HomeMy WebLinkAbout528-2006 RDA Reso
RESOLUTION NO. 528-2006
A RESOLUTION OF THE CHAIRMAN AND MEMBERS OF THE
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA (RDA),
APPROPRIATING FUNDS, IN A NOT TO EXCEED AMOUNT OF $1,094,816, FOR
AMENDMENT NO.5, TO THE DESIGN/BUILD AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE
CITY AND RIC-MAN INTRNATIONAL, INC., FOR THE WASHINGTON AVENUE
IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, PHASES II, IV, AND V, SAID AMENDMENT TO
PROVIDE DESIGN, PERMITTING, CONSTRUCTION AND CONSTRUCTION
ADMINISTRATION SERVICES, FOR THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE 16TH
STREET DRAINAGE AND OTHER MISCELLANEOUS IMPROVEMENTS;
FURTHER APPROPRIATING FUNDS, IN THE AMOUNT OF $52,600, FOR CIP
MANAGEMENT FEES; WITH ALL APPROPRIATED FUNDS TO BE PROVIDED
FROM CITY CENTER REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY FUNDS.
WHEREAS, the Washington Avenue Improvements Project, Phases II, IV, and V (the
Project) is one of the components of the City's Neighborhood Improvements Program; and
WHEREAS, construction of the Project is presently well ahead of schedule and is nearing
completion; and
WHEREAS, in January 2004, the City entered into a Design/Build Agreement with the firm
of Ric-Man International, Inc. (Ric-Man), for the design and construction of the Project
improvements, which consisted of drainage, water and sewer installations, lighting, landscaping,
sidewalks, and other renovations and reconstruction (the Agreement); and
WHEREAS, the Agreement with Ric-Man included the engineering evaluation, analysis
and recommendation on the conditions of drainage in the Washington Avenue and 16th Street area;
and
WHEREAS, the Agreement only required the engineering study and a proposal (report) for
the completion of design and construction of the recommended improvements, and Ric-Man has
now submitted the report and has made several recommendations for the improvements; and
WHEREAS, the report and the recommendations have been carefully evaluated by Hazen
and Sawyer, the City's Program Manager, CIP staff, and the Public Works staff, who are all in
agreement that Alternative No.2, as set forth below, is the more appropriate and cost effective
alternative; and
WHEREAS, Alternative NO.2 entails the addition of five gravity wells and the rehabilitation
of two existing wells and includes additional piping and drainage structures, and all the other tasks
required to obtain the necessary permits, construction engineering, construction administration, etc.;
and
WHEREAS, other alternatives were deemed unnecessary, less cost effective, or not as
efficient in sufficiently improving the existing conditions; and
WHEREAS, in order to fund Amendment No.5, the City requires that the RDA hereby
appropriate funding, in the amount of $1,094,816, as well as an additional appropriation, in the
amount of $52,600, for fees for CIP management.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BYTHE CHAIRMAN AND MEMBERS OF
THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA (RDA) , that
the Chairman and Members hereby appropriate funds, in a not to exceed amount of
$1,094,816, for Amendment No.5, to the Design/Build Agreement between the City and Ric-
Man International, Inc., for the Washington Avenue Improvement Project, Phases II, IV, and
V, said Amendment to provide design, permitting, construction and construction administration
services, for the implementation of the 16th Street drainage and other miscellaneous
improvements; further appropriating funds, in the amount of $52,600, for CIP management
fees; with all appropriated funds to be provided from City Center Redevelopment Agency
Funds.
ATTEST:
PASSED and ADOPTED this 10th daylc>f
I
/
,2006.
Jfuw.t p~
.. SECRETARY
Robert Parcher
T:\AGENDA\2006\may1 006\Regular\WashingtonAve 16thStreetRDAReso.doc
APPROVED AS TO
FORM & LANGUAGE
& FOR EXECUTION
~/7J",
entAgen~~
Counsel ~ \
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY ITEM SUMMARY
Condensed Title:
A Resolution by the Chairman and Members of the Redevelopment Agency appropriating funds for an
Amendment to the Ric-Man Agreement for the Washington Ave. Improvements, for design and
construction services for 16th street drainage improvements, in the not to exceed amount of $1,094,816,
and, funds in the amount of $52,600, for CIP ManaQement fees.
Ke Intended Outcome Su orted:
To ensure well designed quality projects.
Issue:
Should the Redevelopment Agency appropriate the funds for the Amendment?
Item Summa /Recommendation:
The Washington Ave. Improvements Project is a component of the City's neighborhood improvements
program. Construction is presently well ahead of schedule and is nearing completion. In January, 2004,
the City entered into a Design/Build Agreement with the firm of Ric-Man International, Inc., for the design
and construction of the improvements which consisted of drainage, water and sewer installations, lighting,
landscaping, pavement restoration, and sidewalks. The Agreement included the design of storm
improvements at 16th Street and the preparation of a report analyzing the requirements and presen~ing
options to the City on implementation. Ric-Man has now presented the report which has been evaluated
by Hazen & Sawyer, the CIP Office and Public Works and an alternative selected for construction. The
alternative includes new gravity wells, rehabilitation of two existing wells, new piping, pavement restoration,
drainage structures and an additional contingency to replenish the existing contingency on the project
which has been almost exhausted. Based on the report and the recommendations, we are requesting
appropriation of the necessary funds for Amendment No.5, in the amount of $1,094,816, to Ric-Man
International, Inc. for the drainage improvements at 16th Street and Washington Avenue, and appropriation
of the necessary funds for the CIP management fees, in the amount of $52,600, from the City Center
Redevelo ment A enc .
Advisory Board Recommendation:
I N/A
Financial Information:
Source of ApproVEtcl
~
I osJO I
City Center RDA funds
Financial Impact Summary:
Ci Clerk's Office Le islative Trackin
Jorge E. Chartrand, CIP Director
Si n-Offs:
Manager
in
~
MIAMI BEACH
AGENDA ITEM
DATE
JA
S--(O ....Oc;?
lD
MIAMI BEACH
City of Miami Beach, 1700 Convention Center Drive, Miami Beach, Florida 33139, www.miamibeachR.gov
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MEMORANDUM
FROM:
CHAIRMAN AND MEMEBERS OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
Jorge M. Gonzalez, Executive Director } ~
May 10,2006 0 U
A RESOLUTION OF THE CHAIRMAN AND MEMBERS OF THE
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA
(RDA), APPROPRIATING FUNDS, IN A NOT TO EXCEED AMOUNT OF
$1,094,816, FOR AMENDMENT NO.5, TO THE DESIGN/BUILD AGREEMENT
BETWEEN RIC-MAN INTRNATIONAI.., INC., FOR THE WASHINGTON AVENUE
IMPROVEMENT PROJECT, PHASES II, IV, AND V, SAID AMENDMENT TO
PROVIDE DESIGN, PERMITTING, CONSTRUCTION AND CONSTRUCTION
ADMINISTRATION SERVICES, FOR THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE 16TH
STREET DRAINAGE AND OTHER MISCELLANEOUS IMPROVEMENTS;
FURTHER APPROPRIATING FUNDS, IN THE AMOUNT OF $52,600, FOR CIP
MANAGEMENT FEES; WITH ALL APPROPRIATED FUNDS TO BE PROVIDED
FROM CITY CENTER REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY FUNDS.
