Central CT MPO Long Range Regional Transportation Plan 2015-2040

CCMPO-LRTP-2015-final-adopted-1.jpg

EdZ>KEEd/hd DdZKWK>/dEW>EE/E ‘KZ’E/d/KE ???  D]v^?U ,??(}?Ud?? ?? ? KWdWZ/>??U?? ?? ????D]v}?h?? ?  }( ??? ]?o]u? dZ]???}??Z?v??????Zv??o}vv??? D??}?}o]?vWovv]vPK?Pv]??}v ]v}}???}v?]?Z?ZhX^ X???uv? }(d?v??}???}vU ]vo? ]vP]?????]??vPPv]?U  v?Z}vv??????uv?}(d?v??}???}vXdZ}?]v]}v?U.v]vP?Uv }vo??]}v??????]v?Z]???o]?}v? ?Z}?}(?Zv??o}vv??? D??}?}o]?vWovv]vPK?Pv]??}v  v}v}?v?r ??]o??G??Z }8]o ?]??}??}o]]?}(?Z ^??}(}vv???X ????D]v}?h?? ?  }( ??? Contents KEdEd^ ………………………….. ………………………….. ………………. ? &KZtKZ ………………………….. ………………………….. …………….. ? ????D]v}?h?? ………………………….. ………………………….. ………… ? s/^/KE ………………………….. ………………………….. ……………………. ? E?}vo??(}?uvP }o? ………………………….. …………………………. ? D:KZ/DWZKsDEd^ ………………………….. ………………………. ?? ‘v?o ………………………….. ………………………….. ……………………….. ?? W???]v?v?o ]??? ………………………….. ………………………….. … ?? W?o]d?v?]? ………………………….. ………………………….. ……………….. ?? W?]???Z]o? ………………………….. ………………………….. ……………. ?? &?]PZ? ………………………….. ………………………….. ………………………… ?? WZ^Zsd/KE?hW’Z ^ ………………………….. …………………. ?? &/EE^ ………………………….. ………………………….. ……………… ?? &?o(?v]vP ………………………….. ………………………….. ……………. ?? ^??vo}o(?v]vP ………………………….. ………………………….. …. ?? Z?v????u??}v?v??u?? ………………………….. …………… ?? WKW> ………………………….. ………………………….. …………………. ?? W}??o?}v ………………………….. ………………………….. …………………… ?? }v}u]? ………………………….. ………………………….. …………………… ?? Pv]?]o]?? ………………………….. ………………………….. …………. ?? Zv?Zv]]?? ………………………….. ………………………….. ………… ?? ,}??]vPvZ}??Z}o?Z]o? ………………………….. …………………. ?? ^z^dD^ ………………………….. ………………………….. ……………… ??? W???]v?v?o]??? ………………………….. ………………………….. .. ??? W?o]??v?]? ………………………….. ………………………….. ……………… ??? W?]???Z] o? ………………………….. ………………………….. ………….. ??? &?]PZ? ………………………….. ………………………….. ………………………. ??? }vPZvPd?v??}???}v Wov~>ZdW(}?v??o }vv???U ?Z?}?PZ ????Uo??}???}?]?]}v}(?Z(}?uv (?v?}v?  }(?Z ? P]}v[?  ??v??}???}v ????uv}?v?]? ?]oo(}????o  ????}}uX  ,}???U?Z]??]?]}v]?v}????X  dZWov]?G?]o v  u???]??} ???} ZvP?]v?P]}vov?X  Z?o??}vv  ??]?]}v?  }(?Z Wov }??  ?u?G??Z????}?}(?Z(?u? ??}l??Z  Wov?o?v?X dZ WovP]?? ?v??Z}?}(??v??}???}v ]v ?Z ?P]}v?]?Z  ?]? ?}??  ?Z  (????X  W?}i?vP (???? vv??u]v]vP  Z}??}u??Z?v ]?  }oo}???  ??}??X  d Zvl? ? ??v?}?Z ??+ ?Z}  ??Z}??ZWov v ?} ?Z  }vv???  ???uv?}(d?v??}???}v  (}?]??Zo? X  /v???(?}u?Z Pv? }?U ??+}( uu?  u? v]]?o]??U  v?Z ??o] ]?u?Z  ???]?X ????D]v}?h?? ?  }( ??? ????D]v}?h?? WhZWK^K&d,/^ D/EKZ hWd dZ??]u??????}?}(?Z]?  ???]??}}u?o??]?Zv??r ??]?uv???Z??????}(?ZD}?]vPZ(}?W?}P?u]v ?Z?? ??  v????~DW r ??oP]?o?}vXDW r ??]v??}?v? ouv???Z?u???}v?]??DWK??Zv????]vP ?Z]???v??}???}v?ov?X DWK ]?}]vP  u]v}????U]v??}((?oo???U(}? v?u? }(??}v?X dZ .?????}v ]??Z? DW r ?????]?? DWK??}}}?]v??]?Z?Z]????[????uv?}(??v??}?r ??}v?}?o}???(}?uvu??]??}??]v?ovv]vP +}???XDWK[?o}vP r ?vP? ?v??}???}v?ov~??oo??Z >ZdW?}(}?Z?DWK?]v}vv??????(}?v???r (}??Z}?u??]?????X ?}v??}v(}?}]vPu]v}????]v??}((?oo??r ?]??Z?DWK}?v?]?]v}vv????ZvP]vPX/v ????U?Z  ^??}(}vv???]v]????}???}?}?Pv]? ]???P]}vo?ovv]vP}?Pv]??}v?~ ZWK?U ?Z}Z???]?}vr oo?v?ZZ}???}(?Z???[?DWK?Xd Z]???}??  ???o?   ]v ?Zv??o}vv???ZP]}voWovv]vPPv? ]vP]?r ?}o? X &}?? } ( ?Z u?v]]?o]?? i}]v ?Z ?]?}o ZP]}v }?v]o }( ‘}??vuv??  ~ZK’ U ??} i}]v?Z E?P??l soo?}?v]o}(’}??vuv??  ~EsK’ Uv}vi}]v?Z E}??Z???,]oo?}?v]o}(’}??vuv??  ~E,K’ X  ^????v? ?}?Z]??}?Pv]??}vU ?Z?}?v? o?o?]v]??Z]??]? ?}ZvP  ?ZDWK}?v?]??}u?ZZWK}?v?]?X  tZ]o?ZZWK? r ?]Pv?}v??}????}u?o?]v:v??? ????U?ZDWK??}??]??l]vPo}vP?XdZDWK? r ?]Pvr ?}v??}?????]???Z?u?v]]?o]??  v?ZP} ??v}?  ?r ??}?}(?Z}?v??ZvPX?}(?Z]???]?vPU?Zu?v]]?or ]??o}vP]vP?}DWKUZK’UEsK’UvE,K’Z?oo }8]oo?v}???ZZvPX/v&???????? ?ZZK’v EsK’U????}???oo?Z???]?]?u?v]]?ovDWK??r }o ??}v?U?v?o???}?Z  ‘}??v}?[?}8?????vP?r ??}?o}(?Z}?v??ZvPXdZ????}?o]???oo?v]vPX DWKv?]????Z? ?Z]???}???]oov}?}u?o??v?o :?v????X Eyd^dW^ Kv?Z}?v?]??}8]oo?ZvPUDWK?]oo? ?}?]?? v?Zvo?PDWK??]oo??]??Z]??ov??}]v}?r ?}???Zv?u?v]]?o]?? X  ???v?DWKu?v]]?o]??  vv}?]v}??}????]vP?Z]?u]v}??????Z?? v}?}8]o o?uu??}(?Z]?????uv?DWK?X /v:?o?U????U}vv???[DWK??]oo}u?o?(?oo???}( ?Z]?>ZdW?X??Z]??uU](?Z DWK??]Pv?}v??}??]? }u?o? UZ}(?ZDWK??]?]vPu?v]]?o]??(?}u?Z  v??o }vv??? DWK ?]oo ]vo? ?Z? u?v]]?o]?? ]v ????D]v}?h?? ?  }( ??? ?Z]?????????? X Z?P]}v[???]??ov??]oo]vo? (?oo????Z??]oo ]v}??}??   ?Zv?U??]}? ]??Uv??}r i??(?}u?Zoo}(?ZDWK[?uu?  u?v]]?o]??X  /v?Z  uv?uU?Z]?}?uv??]oo?????Zo}vP r ?vP??v??}?r ??}v?ov(}??Z??vu?v]]?o]??}(?Zv??o}vv?r ]??ZP]}vX t,d[^Et tZ]o v}?  }u??Zv?]? ]v v???U ?Z]? ??? ]vo??  v?u?}(ZvP?XdZ?]vo?W x v??ov?}v }(?ZDWK????????]vP??}???Z?]? }vP}]vP]v}vv???  ~?}? x Z(?v??}?Z}vP}]vP??}??}(??o]?Z]vP??r (}?uvu??]?(}?DWK?]v}vv???  ~??Z Er ?}vo??(}?uvP}o?  ??}v}v?P ?  x v??v]????]}v}((?]PZ??ovv]vP  +}???  ~? ?Z &?]PZ?  ??}v}v?P ??  x dZ]vo??]}v}(v?  }????   o}vP r ??u??}i???} }??u]? u?v]]?o ?Z]o ?}???  ~? ?P ??  U r ?o}??P]}vo]l??Zv??}?l  ~??P ??  U?v?r ?l}u??Zv?]???]?}(??v?]??}???  ~??P ??  U????}(?ZZ}???l???} ??]}?]vE??]?]v v?o]v  ~??P ??  Uv????} (Du}?]o}?or ??]v?]??}o  ~??P ??  x h????}??}i???Z???v???  ~??Z Di}? ]u??}?uv??  ??}v}v?P ??  x h?? .vv]o ?  ~? ?Z &]vv?  ??}v }v ?P ??  x h?? K?}v ]? Y?o]?? }v(}?u]?? Z?}?? ~? ov]??vuvuv??  ??}v  }v?P ???  dZ?}?PZ}???Z]??ovU??}v??Z??v?}??Z?]vo??]Pr v].v???]?]}v?U?]??o?]v}?vPX ?v}?}?U L??ZDWK}?v?]?????v ?Z? ZvP?? ]oo]v?P??]v?}?Z?ov?}(?Zv?o?vo?P ?]?}oZP]}v}?v]o}(’}??vuv??vE?P??lsoo? }?v]o}(’}??vuv??X ????D]v}?h?? ?  }( ??? V ision dZv??o}vv??? D??}?}o]?vWovv]vPK?Pv]??}v  ?]oo?}?l ?}P?Z??]?Z]?? uu?? ?o]vU?]??} oU??o]vP ?}vU E?  ?]?]vU Wo]v?]ooUWo?u}??Zv^}??Z]vP?}v?}v????Z???v??}???}v ]v???uv??]v?Z?P]}vu}??Z?]?]}vUZ]??ZP}o?Uv }u?o??Z??}i??v}????Z]??ovX  &}??}???]v]?o?]v(}?u?Z]?WovXdlv ]v}v??U?Z???]v]?o? ???]?]}v(}??Z(????}(??v??}???}v]v?Z?P]}vX/?]??Z ]v?v?}(? Z]?Wovv?Z?}o]?}(DWK U?Z?]v???uv?]v?Z?P]}vU ?Z?Z?}vv???}i??}???P??}(?]??vP(]o]??U?G???Z? ?? ]v]?o?XdZ??]v]?o???(}oo}??}v?Zv???PX ????D]v}?h?? ?  }( ??? WZ/E/W>^ ?X ^(?? X/v???uv??Z}?o???v?]v??v??o]??X’]?v?Z Z]PZ  }v}u]vZ?uv }??}(  ]?]o]??  v  ?ZUu]v?]v]vPv ]u??}?]vP?(??]v?Z??v??}???}v  ?? ??u]??r ?v?o X ?X E??? X /v???uv? ?Z}?o ??}?? vU ?Z? ?}??]oU vZv ?Z v?]?}vuv?X v ]v?? v?]?}vuv ?]?l??}ooZ?uv??]??X d}u]v?]v?Z?P]}v[? ?oo]vP U  ?Z??v??}???}v  ????uu????????Zv?]?}vuv?X ?X ??X  /v? ??uv??Z}?oZo??}?oP??Z??Z?v?}XZ?]v??U?}?l??Uv?]?]?}?? ?}?Z?P]}vo]?U?}?lUo?vUv?o?]v]????o?Xd}Zo??ZuP??Z?U?Z??v??}??r ?}v????uu?????}?]?Zu?]?ZZ]PZo?o}(??}?]u]??vU?Z?  ?Z?(]o?Uu}]o]??X ?X WoX / v???uv??Z}?oul?]?v??o?X >]?o?}?v?}?v?v?]ooPv????]v?P?o ?}?Z?}]oU  }v}u]U  vv?]?}vuv?oZo?Z}(?Z?P]}vX  Dv?}(?Z???Z?(oov }vZ??u?U]v???? ?}?}}?]v???uv?? X  d}?????Z]?U?Z??v??}???}v????uu??? }v??]???}ul]vP?Z??o??v]??U?]?v??o?X E?}vo??(}?uvP}o? ?  }( ??? E?}vo??(}?uvP}o? D}?]vPZ(}?W?}P???]v?Z?? ??  v????~DW r ??]??Z ???v????(??v??}???}v(?v]vPo?U]v??}? v?  ??(}?u v r  v }??}u r ? ??}P?u ???]?uv? (}? DWK?v????XDW r ????(}??Zv?}vo?}o]?]v????}?? }(??(}?uvuvPuv??Z????W ^W?(}?uvuvPuv??]oo??v?(}?u?Z&?o r ]Z]PZr ????}P?uv??