| A | B | C | D | E | F | G | H | I | J | K | L | M | N | O | P | Q | R | S | T | U | V | W | X | Y | Z | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2 | Alternative | Walkability and Bikeability – comfort, mobility and risks for people walking, bicycling, and rolling | Safety for People in Motorized Vehicles – cars, freight, and transit | Infrastructure Condition – state of repair | Mobility for People in Motorized Vehicles – cars, freight, and transit | |||||||||||||||||||||
3 | CRITERIA | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
4 | Non-Motorized Connectivity and Performance | Network Crashes | Pavement Condition | Bridge Condition | Systemwide Mobility | Corridor Mobility | Corridor Throughput | Interchange Area Mobility | Interchange Area Throughput | Freight Mobility | Travel Time Reliability | Connectivity | Transit Mobility | Transit Reliability | ||||||||||||
5 | MEASURES | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
6 | Distance between Crossings1 | Travel Time between Origin-Destination Pairs (Destinations within identified travelsheds) | Qualitative Assessment - Alternative addresses the number and severity of crashes along the corridor (Yes/No)4 | Crash comparison to similar facility types5 | Qualitative Assessment - Does the alternative address pavement condition (Yes/No)6 | Qualitative Assessment - Does the alternative address bridge condition (Yes/No)7 | Vehicle Hours Traveled (VHT) [Daily]8 | Person Hours Traveled (PHT) [Daily]9 | Mainline Speed (average over corridor) [Peak Period]10 | Person Throughput (people/day)11 | Vehicle Hours Traveled (VHT) in Interchange Area [Daily]12 | Person Hours Traveled (PHT) in Interchange Area [Daily]13 | Person Throughput (people/day)14 | Freight Travel Times (minutes)15 | Variability of Travel Time (Travel Time Index)16 | Intersection density17 | Qualitative Assessment - Does the alternative increase access to land use?18 | Transit Travel Times in the Corridor (minutes) [Peak Period]19 | Transit Travel Times in Interchange Area (minutes)20 | Variability in Transit Travel Times (Travel Time Index)21 | ||||||
7 | Pedestrian2 | Bicycle3 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
8 | No Build - General Maintenance | Most crossings spaced 1/8-1/4 mile apart. One location with >1/2 mile spacing. | Transit Stations: 18 Schools: 29 Libraries: 3 Parks: 37 Other Regional: 1 (No change in network from existing conditions) | Transit Stations: 37 Schools: 96 Libraries: 8 Parks: 76 Other Regional: 2 (No change in network from existing conditions) | No - This alternative would not make any geometric or operational changes, so no change in the number or severity of crashes would be expected. | Mainline Crash Rate: 0.926 Total Crashes/day: 1.08 F/A Crash Rate: 0.66 F/A Crashes/day: 0.008 Routes within 1-Mile Total Crashes/day: 3.65 F/A Crashes/day: 0.056 | No | No | 2,570,000 | 3,281,000 | 40-55 mph | Total: 426,000 Auto: 418,000 Transit: 8,480 Auto Occupancy: 1.27 | 21,609 | 27,530 | 2,588,000 | 8-11 | 2.0 (Mean) 3.6 (95th Percentile) | 1.3 access points/mile (No access points added or removed) | Existing access locations would be maintained. No change in access to land use. | 22 | 6 | 2.0 (Mean) 3.6 (95th Percentile) | ||||
9 | Maintenance - A | Most crossings spaced 1/8-1/4 mile apart. One location with >1/2 mile spacing. | Transit Stations: 18 Schools: 29 Libraries: 3 Parks: 37 Other Regional: 1 (No change in network from existing conditions) | Transit Stations: 37 Schools: 96 Libraries: 8 Parks: 76 Other Regional: 2 (No change in network from existing conditions) | No - This alternative would not make any geometric or operational changes, so no change in the number or severity of crashes would be expected. | Mainline Crash Rate: 0.926 Total Crashes/day: 1.08 F/A Crash Rate: 0.66 F/A Crashes/day: 0.008 Routes within 1-Mile Total Crashes/day: 3.65 F/A Crashes/day: 0.056 | No | No | 2,570,000 | 3,281,000 | 40-55 mph | Total: 426,000 Auto: 418,000 Transit: 8,480 Auto Occupancy: 1.27 | 21,609 | 27,530 | 2,588,000 | 8-11 | 2.0 (Mean) 3.6 (95th Percentile) | 1.3 access points/mile (No access points added or removed) | Existing access locations would be maintained. No change in access to land use. | 22 | 6 (One stop; Route 94) | 2.0 (Mean) 3.6 (95th Percentile) | ||||