TO:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
ADMINISTRATION RECOMMENDATION
Adopt the Resolution.
FUNDING
Funding, in the amount of $1,094,816, for construction and contingency and, in the amount
of $52,600, for CIP management, is to be appropriated from the City Center Redevelopment
Agency funds.
ANALYSIS
The Washington Avenue Improvements Project, Phases II, IV, and V (the Project) is one of
the components of the City's neighborhood improvements projects. Construction of the
Project is presently well ahead of schedule and is nearing completion. In January 2004, the
City entered into a Design/Build Agreement with the firm of Ric-Man International, Inc. (Ric-
Man), for the design and construction of the improvements which consisted of drainage,
water and sewer installations, lighting, landscaping, sidewalks, pavement, and other
renovations and reconstruction.
The original Agreement with Ric-Man included the engineering evaluation, analysis and
recommendation on the conditions of drainage in the Washington Ave. and 16th Street area.
The original Agreement only required the engineering study and a proposal for the complete
design and construction of the recommended improvements. Ric-Man has now submitted
the report and has made several recommendations for the improvements (Attachment No.
1 ).
Redevelopment Agency Memorandum - 16th Street Drainage
May 10, 2006
Page 2 of 2
The report and the recommendations have been carefully evaluated by Hazen and Sawyer,
the City's Program Manager, by CIP staff, and by Public Works staff. All are in agreement
that Alternative NO.2 is the more appropriate and cost effective alternative and this is the
recommendation presented in this memorandum. Altemative No.2 entails the addition of
five gravity wells and the rehabilitation of two existing wells. It also includes additional piping
and drainage structures, and all the other tasks required to obtain the necessary permits,
construction engineering, construction administration, etc.
Other alternatives were deemed unnecessary, less cost effective, or not sufficient to improve
the existing conditions. For example, Alternative NO.1 suggested no improvements and only
some maintenance on the existing wells and drainage structures. Since the City does not
believe that this is the cause of the flood problems, this alternative is not viable. Alternative
1 A simply modifies the parameters of the model and shows that the flood issues would grow
if wells were left unattended but once again this is not an acceptable approach. Alternatives
3 and 3A are based on a higher storm criteria than that used in the City and in the
Washington Avenue corridor and would introduce a pump station. This was deemed by staff
to be excessive and therefore not considered justified when considering the cost.
Alternative 4 includes major upsizing of the piping system in the area but results in the same
level of service as Alternative 2, and at over four (4) times the cost. This alternative
therefore was also deemed not appropriate.
The appropriation request includes a supplement, in the amount of $200,000, to the project's
contingency which has been nearly exhausted by other improvements in the City Center
area which were added to the project, such as the construction of the improvements of
medians between Lincoln Road and 16th Street and the re-pavement of this area. The
contingency will only be used if necessary and will be returned if unused or if any portions
are unused. The appropriation request also includes fees, in the amount of $52,600, for CIP
management.
CONCLUSION
Based on the report presented by Ric-Man, and the recommendations made by staff on the
preferred Altemative No.2, the Administration is requesting appropriation of the necessary
funds for Amendment NO.5 to the Ric-Man Agreement, in the amount of $1,094,816, which
includes an additional contingency of $200,000 (Attachment No.2). The Administration also
requests appropriation of funds for CIP management fees, in the amount of $52,600.
Funding is to be appropriated from City Center Redevelopment Agency funds.
Attachments
T:\AGENDA \2006\may1 006\Regular\WashingtonAve 16thstreetRDAmemo.doc
A ItA<IfM I'YIIT I
AMENDMENT NO.5
TO THE DESIGN BUILD AGREEMENT
BETWEEN
THE CITY OF MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA
AND
RIC-MAN INTERNATIONAL, INC.,
DATED MARCH 24, 2006
IN AN AMOUNT NOT -TO-EXCEED $ $1,094,815.46
FOR THE PROVISION OF ADDITIONAL DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION SERVICES,
NECESSARY FOR THE IMPLEMENTAION OF 16TH STREET DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS
AND OTHER MISCELLANEOUS IMPROVEMENTS,
FOR THE RIGHT-OF-WAY INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS PROGRAM
NEIGHBORHOOD NO. 10D - WASHINGTON AVENUE PROJECT
This Amendment NO.5 to the Agreement, made and entered this _ day of
2006, by and between the CITY OF MIAMI BEACH, a municipal corporation existing under the
laws of the State of Florida (hereinafter referred to as CITY), having its principal offices at 1700
Convention Center Drive, Miami Beach, Florida 33139, and RIC - MAN INTERNATIONAL, INC., a
Florida corporation, having its offices at 2601 Northwest 48th Street Pompano Beach, Florida,
33027 (hereinafter referred to as DESIGN BUILD CONTRACTOR).
RECITALS
WHEREAS, pursuant to Resolution No. 2004-25463, on January 14, 2004, the CITY
approved and authorized the Mayor and City Clerk to execute a Guaranteed Maximum Price
Contract with DESIGN BUILD CONTRACTOR, as the successful bidder, pursuant to Invitation to
Bid No. 22-02/03, for Design Build Services to Design And Construct the Washington Avenue
Improvements Project (the Project) - Phases II, IV and V (the Agreement); and
WHEREAS, the Agreement provides for the design, permitting, construction and
construction engineering services for the Washington Avenue Improvements Project, Phase II, IV
and V, from 5th Street to 16th Street; and
WHEREAS, the Agreement was executed for a Guaranteed Maximum Price of
$12,104,429; and
WHEREAS, the CITY adopted Amendment NO.1 for the inclusion of improvements that
coordinate improvements in the Flamingo and Lummus neighborhoods, and provide for the
upsizing of drainage on Washington Avenue; and
WHEREAS, Amendment No.1 increased the total contract fee by $555,783.98, for a total
fee of $13,269,592.30; and
WHEREAS, on October 19, 2005, the CITY adopted Amendment No.2 for the inclusion of
traffic signal improvements at Washington Avenue and 11th,12th, 13th, and 14th Streets,
respectively; and
WHEREAS, Amendment No.2 increased the total contract fee by $686,880.00, for a total
fee of $13,956,472.30; and
WHEREAS, on January 11, 2006, the CITY adopted Amendment NO.3 for the inclusion of
planned improvements along and beneath ih and 8th Streets, between Washington Avenue and
Ocean Drive; and
WHEREAS, Amendment No.3 increased the total contract fee by $1,642,301.22, for a
total fee of $15,598,773.52; and
WHEREAS, on February 8, 2006, the CITY adopted Amendment No.4, for the inclusion of
Green Malayan Coconut Palms in the medians, from the 600 through the 1600 block, of
Washington Avenue; and
WHEREAS, Amendment NO.4 increased the total contract fee by $574,560.00, for a total
fee of $16,173,333.52; and
WHEREAS, the CITY, would hereby recommend, and the parties have ne~otiated, the
following Amendment No.5, for the inclusion of improvements to the drainage on 16 h Street and
other miscellaneous improvements along the Washington Avenue corridor; and
WHEREAS, this Amendment NO.5 increases the total contract fee by $1,094,815.46 for a
total fee of $17,268,148.98.