}?]uv??}?Zu}??8]v? ]v???r uv?}(&?o??v??}???}v(?v???(}??]vP}vv?}vo ??v??}???}vP}o?U]v??]vP?Z}?v?]o]??v??v?r ??v? }( ?Z &?o r ] Z]PZ?? ??}P?uU v ]u??}?]vP ??}i?]?]}v r ul]vP?Z?}?PZ_ r ?????V??h^???~ E?}vo ??( }?uv P}o? ? ??o]?Z ]v ??v ??X d Z}?P}o??o]??]v do ? X do ? XE?}vo??(}?uvP}o? ‘}o? E?}voP}o ^ (?? d}Z]??]Pv].v????}v]v??8(?o]??v??]}??]vi??]?}voo??o]?}? /v(????????}v]?}v d}u]v?]v?ZZ]PZ??]v(??????????? ????u]v???}(P}}??]? }vP??}v???}v d}Z]??]Pv].v????}v]v}vP??}v}v?ZE?}vo,]PZ??^???u ^???u?o]]o]?? d}]u??}??Z8]v?}(?Z???(??v??}???}v????u &?]PZ?u}?uv?v}v}u] ?]r ?o]?? d}]u??}??Zv?}vo(?]PZ?v??}?lU???vP?Zv?Z]o]??}(???o}uu?v]???}r ??v?}vov]v??v?}vo??u?l??Uv????}???P]}vo}v}u]?o}?uv? v?]?}vuv?o????]v]o]?? d}vZv?Z??(}?uv}(?Z??v ??}???}v????u?Z]o??}??vPvvZv]vP ?Zv???ov?]?}vuv? Z???}i?o]???o?? d}????}i?}???U??}u}?i}?v?Z}v}u?Uv??]??Zu}?uv?}( ?}?ovP}}??o??vP??}i?}u?o?}v?Z?}?PZo]u]v ?vPo??]v?Z??}r i??o}?uv?vo]?????}??U]vo?]vP??]vP?P?o?}????v?v]u??}?r ]vPPv]?[?}?l???? E?}vo??( }?uvP}o? ??  }( ??? WZ&KZDED^hZ^ o}vP?]?Z?Z???(}?uvP}o?U DW r ??]??? ?Z^?r ??? }( d?v??}???}v ?} ??o]?Z  ??]? }( ??(}?uv u????  ?}Zo?????vDWK?u????Z]???}P????}r ??u?vP?ZP}o?XdZ??(}?uvu???? u??? ??o]?Z??Z????vDWK?]v?Z(}oo }?]vP??W x W?uv?}v ]?}v}v?Z/v?????^???uv}v?r u]v?}(?ZE?}vo,]PZ??^???u~E,^ x W?(}?uv}(?Z/v?????^???uv?Z?u]vr ?}(?ZE,^ x ?]P}v]?}v}v?ZE,^ x &?o]?? v ??]}?? ]vi??]? v }?Z v?u? v ?? ???Z]ou]o???o  rr }voo??o]?}? x d?8}vP??}v x Kv r ?}u}]o?}??u]??]}v? x &?]PZ?u}?uv?}v?Z/v?????^???u ^ddEDWKdZ’d ^ t]?Z]v}v??}(?ZhX^X???uv?}(d?v??}???}v[??r ?o]?Zuv?}(??(}?uvu????UZ????]oo? o}? ??]?}(??(}?uv??P??XdZ???P???]oo?o}? ]v}v??o??}v?]?Z?ZDWK?]v?Z????X dZ }vv??? ???uv? }( d?v??}???}v ]? ???v?o? ?}?l]vP?]?Z}vv???DWK?U]vo?]vPDWKU?}?o}? ?Z???(}?uv??P? ?XKv?Z ???P?????o]?ZU DWK?]oo????Z]??ov?}  ]vo??ZuX E?}vo??(}?uvP}o? ??  }( ??? Major improvements dZ(}oo}?]vP??}vo]???v??]?oo}(?Z ui}?]u??}?uv??v??P???}u?}?Z ?P]}v[???v??}???}v????u }???Zv???????X dZ???}i????]v?.??]vP?Z>ZdW??}??? }uuv?????]?Zvv????(}??Z?]vuv?}( ?Z?]?]}v??oo}??}v?Z(}?P}]vP?PXW?}i??? P?}???u}V?Z??v}?o]??]v}??}(]u?}??vX E?}vo??(}?uvP}o? ??  }( ??? ‘EZ > ???? W  P  ‘]???]}?]???}u]v?vv}?? ??v?]}v X   }v}? }vr ????? v? (]o]?? ??Z ??v?}( ?]?oU?]??vP ]v(?r ??????? X  /v??U?l?}??]vPu}?8]v?(?}u?Z?]? o???]o?X KdU?}?v?U DWK Z?]?oo ??}i??(}?v?]?}vuv?o]u??X  }v}?????? ??}i???Z?]u?]??Zv?]?}vuv?X KdU?}?v?U  DWK ?]Pv?}?v??????}vZv?Z?]o?v?]?}vuv?X  h ???v??}???}v?}ul?(Uo]?o}uu?v]??U ]v??r ??o? ]v???]?Zv?]??}??}?v?o (} ???o}?uv?? v?]??X KdU?}?v?U  DWK /u??}??}oo?}vX  }oo??P]}v r ?]??8?Xt}?l ?]?Z?}o]?}?}??vo?P}}]v???}???v??8 ?]}o?}v?v??u]??Zuo??}v]oo??} ????]?r ?(}?????u r ?]vo??]?X ^???}o]U ?}?v?UKd ? ? ?o}?Z]PZ r ??}uu?v]?}vv??}?l?X }vv??}?lr ??vu?o}???]v?Z?P]}v?}?Z]v(}?u?}v????Z]PZr ???}P]?o??v????}?Z??]o???o~XPXU?o}uu??r ]vPX &?o P}??XU ^??U?}?v?U?or }u? ? ? E?}vo??(}?uvP}o? ??  }( ??? W?????v]vZ]??}?]}??]}??X  vZv?v]?]?? vZ]??}?]?]???Z?}?PZ??v??}???}v]v???uv???Z???r ???  ?Z?????v??}u}?}u??oov r ?????v?X ^??U?}?v? ? ? W^dZ/E^Ez> /^d^ /u?ouv??Z^??[? Z }u?o?????? [  o? X  oo??}i?? u?????}?](}?????]v?v?o]???X KdU?}?v? ? ? }??v??}?l  }(}v r  v}+ r ?}????]vv?o]?? ?}???X  Z}??? ?Z}?o}vv??}?Z&?u]vP?}v vo,?]?r P d?]ovZK’[?u?o? r ??v??}?lX DWK U?}?v? ? ? }u?o??Z&?u]vP?}vvo ,?]?P d?]oX  Wo?P?ZP??  ??vZKl,]ooZ}]v&?u]vP?}v  v, ??^???]v ^}??Z]vP?}vX d}?v?U  KdUW ? ? }vv?vP?]??]o??}?ZE??]?]v r ,??}???r ????]oX  >]vl?Z??????]o?}^hvt???u?Doo ?]?Z?????X d}?v?U DWK U KdUW ? ? W?}??v??vZ]l]vP??]o?X  W????Uu]v?]vUvU ?Z??}??]oU??v?Z?P]}v[???]o????uU]vo?]vP?Z E?vPovd?]oX d}?v?UW ? ? E?}vo??(}?uvP}o? ??  }( ??? Wh>/dZE^/d }vv??Z?P]}v?} ?Z E?z}?l]??U^?u(}?U?]Pr ?}??Ut?????Uv,??}?  ??X  d ?v?]??Z}?o]v??r ?P]}voX??v?Z ????(?o ?]P?}?? r t???????v?]? }??]}??Z?}?PZ?]??}oUWo]v?]ooUvE??]?]v?},??r (}?X  Z}v.P??o}o???}????}.????]X D??} r E}??ZU ddZE^/d ? ? Z?v}uu????]oo}vP?ZE?,?v r ,??}? r ^??]vP.o }??]}?X Z}v.P??o}o???}????}.????]X u??lUKd ? ? Z?}vo]?o}o???}???X  o]u]v??}???v??v?(?? ?Z??}??]o?}]u??}?????u??(}?uvX ddZE^/dU }vr ???}?? ? ? h?/v??v???]??ovv]vP ?}]u??}???]o]??X  ^?u]? oo ??v?]??}???]v?Z?P]}v (}?]vo??]}vv???X ddZE^/d ? ? ?]PvP?}Z]PZ?v?]?]]o]??X  W}??u??v?Z?o?? ?u?}]v??}?????}??X ddZE^/d ? ? /v?oo]Pv???v?]?????u X  / u??}???v?]?v????v?]? ?]?Z ?Zv}o}P? X  DWK U ddZE^/dU}vr ???}?? ? ? E?}vo??(}?uvP}o? ??  }( ??? WZ/sds,/>^ o??}v]Z]PZ???]Pv??}]v]?o??v??}????} ?}]}vP??}v}?]v]v??X  ^???ouv? ?]??vPv}?.r ?}v????u??]?Z?]Pv??Z?]???]???}v?} o??v? ?}???X Kd ? ? ??o}?}vv?vPo}o??????}????o??v??}??? (}?}vP??}??]}??X  Zo]???8}v???]o??lv]?vP ?}P?Z?  v]????]vP??8}v?}?Z????P?]X DWK U?}?v? ? ? Z?o]v????}v??]?Z?}?v}????Z????}??]?X  o]u]v??vv??????}???}]u??}??(??v??8G}?X d}?v? ? ? /u?ouv???uvPuv?vl}??]Pvo}}?]v?}v ?Z????}??]?X  ???u??8o]PZ??v}v?}o]? ?]????}v}vP???}?U??]oo?}v????Z?}?PZ ?}???U?}]u??}??(??v??8G}?X d}?v?UKd ? ?  ?o]PZ?vl}???u???vP?}??o}?}v?X KdU?}?v? ? ? }v?????Z?P]vPv??}?l?}????}??o??]?Z]o?X &?oP}??XU ^??U?}?v? ? ? E?}vo??(}?uvP}o? ??  }( ??? &Z/’,d D]v?]vv??P? ?Z?P]}v[? ?]o????u?}Zvo (?]PZ???8X  ^Z]L?u?Z(?]PZ??(?]o(?}u ??? Z]PZr ???v?}??}?]oX WvuUKd ? ? ‘v?o ??  }( ??? ‘v?o /DWZKsdK>>d /KE }u??Zv?]???Z}?o}oo?}v??8}v]?}v? v]v]v???P]}v r ?]X ^Z/Wd/KE d}v????Z???v??}???}v(?v????v?]v?Zu}??8r ]v?U }?? r +?? uvv?U P}} ? ? ??v?oX /v ?Z ???U??}??}v???]v??Z??vo?Po]u]??}oor ?}v?}??}???}?U??Z???8}?v??U?lv???]v ?o ???].?uXdZol}(}u??Zv?]??}Lv (}?? ?ovv?? ?} ?o?}v Pv?o]??}v? vv}?o ?]r vvul???}i??o}?uv?U?o??}vUv??]}?]r ???}vZoovPX dZ??}o](??}v}(’W^???v???}o??}v?}?Z]???} ouX Dv?’W^?v]??U??Z??Zu]oo]}v?}(?u???Z}v?]v]??or ?}vU??}??l}v??8}v]?}v?X^????]v?P???Z? ??}???v}?]v?}?v??Z}??}(u}uv???}v]?}v???o?} ]v?}}u??Zv?]?Z]??}?]o????]?Z?}?v r ?Z r o}lU v?}v?]}??PX?}(??]?vPU’}}PoU(}?]v??vUv}? }vo?P]??o]???8u??}voo?}?(?}u????????}?v ?}}oo?}??V]?o?}ul?????? r Z}??o?u??}( ???]o  ??8 ?]ooX dZ ???}?u?}?o }u??Zv?]?v?? }( ?Z? ?}?? ?U?Z]Zvo?}]vo?}?Z?]v(}?u?}v??Z??oo ?u?v???o?}???U??(??Z?}oo?}v?]??}( ?v ?Z o?P?? DWK?vKd?X ???}?Z]? ]v(}?u?}v }?o ??}o??}v]? ??v??}???}v ?ovv]vPX &}? ?Z? ??}vU ?Z]?Wov oo?}voo?o?v??????}ulP}} r (]?Z+}??? ?}??]??Z]?]v(}?u?}vX dZ??o?}}??}???v]??(}?P?Z?]vP?.???ZvX]r v???}???U(}?]v??vU]vo??Zo}?}v}(?Z]v?X dZ?o}?}v??v}?v??]vv???v ?]?(}?uUo? o}vP}}v??o?]v?}????]??XdZ]? ul??}?l]vP?]?Z?Z?????]8?o?v]u?]???Z(r .]v?}(?(??]u??}?uv???}P?u?Xd}?????Z]?U?Z]? Wov?}uuv?}??]?vPoo^?? v  o}o?}o ]?Z??r ??}v?}??8]v]v???]?Z’W^?v]???Z??}?o}?}v v??u]??Z??}v??o]v]v??P]????X K^d W?}i? }???v? }v ?Z ?}?? v ??? }( ?X dZ]? r ????o]v????v(?}u(??}?}?]?v?XdZ}??}(??]u??  ? }oo?}v]( ??}??o? ??? ~?]?Z ???}??]? ??]?r uv?v???]v]vPU?Z}?o?o??o?o}?X ‘v?o ??  }( ??? ^ddh^EEyd^dW ^ ? ???v?U ???} ??Z ]v(}?u?}v ]? u]v]uoX /v ?Z}??U ??}??uv?v}oo?}v}(?Z??}?o}???o??o? ?? ]Lo?X,}???U]u?]uv??}?]??XdZ?]vo??Z?]or ]o]??Uo]v?]vPUv}??}(?Z]? r ?????~?Z]o?}uv?r ??U??Z?’}}PoUZ???}(??v]v????]vul]vP?Z? ? ?]oo ?} ??v??}???}v ?ovv??U v} }uu]?uv?? Z? vu??oo??Zv?}?o}???]u??? }oo?}v ????u ?Z? ]? ?}???U ?o]oU v ?}?lo ~]XXU ?]o?P}}?v}?v}?]u?