10 | Maintenance - B | Most crossings spaced 1/8-1/4 mile apart. One location with >1/2 mile spacing. | Transit Stations: 18 Schools: 29 Libraries: 3 Parks: 37 Other Regional: 1 (No change in network from existing conditions) | Transit Stations: 37 Schools: 96 Libraries: 8 Parks: 76 Other Regional: 2 (No change in network from existing conditions) | Yes - Widening the right shoulder is associated with a reduction in crashes of all types and severities. -Widen shoulder by 1 ft (CMF ID 8342) -Increase shoulder width from 10 ft to 12 ft (CMF ID 5509) | Mainline Crash Rate: 0.926 Total Crashes/day: 1.08 F/A Crash Rate: 0.66 F/A Crashes/day: 0.008 Routes within 1-Mile Total Crashes/day: 3.65 F/A Crashes/day: 0.056 | Yes | Yes | 2,570,000 | 3,281,000 | 40-55 mph | Total: 425,000 Auto: 418,000 Transit: 7,150 Auto Occupancy: 1.27 | 21,609 | 27,530 | 2,588,000 | 8-11 | 2.0 (Mean) 3.6 (95th Percentile) | 1.3 access points/mile (No access points added or removed) | Existing access locations would be maintained. No change in access to land use. | 17 | 6 (One stop; Route 94) | 2.0 (Mean) 3.6 (95th Percentile) | ||||
11 | At-Grade - A | Most crossings spaced 1/8-1/4 mile apart. One location with >1/2 mile spacing. -Potential to add new crossings. -Distance between grade-separated crossings would increase due to conversion of some overpasses and underpasses to at-grade intersections. -New nonmotorized conflict points would be created at locations where at-grade crossings replace grade-separated crossings. | Transit Stations: 18 Schools: 29 Libraries: 3 Parks: 37 Other Regional: 1 -No change in network from existing conditions -Conversion of some grade-separated to at-grade crossings would increase crossing delay and reduce travelshed distances. -Potential new crossings would improve performance | Transit Stations: 37 Schools: 96 Libraries: 8 Parks: 76 Other Regional: 2 -No change in network from existing conditions -Conversion of some grade-separated to at-grade crossings would increase crossing delay and reduce travelshed distances. -Potential new crossings would improve performance | No - Net expected fatal and serious injury crashes/day on the mainline and routes within one mile combined would increase compared to the no build. | Mainline Crash Rate: 1.87 Total Crashes/day: 0.45 F/A Crash Rate: 3.226 F/A Crashes/day: 0.008 Routes within 1-Mile Total Crashes/day: 3.67 F/A Crashes/day: 0.059 | Yes | Yes | 2,600,200 | 3,317,100 | 20-25 mph | Total: 219,000 Auto: 211,000 Transit: 7,640 Auto Occupancy: 1.28 | 9,704 | 12,441 | 757,000 | 18-23 | 2.5 (Mean) 4.3 (95th Percentile) | 2.9 access points/mile | 12 new at-grade access locations would be added to the new roadway. | 19 | 9 (Three stops; BRT) | 2.5 (Mean) 4.3 (95th Percentile) | ||||
12 | At-Grade - B | Most crossings spaced 1/8-1/4 mile apart. One location with >1/2 mile spacing. -Potential to add new crossings. -Distance between grade-separated crossings would increase due to conversion of some overpasses and underpasses to at-grade intersections. -New nonmotorized conflict points would be created at locations where at-grade crossings replace grade-separated crossings. | Transit Stations: 18 Schools: 29 Libraries: 3 Parks: 37 Other Regional: 1 -No change in network from existing conditions -Conversion of some grade-separated to at-grade crossings would increase crossing delay and reduce travelshed distances. -Potential new crossings would improve performance | Transit Stations: 37 Schools: 96 Libraries: 8 Parks: 76 Other Regional: 2 -No change in network from existing conditions -Conversion of some grade-separated to at-grade crossings would increase crossing delay and reduce travelshed distances. -Potential new crossings would improve performance | No - Net expected fatal and serious injury crashes/day on the mainline and routes within one mile combined would increase compared to the no build. | Mainline Crash Rate: 1.87 Total Crashes/day: 0.45 F/A Crash Rate: 3.226 F/A Crashes/day: 0.008 Routes within 1-Mile Total Crashes/day: 3.67 F/A Crashes/day: 0.059 | Yes | Yes | 2,600,200 | 3,317,100 | 20-25 mph | Total: 219,000 Auto: 211,000 Transit: 7,640 Auto Occupancy: 1.28 | 9,704 | 12,441 | 757,000 | 18-23 | 2.5 (Mean) 4.3 (95th Percentile) | 2.9 access points/mile | 12 new at-grade access locations would be added to the new roadway. | 19 | 9 (Three stops; BRT) | 2.5 (Mean) 4.3 (95th Percentile) | ||||