NOW. THEREFORE. the parties hereto, and in consideration of the mutual promises,
covenants, agreements, terms, and conditions herein contained, and other good and valuable
consideration, the respect and adequacy are hereby acknowledged, do agree as follows:
1. ABOVE RECITALS
The above recitals are true and correct and are incorporated as a part of this Amendment
NO.5.
2. MODIFICATIONS
The Agreement is amended, as defined in "Attachment 1", attached hereto and
incorporated to this Amendment to the Agreement.
3. RATIFICATION
The CITY and DESIGN BUILD CONTRACTOR hereby ratify the terms of the Agreement,
as amended.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Amendment NO.5 to be
executed in their names by their duly authorized officials as of the date first set forth above.
ATTEST:
CITY OF MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA
MAYOR
CITY CLERK
ATTEST:
RIC - MAN INTERNATIONAL, INC.
President
Secretary
Print Name
Print Name
APPROVED AS TO
FORM & LANGUAGE
& F- EXECUTION
1!~
y. 10pmentAg~ate
Gena Counsel~ \ -
ATTACHMENT 1
Section 01000
Section 01000 of the Contract Specifications entitled, "Professional Services", is amended as
follows:
PARAGRAPH 1.02 - SCOPE OF PROFESSIONAL SERVICES, after paragraph "M." insert the
following:
P.
DESIGN BUILD CONTRACTOR shall provide all design, field coordination services,
permitting, maintenance of traffic, materials, manpower and equipment, tree and shrub
maintenance and guarantee and all other work as necessary to install drainage
improvements in accordance with the Technical Memorandum for Washington Avenue
and 1&h St, Alternative 2, prepared by APCT Engineers and Ric-Man International, Inc.,
and dated January 16, 2006.
Construction engineering services during this work shall include, but not be limited to,
preparation of design plans; preparation of permit applications; attendance at pre-
application meetings with regulatory agencies; procurement of permits, preparation of as-
built plans; review and approval of submittals, working drawings, and shop drawings;
processing and responding to contractor requests for information; construction inspection
and reporting; witness testing of systems; soil compaction verification; development of
detailed punch list(s); and coordination to obtain substantial completion and close out work
required for final acceptance.
A contingency of $200,000.00 is added to this work to replenish the prior contingency
amount that was expended on CITY requested revisions. This provides the CITY with
additional flexibility to address additional requested changes that may arise.
HAZEN AND SAWYER, P.C.
975 Arthur Godfrey Road, Suite 211
Miami Beach, Florida 33140
Phone: (305) 532-9292
Fax: (305) 534-8887
CHANGE ORDER NO.
40100-17.0
PROJECT:
City of Miami Beach
ROW Infrastructure Improvement Program
Washington Avenue Improvements Project
DESIGN/BUilD FIRM:
Ric-Man Intemational, Inc.
1210 Washington Avenue, Suite 200
Miami Beach, Fl 33139
TITLE: 16th Street Stormwater ImDrovements
DESCRIPTION OF WORK:
Stormwater Infrastructure Improvements on 16th Street and Washington Avenue built in accordance with Altemative 2 of the
"Technical Memorandum for Washington Avenue and 16th Street" prepared by APCT Engineers, dated January 16,2006
and Median Uplighting Repair from the 600 to the 1500 blocks of Washington Avenue.
Item Descriotion
Qty
1.0 Construction
1.1 Gravity Well Construction Each 5 $ 350,000.00
1.2 Gravity Well Rehabilitation Each 2 $ 140,000.00
1.3 Manhole Each 2 $ 16,000.00
1.4 Inlet Curb Each 2 $ 12,800.00
1.5 Stormwater Piping 15-inch LS 1 $ 6,000.00
1.6 Stormwater Piping 24-inch LS 1 $ 53,280.00
1.7 Concrete Curb and Gutter. Type F LS 1 $ 300.00
1.8 Concrete Sidewalk. 4-inch thick LS 1 $ 450.00
1.9 Roadway and Driveway Restoration LS 1 $ 10,640.00
2.0 Contingency LS 10%
3.0 Mobilization/Bond/Insurance LS 5%
4.0 Overhead/Profit/Contract Administration LS 17%
Construction Subtotal
5.0 Engineering Services LS 15%
Allowance for Miscellaneous Contingency to
6.0 Supplement Prior Account which has been LS
expended on City Requested Additions
$ 589,470.00
$ 58,947.00
$ 29,473.50
$ 100,209.90
$778,100.40
$ 116,715.06
$200,000.00
TOTAL lUMP SUM: $1,094,815.46
Original Agreement Amount: $12,104,429.00
Previous Change Orders: (1 through 16) $4,068,904.52
Total For This Change Order: $1,094,815.46
New Agreement Amount: $17,268,148.98
DESIGN/BUilD FIRM:
RIC-MAN INTERNATIONAL, INC. DATE
CONTRACT ADMINISTRATOR: PROJECT MANAGER:
CITY OF MIAMI BEACH DATE HAZEN AND SAWYER, P.C. DATE
A 1" rftcl+ PI (f1t/ r 2-
TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM
For
Washington Avenue and 16 St
Miami-Dade County
Florida
Prepared for
lQ City of Miami Beach
-
-
Prepared by
~B
~~.~;.