}?v???v}v]v]v? ???}v??XE???????}(}oo}??W ? Kd U D,^U vl}? DWK  P]v? ?? ?} ?Z]? r ???? ??8?X ^?????}?? r }??}v}(?Z]?Wovv}vo?? ?]?Z]v??}???X ? KdUD,^U^???}o]?o}?v]u?ouv??ov]vr o?]vPZ???U?P]?????}L??Uv??+??]v]vP}ur ?}vv?? ?} }oo? v ??u]? P }} ]v]v? ?X ^?????}?? r }??}v}(?Z]?Wovv}vo???]?Z]v.? ???X ? >}o?}o]}???Z^???}o]?????uX ^?????}?? r ]ur ?ouv??}v}(?Z(}?uv?}v^???ovv}ur ?o??]?Z]v.????X ,/’, r ^WKDDhE/d/KE EdtK Zd^dZd^/DW >DEdd/KE d?v??}???}v ]v???uv??u??? ]v?P?? vPv?]vo? r }uu}?oo????X ^Z/Wd/KE /v????U?Z^?? ???W?o]?E}X?? r ???XdZ]?o?~v}? ??}v ?? r ???(  }(?Z}vv???’v?o^?????U?X ??? U uv??^}u?o?vP?Z?????U_}??Z]v?P??}v}(oo??r ??}(?Z??v??}???}v????uU]vo?]vP?o]???U????]v?U v??v?]??]??]v?}?Z?ovv]vPU?]PvU}v?????}vUv }???}v}(?}???]v?Z^??XdZo?vi}]v?Kdv u?v]]?o]???}??v^??}vou}?v?_}((?v??r ]?(}??Z^}v?????}vU???}??}vU?Z]o]??}v}??o}r ?}v}(Z]PZ???U?}?}??????Y?}v?(]o]??(}?oo????U ]v o?]vPY]l???v?]?ol?X_&?}u.?o??????}vU Kdvu?v]]?o]??u????}??o???9}(?Z?(?v? (}???Z??}i??X 1  dZ]?Wov?}uuv??Z??ZP???}(?9}(??v??}???}v(?v??r ]?(}?P]?vu?v]]?o]??U}??Z?}(oo??Z(?v]vP??v]v P]?vu?v]]?o]????]?ov??}?Z??v?P}(oo?}?l??}uu??vP? (}}?}?]?o?}?}?l]v?Z?  u?v]]?o]??U?Z}?o??v?}v}u?o? o?Z}?PZKdvu?v]]?o]??]v?Z?P]}vu???v}?]v}?r ?}??v}v r u}?}?]?????]v?}?Z]???v??}???}v???? uU ?Z]?Wov???}vPo?v}??P??Zu?}P}}?v?}v?Z ?9u]v]u?uX 1  K^d W?}i? }?? ?v? }v ?Z ??].? }( Z ??}?}? ]ur ??}?uv?}???P?X ^ddh^EEyd^dW ^ dZZ}u?o??????[]oo]?o?X/?]?v}????}?ZKdv u?v]]?o]???}Z??}]?XE???????}(}oo}??W ? Kdvu?v]]?o]??]v?P??oo????]v?}??v??}??r ?}v??}i??X ^???? ]uu]?o?v}v?v??]v.v]?o?X ? d}(]o]??]u?ouv??}v}(?Zo?U DWK  ??]??oo ??}?}???v??}?? ?}v??}i??]v?Z?P]}v(}?}u?o]r v?]?Z?Zo?X ^???? ]uu]?o? v}v?v??]v.r v]?o? X ^????]u?ouv??}vX}?]vP?}o???? r ??????u?]v}uu?r v]??^??????u??~???? r ????U?Z??v?P}(?}?l??]vZu?v]r ]?o]???Z}?ol}?]l?}?}?l]??(}oo}??W?o]vU?X?9V?]??}o U?X?9V??r o]vP?}vU?X?9VE??]?]vU?X?9VWo]v?]ooU?X?9VWo?u}??ZU?X?9V^}??Z]vPr ?}vU?X?9X W???]v?v?o]??? ??  }( ??? ? Kdvu?v]]?o]????v?o???9}(?]?(?v? }vv}v r u}?}?]?????X ^????.?o??????v}v?vr ??]v.v]?o?X ? DWK  ?}P]? ?]PZ??}??}i ???Z?Z}u?o??Z ????? [  ]v]???o??}v?X  o??????  v}v?v??]vr .v]?o?X W^dZ/EEz>/ ^dZKhdEdtKZ< /v???uv??]v]?(]o]???Z}?o(}??}v?P]}vo v??}?l}(?]Pv??}???X ^Z/Wd/KE dZZ}u?o??????[???}Z?v??}???Z?}o?Z??r ???]v?v?o]????o?]v?Z??v??}???}v????uvr }?]vPo?oo?(}??Zu?}}uu}?U?}?Z?oo?}?oU v}?i????]???v?Z]????vP??Uu?????]?Z?(??v 8 ]v?X dZ]? Wov ??}??? ?Z? P}o? ]v ]?? ??]v]?o? }( ^(??  v ?? Xz??ZWovo?}?}Pv]???Z???}??? ?o]u]?X/((?v??v}??}????}?Z]v??}]v?]?]r o???}?]o?vP]ov.??(}??ol??v]l??U?Z]?  ??o]?}vu???}vv???X/v}?Z??}??U]v???uv? ?Z}?o (}?? }v ]u??}?]vP ??v??}???}v (]o]?? ?Z? Z? v??P?U}? ?]Pv? U(}?????]vv?o]????X 2 2  ,}???U?ZWovo?}u?Z?]???Z?oo??v??}???}v(]o]??U??? ?Z??}o?U??Z?]v?Z?}(o]u]? r ??????????U?Z}?o   ?]Pv?}???oo?????]?Z?(??X d}v????Z?]v???uv??]v????]vv?o]??(]o]?? ul(} ?}Z?v?U??oUv?o?u?o?????(?o????uU }u??Zv?]?U?oo r }vv?v??}?l}(u?o? r ???}??? ?? ?o}? (}? ?Z]? WovX &]P?? ?  ~?X ??  ?]?? ?Z? ?}???U ?Z]Z ???o? (?}u ??v?]? ??o] }v??o??}vX dZ ?}????]v? v?}}vv??}??o?}vv???v?}??o? ??v?}v??]?Z???v?v(????????]vv?o]??]vr (?????????]?Z]vv?]?Z}???Z?P]}vX~dZo??]vo? ?Z&?u]vP?}vvo,?]?Pd?]oU]???? o}?  ?]?r ?v???P???}]????]o?]Pv].vU?ZE??]?]v r ,??}? ???? u?o? r ?? ??]oU v ZK’[? u?o? r ?? v?r ?}?lX K^d }??}v}(?]Pv?v??}?lZ ?v}}??XdZ}??}(]ur ?ouv??}v?v?}v?ZZvP???}?}?v??v?(?}u o}?~XPXU?]PvPvov???]?]vP?}?o??o?Z]PZ~?]P? v??vvo?(}?????]vv?o]????X ^ddh^EEyd^dW ^ ?Lv??}?l ]? ]vo?]v?Z]?Wo vU???}v}uuv?? ?]??Z?}?PZ?Z??o]]v?}o?uv???}??X}??}v}( ?ZWov?]oo?]Pv](?}??}v}(?Z]?v??}?lX  W???]v?v?o]??? ??  }( ??? E???????}(}oo}??W ? DWK  ?o}??v}????P]}vo}v r  v}+ r ???? ?}??v??}?lX }u?o??]?Z?Z }??}v}(?Z]?WovX ? DWK?}?l??]?ZZK’?}?.vv]v?P???}??v?r ?}?l?X ^????]v????v}v?v??(}?}v??X ? Kd v u?v]]?o]?? ]v?P?? ?Z v??}?l ]v?} ?Z]? ?ovv]vPv??o]?}?l??}??v?X ^?????}?? r }??}v}( ?Z]?Wov v}vo???]?Z]v}v??X ? D?v]]?o]??]v?P???Zv??}?l]v?}?Z]?Wov?}(}vr ????}v v ?o}?uv?X ^???? ?}?? r }??}v }( ?Z]? Wovv}vo???]?Z]v?v???X ? Kdvu?v]]?o]???]Pvv???}i???}??}?]?r ??}??]?U?? ?(]o]??}v?]Pv??}?X K??? }v??}i??]?U????vP?}?? r }??}v}(?Z]?WovX &ZD/E’dKEE>,Z /d’dZ/> ‘?? ]v  u?o? r ?? ??]o }( ?P]}vo ?]Pv].v ?Z}?o  ?o?PPX ^Z/Wd/KE dZ&?u]vP?}vvo,?]?Pd?]o]??ovvU}v?v?}?? ?? r u]o??]oo}vP(}?u??]o?}?]PZ? r }( r ????vE? ,?vvE}??Zu??}vUD??Z????X/v?v????Uo?P 3  ?}oo??ZK’X 4  ??u???DWKX ??}v?}(?Z??]oZ?v??v}?v?}?Z??o] (}??ol ]vPv]l]vPXdZ???}v?Z???]lo?}u ui}????}vo(]o]??v?}??]?????}vU?]?Z}vP?r ?}v(???v?}vouv???X^?}?}?v?? 3  }(?o]???v?r ???]v???Z?]u????]}v?}??X??u?? 4  ]v]??Z? uv??}]v??o} vP?Z??]ovi}?}?????U????v]???]?]??U ?]?Z?}u?????}???U???}?u}?X??Z?u]v]vP?r ?}v?}(?Z??]o?}u?o?Uvo]vl??}u}?v?o? r ?}?r ?o?????vv??v?????o]?ZU]?]?v?]r ???Z??Z??]o?]oo o?}]v??]vPo????}uu????v ??o]??]l??v?ol??X 5 dZ??]o?????Z?}?PZ??}?}?v?]v?Z?P]}vU^}??Z]vP?}v vWo]v?]ooXdZ??}?v?o?}ul???Zo]}v[??Z?}(?Z ?u]v]vP?v}u?o?u]oP}(?Z??]o]v?Z???X?}(  ?Z]?WovU?Z}vo?????Z??u]v]vP?}}u?o?]v?Z ?????v??vW ?X }?v?oo ?v? ]v Z?Z]? v t?? D]v ^??? ]v Wov???]oo~^}??Z]vP?}v ?X ,??^???]v^}??Z]vP?}vvZKl,]ooZ}]v&?ur ]vP?}v 5  ^h?o]??_]l]vPv?ol]vP]vo?oo}?Z?????}???]?}uu??vP ?}?}?lv???}vU??Z??Z}??]vPU??vv]vP??v?U?]?]?vP(?]v?}? (u]o?u u??U}????o]vP?}??l}?v???]vuv??v?X W???]v?v?o]??? ??  }( ??? &]P?? ? X?]Pv??}?? v??}?l  v??]ou? W???]v?v?o]??? ??  }( ??? ? &]P?? ?  ~?X ?? ]oo??????U?Z?P??????Z??]o?]?? v??U?]?o?}]v?X 6  ???ZU?Z?} v???????]u??]ur ?]uv??}??}(?Z??]oXdZ]?Wov?Z?(}??}uuv? ?Z?Wo]v?]oov^}??Z]vP?}vU?}P?Z??]?Z?Z]?v]PZ}?? &?u]vP?}vvZ?Z]?U?}?l?}.oo?ZP??X K^d }uu?v]??Z?(}?v?Z?vP]v?]vPv?]Pv(}??Z &?u]vP?}v vo ,?]?P d?]o ]v Pv?o ??v? ???U??? ?} ? ???U??? ?? u]oX }v?????}v ?vP? ??v ?}?PZo? ? ???U???v??U???U?????u]oX~?]P?v}?Z??]Pv 6  dZP????]??v??}?UP?vo]v?}v?Zv}??Z r ?}??Z?}???Z? ?}?PZo?]????Zu?X ZoovP?v?]??Z }??????v?oo?XdZ]??]o?v??r u??}?o}????v???v???u]oo]}v?}vP]v?Ur ?]PvUv?]o?Z??X?u]o?}(?Z??]o?Z?Z????} }u?o?~? ^ ????  vv?????? U ?X  ?? X ^ ddh^  EEyd^dW^ D}??}(?Z??]o?]?Z]v}vv???Z?v}u?o?XdZ ?u]v ]vP?v?]o???}v?o]]vU}?v???}U?Z?P]}vX?}( ?Z]?WovU?Z?????}(?Z??]o]v?Z?}uu?v]??]??]v do ? X 7 E??????(}??Z ??]o]vo?W 7  ^?}v??Z???v?}v?????}v?v}?}v?]?^?v?]o?X_D]oP ]????}?]u?X do ? Xd?]o??}?}?v?? >}?}v ?l?u W???]v? ?o]??? d}?o???? ZKl,]ooZXU &?u]vP?}v dZ????U?l??l????? r ?WD ?? ?? ?? ^v,]ooZX  l^Z??l??? U ^]u???? dZ????U?l??l????? r ?WD ?? ?? ?? ^ou}v?}}l?]PU ??’?v? dZ????U?l??l????? r ?WD ? ?? ?? ^Z???U hv]}v?]oo dZ????U?l??l????? r ?WD ?? ?? ?? ^????W?lU ?}v dZ????U?l??l????? r ?WD ?? ?? ?? ^}??Z}(^Z??U^]u???? ^?v?U?l??l?????? r ?WD ?? ??? ??? W???]v?v?o]??? ??  }( ??? ? DWKv }vvKd P?}v?}?(}?  ?Z??}?}? Wo]v?]oo’?????vDWKZ]??}v??o?v??}??r (}?u?Z????X t]?Z]v}v??}(}??}v}(?Z]??ovX ? dZ(}???}?v?vu}?}u?o?vP]v?]vPU?]PvU v}v?????}v}(?Z?u]v]vP?v.v]?Z????}(?Z ??]oX }u?o? ?]?Z]v .? ??? }( ?Z }??}v }( ?Z]? WovX do ? Xd?]ou]oPv???????}?v D?v]]?o]?? hv?]o? u]oP ^???? Z?Z]? ?X? }v r Zo(u]oo]vl??v}?v?oo?v?vt??D]v^???]?.v]?Z]vP ?]Pvv?]oo???}v??}v?????}vX??vt??D]v^???v ?Z^}??Z]vP?}v?}?vo]vU?}?lZ????} }uuvX ^}??Z]vP?