V`�d11 C O,S J/o l '7
10
11
I
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
execufiue' 28
' PAGE
1
1`���S�Oey WV��S
oi- L\hi
F1o� ssro,..
be'ielc
PREPARED BV �EV
2
aG
4
Q.(=6163
5
1 ern Tr, OTAC-tllil c �lOrV
�c, _
� Li 1 t
69-7(1-ccc p
--
s
= SS VC= 1,3� S=
2,39 0
0L
7
CA
-4, 5=
)azZ o
5fe. ro-A--
9
- �,81 U•1- �,h5
340
Tt = 3 ,
10
11
_ to
�30LF
s = 14S'
S)S
12
13
�SSurme �)�
3v��
�t =
V•� r*, r,
14
15
16
17
_
18
19
US
20
Gl 0 , 5 CZ•3)`3
00
= a, 63) Z
3. Tj
21
c 3 ,5 GT
- 13 cS
22
'
23
24
25
26
27
execuffve 28