III1'L ~ -IIIC. '
. .. ---'--.--
January, 2006
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
INTRODUCTION... ...... ... ...... ......... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ...... ... ...... 1
METHODOLOGy......... ............. ......................................... 1
PROPOSED ALTERNATIVES... ... ... ... ...... '" ....... ......... ... .....4
COST ANALYSIS... ......... ...... ... ...... ......... ... ....... ... ...... '" .... 6
ALTERNATIVE ANALYSIS... ...... ... ...... ~.. ... '" ... ... ...... ... ... ..... 7
CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS... ...... ... ...... ... ...... 8
EXHIBITS
Location Map
Average October Groundwater Elevation
City of Miami Beach Rainfall Data
APPENDIXES
Appendix A: Alternative 1 :
Drainage Map
Cross Section. Alternative 1
Hydraulic Modeling (ICPR Input Data)
Modeling Results (ICPR Output Data)
Alternative 1A:
Hydraulic Modeling (ICPR Input Data)
Modeling Results (ICPR Output Data)
Appendix B: Alternative 2:
Drainage Map
Cross Section. Alternative 2
Hydraulic Modeling (ICPR Input Data)
Modeling Results (ICPR Output Data)
Cost Analysis
Appendix C: Alternative 3:
Drainage Map
Cross Section. Alternative 3
Pump Station Design
Hydraulic Modeling (ICPR Input Data)
Modeling Results (ICPR Output Data)
Alternative ~A:
Hydraulic Modeling (ICPR Input Data)
Modeling Results (ICPR Output Data)
Cost Analysis
Appendix D: Alternative 4:
Drainage Map
Cross Section. Alternative 4
Pre-Development Hydraulic Profile Calculations
Post-Development Hydraulic Profile Calculations
Hydraulic Modeling (ICPR Input Data)
Modeling Results (ICPR Output Data)
Cost Analysis
INTRODUCTION
According to City of Miami Beach records, the intersection of Washington Avenue and
16th Street, specifically the northeast and southeast corners, is subject to severe
flooding. The municipal building on the southeast comer of the intersection experiences
flooding that extends inside the building during moderate to heavy storm events. Similar
conditions are experienced in the building at the northeast comer.
The APCTE Water Resources Department has studied the area and interviewed people
who work in the immediate area (Travel Agency, Fuddruckers Restaurant, etc). All
agreed that the situation is critical and indicated the water level reaches 4ft above the
sidewalks in some locations. They also indicated that the water on the street is splashed
to the sidewalk and buildings by cars passing by.
APCTE performed a comprehensive analysis that considered 4 improvement
alternatives. This analysis included: Topographic Survey, Subsurface Utility Engineering,
Hydraulic Analysis and Construction Costs Estimates.
METHODOLOGY
The methodology developed for this analysis included the following steps:
TODOgrllDhic Survev:
This phase included a survey of the area limited by 16 ST from Washington Ave. to
Collins Avenue and the area along Collins Avenue, adjacent to the 16 8T intersection
350 ft north and 150 ft south.
Subsu1face Utilitv Engineering (SUB:
A utility investigation was performed in this area in order to identify and locate all existing
utilities that may be impacted by this project and to locate all existing drainage pipes,
which were to be evaluated hydraulically as part of this study.
Hvdraulic Anllwsis:
Our team followed the criteria established by the City of Miami Beach Stormwater
Management Master Plan regarding the Flood Protection Level of Service (FPLOS), as
summarized below:
CITY OF MIAMI BEACH FLOOD CRITERIA
LAND USE RAINFALL FREQUENCY FLOOD LIMIT
To Crown of street, or to
1. Residential and 5-year within 15 feet of a dwelling
Commercial Areas or other occupied building,
whichever is lower
2. 2-Lane roads in 5-year, except 1 O-year for a
residential bridge or culvert in the To Crown of street
and commercial areas canal system.
3. 4-Lane roads in high 10-year To outer edge of traffic lanes
Density, high traffic areas
4. Private parking lots and 2 - year As per Section D-4 of Public
Similar paved areas Works Manual
These critene ere outlmed In DERM's PoliCY for DeSign of Drelnage Structure, dated December 1980.
CitY of Miami Beach
Flood Protection Level-of-Service Ratlna Svstem
Flood Protection Number of
Level-of-Service RatinG Flood Protection Criteria Met
A All Four Criteria
B Three Criteria
C Two Criteria
D One or None of the Criteria
Desion Storm
The design storms used to evaluate the proposed drainage system were 5-year/1 and
24-hour, 10-year/1 and 24-hour and 100-year/1 and 72-hour storms. The hydrographs
associated with each design storm were obtained using the Soil Conservation Services
(SCS) Unit Hydrograph Method and the City of Miami Beach Rainfall Distribution,
included in the Comprehensive Stormwater Management Program Master Plan,
Prepared by CH2MHILL, March 1997.
Rainfall Data
In coordination with the City of Miami Beach, it was agreed that the storms that should
be modeled were: 5-year (1 and 24-hour), 10-year (1 and 24-hour) and 100-year (1 and
72-hour). Rainfall depths for these storms are indicated in the following table.
Storm Event Rainfall Depth Source
finch)
5-Year/1-Hour 3.20" FDOT Drainage Manual, Fig. 5.11
Comprehensive Stormwater
5-Year/24-Hour 7.50" Management Program Master Plan,
PreDared bv CH2MHILL, March 1997
10-Yearl1-Hour 3.60" FDOT Drainage Manual, Fig. 5.11
Comprehensive Stormwater
10- Yearl24-Hour 9.20' Management Program Master Plan,
PreDared bv CH2MHILL, March 1997
100-Yearl1-Hour 5.05" FDOT Drainage Manual, Fig. 5.11
Comprehensive Stormwater
100- Year/72-Hour 18.50" Management Program Master Plan,
Prepared by CH2MHILL, March 1997
Other Desion Criteria
Avg. Oct. Ground Water Level: 1.60 ft (Miami-Dade County Design Standard W.C. 2.2)
Design Tidal Elevation (DHW): From ~.OO to 3.00 feet.
Head Loss to compensate for specific gravity of salt water vs. fresh water: 1.50 ft.
Curve Number (CN): 95 for the entire project area.
ICPR Modeling
2
The Advanced Interconnected Pond Routing (AdICPR) computer model (Version 3.00)
was used to evaluate the proposed drainage system of Washington Avenue at 16 Street
for several storm conditions (5-year/1 and 24-hour, 10-year/1 and 24-hour and 100-
year/1 and 72-hour). The AdlCPR computer model is a hydrodynamic model developed
by Streamline Technologies, Inc. and simulates hydrologic and hydraulic conditions by
generating runoff hydrographs and dynamically routing these hydrographs through
stormwater management systems. This computer model is highly known by all
Environmental Agencies (DERM and SFWMD). This method generates runoff
hydrographs using the following hydrologic parameters;
1. Basin areas
2. Curve numbers (CN)
3. Percent directly connected impervious area (DCIA)
4. Rainfall depth
5. Rainfall distributions
6. Times of concentration (TOC)
The following subsections describe these parameters in detail and how they were
applied in the project hydrologic modeling.
Basin Area
The basin area is the surface area encompassed by the individual drainage basins and
is associated with a given node in the network. These areas were subdivided into
impervious and pervious.
Nodes
In AdlCPR, nodes or junction are used to simulate drainage structures, receiving canal
and the groundwater table.
An important parameter for the simulation of the proposed drainage system is the
surface water elevation at the boundaries. For this particular project, and following the
same approach used in the drainage analysis of Washington Avenue, APCTE used
variable water elevation boundary nodes based on information obtained from EDAWand
Burns and McDonnell, who are simulating the existing drainage system downstream of
our project.