}v ?X? DWK]?]v?Z??}??}(]v]??vP  ?????}??u]v??(???}??(}? ?Z? ?]ov}??Z}(t??Y?v^??? X/?]????v?o?]vP?o???}vvKd  (}??Z]????]??}v XDWK?????}]v]???Z????]v&z? ?v}u?o? ]?]v&z??X Wo]v?]oo ?X? dZWo]v?]oo’?v??oo]v??}v???U???P?v??}}u?o??}??vP ????}v?Z??]o]v????X]????]}v???v???VZ}???U??}?Z]8r ?o??}(???]vP???}?Z?]o?}?]PZ? r }( r ??U ?Z??}i??u]v?]v?Z }v???Z?X  DWK]?]v?Z??}??}(]v]??vP  ?????}??u]v??r (?? ?}?? ?Z?}?PZ Wo]v?]oo X /? ]? ???v?o? ]vP ?o?? ? }vvKdX DWK?????}]v]???Z????]v&z??v}u?o?]?]v&z??X &? u]vP?}v ?X? ZW ??o] ]v ???? ?} ?Z ^?? K8 }( W}o]? v DvPuv? (}? ? ???U????}}u?o??ovv]vPUvP]v?]vPUv?]Pv(}??Z]v}u?o??r ?}v}(?Z??]o??vZKl,]ooZ}]v&?u]vP?}vvE}??Z????]? ]vWo]v?]ooX W???]v?v?o]??? ??  }( ??? h^tz^/dZ/>^ ^?????Z}?o}vv??Z????u?o? r ????]o?}ui} ???r v?}v???Z?^hvt???u?X ^Z/Wd/KE dZ?]Pv(}??ZE??]?]v r ,??}?????U?ovv?X? r u]o?? r }vo?Z]PZ???Z??]oo}vv??Z??}]??Uoo?(}?  .? r u]o ??]o (}? ????]v v ?o]?? ?? ??v ?Z ??v?]?v ????Z????[?????v??u]v??]v}?v?}?v E??]?]vvZ}??????E?]vP?}v:?v?}v]v?Z??X 8  dZ]???]o}v???????o}u??v?]}v}(?Z?P]}v[??]???r oo?v}v?]??v?]??}??v??}?lVZ}???U?Z??]o]? ??v?}(oo ?Z}??}(]???}?v?oW??u?]vP??]o????}?? ??Z?o?????}(Z}?????]v??}(,??}?~}?t?? ,??}? 9 U]?]??vo]lo??}????uv????o??o}vP?Z}??]r }??}??]?Z?}]l?XD}?}??U?Z]o?Z??]o?????]?Z]v u]o}?? ?}}(v??o}vv???^??hv]???]??vt??r (?u?DooU]?}vv???}v]?Z?XdZov???Z?????}?v? ?Z? ??v?}v? ~??? ?}?U ??? ??l]vP o}??U v ?Z]l 8  dZv ??}??]PZ? r }( r ????o??(??Z???v?]}v}(?Zu?o? r ????]o ??}(Z}?????X ?}}??v???v?Z??Z}??]??v??v????(}??r ???]v?v?o ]???vul?]?]u??}o?Z?uv??]oo (}?P}?Z]????Zv???o]vP?}~}?(?}u?Z???v?}v?X dZ]? Wov vv}? ?u? ?Z ol }( }vv??]?? ??v Z}?????v,??}? 10 U??]?v.??ZP????v}?vr ?}?vE??]?]vU?Z???? ??]oU^hUvt???u?DooX tZ]o?Z???ui}?]??}(??8?}?Z??]?????v?o???]?? ???]????}u}]oU?Zo????}(]o]??}?ov???o Z}???}??(}??ol]vPv]l]vP ?]?Z?Z??}??]v(???????? X ‘]?v?Z??Z??]o]?? ??}????]?Z]v?Z}??]??v}(^h vt???u?U?Z]?Wov?}uuv??]o]vP(?}u?Z??]o?} }?Z}(?Z?o?P??]?Pv??}??v???}??X/v}???} u?]u]? ?? }( ?Z ??]o ~v u]v]u]? ??}u}]o ??8U ?Z? ?] ??]o? ?Z}?o ?l ?Z (}?u }( ]?U }+ r ?} ??]o??Z??}??]oX &]P?? ?  ~?X ?? u???}?v?o?}???(}? ?Z??????X K^d dZ}??(}??Z??]??]o?]?????} ?]u]o??}?Z?(}? }?Z???]o?]v?Z?P]}v~}v?Z}??}(??u]oo]}v??u]oX 9  ^}??Z????v?]}v}(v]u??}?uv???}t??,??}?[?d?}???}}l d?]o ?}?o ??  ?]?o v ??(?o }vv?}v??v }?v?}?v E??]?]vvt??,? ?}?v??X 10  dZ?o]??]?Z]v?Z????]?}(DWK[??]???Pv?UZK’X W???]v?v?o]??? ??  }( ??? /v?}u??U?Z}??u?Z]PZ???}?Z?v}( ?]oX ^ddh^EEyd^dW ^ d}ul?Z???]o?U?Z]Z?}v???????v?U?o]??U ?Z(}oo} ?]vP?]oov?}}u?o?XE???????}(}oo}? ?W ? d}P?Z? ?]?Z ZK’U KdU v  +? u?v]]?o]??U DWK  ???]?v?o???}???X ^?????}?? r }??}v}( ?Z]?Wovv}vo???]?Z]v??}???X ? Kdvl}?+?u?v]]?o]??}u?o?  vP]v?]vPU ?]PvUv}v?????}v}(Z}?v?]??]o?X }u?o? ?]?Z]v.????}(?Z}??}v}(?Z]?WovX WZKdd/KEEyWE ^/KEK&,/>/’EddZE^/d ^z^dD h??Zv}o}P??}] u??}??Z??(}?uvU8]v?Uv?]r ??Z]?}(??v?]?v????v?]?]v?Z?P]}vX ^Z/Wd/KE D}????v?]?]v?Z?P]}v}?v}???v}v]??]PZ?? r }( r ????????Z??o]?}?U?Z]Z]??Z???]?Z}?Z?u}? }(??v??}???}vU]vo? ]vP???}vo??v??}???}v~??v (?]PZ? ~???l?X tZ]o ??Z ]v(???????? r ?Z?]vP ]? .?oo? ?u??U(}?]vP????}u]??]?Z??8}LvZ?v???]ur ??}v?Z??U?o]]o]??Uv??}(??v?]?????uWv}? }vo?????v?v? o??o?}}??]?Z??8 v ?Z?r o??vo??u}??o}?o??Zv???vP??? v ??U ?vo]l ??U ?Z}? ?]??? v ZvP ]??}v?U ?u]vPU }? ?ov?]v???}v??}??8U?Z?u?????l?}.??}??U?v ](]?uv?Z]?vP??8 iuXdZ]?ul???v?]??v}u???? ?]?Z?]?]vPUvU?}v???vUv?????]??Z]??r u?oo?X dZ?P]}v.v?]??o(]v?Z]??]???}vX}vP??}v~ d?8v }vP??}v U?X ??? U??]oo?}v?Z}??]}???????Z W?o]d?v?]? ??  }( ??? ?P]}v[? ??v?]? ????uU Z? u (}? o}vPU ?o}? ??]?? }v ]?? ??? v?v?XdZ]?Wov(??????}i???Z??Z?P]}v]? ?????]vP ?} ??? ?Z]? ??}ouX dZ? ]vo? /v?P??}v ?]?ZE?z}?l  ~?X ??  E?,?v r ,??}? r ^??]vP.oZ]o  ~?X ?? v?ZE??]?]v r ,??}?????~?X ??? XdZ???}r i???]oovo??v?] ??]???}????}vP??}v???}?]]vP ??]v?v????????]PZ?? r }( r ??X ,}???Uv]?Z??Z?]ov}???????}i???]oo???}vr P??}v}voo}(?Z?P]}v[????}???Xd?v?]??]??v}????r o]vP}v?Z?]o}?????}??]}??~}?? ??o]vP}v?Z}?}?r ?]}?????vo?}???Z}????]????oo????}( }vP??}vX^]v]?]?v}??]?o}??}??]o?}}v???????r ???]PZ?? r }( r ??}v??????}??U?}o??}v??Zv??]? ?Z???P}(???v?v? ]vu]? ??8  ?vX ]??? ??? }( ?Zv]??? Z? v ?o}? ?} } ?Z]?X dZ?]vo?W ? d?v?]??]Pvo??]}?]?? ? ^]Pvo}}?]v?}vl}??u]??}v ? Y??i?u?? ? vZvo??}v??? ? W??]}?]vP ? D?o??o}}?v??? ? W??vP?]v(}?u?}v?? ??u? ? do?Z}vv}vo]v??]?}}l]vP~XPXUKvoolKvo]l v??? ? }v?v?}?? }??u]??}vU ?o r ?u }u???? ?Z?o]vPU v??}u?]???Z]vP(}?]o r  r Z]v????v?]? ? ??}u??Z]oo}?}v ^ddh^EEyd^dW ^ ? DWK  ???]?v ?v?]oo?Zv}o}P]?Uvr ??u]v?(?]o}???}vo]u??}?uv??X ^?????]?Z]v ??}???}(?Z}??}v}(?Z]?Wovv}vo???]?Z]v .????X ? d ??v?]?  v}vvKd?]oo]v??oo]vP??}u??Z]o o}?}v?Zv}o}P?]voo?? ?L??Zo?vZ}(d (?r ??l X ^????]v?????]?Z?Zo?vZ}(d(??lX ? ^o?}???}vo]u??}?uv???]u?ouv?X }vr ?vPv?}v(?v]vPU? ?????]?Z]v?Z?u}v?Z?L????? v?v}vo???]?Z]v ??} ??X W?]???Z]o? ??  }( ??? W?]?? ?Z]o? >dZKE/,/’,tz^ /’E/DWZKsDEd^  o??}v] Z]PZ?? ?]Pv? ?} ]v]? o??v? ?}??? ?} ?}]}vP??}v}?]v]v??X^???ouv??]??vPv}?.?}v ????u??]?Z?]Pv??Z?]???]???}v?}o??v??}???X ^Z/Wd/KE ,]PZ???]v?Z?P]}vZ?Z}l?}]v???Z??P?o?o?}vr P??Xd}u]v]u]?o?vul}??uo??}(?Z?}v?r ?}?lUo??}v]Z]PZ???]Pv?Z?v]v??oo??}u}( ?Z?o}?}v?XdZ??]Pv?P]??]???]v(}?u?}v]v?Z ? }(}vP??}v}?]v]v??X hv(}???v?o?U?Z??o]??}(?Z??]Pv?Z?v?}u?Z?o]ur ]???}?Z]?????v??XD??P?}Lv]v]??]u?o? ?Z?o??]???U}??}^?ovo??v??}???U_?]?Z}????]r (?]vP?Z]Zo??v??}????Z}?o ?lvXdZ]?]?????o? ??}ou(}??]????Z}?v}?]v?u?o?(u]o]??]?Z?Z?r P]}vov??}?lV?v????Z??}P}U?Z?u??]?Zo}vP ]v?}?ZiuU}??o}?}?vo??v??}????]?Z?v????]?]vPX 23  ^]Pv??]oov]v?o????}]??}v?(}????i?v?}v}?] v??r ZvPX??}?Z}u?o?v???}(???oU]vo?]vP?Z}vG?v}(/ r ??vZ}????]v,??}?V/ r ??U/ r ???Uv??]vD?]vV/ r ??U??Uv? /( ?Z? ?]??? Z ?? ]v(}?u? }vU uv? }( ?Zu o]lo? ?}?o(}oo}?]?X d}v????Z(???G}?}(??8U?Z]?Wov?Z?(}??}ur uv??Z]v??oo?}v}(]?}voo??}v]Z]PZ???]Pv?? ????P]?}]v??XdZ??]Pv??Z}?o]v??oou?Zo]l?}?v ?]Pv??}vo}o?} ?U}??]??]Pv?}vZ]PZ???W?Z?]?U?Z? ??}??????ui}?]v????}vo}vP?Z?}??Uv?Z? ??}???o????]]v?v}(??????vo???]?? u]??}?(}?P?]??}vX /v??oo?}v}(?Z??]Pv??]oo???]??Z]v?. ?}v}(???r ?P] o??v? ?}??? v ???}??]? ?]Pv o}?}v?X &}? ]vr ??vU?Z?]??vP?]Pv?]v?Z?P]}v?Z???v}(}vP??}v }v/ r ??]vt??,??}?v?]?o??v??}????Z}?o ????ouv??]?Z??}?]Pv?Z?ooi?v?}v?U] v}?Z]r ??}v?U~???v?}v?Z?}???Z???v??(}oo}??W/ r ?? ?  ?? ? ?E ?  ??? ?  ??E ?  ??X &]P?? ?  ~?X ?? u???Z]??}?? ~?Z]v???oo?}?Z?o??v??}???X  23  dZ.????]Pv ?Z}?oo}??ooZ}(i?v?}vv]v(}?u?]???}( ?Z???v?Z?u???ul?}v??}????}v?Zo? ?v??}??V ]v??,??}?Vv/ r ??v??]vWo]v?]oovE??]?]vUu?o??o?]Pv? u?v?}]v ]?????o?u}?uv?XdZo}?}v}(?Z?oo}? }??]????}?]u?X~??o?]Pvo}?}v?u?]+?v}?o?X W?]???Z]o? ??  }( ??? ?Z?}v?]Pv?Z}?oo}?}??Zi?v?}vv?r ?v?oo?Z?}]v?v??}?[?}?Z?}??X/v?}u??U]?u? ??o?}}u]??]Pv?U??}?]u}?]v(}?u?}vv]?r ?o?}v??vVZ}???U?Z]?WovZ}o??Z??}u o??r v??}???U??Z??Z}?U??}}}u?o?(}?ou}??vr ?}????Z?]????Z}o???l?Zu?}?uu?X ^ddh^EEyd^dW ^ ? Kd v D,^ }u?o?  v ???  ]???]}v ?ov?X Wov???o?????]v????Xh?????v]vPX ? DWK  ???]? }??}???v]?? (}? ]?}vo }? ]u??}? ?]PvPvul??}uuv?}v??}KdX ^?????]?Z]v .????}(?Z}??}v}(?Z]?Wovv}vo???]?Z]v ??}???X ? Kd]v??oo??]PvP??}uuvo}?