13 | Local/Regional Roadways - A | Most crossings spaced 1/8-1/4 mile apart. One location with >1/2 mile spacing. -Potential to add new crossings. -Reduced nonmotorized conflict points at many crossing locations due to reduction in mainline access points. | Transit Stations: 18 Schools: 29 Libraries: 3 Parks: 37 Other Regional: 1 -No change in network from existing conditions -Potential new crossings would improve performance | Transit Stations: 37 Schools: 96 Libraries: 8 Parks: 76 Other Regional: 2 -No change in network from existing conditions -Potential new crossings would improve performance | Yes - In the 4 access pt scenario, net expected fatal and serious injury crashes/day on the mainline and routes within one mile combined would decrease compared to the no build. | Mainline Crash Rate: 0.926 Total Crashes/day (4 AP): 0.64 Total Crashes/day (3 AP): 0.63 F/A Crash Rate: 0.66 F/A Crashes/day (4 AP): 0.005 F/A Crashes/day (3 AP): 0.004 Routes within 1-Mile Total Crashes/day (4 AP): 3.77 Total Crashes/day (3 AP): 3.83 F/A Crashes/day (4 AP): 0.059 F/A Crashes/day (3 AP): 0.06 | Yes | Yes | 2,574,500 (4 AP) 2,577,600 (3 AP) | 3,287,200 (4 AP) 3,290,900 (3 AP) | Regional: 30-45 mph Local: 25-30 mph | Total: 337,000 Auto: 330,000 Transit: 7,150 (4 AP) Total: 315,000 Auto: 308,000 Transit: 7,150 (3 AP) Auto Occupancy: 1.28 (3-4 AP) | 20,285 (4 AP) 19,869 (3 AP) | 25,924 (4 AP) 25,393 (3 AP) | 1,923,000 (4 AP) 1,886,000 (3 AP) | Regional: 10-15 Local: 15-18 (4 AP) 16-19 (3 AP) | Regional: 3.0-3.2 (Mean) 5.1-5.3 (95th Percentile) Local: 1.4-1.5 (Mean) 2.1-2.4 (95th Percentile) (3-4 AP) | 0.4 access points/mile (I-35W, TH 280 OR Snelling Ave, and Marion St) OR 0.5 access points/mile (I-35W, TH 280, Snelling Ave, and Marion St) | 5 or 6 access locations would be removed, however overpasses would generally remain. Distance to access I-94 would increase for some trips, however connectivity across I-94 would increase in areas where ramps are removed but overpasses are maintained. | 17 | 7 (One stop; express bus) (4 AP) 3 (No stops; express bus) (3 AP) | Regional (4 AP): 3.2 (Mean) 5.3 (95th Percentile) Local (4 AP): 1.4 (Mean) 2.1 (95th Percentile) Regional (3 AP): 2.8 (Mean) 4.8 (95th Percentile) Local (3 AP): 1.1 (Mean) 1.4 (95th Percentile) | ||||
14 | Reduced Freeway - A | Most crossings spaced 1/8-1/4 mile apart. One location with >1/2 mile spacing. -Potential to add new crossings. | Transit Stations: 18 Schools: 29 Libraries: 3 Parks: 37 Other Regional: 1 -No change in network from existing conditions -Potential new crossings would improve performance | Transit Stations: 37 Schools: 96 Libraries: 8 Parks: 76 Other Regional: 2 -No change in network from existing conditions -Potential new crossings would improve performance | Yes - Net expected fatal and serious injury crashes/day on the mainline and routes within one mile combined would decrease compared to the no build. | Mainline Crash Rate: 0.926 Total Crashes/day: 0.86 F/A Crash Rate: 0.66 F/A Crashes/day: 0.006 Routes within 1-Mile Total Crashes/day: 3.62 F/A Crashes/day: 0.056 | Yes | Yes | 2,584,600 | 3,299,700 | General Purpose Lanes: 30-45 mph Managed Lanes: 40-60 mph | Total: 376,000 Auto: 367,000 Transit: 8,980-9,050 Auto Occupancy: 1.31 | 17,773 | 23,201 | 2,169,000 | General Purpose Lanes: 10-15 Managed Lanes: 8-11 | General Purpose Lanes: 3.2 (Mean) 5.3 (95th Percentile) Managed Lanes: 2.5 (Mean) 4.4 (95th Percentile) | 1.3 access points/mile (No access points added or removed) | Existing access locations would be maintained. No change in access to land use. | 12-15 BRT - 0: 12 BRT - 1: 13 BRT - 3: 15 | 4-7 BRT - 0: 4 BRT - 1: 5 BRT - 3: 7 (Up to 3 stops; highway BRT) | Managed Lanes: 2.5 (Mean) 4.4 (95th Percentile) | ||||