Links
Links or reaches define physical characteristics of the drainage or conveyance system.
The AdlCPR model allows for a wide range of reach types to be simulated:
1. Culverts (circular, oval, arch, and rectangular)
2. Channels (trapezoidal, parabolic, and irregular)
3. Weirs (horizontal or vertical trapezoidal, parabolic, arch, rectangular, and
irregular)
4. Drop structures
5. Rating Curves
6. Bridges
7. Breaches
The links used in the project hydraulic modeling included culverts, weirs and rating
curves.
3
Well Ratina Curve
The proposed Drainage Wells were modeled as a Backwater/ Headwater/Discharge
rating curve and using the variable groundwater conditions, as indicated below:
Backwater (ft) Headwater (ft) DischarQe (cfs)
2.00 2.00 0.00
2.00 3.50 0.00
2.00 10.00 10.14
3.00 3.00 0.00
3.00 4.50 0.00
3.00 10.00 8.87
PROPOSED AL TERNA TlVES
Four alternatives were developed to perform this analysis as described below:
Alternlltive 1:
(existing conditions! Do nothina)
Includes the evaluation of the existing conditions on 16 ST from Washington Ave. to
Collins Ave. The existing drainage system is based in four catch basins that are
connected to two isolated drainage (gravity) wells. This alternative includes the
evaluation of four sub-basins, as indicated in Appendix A.
Since there are flooding problems in this area, we assumed that the existing wells were
not working properly and they were modeled with a reduced capacity of 400 GPM. As
indicated also in Appendix A the results of the hydraulic model reproduce the existing
conditions and depict flooding at all existing structures, having more that 6" at the critical
points.
Alternative 1 A:
(existing conditions/Do nothina)
As requested by the CMB this alternative is the same as Alternative 1, but reducing to 0
GPM the capacity of existing wells. As depicted in Appendix A, the flooding increases
significantly with this approach.
Alternlltive 2:
(5 Gravity wells and 2 rehabilitated wells)
This alternative includes five drainage (gravity) wells and the rehabilitation of two
existing wells. Two wells will be built on Washington Avenue from 16 ST to Lincoln Road
(N-8 and N-9) , these two wells will collect the runoff generated by Washington Ave. that
contributes to 16 St. Three wells will be also built on 16 St. (N-5, N-6 and N-7) as well of
the rehabilitation of the existing two wells (N-1 and N-3). There are a total of seven wells
for this alternative,S proposed and 2 rehabilitated. The results of the hydraulic models
indicates that even though this effort water stages will reach above the edge of
pavement at the two most critical areas, structures N-3 and N-4. See Appendix B.
A1ternlltive 3:
(1 Dum" station. 3 in/ection wells. 2 gravity wells and 2 rehabilitated wells)
4
The proposed drainage system for this alternative is based on 7 drainage wells. (2
gravity, 3 injection and 2 rehabilitated) and a Pump Station. As alternative 2 there will be
two wells on Washington Avenue from 16 ST to Lincoln Road, these two wells will collect
the runoff generated by Washington Ave. that contributes to 1651. This altemative also
includes a stormwater pump station located next to structure N-4 that will discharge into
three interconnected injection wells on 16 St. The
locatio~ of the Pump Station has been field verified
in order to assure its feasibility. For that purpose
there is an area available on the south side of 16
Street, 200 ft east of Washington Avenue. The
Pump Station will be under ground and only the
e ca pane s WI e VISI e. s In ern Ive
the existing wells on 16 ST will be rehabilitated. All
wells were simulated with a capacity of 700 GPM.
The results of the hydraulic models indicate that
flooding will be eliminated on 16 St if this alternative
is built. See Appendix C.
Altemlltive 3A:
(1 DUmD station. 3 iniectlon wells. 2 aravitv wells and 2 rehabilitated wells)
As requested by the CMB this alternative is the same as Alternative 3, but reducing the
capacity of the wells to 400 GPM. As depicted in Appendix C, the flooding will be
reduced with this approach.
Altemlltlve 4: (PiDe UDSizina and two aravitv wells)
This alternative includes upsizing the pipes from Washington Ave to Biscayne Bay in
order to increase the hydraulic capacity of this system and eliminate the flooding
problems on 16 ST. As alternative 2 and 3 there will be two wells on Washington Avenue
from 16 ST to Lincoln Road (N-8 and N-9) , these two wells will collect the runoff
generated by Washington Ave. that contributes to 16 St. The proposed upsizing includes
pipe sizes from 54D to 66D. This alternative will also protect 16 ST from flooding at a
higher cost. See Appendix D.
Summary of Hvdraulic Analvsis
Alternative 3
Peak Stage
flood
3.73
o.om
3.75
(000
3.30
(000
3.03
(0,001
5
Altemative 4
Peak Stage
flood
4.43
(000
4.45
0.00\
4.35
(0 00)
4.32
(0.00)
5
Altemative 3
Peak Sta e
5
Alternative 4
Peak Sta e
Property
Travel Agency
Floor EI. 5.97
Bank Door
Floor EI. 7.05
SE Building
Floor EI. 6.95
Fuddruckers
Floor EI. 6.30
Ratln 1 to 5
Average Rating 1.3 3.0 5 4.0
Flood C B A B
Protection
Level-of-Service
Notes:
1- All elevations are in feet.
2- Flood protection Level-of-Service evaluation is based on the City of Miami Beach
criterion, which does not include comparison with the floor elevation of adjacent
properties.
3- 6- of flooding of crown of road for the 100-year storm is permissible.
COST ANALYSIS
The cost analysis was based in two elements; the cost to build the proposed alternative
(Capital Cost) and the Operation and Maintenance (O&M) of each alternative. The
capital cost were determined based on current unit prices as included in Appendixes B,
C and D. Alternative 3 includes also the cost of operating the pump station as well as the
cost for replacing the pumps every 10 years. The O&M project costs are based on the
maintenance requirements associated with the proposed facilities for each altemative as
indicated in the following table:
Basis for O&M Cost Estimates
Activity Unit Price
Pipe FJushing(<30
diameter)
$0.95/LF
Frequency
Once every 5 years
6
Pipe Flushing (30 and
Larger)
Catch basin Cleaning
Manhole Cleaning
Well Redevelopment
Well Sediment Trap
Cleaning
Electricity
Maintenance of
Pump station
Replacement of
Pumps
$9.00 /LF
$114 per basin
$114 per basin
$3,000 each
$114 per trap
$0.10 per KW-H
$15,000.00
$100,000.00
Once every 5 years
Twice per year
Twice per year
Once every 10 years
Once per year
400 per year
Every 5 years
Every 10 years
A I I
Summary of Alternative Cost nalYSI s
Estimated Equivalent Annual Total Present
Alternative Capital Annual1 O&M Annual Worth2
$ $ $ $ $
2 894,815.46 84,470.58 6,329.90 90,800.48 961,940.33
3 1,962,789.18 185,287.30 22,797.44 208,084.74 2,204,449.68
4 4,105,324.74 387,542.66 11,695.19 399,237.84 4,229,525.72
1. Capital Recovery Factor = 0.07 based on a 20-year life
2. Present Worth Factor = 0.07 based on a 20-year
ALTERNATIVE ANALYSIS
In order to select one of the alternatives analyzed, we have developed the following
matrix that illustrates how the proposed alternatives performed under the different
storms and also their costs.