}v?X }u?o? ?]?Z]v?v???}(? Z}??}v}(?Z]?WovX >K>^dZdZKEE d/KE ??o}?}vv?vPo}o??????}????o??v??}???(}? }vP???Z?}?PZ r }??]}??XZo]???8}v???]o??lv]?r ?vP?}P?Z?v]????]vP??8}v?}?Z????P?]X ^Z/Wd/KE d? 8]vuv?????}(?Z?P]}vU}?ooo}vP]???? r ??? ?]?(?}ud????]oo?Z?}?PZ?]??}oU&}????]ooUvWo]v?]oo?} E??]?]vU]?Z??~??o?}v}??Z r ?}??Z(?}u?]??}o?Z?}?PZ ^}??Z]vP?}v?}D?]vXD}?????]o?v}oo?}??? v?U ?U}?}??]??X}vP??}vvo}vP??]??u????o?X D?Z}(?Z]?}vP??}v}???}?Z?o????]??}(}v?vr ?}??}oo?}??vU??]oo?U???]o?o}vP?Z?}??]}??X tZ]o?Z??v?u?}??o}o?}?U(?}(?Zu}vv?X  dZ]?(}???]????}?}??vu??}v?}?Z(?}oo?}??v ???]o??Z??U?Z??}????v]vP?ZuX/(]v????}v? ???}?u?]v?U?Z?????Z???Z}oo?}??v???]o? }??G}?X ‘]?v ?Z ??}Z]]?? }??U v?]?}vuv?o ?v?]? ]o]??U v ?}o]?o]v(?]]o]??}(}v?????vPui}?v??}??Z?}?PZ ?Z?P]}vU?Z?P]}v?]ooZ??}ul????}(?Z?} v??}?l]?Z?U??]oo????8?}o?uP?}??X~??}?}?r ?o?}v P?}??Z vU ??]oo?U ????oU ??8 ]? ? ?? ?} P?}?X’]?v?Z?uv??}???}?v??]??U?Z]vr ???]v}vP??}vu?v}?o]v?????}vv?oX W?]???Z]o? ??  }( ??? &]P?? ? XW}?v?oo??v??}???v?]Pvo}?}v? W?]???Z]o? ??  }( ??? Kv}??}v?Z?Z?v}?v??o}???  ?Z}?o]??Z?? }(o}o?????XdZ???????vo?P?(?o}??r ]??XdZ?????v????].}??}???v]???}}K}??8(?}u ?Z}oo?}??v???]o?VZ}???(}??Z?v}?Z? ?Z? v }vv?}v?X dZ ??}v ?Z? ? ???? ? ?} ?vr ???o]?]??Z??Z?}v}?i}]v?}P?Z??ooW?Z????v ???v}(?o}?uv?]v?Z?P]}vZ??]ov}???]?}vo ]??o}l?U?Z]Zv]????v+??o?]??]??o?P ?}o?u?}(??8U??U?o r  r ? r ?????? ???Z?]u??r ?Z??Zv??}u}?u}]o]??X’]?v?Z????v?ou]v?vv }?????Z?}????}?Zo}ou?v]]?o]??U]?u]PZ? ]v?Z]?]v?????}o}}l??Zuv? v v?Z?o?}o]?? v.??M dZ?u?o?}X/vuv???U}vo? ?Z}???Puv??}(?r ?Zo??}?ov?}(}?uo}l?}??}(???v?o?]?}vr ?v?}???????XdZ]?Wov?Z?(}??}uuv??Z??Z?}?r ?]]o]??(}?}vv?vP?Z?o}l?Uv?Z???o?v??? ]v}vP??}v~v]v??]v?vv?v.?? ??]}??o? ???]X ^ddh^EEyd^dW ^ ? DWK  ???]?}??}???v]??vul??}uuv?}v? ?}u?v]]?o]??X ^?????]?Z]v.????}(?Z}??}v}( ?Z]?Wovv}vo???]?Z]v??}???X ZKhEKhdZdZK&/d Z?o}vP??o}o ]v????}v??]?Z?}?v}????Z? ???}??]?X ^Z/Wd/KE Dv??}?]v?Z?P]}v?}????X??}?Z??o}?]? P?}??Z }( ??} r ?vv? ????v ?o}?uv?U ??8 ? uv? ]v????}v? ]? ?}v ?Z]? ?]??X dZ o}vP o?? ?Z????o?? ?]oo??ui}?]v????}v??]?Z??8o]PZ?? Z?(}?o} r ov]vPU]XX??]oo}??U?Z??]???}??]vr ???}?lo}o?}?XdZ???o?]??vv????l r ???? uv?]v????}v?U??]oo?(}?? r ????}??~??o?}U?}?}u P?Uu] v}?]v????}v??]?Z??8o]PZ??XdZ]?}vP??}v Z?v?u?}(??]uv?o+??U]vo?]vP????uv (?oUvU??]oo?U?Zv}??Puv?}(?lo??UvP?}?? Z?]}? ? ]u??v? ?]??? ~?}oo]vP ??}??U o??vP ?Z?}?PZ?oo}?  o]PZ??U?X  ?]u?o ?}o??}v ?Z? ???? oo }( ?Z? ??}ou? v ]vr ????]???Z]o???o???]vP?Zv?]?}vuv?o~]vr o?]vP]??}oo??}vUv}]?Uv(?o}v??u??}vv?(?? ]????}(?]Pvo]?]v????}v?]??}?v}???XdZ]?Wo vZ}o? ?Z?uv?]v????}v?]v?Z?P]}v}?oP??o?v.?(?}u }v???]}v ?} ?}?v}??? v }?]vPo? ???}vPo? ?}ur uv??Z??}?v}???}v?]???]}??o?(}?oo]v??r ??}v??}i??XdZWov????}????Z]v??oo?}v}(?}?vr }???  ?Z??????}??]?v(?]oX W?]???Z]o? ??  }( ??? ^ddh^EEyd^dW ^ DWK}u?o?????}(?}?v?o?}?v}??o}?}v?]v ?]??}ovWo]v?]oo]v????X ? Kdvu?v]]?o]??}v?]??}?v}???(}?oo]v??r ??}v??}i??X ^???? ]uu]?o?v}v?v? ?]v.r v]?o?X ? DWK  u}].??Z??}i??o??}v??}???}??]Pv }v?? ?}]v?? (}? ]vv}??? ??}i??X K??? ?]?Z]v ?Z? u}v?Z?}(?Z}??}v}(?Z]?WovX ? DWK  ?o??  ?}?v}?? ??}i? (}? ?Z d/W ?  u}v????}v(}??Z?P]}vX K???  }vv}??}???v]??r ?]?X ^^DE’DEdE ^/’E>KKZ/Ed/K E }v?}o]? ?]???? v ?? ?u o]PZ?? }v }vP?? ?}??}]u??}??(??v??8G}?X ^Z/Wd/KE tZ]o?Z?P]}v[?ui}??Z}?}?PZ(??U??Z?Z}????v ??U}vu]vo?  ??]?Z?}?PZ??8U?]?Z?Zu]P??}v}( ??]o]v?}?}?]?o??v???]??U?Z?v}?o?}??v??}?? o?P?}o?u?}(o}o??8XdZ]?Zuoo??8[U?Z]Zu}??? o}????vul?(???v????v?U}vG]???]?Z?Z???r ?}?v(?v?}v ]vP}(?Z??}???P]}vo?Z?}?PZ r ?}???V ]??u]????v}?}vo??u?oo?????}vP??}vv o???o?}???o??]v?]Pv].v?o?o??]v????X ~^ d?8v}vP??}v  v ^(??v????? U?X ???  v ??? U?????o?U(}??u?o?X ^??]??ov???}o]]??Z??]?? (????  }uu?]o?or }?uv??}}?v?}?v?} ??Zo]l?}?ooo?]??Z]???}ouU ??]v?Z?Z}???}u] r ??u?Z??]oov}?Z?u?Z+?}v ??8U??Z?}v}?????Z ?]??vP  ?o}?uv?Xd}??? ]?v}?Z???W?o}vP??Z??}?]??Z?U?Z???]ool? }u]vPX,}???U?Z?  }?v}?uv?Z??Z?]?v}?}}u(}? ]u??}?uv? v }v?Z}v????U]v?}(?????v???v?v }v??}ooU?Z}vP??}vv?(??Z????}??Zuoo ??8[vu]?P?Xd?}??}?v????}}?Z]???? uvPuv?v?]Pvo}} ?]v?}vX ??uvPuv?}v?}o]???Z]vv?u?o~v}Lv ?}}?o??]??]????v??????Z????](?u}?????]??X ?oo]vP?Z?}]v??}(]vP???vP???v?Z]v?Z}vv??r ?}v}(???v???oo????v?(uv????U??]vP?Z  ?}?v?o(}?}vG]?v??]vP?Z???]v(}?oo??v?r ?}???}v????~]vo?]vP????]v?U?o]???Uv??v?]??]r ??X Z}?? }( ??8 o]PZ?? o?} .v uv? ???]??X d??v]vP u}?r uv?? }Lv ?? (???v? ?]Pvo ZvP?V }vP??}v v ( ??????}v ???o?X ^]Pvo }}?]v?}v v o]u]v? uv? }( ?Z??vv??????}??v?Z??(]o]????G}???ur ]vP??8o]PZ???}?Z?u}??]???}v}?ZZ]?????[U?? ??Z??ZP?v??[??Z?}v?v?}?v?Z?}X W?]???Z]o? ??  }( ??? dZ]?Wo vZ}o??Z???]v?}???]v?Z?P]}v??v?}P]v (?}u?Z??Zv]???V]??Z?(}??]???Z??Z]u?ouvr ??}v}(??uvPuv?v?]Pvo}}?]v?}v?Z??r ??}??]?X ^ddh^EEyd^dW ^ ? DWK  ???]?}??}???v]??vul??}u uv?}v? ?}Kdvu?v]]?o]??X ^?????]?Z]v.????}(?Z }??}v}(?Z]?Wovv}vo???]?Z]v??}???X ? Kdvu?v]]?o]??}v?]???}v??}ov?]Pvo }}?]v?}v?Z??o?v?X ^???? ]uu]?o?v}vr ?v??]v.v]?o? X ? DWK  ?o????}i?(}??Zd/W?u}v????}v(}? ?Z?P]}vX K???}vv}??}???v]???]?X hdKDddZ&&/E &KZDEd ?o]PZ?vl}???u???vP?}??o}?}v?X ^Z/Wd/KE ,]PZ??8?}o?u?v?o???}(?}K??Z?  o?}?]?r ??}v?Z?vP?}????8?]}o?}v?Z?}u?}??vX ??}??}??}v???]v??Uu?v]]?o]??v?Z^??? ?vo?}v(}?????]}o?}vU}??voo???}v?XdZ ???o?v?v?Z?v}?}vo?]u?]???Z??v??}???}v ????u ~? ??]vP o?? v ]v?? ?? o?} vvP?? v ?????o?oo]??v??}????XdZ]?]?Z?P}???}?}]??X dZv}o}P?]?v}??]oo?}??v]?Z?Z?}???}+v???Z} ?]}o???8o??v????Zo]??}(}?Z??]vi}???X dZ? ]vo??Z}??Z}??v?o]PZ??v?]???v?(???Xd} v????(??v??}???}v????uU?Z]?Wov?}uuv??Z? ??}u?v(}?uv??]?]v??oo?Z???o}???U ]v??U?]}o?}v?U}??]?l?Z]PZX ^ddh^EEyd^dW ^ ? DWK  ???]?}??}???v]??(}???}u???8v(}?r uv?vul??}uuv?}v??}Kdvu?v]]?o]r ??X ^?????]?Z]v.????}(?Z}??}v}(?Z]?Wovv }vo???]?Z]v??}???X >dZ/s,/>^hW WKZdEdtKZ< }v?????v??}?l}(  Z?P]vP???}v??}????}???Z??}( o??]?Z]o?X ^Z/Wd/KE dZ?Z??}(o]u?ZvPU?}P?Z??]?Z?]?]vP(?o??]? v P}?}o]?o ]v??]o]??U ? ul]vP o? ?Z? ?Z ???}r o?u r ? ??v??}???}v ????u }v????? }?? ?Z o?? . L????]?v]?Z?v?]?}vuv?oo?v}?}v}u]oo?????]vr oX????o?U}?Z?(}?u?}(u}]o]??v??]]o]??? P?}?]vP]v??}u]vvXdZ?]vo??Z??]?}vo(}?u?}( ?ol]vPU]l]vPUv??v?]?U??oo?v?????}Z???Z ?? o}uu??vPv?v?(}??}vv??Uu?o? r ?? W?]???Z]o? ??  }( ??? }uu?v]??X ~Dv? }( ?Z ??}i?? o]?? }? ????}?? ?Z?X tZ]o?Z????}Z???o?ovU?v?u?}??}u?r ?v]v??v?}vo?u?o????Uv?u?oo??Z?]vl ?Z?vv?}(  ?}]??}v??}u}]o?U]?]??vo]lo??Z? ?Zv(}????]oo??}u?o?o?]????Xd}????Z]? v]vo]u]? r ???}o?uUo]u]? r u]??]}v?(????Uo??vr ??(?o?Z]o??]vP?o}?vU?}(??]?vPU????vP ?}u?l? Xo??]????Zu}????}u]?]vP}(?Z? ?Zv}o}P]?XtZ]o?Z?????(}?uo]lvv?Z??Z ?} ?]?Z }v?v?}vo ?Z]o?U ?Z? Z? ?v]?? (?o]vP v??Z??]v}u??o?]?Z?Z?]??vP(?o]???]??}v v??}?lXdZ?]?}(o ??]?Z]o?v??]????Z??}v }( v? ]???]??}v ????uU v}? }( ?}?] (?o ?vl? v ??u????}(Z?P]vP???}v????]?}?]P]v?v??v?}v?X dZ?Z}o?o}??}v}(o??]??]?o]lo??}v??]?? ?Z]v??oo?}v}(Z?P ]vP???}v?v????}??vP??]?uv? ~XPXU?u??u???XtZ]oZ?P]vP???}v??v}???v?]?U ?Z??Z}(?Z?o}?uv? v ?v?U](v}?Z?v??U}(?Z}?r ?v?}(]v??oo?}v??}???Z?P]}v v ]?o}P]??oZoovP ?vo]lo??}Z]??] ?Z}??P}??vuv?]v?}o?uv?X? v?}?Z??Zo??]?Z]oG?P?}??U?Z]?Wovoo?(}? ]v??oo]vP???}v??ooui}???v?