18 | Reconfigured Freeway - A | Most crossings spaced 1/8-1/4 mile apart. One location with >1/2 mile spacing. -Potential to add new crossings. | Transit Stations: 18 Schools: 29 Libraries: 3 Parks: 37 Other Regional: 1 -No change in network from existing conditions -Potential new crossings would improve performance | Transit Stations: 37 Schools: 96 Libraries: 8 Parks: 76 Other Regional: 2 -No change in network from existing conditions -Potential new crossings would improve performance | Yes - Net expected fatal and serious injury crashes/day on the mainline and routes within one mile combined would decrease compared to the no build. | Mainline Crash Rate: 0.926 Total Crashes/day: 1.13 F/A Crash Rate: 0.66 F/A Crashes/day: 0.008 Routes within 1-Mile Total Crashes/day: 3.62 F/A Crashes/day: 0.055 | Yes | Yes | 2,575,900 | 3,289,300 | General Purpose Lanes: 40-55 mph Managed Lanes: 45-60 mph | Total: 447,000 Auto: 438,000 Transit: 8,800-8,860 Auto Occupancy: 1.31 | 20,596 | 26,981 | 2,728,000 | General Purpose Lanes: 8-11 Managed Lanes: 8-10 | General Purpose Lanes: 2.1 (Mean) 3.8 (95th Percentile) Managed Lanes: 2.1 (Mean) 3.7 (95th Percentile) | 1.3 access points/mile (No access points added or removed) | Existing access locations would be maintained. No change in access to land use. | 12-15 BRT - 0: 12 BRT - 1: 13 BRT - 3: 15 | 4-7 BRT - 0: 4 BRT - 1: 5 BRT - 3: 7 (Up to 3 stops; highway BRT) | Managed Lanes: 2.1 (Mean) 3.7 (95th Percentile) | ||||
22 | Expanded Freeway - A | Most crossings spaced 1/8-1/4 mile apart. One location with >1/2 mile spacing. -Potential to add new crossings. | Transit Stations: 18 Schools: 29 Libraries: 3 Parks: 37 Other Regional: 1 -No change in network from existing conditions -Potential new crossings would improve performance | Transit Stations: 37 Schools: 96 Libraries: 8 Parks: 76 Other Regional: 2 -No change in network from existing conditions -Potential new crossings would improve performance | Yes - Net expected fatal and serious injury crashes/day on the mainline and routes within one mile combined would decrease compared to the no build. | Mainline Crash Rate: 0.926 Total Crashes/day: 1.21 F/A Crash Rate: 0.66 F/A Crashes/day: 0.009 Routes within 1-Mile Total Crashes/day: 3.63 F/A Crashes/day: 0.055 | Yes | Yes | 2,569,000 | 3,280,200 | General Purpose Lanes: 45-55 mph Managed Lanes: 45-60 mph | Total: 458,000 Auto: 449,000 Transit: 8,800-8,860 Auto Occupancy: 1.29 | 21,790 | 28,174 | 2,845,000 | General Purpose Lanes: 8-10 Managed Lanes: 8-10 | General Purpose Lanes: 1.5 (Mean) 2.5 (95th Percentile) Managed Lanes: 1.6 (Mean) 2.8 (95th Percentile) | 1.3 access points/mile (No access points added or removed) | Existing access locations would be maintained. No change in access to land use. | 12-15 BRT - 0: 12 BRT - 1: 13 BRT - 3: 15 | 4-7 BRT - 0: 4 BRT - 1: 5 BRT - 3: 7 (Up to 3 stops; highway BRT) | Managed Lanes: 1.6 (Mean) 2.8 (95th Percentile) | ||||
26 | Expanded Freeway - B | Most crossings spaced 1/8-1/4 mile apart. One location with >1/2 mile spacing. -Potential to add new crossings. | Transit Stations: 18 Schools: 29 Libraries: 3 Parks: 37 Other Regional: 1 -No change in network from existing conditions -Potential new crossings would improve performance | Transit Stations: 37 Schools: 96 Libraries: 8 Parks: 76 Other Regional: 2 -No change in network from existing conditions -Potential new crossings would improve performance | No - Net expected fatal and serious injury crashes/day on the mainline and routes within one mile combined would increase compared to the no build. | Mainline Crash Rate: 0.926 Total Crashes/day: 1.20 F/A Crash Rate: 0.66 F/A Crashes/day: 0.009 Routes within 1-Mile Total Crashes/day: 3.67 F/A Crashes/day: 0.056 | Yes | Yes | 2,577,100 | 3,289,600 | 45-55 mph | Total: 452,000 Auto: 445,000 Transit: 7,020 Auto Occupancy: 1.27 | 21,544 | 27,404 | 2,806,000 | 8-10 | 1.5 (Mean) 2.4 (95th Percentile) | 1.3 access points/mile (No access points added or removed) | Existing access locations would be maintained. No change in access to land use. | 17 | 6 (One stop; express bus) | 1.5 (Mean) 2.4 (95th Percentile) | ||||
27 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
28 | 1 | Includes all corridor crossings available for nonmotorized use, including underpasses, multimodal bridges, and pedestrian-only bridges. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
29 | 2 | Pedestrian travelshed assumed to be 0.5 mi/10 minutes. At-Grade alternatives assume existing pedestrian bridges would remain or be converted to mid-block crossings. At-grade pedestrian crossings would increase travel times to cross the corridor. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