Criteria Storm 1 Storm 2 Storm 3 Present Worth Cost Evaluation
5v-1h 1()y-1 h 100v-72h $1000 (1-5)
Alternative 1 Fail $2 1
Existing Fail Fail
Conditions
Alternative 2 Pass Pass Fail $961 4
Gravity Wells
Alternative 3 $2,204 5
Injection Pass Pass Pass
Wells & PS
Alternative 4 Pass Pass Fail $4,229 3
Pipe Upsizing
As illustrated, the existing drainage system (Alternative 1) will not protect the project
area under any of the analyzed storm events. Alternatives 2 alleviates flooding on 16
Street during the 5 and 10 year storm; however it fails during 100-year storm, allowing
more than r of flooding at the crown of the road in the vicinity Washington Avenue.
AIlemative 3 passes the 5, 10 and 100 year storms and eliminate flooding of the road for
all analyzed storms. This alternative requires the construction of a stormwater pump
station. Alternative 4 is the most expensive one and does not meet an acceptable level
of flooding during a 100-year storm.
7
CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
APCTE concludes that the best alternative to eliminate the flooding at 16 Street is the
Alternative 3, which consists in building a Stormwater Pump Station, three injection
wells, two gravity wells and the rehabilitation of two existing wells. Hydraulic calculations
for this alternative, Appendix C, depict water stages that provide the Level of Service
required by the City of Miami Beach at this intersection.
8
T--
~t-..
~O)
~I.O
l&.J
C).
_-.J
l/)l&.J
~
V)
::::
-...0
'-
~t::
~~
'-::::
hO
~<J
::::
O::~
~~
-...Jh
~V)
'-
~
lJJ
~
~
~
~
~-
ct~
e~
1/)l&.J
:t:~
I~
~lr)
"'~
~
T~
c
Q
~~
QC?
.....\0
lr)1IJ
:t:~
.!..~
",I/)
)....~
I~
Q~
~-
-.J~
~~
Q...j
lr)1IJ
ct8
c.
a.......
-.J
La....
-.J
.l&.J
La...
8
Q
I
88
-.J'
la...1..O
. -.J
la...Lu
j: j:
~~
a.
ll,j1.O
-.J
Lu
~-
~~
ctl.O
u.
-.J
Lu
~
1.0
I
~
Q
hh
lJ.JU
~~
h-..J
V)-<:(
U
l.O-
-a....
~
8
c5
t
N
en
.z
wO
.c:i=
en ..,-
..... <0 C
Z --z
W co
~ Zo
w <(c:>
6 ~~
0:: z.....
a. w~
~ ~~
w Z..
C) o~
<( ..... >
z C)-
~ ~~
c ~~
~~
....I
<(
~~2~=_===;r==....,,_1-
. . .
133!llS lH91
- ~I=.z= --
.,
P'
c'
Ii
'd
....~
2/1
i
I
i I
I Ii:
IL .' I
~ -----------"". I \ ~ "--------- ~)
b. ... .i:" .. r. :" I' . I .. . .. I _.. .~,' '-i.......~~_L..y.................~
-~-~----~_.......,; ,
II II . .... .,
1
: . !. '..-~--
.. J.. .. I.. 1'. I.. . ~:!.' . I ".. .. ... _ ..! '! \ I _I' I.. . ar.. .. \
----_____-i__.___, .
Po
r---...,
1 1
1 1
1 1
, ,
1 ,
, 1
, 1
-------r------' I
/ ~
/ I ~ 1
/ I ~ ,
/~ ~ .!: U I ~ ; ~ ~ u ~, I ~
// ~ ~ i; I - - - s~ t-l 1 p.r
7' ~~ I" HH /.Os'/8)
/ I ~ ~ r-Jj.,.1 p.(
:/ @ I l' "'- r;J"':gp.\
. . I~l ,'/
. l-q~(
. II) r-
I~ fe;;;
'lI ';5 J..
" ,u .
· ,.t: /
e 'lJf, (I
· ." , f ,,/
------.1 )
UJ
=>
z
UJ
>
<
z
o ,
l-
t.:)
Z
I
III
<
~
0' ~~~..
H~ ~ ~ ~ ~
";;' -.. .. 1;7' cr>
C c... <D \l) Oll W
:J. 0.... . . . .
~ tr - <& op "".....
.
DI
O~
..... '- - V' Cl" '" f\I
,,1 . +- _ _ _ _
.0_ 0'11\ QD
,a
!
j
"
gr
i:;~~~~~
!i'?-~~W
) 2" 0~~;
a 2 u c";"';..DI .
!i~=~~~~
: & 5
-' .. - - _jOloD.....
! ;!~~':j:;~
i ~~
: ~ ~:: ol~l~ ~
Kj'?- -ww
V. ~
;: g.,r
..._____t:o,..,~1ID
_""+0000
:: ,; ~~..:,...:...;...;
h - ~I~ ~ W
"":-::. ~ ~ J,:
~ ~ _ <D UO '" ."
o
fr_ tal_
,,1"":',::: "': ":' ~'C:
2,:;' - '" W <,j.I <0
I ~
! ~
~7:~~'~~
ii~:~~W
~
i ~rc ???~
o ~~: ~,~~-. ~
... r'\I _ r. _ '"
.. 'U C ~
;K~;~~~~ g
! c. ~- \,0 <Q <t'I ;:
i~;;' ~
- I r
too ..- "<f _ _ _ <Q.\D _
Q ...''':".... 0 0 C"IO> "0-
S <b-lDlIIllDjw .
U j - :
~ &~. :
g;~~~g::: i
t-' ~
D .
1?.;_...........'" "
,,1"''''- a:> ~........ ~
;. i:.::"': ":loD.iJ ~
o t 0
_ n
~ c
:-~~:5:: ~
o 0
c
iEl
~
T--
~
C\JV)
-.J
-.J
~lJJ
__3;:
J-.-
~lJJ
<:~
a::~
~~
-.J~
~Q:
~
~
~
llc:"
-.11'0..
~())
~ll"i
C::S.
.....-.1
II')Lu
I
~~
0"'1
1-\.0
V'lLu
::t<.!)
I~
~II')
.......llc:
~
T~
~
I
..I:
0:;:'"
.~
Q.