}v?]v?Z?P]}v~ur ?o}???U ?Z}}o?U v ?Z}??]vP v???V ]? o?} ?}uuv? ????}??vP?Z]v??oo?}v}(Z ?P]vP???}v????}u}]o }?v?[?o}?}v?~]XXU?Z??Z]o??l??}??v]PZ?X ^ddh^EEyd^dW ^ }vv???[????uv?}(v?P?vv?]?}vuv?oW?}?r ?}vPvvsZ?P]vP???}vP?v???}P?u]v????Xd?} ?}?v?}(?Z??}P?uZ ?v(?vX ? DWK  ]v?.???]}?]??o}?}v?(}?Z?P]vP???}v]vr ??oo?}vX ^?????]?Z]v}v??}(?Z}??}v}(?Z]?WovX ? KdU u?v]]?o]??U v ?Z]? ???? ]v??oo Z?P]vP ??r ?}v????]}?]??o}?}v?X ^??????} }v?(?v]vP]??]or oX}vo???]?Z]v??}???}(????X  v??o}vv?r ??^??hv]???]??~^h  Z?]v??oo??}Z?P]vP??r ?}v?}vu???v]?o}}l]vP(}?}??}???v]???}]v??oo u}? X &?]PZ? ??  }( ??? &?]PZ? ^dhzK&&Z/’,d^z^ dD }}? ]v??]?Z????]v?P]}vo???v???}????v ?ov(}?]u??}?uv???}?Z?P]}v[?(?]PZ?]v(????????X ^Z/Wd/KE DWK}}?]v???]?Z?Z?]?}oZP]}v}?v]o}(’}??vr uv??}v(?]PZ??ovv]vP+}???X/v????ZK’U]v???v?r ?Z]??] ?Z?Z???v}?Z?DWK?U?o}?v]v]?o]v?vr ? }??}( (?]PZ? r ?o?v?]v(????????XdZ?+}??Z?u}??Z ]v?}}v?v?}??(?]PZ??ovv]vP??}???Z?  ]vo????lr Z}o?}???Z??}P?u??oo?(}??}v}}?]v?}v}( (?]PZ? ?o vv]vP +}??? ?]?Z ??? Pv]? v v]PZ}?]vP ?ovv]vP Pv]?X ? }v ?Z]? }v?v?}?? ?ovv]vP +}??U ?l??}??]v?Z(?]PZ???v??}???}v]v(????????(}?o}oU ?P]}vo v ]v?? r ?P]}vo (?]PZ? u}?uv???]oo  ]v?r .U v ?}uu v?}v? ?]oo  u ?} ]u??}? (?]PZ? ??v??}???}v}v]?}v?X ^ddh^EEyd^dW ^ ? DWK}v???ZK’?}}}?]v?}v(?]PZ??ovv]vP +}???X  }u?o?X ? ZK’ }v?v??  ?]?Z }vP}]vP (?]PZ? ?ovv]vP ??}??X  KvP}]vPX ? DWK?o????}uuv? }v??Z????o?(?}u(?]PZ? ?ovv]vP+}???X  o??????v}v?v??]v.v]?o?X Z/>^z^dDhW’Z^ D]v?]vv??P??]o????u?}Zvo(?]PZ???8X^Z]L ?u?Z(?]PZ??(?]o(?}u???Z]PZ???v?}??}?]oX ^Z/Wd/KE }vv???]?}??o??vv?}v???l?(}?(?]PZ?XdZ]?Z? uv?]oo+??U]vo?]vPv?]?}vuv?o??}ou?~]??}oo??}v v v}]?U ?(?? Z??? ~???l? ?}? }oo]?]}v vP?? ?} }?Z? ?]???U Z]PZ? u]v?vv }??? ~?Z? ???}? ?}r ???X  (}??Z??????l?UZ}???Uu}??(?]PZ?u}? ??Z]?}???]vXdZ?P]}v}?v}?Z?v?????Z]??]vP }??]}??V Z}???U ]? }? }??  ?]o }??]}? o}vP ?Z]Z ]o? }???}v? }v?v?X dZ]? }??]}? }vv?? ?Z?}?? ]v ?]P?}???]?Z  ]v??u}o???v?^??]vP.oX hv(}???v?o?U ?Z }??]}? Z? v oo}? ?} ??]}??U o]u]?vP?Z??U?]PZ?Uv(???v?}(??]v?X????o?U ?]??]????o?}v???]vUv?Zo]v]?v}o}vP?}ur ???? ?]?Z ???l (?]PZ?X d } ???? ?Z]?U ?Z]? Wov ?}ur uv??Z??Zo]v??P?vu]v?]vX &?]PZ? ??  }( ??? ^ddh^EEyd^dW ^ ? DWK  ?l? (?v]vP (}? ?]o o]v ]u??}?uv??X }ur ?o?X DWK  ??u]?,]PZ r W?]}?]??W?}i?????}??]r ?}v??????(}????u]oo]}v?}??]??Z? ]oo]v]v????X dZ?????]?Zo??]v?Z???Z}?]??}v}(?Z??v??}?r ??}v]ooX ? h?P???}?Z?]oo]vU?Z]Z?}?ov.?(?]PZ??? ??ooU?]vP}v?]?????}(?Zv??o}vv?r ]??Z]o^???X dZ????]??v???v  ?Z}?o}ur ?o?]v????X ? DWKv}vvKd?l(?v]vP?}]u?ouv??}ur uv?}v?(?}u?Zv??o}vv???Z]o^???X P]v? }v?Z????]?}u?o?X ? Wvu?]vP??Z??l???}???}(??]???8]v?(}? vZv(?]PZ??]oX ^?? ????}}v?(?v]vP]??]ooX }vo???]?Z]v??}???}(????X W?????}v???P?? &?]PZ? ??  }( ??? Preservation & upgrades /v]?}v?}?Z ui}?  ]u??}?uv??o]??]v?Z??]vP??}vU?Z ?o?o}?o]????].??}i??~??????}vv u]v}?  ]u??}? uv? ??}i??]v?.?}?]vZ}(?Z?}?v?]vv??o}vv???X dZ]?o]??}(??}i??]v(}?u??Z?P]}v[?d?v??}???}v/u??}?uv? W?}P?u~d/WXdZ?o??v}?.vovu??}o?]v???}v? ?}ZvP]vPv?U}v]?}v?Uv(?v ]vPX d??  ]v?Z?o? o}?u? W  ~??????}vU h  ~??P?U}? E  ~v?V d]u  u? ^ U D  }? > (}??Z}?? r Uu]?u r U}?o}vP r ??uX ~D}???Z}?? r  ??u??}i??Uuv?}(?Z]ZZ?u}? ?}v?Z}v???o?Z?Uv(}?v]v?Zd/WX E}??Z? ?]P??}i???v}?]vo?o}?X&}? ]????]}v}(?Z?P]}v[??]P?U? ?]P? U?X ??? X&}? u}?]v(}?u?}v?P?]vP?Zd/WU(?o(?v]vP ??}P?u?Uv?Z?ovv]vP??}??U? lP?}?v U?X ??? X W?????}v???P?? W?????}v???P?? &?]PZ? ??  }( ??? dZ(}oo}?]vP?o?o]?????v?v(??????v??}?? ?}v??}i??]v?.?DWK  vuu?u?v]]?o]??XW?}i??v }v???}(]u ?}??v?}?Z?Z}o?P]}v?o]???v??ZZ]vP ZP]}v r ?] Voo}?Z???}i???P]?v?v??Z????? u?v]]?o]??[?vuXW?}i???v}?o]??]vv?????o?}??X tZ]o??}i??u???]vo?]v?Z]?Wov?}?}?v?oo? o]P]o(}?(?o??v??}???}v(?v?U]vo??]}v]v?Z]?Wov}?v}? P??v??Z???}i??]oo?]?(?o(?v?}?}u?}???XdZ]?o]??]?}v?}??}(??}i??(}??Z?P]}v[?d? v??}???}v /u??}?uv?W?}P?u~d/WXDv?}(?Zo]??  ??}i??Z??}v???v]?U?Z]o??}i??o]??]v?Zd/W??Z?o?} ?]?(?o(?v]vPX??Z]?Wovv?Zd/W????]??}.?oo? r }v???]vUuv?}(?Zo]????}i???}v?]? ?v(?v}v????v?o?Zv? ????o}?uv?v?o??}vZ?v}u?o?XdZ???}i??U?Z]Z?v}??   ?v??Z WZ?  }o?uvU???]?(???Z?o}??}vX^}u}(?Z?u?o?ol}????u??V}?Z??v??v?]?????X  dZ]?Wov ]???i??}ZvP v ?Z?}?PZ uvuv????Z?P]}v v v?Z]?o]??u?????}?G?ZvP?]v??}i?(?]]o]??U}??U v??]}?]??X&}?u}?]v(}?u?}v?P?]vP?Zd/WU? lP?}?v U?X ??? X ??]?}v?(}???}i????~?]v]??v??Z}o?uv tZ? ??v(}??Z(}oo}?]vPW ?oA??}v??}oV]lWA??r ??]vv?o]??]u??}?uv??V?]PA?]P?Z]o]??}v}???ouv?V,??AZ]PZ??V Z]ld?]oAZ]l]vP??]oV ]v?/u?A]v??r ??}v]u??}?uv??VZ}vA?}v?????}vV?v?A?}?v}??V??^?A??????vZvuv?l??.?}vVZ]oA }vr ?v?}vo?]o?}Vd?]oA]?u?o? r ????]oV dA?}??u]vV d r ?A?}  ??u]v~?(??Vt]vA?]v]vP X Z’/KE r t/ tZ? tZ? d?? ??X}?? 24 WZ? d]u /v???P]}vo??v?]?(?}uE?z}?l]??u??}~?]P?}?? r t????? }??]}??Z?}?PZ?]??}ovE??]?]v?},??}? d h v  > ,]PZ r ??l]v??]???]o (?}uE?,?v?}^??]vP.oU ?]?o]v Z]o h v  D E??]?]v r ,??}????? ,?? E ? ???X?u W ^ 24  ?v]vP}v?Z??}i?Uv}?oo}(?Z}??u?}?v??Z?P]}vX W?????}v???P?? &?]PZ? ??  }( ??? ??v?]}v}(?]??}o?Z??o?}Wo?u}??Z ?? E v  D ??????u]u??}?uv?? d W v  ^ W?}??}v}(?ZE?vPovd?]o Z]ld?]o W v  v W?}P?u?}?]vP El Z>/E tZ? tZ? d?? ??X}?? WZ? d]u &?u]vP?}v?v??]P ?]P W ? ? X ? ??u KE ^ &}??Z}ZXU??vZuZX?}E}??}vZX Z}v W v  D Z/^dK> tZ? tZ? d?? ??X}?? WZ? d]u Z?X???U>l?X?}^}??Z]vP?}vd}?v>]v ?o h v  > Z?X?UZ?X????}&?u]vP?}vd}?v>]v ?o h v  > Z?X?UZ?X???U v:?}u?X ]v?/u? h v  > W?????}v???P?? &?]PZ? ??  }( ??? Z?X?UZ?X???}sv?]o?ZX ?o h v  > Z?X??UZ?X????}Du}?]oo?X ]v?/u?U ?]P h ? ? X ? u ZKt D Z??X??v?? d r ? h v  > ^?+}?ZXvDo??^?XVDo??^?XvD]?^?XVD]?^?XU D?o?XUv :?}u?XVD?o?XUWo^?XUv ??o]vP?}v?X ?v? h v  > ^}??Z^?XUZ??Z^?XUvhv]}v^?X ]v?/u? h ? ?X???u  ^ ^}??Z^?XVZ}?????^}??Z^?Xv^}??Z^?X??X ]v?/u? h v  D t}o}?^?X Z}v W v  D t}}ov^?X?/E’dKE tZ? tZ? d?? ??X}?? WZ? d]u ?]P]vP}(P??]v?Zd?v?]?d?]o Z]ld?]o E v  D ??o]vP?}v?}?vv?? ]lWU ??^? E v  > &?u]vP?}vZ]??d?]oU??o]vP?}v?X?}Z?X?l?????l]vPo}? Z}v W ? ?u  KE D D?o? r ????]oUZ?X  ????}??o]vP?}v? X  d?]o E v  > Z??X?v??? d r ? h v  > W? ????}v???P?? &?]PZ? ??  }( ??? EtZ/d/E tZ? tZ? d?? ??X}?? WZ? d]u ?}^?X Z}v W ? ?X???u  D ?]Pvl}v?????}v}(v}vr?}]?ov??}?l ]lW h v  KE D ??^?XU?? D]v^?XUvE?]vP?}v?X ]v?/u? h v  D oo]?^?Xv??]}??~^}??ZD]v^?XV^?vo?^?X ?v? h v  > ‘ov^?X????]v]u??}?uv?? ]lW h ? ?X???u  ^ D?o? r ????]o(?}u??????]o?}^h d?]o h v  D D?o? r ????]o(?}u???? ??]o?}t???u? d?]o h v  > Z?X???v??^?X ]v?/u? h ? ?X???u  D ,??^?X?}v?????}v Z}v W ? ?X???u W ^ Z?X???v}?]v?X ?oU]v?/u? h v  D Z?X ???  v??]}??~^?o^?XVolZ}l?XV >]v}ov^?XUD}v?}^?XUv?? ?ZX ?v? h v  > Z?X???UZ}?????u???}t??D]v^?X d r ? h v  > Z?X??UE}??Z^?XUv^?vo?^?X d r ? h v  > Z?X??UZ}????u???}??]v??? d r ? h v  > Z?X??UZ?X???Uvoov^?X d r ? h v  > W>/Es/>> tZ? tZ? d?? ??X}?? WZ? d]u u?^?Xv??]}??~t?Z]vP?}v^?XV?o?^?X ?v? h v  > W?????}v???P?? &?]PZ? ??  }( ??? &?u]vP?}vvo,?]?Pd?]oU&?u]vP?}v?}^}??Z]vP?}v d?]o E ? ?X???u  D W???]v]u??}?uv??]v}}l?’?vov??????}v}v?Z E?vPovd?]o ]lW h v  D Z?X???vZ?X?? ~}}l^?X Z}vU ]lW h ? ?X? ?? u W D Z?X???U}}l^?X?},}}l?^?X t]v h ? ?X???u  D Z??X??U???Uv???]l]u??}?uv??v?]?ol ]lW h v  D W>zDKhd, tZ? tZ? d?? ??X}?? WZ? d]u ??]