30 | 3 | Bicycle travelshed assumed to be 3 mi/20 minutes. At-Grade alternatives assume existing pedestrian bridges would remain or be converted to mid-block crossings. At-grade bicycle crossings would increase travel times to cross the corridor. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
31 | 4 | Listed CMFs are for roadway segments, not interchanges/intersections. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
32 | 5 | Expected crashes per day are based on VMT per day and statewide average crash rates by facility type. Crash rates are per million VMT. F/A (fatal and serious injury) crash rates are per 100 million VMT. Routes within 1-mile do not include mainline crashes. Regionwide results were calculated but are not shown since no variation between the alternatives was observed. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
33 | 6 | This is a high-level qualitative assessment. Specific improvements to be determined. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
34 | 7 | This is a high-level qualitative assessment. Specific improvements to be determined. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
35 | 8 | VHT results are based on output from the regional model. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
36 | 9 | PHT results are based on output from the regional model. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
37 | 10 | Results are based on output from the regional model. The AM peak period is from 6:00 – 10:00 and the PM peak is from 3:00 – 7:00. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
38 | 11 | Auto results are based on output from the regional model, transit results are based on output from the STOPS model. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
39 | 12 | Results reflect the impacts of each mainline alternative, and do not represent final interchange configurations. Interchange alternatives will be studied in greater detail in the Tier 1 EIS. Results are the total of the following interchange areas: I-35/TH 55, Cedar Ave, Riverside/25th Ave, Huron Blvd, TH 280, Cretin Ave, Snelling Ave, Lexington Ave, Dale St, and Marion St. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
40 | 13 | Results reflect the impacts of each mainline alternative, and do not represent final interchange configurations. Interchange alternatives will be studied in greater detail in the Tier 1 EIS. Results are the total of the following interchange areas: I-35/TH 55, Cedar Ave, Riverside/25th Ave, Huron Blvd, TH 280, Cretin Ave, Snelling Ave, Lexington Ave, Dale St, and Marion St. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
41 | 14 | Results reflect the impacts of each mainline alternative, and do not represent final interchange configurations. Interchange alternatives will be studied in greater detail in the Tier 1 EIS. Results are the total of the following interchange areas: I-35/TH 55, Cedar Ave, Riverside/25th Ave, Huron Blvd, TH 280, Cretin Ave, Snelling Ave, Lexington Ave, Dale St, and Marion St. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
42 | 15 | Results represent corridor travel time for all vehicles (including freight) based on regional model output. Travel time is measured between the logical termini (I-35W/TH 55 to Marion St). | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
43 | 16 | Calculated using weighted average peak hour volume to capacity ratio using regional model outputs. Travel Time Index (TTI) measures the reliability/variability of travel times. It is the ratio of corridor travel time in the peak period to travel time at free-flow speeds or uncongested conditions. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
44 | 17 | The final access configuration has not been determined at this time. This measure is intended to capture the addition or removal of access points for each mainline alternative based on assumed changes in the regional model. There are 10 existing access points within the existing 7.5-mile corridor. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
45 | 18 | The final access configuration has not been determined at this time. This measure is intended to capture the addition or removal of access points for each mainline alternative based on assumed changes in the regional model. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
46 | 19 | Results are based on STOPS model output. Travel time is measured between the logical termini (I-35W/TH 55 to Marion St). | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
47 | 20 | Results are an average of hour 2 of AM and PM peak periods and include only mainline east-west route (not routes using cross streets). | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
48 | 21 | Assumptions: (1) Low floor boarding on all buses and platforms, (2) off-board ticketing, and (3) multiple door boarding. Signal delay is not accounted for in this analysis. TTI measures the reliability/variability of travel times. It is the ratio of corridor travel time in the peak period to travel time at free-flow speeds or uncongested conditions. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
49 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
50 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
51 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
52 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
53 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
54 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
55 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
56 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
57 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
58 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
59 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
60 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
61 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
62 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
63 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
64 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
65 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
66 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
67 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
68 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
69 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
70 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
71 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
72 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
73 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
74 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
75 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
76 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
77 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
78 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
79 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
80 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
81 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
82 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
83 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
84 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
85 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
86 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
87 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
88 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
89 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
90 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
91 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
92 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
93 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
94 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
95 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
96 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
97 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
98 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
99 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
100 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
101 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
102 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
103 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
104 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
105 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
106 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
107 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
108 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
109 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||