~LO
...j
Lu
~~
O~
1-:.1.0
II')
::t~
.!..~
.......11')
)...llc:
I~
Lu
Qo....
~tr?
a:: 1.0
u
...j
Lu
llc:"
-.lLO
~O)
~.
Lu\.O
Q.
..... -.I
V'l1..t.J
8 8
~ 8
I Q 8
I ..n
I c
<=
a
-
1-.1-.
Lul.>
lulu
ct:V')
I-.-.J
V)~
~S:2
-0..
~
t
N
II
'.j.~
.:~
::::>,
en 1
...J
...J
~
0
W
t-
::i
..in
0<( Q
o -'=:c .
t- co W
Z or- 0:::
weN
:E Zo
w <Cz
> W<(
o :J en
a:: Z...J
a. W...J
:E ~~ 133H1S 449 J
W z~ '+=~ -
C)o
<C t-- UJ
~ ~~ :J
Z
IUJ
>
~ :i: C) C[
z
0
o 0 U') ....
0
,z
~N ., 1-
I~
W
>
~
Z
0::: . .
W
I-
...J
<(
133l:l1S lHS 1---
!
!
i
, :
I
I. L_._______--" .~
\.;.,. ,.. .. I. .. I .. I" I' . I. .. I ... .~
.~-~---~~~~
!
!
i
, i
\ '-._----~)
.......-L_........................_....
I '" I ,...~---
.. I.. .. I. _. I.. .. ~:!. .. '.. ..:... . l. '!' \ , _.. I.. . ~.. ".,
-------~_......__._--~ .
-:------, I
~ I
I
I
I
I
I
I r---~
I I I
I I I
-------~ ::
.. I I I
~: I I I
~~ I I I
~~ L I I
'" ------r------ -
/ c.
/j ~ I j l~ I
/ ~~ i W I ~ ~~ '2 I
/" "~> ~:; ~ . '01 I
/ / ~ ~! ~ 0: ~ : ~ ~ ~! z .. - tJ I I' ,,[
._,~/ ~.~ ~ ~ I ~~"' I' I Ie)
. ,/ I 2 !::! 1'1''-'' 1 ~(
<V I "... ::=.Pe.;
-. ~ . I~p .
==>l I~~t
. f"--
~ k
.!'.;~<V 11\ C ~
I " '0, "0'0 .8: 0: . ~ ~''1l Is 1-
" .. UI'Dq.Q"S ..." ~ l1-. ,U .
~ " I ~~;. - I(" 4jJ +,...
~ '-------------, i . ,,~'11 t,' I'i
0> g'o~g'rg'~g' ~ ...~_-~ ,:..1
,,) 3E_~:O~~:Oolju'C I \lII' ~/1 I ~
f'OCtlQl;\o 00000 -.. i:. "
;~:;~;:;~;o~ -----1 )
jiJ- 00,.: '00000
g
c.
~ i:
Q. ~~
.
~
~
.~
o
ig:~~~~~~~-
~Q<.-""<Q<I'<f'l<J)""'W
.
~r
~::~~=:~~~~.~
Kg - '" <.l' <D U> lD <D '" ,<41
or
:;~:~~~~~~~~~
I S~- >D<DltI......,"'lI' oj) "'"
S' :2 tJI 0'- _ Cl'Cl'0'tl' 0'
~ E ~_ ~~ .~~~~~ (:
"~~L OQOClQQQOO
~jl~:::~~~~:~: 2
a z:z.....zzzz C
~ 0 c
;~i~::~~3~:~: {
~ g '(:
I.~- "~o'~~~~~-
B<;),;~",:~~",:",:~~c-: f
i ~~- "'''''''''''''''''''Lf\<tl l
r g;r;. i' ,
~~~ ~~~~~~~~: ~
~
~
;:
~I
~
p
~
s
i
..
t'
~
hi
! ~
~
.
L
0:::-
88
-.I.
~I.O
....j
~Lu
r-- =-::-
-.1"'-
~ "<(0)
U) ~u1
-...J c.
.....-.1
-...J VlLu
Lu
~
~ ~~
o.
0 Ll,jlO
-- -.I
rr,h Lu
(.)
Lu ~-
~-:, @5~ ~
--~ I-:,lO
l/)
h-- Lu -
:x:~ 1-1-
,"<( ~- lJ.JU
~CJ ~t; ~-
~~ Q::~ lJ.JlJ.J
:<::<: ,,=-:: ctlO O. a::1I)
1-"1 I--.J
O::~ "<( u VI
)...,Lu -.I :t:t5 lI)~
Lu 1Cl.. Lu U
~ 1"<( (.0-
.....1- -Cl...
h~ "VI ~
-...JO )...,~
1"<(
~-- oliJ
h .....Cl..
~
h
U)
~ ~
~ ~.
::::J
~
8~
-.1"'-
1..&....
-.I
.liJ
I..&...
~ 8 8
!!? Q 8
I I LO a
1 I
1 I
~
N
o
z
e::(
en
-I
-I
~
o
W
I-
:J
-
m
e::(
J:
W
';0::
CJ)N
en.r:. -
I-<OCJ)
Z~-I
0-1
~Z~Z
We::( 0
>WZ-
O::>QI-
EX:ZI-~
D..Wocn
:!:>Wc..
-<(':!:
WZ~::>
C!)O(t)c..
<(I- -
Z cn~
_C>-I
~Z-l
C~~
~~
~
C>
N
(t)
W
>
l-
e::(
Z
a:::
W
I-
-I
<(
-:------,
i I
I
I
I
I
I
I r---~
I / /
I / /
I / /
-------, / I
I / /
I I /
I / I
L------r------/ /
// ~::: I::: -~ /
~ s ~ 0 ~ ~ ~ g~ /
.~ ' w I ~
... ::;' 't. N i5 ~ ~.., ~ :r ~ - .... -' 'a,l I
~ ;;/0 0: u ~ t. Eli ~ Iii:' t. ~u;:iC : ~II II (
~!;~ ~ z ~= ~~; ~6 I~ H;~~ : It;{ If:)
.-~7'~~:::~ ':~l'i~~.:e.Il'i ~J~~~ ~,II./.1 M.!
/' : ~~~ ~~ ~ fIla: g: :::e ~ ~ 1
. 'I I I 1 II I ~ rJ /~/Ie)
/:z H .
. l-tzLu ~
- VI I"-
/~ k:
;"~ ,~ J..
J' - ~ 4jJ 'u.t:;-
.:; . ~'" f' . 'I
fl . , t
· rr / t "I
------1 j
I.
'.i~
...~
.:/1
I
t~L--_------
-,I' .jl- -'-11"1' -1-1
-~~---=--'-"~
1
_. .~~I..:..I...~:!.f.~
>
.
~ 0-
C .
a: ~
~ .8...
G. ~~
"0
g
.!:u
!a
, .