?]?}v}(Wo?u}??ZZ???}]?v>u]v?}}l??}????U?r ?}v}(>u]vd?]o Z]ld?]o E ? ?X???u KE ^ oov?}?vZXU&ooD}?v?]vZX?}t}o}?ZX Z}v h ? ?X???u  D Z?X~]vo?]vP?o??? Z}v h ? ?X???u  D u]?^?XUZ?X???},]PZ^?X Z}v h ? ? X ??? u W ^ ??}v}(}?v?}?vu?v]]?o??l]vP W?l]vP E ? ?X???u  D ??Wo?u}??ZZXvD?Z??^?X ]v?/u? W ? ?X???u  D ‘????}vZX Z}v W v  D ,??]v?}v?XUZ?X??}?u?????ZX Z}v h ? ?X???u  D >lWo?u}??Zo?X Z}v h ? ?X???u  D D]v^?X ??^? W ? ?X???u  D Z?X?v,??]v?}v?X ]v?/u? h ? ?X???u  > W?????}v???P?? &?]PZ? ??  }( ??? Z??X?v?? ]v?/u? h ? ?X???u  > ^}?ZXU?}??XZ?}t?Z]vP?}vZX Z}v h ? ?X???u  D ^XD]v^?XUEXD]v^?XUv Pv??X ]v?/u? h ? ?X?? ?u W D ^?u}??ZXUZ?X??},??]v?}v?X Z}v h ? ?X???u  D ^}??ZD]v ^?XUZ?X ??}Z? X Z}v W v  D ^}??ZD]v^?X~?}Lv ?? ???? Z}v h ? ?X???u  ^ d},}oo}?ZXUZ?X??}v Z}v h ? ?X???u  D d????]oov???}Wo?u}??Zv??^]?ol ]lW h ? ?X???u  ^ t}o}?ZX’????}vZX?}t}o}?d}?v>]v Z}v h ? ?X???u  D ^Khd,/E’dKE tZ? tZ? d?? ??X}?? WZ? d]u ??^?XUD?]v?X?}??>vX?}Wo]v?]ood}?v>]v d?]o E ? ?X???u  KE D D?Xs?v}vZXUD?]}v?X?}W?}???^?X Z}v W ? ? X ?? u & D Wov???]oo??]v??]???]???.?}v~Z?X?? ??^? h ? ?X???u  D Z?X??v??]}???}? ]v?}?vv??Uv??^?X?}&ov??^?X ]v?/u? h v  > Z?X??UWo]v?]ood}?v>]v?}>??>vX ?o h v  > Z?X???U/ r ???u???}????o?^X d r ? h v  > ^}??ZvZXUZ?X????}Z?Z]?d}?v>]v Z}v W ? ?X???u  D :?>vXvt?? ^?X ]v?/u? h ? ?X??u  D W?????}v???P?? &?]PZ? ??  }( ??? Finances ^}?v.vv]o?ovv]vP]??]?}?o?}?Z ????}(v???v??}???}v??}i?X dZ]?Wov]????]??(?o ?P?o?}v??}.vv]oo? }v???]vU?Z]Zuv??Z ??u??}?o}??}( oo?ovv??v??}???}v ??v]????U}?Z(}???????}v v??P??Uu?v}???Z ???  ??v??]ooX o?Z}?PZ??}i?}v??Z}?o?lv?]?ZP?]v}(?o? v ?Z????v?oo???P????}?l v ?Z]?Wov???]???} ??}?] u}????}o??u?}(?]oo(?v]vPv??}i?}??? }??]????v?? r .????u??]}X&?v]vP(}?P}??vuv? r ??}v?}???v??}???}v??}i??}u?(?}u?Z?o?o?}(P}??vr uv?W(?oU???Uvo}oXdZ(}oo}?]vP??}v????v?? Z??}???]v???v? r ??~????}oo??X W?????}v???P?? &?o(?v]vP ??  }( ??? &?o(?v]vP dZo?P???}??}((?v]vP]v}vv???]??Z(?oP}?r ?vuv?X~dZ]?]?v}?o??????]v}?Z?????}?}?v??]?U ?Z????l??}?]v]ovo}oP}??vuv??u?}v??]?? o?P??Z?XdZ??]v]?o}?}(o?]??vP?Z]????r uv?  }((?o(?v?(}???v??}???}v]??Z D}?]vPZ (}?W?}P???]v?Z?? ??  v?????  ~DW r ??XdZ]??U??? ]v]v?}o?]v????U????Z ^(U}?v?oU&o?]oU(r .]v?d?v??}???}v??]???W>P?(}?h???  ~^&d r >hUv ]???  ?}??]?]v????X /?Z?v ??v?Z?}?PZ D?}(????X DW r ??]?}u?o?o?U??Z}?]?]vP??]????}P?u??}(?v ??v??}???}v ??}i??X dZ hv]? ^??? ???uv? }( d?v??}???}vZ??Z?ui}?]?]?]}v?U?Z&?o,]PZ?? u ]v]????}v ~&,tU ?Z &?o d?v?]? u]v]????}v ~&dUv?Z&?oZ]o?}u]v]????}v~&ZX r &,tU &dUv&Z(?v]vP??}P?u????]?W ? Z??Wll???X,?X}?XP}?l( ?o]l??}i??X(u ? Z??Wll???XLX}?XP}?lP?v??l?????XZ?uo ? Z??Wll???X(?X}?XP}?lWPlW???? X }v}u]v?}o]?o?v??]v?????Z(????  }(??v??}?r ??}v(?v]vP]v?}}??XdZo}vP r ??u?}o?v?}(?Z??v?r ?}???}v????u]????}???X&]P?????Z}???Z G????}v]v(?oZ]PZ????v]vP}???Z???Zo(vr ????X/v}v????U?Zu?]vZ}???vZ]v???uv? ? ~ZZ}(????U}?Z??u?o???lPU[?v?o?P??Zv?}v[? ??v??}???}v????uv???]v(??]}v}(?]?oXdZ?vr o?Z??]?}v}(uv???v??}???}v??}i??X??]? &]P?? ?? X&?oZ]PZ????v]vP}???u $0 $100,000 $200,000 $300,000 $400,000 $500,000 $600,000 $700,000 $800,000 $900,000 $1,000,000 1957 1960 1963 1966 1969 1972 1975 1978 1981 1984 1987 1990 1993 1996 1999 2002 2005 W?????}v???P?? &?o(?v]vP ??  }( ??? u?]?U?}u}(?Z???}i??ZovP?]?Z}?v???r o?  ?}???}v??}?Z}??oo?V]v}?Z???UZ}???U?Z ?[?o]u]??}v?}^?Z}?o r ??_??}i??o?}?Z?o?l]vP}( o}? r ZvP]vP(??]?~XPXU?}??v?}u]v?vvv??]vP ??}i????Z??Zv??? ]vPu}?}u?o?v?X~&}??Z ????}??}(?ovv]vPU?Z??v?(?}u??u?o??]?}v?]? }v r ?u}???v?Z}?Z](+????}???Z lo}P }( ?]??vP ]v(???????? ??]? v?X do ?  o]??? ZZ(?v??}i??]v?Z?P]}vXoo??}i??Pv]v???? v?v}?}u?o?X/v]?}v?}?Z???}i??U?Z? o?}(?v?Z????(]vP}(??lv?]o}?]v^}??Z]v P?}v v????]]v]????U]vo?]vP?Z???Z?}(v???v?]? ???(}??Z?P]}vX dZ]???]??}v}((?o??v??}???}v(?v?~(?}uoo??}r P?u????]???Z}?v]vdo?(}??Z?v????]} do ? XZZ r (?v??}i??]v?Z?P]}v d}?v ??]??}v d}?o?~??? &X? ~??? ^??? ~??? >}o? ~??? ?o]v Z}v?????}vv??]vPW?]?}?oZX ??? ??? ? ??? ?]??}o Z}v?????}vvv}?uo]??}v}( D]?^?X ]v????}v?]?ZDo??^?X ?U??? ?U??? ? ? ??o]vP?}v >]v???lW&?u]vP?}vZ]??d?]o ??? ??? ? ? E??]?]v W?uv???????}vW}?]v?XU??^?XU^?vo?^?XUvoo]?^?X ?U??? ?U??? ? ?U??? E??]?]v D]oov}??o?W}?]v?X~tXD]v^?X?}K?P}}?XU?? ^?X  ~E?]vPr ?}v?X?}^}??Z^?XU^?vo?^?X~Z??v??^?X?}^}??Z^?X ?U??? ?U??? ? ??? Wo]v?]oo Z}v?????}vv??]vPWu?X^?X ??? ??? ? ? Wo?u}??Z D]oov}??o?W,??]v?}v?XUZ?X??}?u?????ZX ??? ??? ? ? ^}??Z]vP?}v D]oov }??o?U^}??ZvZ~????L XvD}?v?s?v}vZX~????L X ?U??? ?U??? ? ?? ^}??Z]vP?}v >]v???lWWov???]oo?}Z?Z]??}?vo]v ?U??? ?U??? ? ? W?????}v???P?? &?o(?v]vP ??  }( ??? (?}u????  ?}??? ? X  E}??Z??Z]??o}?v}?]vo???}r i??o??].?^????]X_&}??u?oU??o]vP?}vu??r ]?u}v?(}?????]??8?]Pvo??}i????]oov}? ]vo?]vdo?](?Z???}i?]vo???]Pvo?}???]?Z ?P]}vXd?v?]?(?v ]vP]?o?}v}????}(do??Z]Zo?? }???Z?P]}v[?v^??[?o?P????}i?? t  ? ???u]oo]}v(}? d(???l~????]??v?]???}i???vE??]?]vv ,??}? v ???? u]oo]}v (}? ?Z E,,^ Z]o }??]}? ~Z]PZ ???]o??vE?, ?vU,??}?Uv^??]vP.oX/v ]?}vU?Z???]Pv].v?]???v]?]vZ]PZ????vr ]vP??v?Z?}?v?X^}u}(?Z]???]?}vu????o?(?}u ui}??????}i??~XPXU?Z??v?]}v}(Z}????]v?]??}o (?}u?????}????}?o]P]]o ]??????]?}v?~XPXUu?Z}(??r o]vP?}v v}? ]vP }v?]? ??? }( ?Z ,??}? h?v]? ??Z]Z?o??]?(?}u???o(?v]vP??}P?u?U??]? v???Zo??]??}??Z?}(?v?}vU?]?Z?]???]??}vov ??]??]u?o]?}v?X ?(}??Z  ?o?]v?Z]???}v]??}??(?}u}vvKd[? vv?o ??uu?? }( (?o }o]P?}v? ~?Z (?o P}??vr uv?[?oPo}uu]?uv?(}??Z(?o?Z?}(??}i??X dZ^??(d?v??}???}vW?}P?u~^dWU????}(?Z]Z? uvP? DWK U]????]o o??Zo?P??(?v]vP?}??(}? ??v??}???}v??}i??]v?Z?P]}vXo]P]o?}?(}?(?v]vP do ? X&?oZ]PZ??(?v]vP???]??}uu?v]??U???? r ???? d}?v ???? ???? ???? ???? ???? ???? ???? ???? ???? ???? ???? d}?o ?o]v ? ?X?? ? ?X?? ? ?X?? ? ?X?? ? ?X?? ? ?X?? ? ??X?? ? ?X?? ? ?X?? ? ?X?? ? ??X?? ? ???X?? ?]??}o ? ?X?? ? ?X?? ? ??X?? ? ???X?? ? ???X?? ? ???X?? ? ???X?? ? ?X?? ? ??X?? ? ??X?? ? ?X?? ? ?U???X?? ??o]vP?}v ? ?X?? ? ?X?? ? ?X?? ? ?X?? ? ?X?? ? ?X?? ? ??X?? ? ?X?? ? ??X?? ? ?X?? ? ???X?? ? ???X?? E??]?]v ? ?X?? ? ??X?? ? ??X?? ? ?X?? ? ?X?? ? ??X?? ? ??X?? ? ???X?? ? ?X?? ? ?X?? ? ??X?? ? ???X?? Wo]v?]oo ? ?X?? ? ???X?? ? ??X?? ? ??X?? ? ?X?? ? ?X?? ? ??X?? ? ?X?? ? ?X?? ? ???X?? ? ??X?? ? ?U???X?? Wo?u}??Z ? ???X?? ? ???X?? ? ??X?? ? ?X?? ? ?X?? ? ??X?? ? ???X?? ? ?X?? ? ??X?? ? ??X?? ? ??X?? ? ???X?? ^}??Z]vP?}v ? ?X?? ? ??X?? ? ?X?? ? ??X?? ? ?X?? ? ??X?? ? ??X?? ? ??X?? ? ??X?? ? ??X?? ? ??X?? ? ???X?? ZP]}v ? ?X?? ? ??X?? ? ??X?? ? ??X?? ? ??X?? ? ??X?? ? ??X?? ? ??X?? ? ??X?? ? ??X?? ? ??X?? ? ???X?? W?????}v???P?? &?o(?v]vP ??  }( ??? ?????]??}vvKd?}?Z}?o??].?&,t?}or o?}?? }? ???]o?X ~>}o ?}? ? ]vo]P]oX  ^dW v}ur ???????o????}P?u?XK(?Z? U?Z^??(d?v??}??r ?}v W?}P?u t  h?v ~^dW r hU ?Z]Z ]? ? }v ??v]? ?U]??Zu}???]Pv].v?X   DWK  ]????}(?Z,??}???r v]??v?]??}????9}(^dW r h r ,??}?(?v? ~?? u]oo]}v }?? }( ??? u]oo]}v vv?oo?U o?Z}?PZ ?Z ?? u}?v?G?????XtZ]o}vvKdu]v]????u}??(?o ??v??}???}v(?v]vP??}P?u?UuvPuv?}(^dW r h(}??Z ?P]}v?????]?Z DWK X do ?  ~?X ?? u}v??????Z?]Pv].v}(^dW r h]v(?v]vP ?Z?P]}v[???v??}???}v????uX??Z?oul?o?U ^dW r h(?v]vP?(??