.,0
133~lS l-l+91
=
0'0:.0'11;>1,:>0'
0' C ere c c
~~E~ggg~g
i~~:::~:o
- - - Q c;JI
Q g~ .:> c c
~i~==::gg
g~~~:..~
o
~~~:~~~3~
'Q-.....~CT>"'.....t'I
i8'::":--:~~-:~
~ cc - <l) <D.... '" ........
.
~r
ON
_ t_ - _ .... '" <Q....
"";"; "': "': ';~ ~ .
,.:g-<Il<D'" tJ1<D
.
~r
Of'< "'\Df\l.....-<O
~~~~:~::~
in
~ = - ~I~ N .. ~ ~
,,} >- + N('f '" _ _ lI'\
;g~.;..;..;.,;.;,.;,
0-
- .
, ~ ~
't r_ ;~~~~~
~tU[oooooo
't - 0- ~~~!:~?
l~~~::::::
~~~::5': . .
- ~-
t 0'(10--
'~g'- ~~~;~~
~ _ gE ~ ~ ~ ~ ~l~ :)
r~~-::::~~ f
.r"
I g a
; ~~~:~~5~:
-'--
r ~w
i ~::~~~~~~
_ ~o-~-I+-.~~
::r
l! ~
8 or
...--...."'O.....g'>
r.. ~~:::::~~..
o
.
~
or
........-."Lfl\D~....O
..,"'... -- 00__
,...... . . ..
. > ~ ""..,......... II'>-&:
..~
8 ~ c
.. 00 C'
:; 6;; ~~~~~~ (
." c;;- '" Ul .,.H,., \D Ul ~
~i~
! g:r 'E
i ;, ~: ": c ~ ~ ~I~ f
~ ~~ - ""..........., Ul:'" ::
i 41 f
j ~; ~ :: :I~ * j
:;~ S~~~~: i
o ,
i ' i
...:r-....LCl<DalOW
i;:~~~~~~
j
f " ~ ~ ~ : 1; ~I''':
i;;;:"';"';"';";~..D :=
It
j
r!
~
,
E,g zzzzzz
o
- ,......, '<I <D Q.
f ~ zjz:z z z 2: !
:~
",m
;;;0
r~
s
i
~ II
.
jg
.. I ~
i ! ~
..
t'
~
I
~
Cl::~
8~
-.Jr.o
Ll..
. -.J
Ll..Lu
"(
~-
-.J"-
~O)
~~
_-.J
l/)Lu
~
~~
c.
.Il)
Lu
-.J
Lu
't-(!) I
I: ~
<:::
~~ ~~ ,-'-
Lw(.)
e~ LwLw
-- -- ctV)
hU) V)Lu I '--.I
:J::~ I:
~~ I~ ~~ ~~ V)~
Q::~ (.)
<::::::::> ~l/) \()-
Q. -Cl.
Q::lO I-"'t
O::Lu ,~ u. V)li.J ~
7lt -.J :J::~
Lu
~~ ~ .!.~
,l/)
-J-- )...~
~~ ,'<(
Q~
~
~
8~
-.J
Ll...
-.J
.Lu
lI...
8
~
I
8
Q
I
~
Il)
I
8
c)
I
~
N
en
-J
-J
~
~
~~
(J) <0 ,n
~T"-\..I
ZeN
Wzc
~C(Z
>W<(
o=>>C)
o::zz
a..WN
~~(i)
Wzo..
C>o=>
<t-W
~C}9:
~~~
CCl)~
~~
<(
z
a::
W
t-
-J
<(
!
i
i
I I
~ L________-----" .;
L -. ,I' .:. . I. . I' " .. I . , . t ~Ii
.~-~-~-_.....-
II I IJ .
!
!
!
_ i
\ '-.-----"'.J
".-L..................... _-......
Q
-----""""'-====. . ~----
I' I. I' I I' I. I I' "'.~" I' 'I' I'!.' ~ . r '. \, I' I.. . '!.. ..,
~ -: -=-=- ..:.~~:-~--"---"--_..~---!. .
~ I
I
I
I
I
I
I r---~
I 1 1
I 1 1
I 1 1
-------, 1 1
I 1 1
I 1 1
I 1 1
L______,______I 1
/~ I ~ 1
/ ~c ~o 1
// >: .. I : W :;; E u '.01 1
/ z ~ ~ ~ ~;.:: I ~ ~ ~!,: f-, 1 ;' _(
// ~ ~ J 0 14 I ~ ~ Ct ,-.. 1 ' ,
, ~ I ~ 'I": I" ,. )
._.~ ~ m ~~ ..., ~ ~- s 1 .r
/ I ~ ~ :;; F-4'1 I. "
:~. <V._. I I <D r;J ~II ~
---- ~f' I~p.
. "-<tl~
-- VI r'-
I~ ~
f~ 15 L
.. - 1'-' ,
e;." 1 ...._r
"'~~/! t'1
.~ 1 pll
- .. I "
-----.1 I
~
~ ..
Eli
~ J:
~~
"'0
i ~.
~ t,;
~ j~
..
'0
m
..
133!:11S lH9 I
'i=;i":=~~.-
':)Y ~I"O
, UjaoQ.QnS
tI' go r - ;~ Ii' It ~; f r ~ F
Ee --00___..'____
; J~!!;~H !H!H
ou_.. ~ ~I;~ ~ 0 0 0 0 o~o
I. g:: ~ ~ ~ ~ -: or; ~ ~ ~ ': ~!~:
~ lJ;: - ~ >fI IT' fr' ...... ... ,... '" w .., ~I<&
I ~
! ~
E~-<ll '" ...111'.. "".. <:>~'" _I.
~ , . ~ ~ ~ .,I~ ~ ^ - ~ .. - ~
~~-\lIo4l'llWot:J"'o4l.tl"''''......
g~
~~~~~~~~:"''''Yl..."
j-
0"
:Jog.ooocooc>ooo",
~ !.- ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~I~ ~ ~ ~
o ~: ~ ,! ~ ~ ! ~ g g, g g. g g
~... :i ~ i i ~ z ~ ~E~ i ~ ~
;~~:-,~~,..,o~glg~ggg !
i~- 5~:";";";";";";~";";";";";
...2-....
~.?'~ -... .... It> Ill" 0"
"~~:~....,:..~:
r:bll~I~:;!:IJ~:~~.
.:;: ~.~ ~ ~ .,; ";i~ ~ ..; ..;..; .;
S - I I
~" ::: :I~ ; :1: :: ~ ~ _
i !
"::;: ~ oi~ JI~ ~; ~ ~
;; ': ~...;..~":'(";..;"';"';"';"": '"
j
..
...
~
133CflS lHSI---
i
il
:): 0 _ ~ ~ .
-:-- "'...,.." ~ 0"> -:- _1_ - -:-
2. z Z z.'z z z z ZT'~' z. z z