}v}(  ood/W r o]??(?v?Z?????or ??o?}v??v??]v????U?]?Zv???}v]v????U?Zv }vo?}v??}i???(?v]v?Z?P]}vXvv???}( vl  ]v]r ???Z???v}(?oo? r (?v??v??}???}v??}i??]v ?Z?????u?v]]?o]???Z?  ??X ? do ?  ?Z}??U^dW r h(?v]vP??]??? r ?} r ??v}?? ?u u}vP u?v]]?o]??X E? ?]?]v ?]? ?Z o?P?? ?Z?}(^dW r h(?v?]v  ?Z?P]}vU}??}v r ?????U??v ???? v ????X ?]??}o v Wo?u}??Z u ]v ?}vU ?]?Z ^}??Z]vP?}vo}?(}???ZX Z]??}(^dW r h(?v?o?}??]?}v???]??]?X? do ?  v do ?  ?Z}?U]+?v}(u}??Zv??v?? r (}o??r ????Zu?v]]?o]?? ?]?Z?ZZ]PZ??~Wo?u}??Zvo}?r ??~?o]v???]?(?v]vPo?o??]v????X dZ?????o??}v?(}??Z]???]?}vXdZ?]vo?W ?X W}??o?}vXE??]?]vZ?]PZ??u??uv???]v?? ???o]vP?}vX ?X Z}v??}?l?XdZ?}?ou]oP}(  ?}?o]P]o(}?(r ?o(?v]vP]v?]??}o]??Z??u??Z?}(??o]vP?}vX ?X D?]?XW?(?o?P?o?}vU(?v?u?????}v }u???? v v}? ?? ?]? ?]?X D?v]]?o]?? ?Z? ??u]???}i???Z?}????}v?}?Z}???]v]?o?}( ?Z]?Wovvv.??Zv???P]}v?u}?o]lo??} ??(?v??Zv?Z}??Z?}v}?X ?X Z?}??}v???]v??X??}?ZZ]PZ}??}(??}i??U?Z ?P]}v}Lvv}vo?(?v}v}???}??}i??~vu?v]r ]?o]??????X????o?U?Z?P ]}v[?]??v?}?v? u?v??Z?l]vP???v?X[ &????  ^dW r h??}i??~?]?Z??u?}???v}?]vo?]v?Z }??o???Z}?v]v ??}?JZ(?v?}??v}?(}?vX X Z???}i???]oo?}?Zd/W}v??}i??o}?r uv?Z?}vo?X W?????}v???P?? &?o(?v]vP ??  }( ??? do ? X^dW r h???v?P}(ood/W r o]??(?v? D?v]]?o]?? ???? ???? ???? ???? ???? ???? ???? ???? ???? ???? ???? ?PX ?o]v vl vl vl ?9 vl vl ??9 vl vl vl ?9 ??X?9 ?]??}o vl ???9 ?9 ??9 ?9 ?9 ?9 ?9 ?9 ??9 ?9 ??X?9 ??o]vP?}v vl vl vl vl vl vl ?9 vl ?9 vl ??9 ??X?9 E??]?]v vl ?9 ??9 vl ?9 ??9 ?9 ??9 vl ??9 ??9 ??X?9 Wo]v?]oo vl ?9 ?9 ?9 vl vl ?9 vl ?9 ?9 ?9 ?X?9 Wo?u}??Z ???9 ???9 ?9 ???9 vl ???9 ??9 ?9 ?9 ?9 ?9 ??X?9 ^}??Z]vP?}v vl ?9 vl ?9 ?9 ??9 ?9 ?9 ??9 ??9 ?9 ??X?9 ZP]}v ???9 ??9 ??9 ??9 ?9 ??9 ??9 ??9 ??9 ??9 ??9 ??X?9 do ? XW?v?}(^dW r h?Z? ?]???}?v D?v]]?o]?? ???? ???? ???? ???? ???? ???? ???? ???? ???? ???? ???? ?uX ?o]v ?9 ?9 ?9 ?9 ?9 ?9 ??9 ?9 ?9 ?9 ?9 ?X?9 ?]??}o ?9 ??9 ?9 ??9 ???9 ?9 ??9 ?9 ?9 ??9 ?9 ??X?9 ??o]vP?}v ?9 ?9 ?9 ?9 ?9 ?9 ?9 ?9 ?9 ?9 ??9 ?X?9 E??]?]v ?9 ?9 ???9 ?9 ?9 ??9 ?9 ???9 ?9 ?9 ??9 ??X?9 Wo]v?]oo ?9 ?9 ?9 ?9 ?9 ?9 ?9 ?9 ?9 ?9 ?9 ?X?9 Wo?u}??Z ???9 ??9 ?9 ?9 ?9 ??9 ??9 ?9 ?9 ?9 ?9 ??X?9 ^}??Z]vP?}v ?9 ?9 ?9 ?9 ?9 ??9 ?9 ?9 ???9 ??9 ?9 ??X?9 ZP]}v ???9 ???9 ???9 ???9 ???9 ???9 ???9 ???9 ???9 ???9 ???9 ???X?9 W?? ???}v???P?? &?o(?v]vP ??  }( ??? do ? X^dW r h(?v]vP?u?v]]?o]??~???? D?v]]?o]?? ???? ???? ???? ???? ???? ???? ???? ???? ???? ??? ? ??? ? d}?o ?o]v ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ??? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?? ? ??? ?]??}o ? ? ? ??? ? ? ? ?U??? ? ??? ? ? ? ??? ? ? ? ? ? ?U??? ? ? ? ?U??? ??o]vP?}v ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ??? ? ??? E??]?]v ? ? ? ??? ? ?U??? ? ? ? ? ? ?U??? ? ? ? ?U??? ? ? ? ??? ? ?U??? ? ?U??? Wo]v?]oo ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? Wo?u}??Z ? ?U??? ? ?U??? ? ? ? ??? ? ? ? ??? ? ?U??? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?U??? ^}??Z]vP?}v ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ??? ? ? ? ??? ? ? ? ? ? ?U??? ? ?U??? ? ? ? ?U??? ZP]}v ? ?U??? ? ?U??? ? ?U??? ? ?U??? ? ??? ? ?U??? ? ?U??? ? ?U??? ? ?U??? ? ?U??? ? ?U??? ? ??U??? do ? X^dW r h(?v]vP?u?v]]?o]?????]? D?v]]?o]?? ???? ???? ???? ???? ???? ???? ???? ???? ???? ??? ? ??? ? d}?o ?o]v ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?? ?]??}o ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?? ? ?? ? ? ? ?? ? ? ? ? ? ?? ? ? ? ??? ??o]vP?}v ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?? ? ?? E??]?]v ? ? ? ? ? ?? ? ? ? ? ? ?? ? ? ? ?? ? ? ? ? ? ?? ? ??? Wo]v?]oo ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? Wo?u}??Z ? ??? ? ??? ? ? ? ?? ? ? ? ?? ? ??? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ??? ^}??Z]vP?}v ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?? ? ? ? ? ? ?? ? ?? ? ? ? ??? ZP]}v ? ??? ? ??? ? ?? ? ?? ? ?? ? ?? ? ??? ? ?? ? ?? ? ?? ? ??? ? ??? W?????}v???P?? ^??vo}o(?v]vP ??  }( ??? ^??vo}o(?v]vP }vv????o]?Z?]o?}v(?o(?v]vP(}?]????v??}??r ?}v??}P?u?X  ???v?o?Uv?o???}?Z]?? }( ?Z u}v?(}? ??v??}???}v?]?o??}i?? ]v?Z^?? }u?(?}u?Z&r ?oP}??vu v?X  D}??????U????o?o??Z}?}???]}(?Z E}??Z??U??u?Z  P????}??}v}(???vl}??P]}vo (?v?  ?} ??(}?  ??v??}???}v  ??}i?? X  D}??? ????v??}??r ?}v??}P?u??(?v(?}u?Z^?]od?v??}???}v&?v ~^d&U ?Z]Z }oo ?? ??v?? (?}u ??v??}???}v r ?o? ???U(? U  v??v????oo?(?}u?Z??}?}(^?]o d?Ko]P?}v}v?X  Z}?PZo???}?Z]??}(?Z^d&}u?(?}u ???u}?}?(?o???vu}?}??Z]o?]???Xo?Z}?PZ?r o]v}v?Z??}???  ]??]?o(?}u}?Z}v}u] v  v?]?}vuv?o???????~?Z?(?v?}v?W]P}?]v??U ?Z??v???Z??]vP]v?P]vv]vP?}(oo?Z}??}(?Zo?o v?}??????Z^??[??]??vP??v??}???}v????uU o? o}v ?? (}? ??P?? X dZ ?]v]vP P? ??v ?Z ^??[?uv?v]??v?Z???]}???}}??XdZ?]vo?W ?X o]v]v(?o]X  dZ(?oP?}o]v??Z?v (?}?v? ??X?v????Poo}v  ?]v????XdZol}(v ]v??}]vG?}vuv??Z?(?o??v??~v?}?vr ?o???]Z?(oovv}v?v???}(oo]v?o??u?X ?}v???vUP????Z?}(??v??}???}v}??? u???}?v??Z????X ?X ???}v]v?Z? ??P?}o]v??X  dZ^??u}?}?(?o ?????????v????Poo}vU}???X?9U??v???? v ????X dZ]? ?u?oo? ?? ?Z ?]?? }( ?Z ^???}?v??l??}i??}v]??}?vU}??v?}??}?] ^??u?Z(}?(?oo? r (?v??}i? ?Xol}(]v??} ]vG?}v ]? o?}Z}o]vP ?Z???v?? ~v?Z ^??[? ]o]?? ?} ?l }v ??v??}???}v ??}i?? }?? ?Z o}vP ??uX ?X ‘?}?]vPu]v?vvv?X  D?Z}(?Z^??[???v??}?r ??}v]v(???????????]o????]vP?ZP}ov? ??}( ?Z???v???U}Lv?]?Z?? r ???]Pvo](X????o?U o?P?}??}v}(?Z^??[??}?U?]P?Uu?Uv}?Z? ???????? ? v}? ?? (}? ??ouv? ~}? ?o?vP u]v?vv}???XdZv?}?looo?Z???}i??? }v?u ???v??ZoovPWKdZ???u??Z ?vr (?v  ^??u]v?vv??v]v?Zv?(?????} }v?Z}??}(?? r ?]oo]}vX ?X ????] X?o??o]??}(^d&(?v?~??9]v????]??? ?} ?? ?Z ? }v ??v??}???}v ??}i?? ?] (}? ?]?Z }v? XdZv?}??(}??Z???o??o??u}v??]or o(}??Z???v?v(????X W?????}v???P?? ^??vo}o(?v]vP ??  }( ??? >}oP}??vuv??o?}?o?  ?]?o?}o]v.vv]vP?Z??v?r ?}???}v????uXE?}voo?U?Z]??? r ?]???v?}(???(??v?r ?}???}v(?v]vP}u?(?}uo}oP}??vuv?XdZ]???}?}?r ?}v ]? ??? ?} ?]?]v?Z(???? ?(?ov ^?? .r vv???]}??Xd}?vv]? ?o?}(ZoovP??]u]o? ?}?Z}?}(?Z^???}?Z]v??v??v??v]????W]v uv??o?Uv?~????o?o?(}?u]v?vvv?Z]o]r ??}v?P?}?]vP?Z]o??}???????Uu?v]]?o}v?Uv }?Z??}???}(??v????Pvv?}?  ?Z?]vl]vPX >Kd/W /v????U?Z }vv??? ‘v?o??uo????W?o] ? ?? r ???U?Z]Z??Z}?]??Z????}]???  }v??}(?v??}r P?uoo?Z>}od?v??}???}v?]?o/u??}?uv?W?}r P?u~>Kd/WXdZ]???}P?u]??]Pv?}?l?Z?o }( ^dW r hUv}u?  ?]?Z(?????]vP??ZX}vvKdZ? P??}??}?]?Z]?(?v]vP?}?Z?P]}v?v]v r ???v?l? ?Z?P]}v?  ?}???Z]??Z?}(^dW r h(?v?}v??? r ?o ? ??}i??]v?Z]??P]}v?X do ?? X&????^dW r hW?}i??~????v}v?? d}?v W?}i? WZ? z? &?o ( ?v? ?o]v Z?o?]P????}??D????Z]?? KE ???? ? ?U???U??? ?]??}o uZu}?o KE ????~??X ? ???U?? ? ?]??}o /v????}v/u??}?uv?? d d d ?]??}o Di}?/v????}v/u??}?uv? ZKt ????~??X ?? ?]??}o Di}?/v????}v/u??}?uv? KE ????~??X ?U??? E??]?]v Z}v?????}v}(,??^? & ???? ? ?? ?U??? KE ???? ? ?U??? U??? Wo?u}??Z Z}v????????(}}???}v~?o??^?}v???(?v? KE ???? ? ??? U??? Wo?u}??Z /v????}v/u??}?uv??}vZ}??? KE ????~??X ? ?U? ??U??? W?????}v???P?? ^??vo}o(?v]vP ??  }( ??? Kv ?]Pv].v? ]+?v ??v>Kd/W v^dW r h ]? ?Z? >Kd/WU ?  ??? r (?v ??}P?uU ]? ]vP u]v]??? ? }?v]o? }( ‘}??vuv?? ~K’?U v}? DWK?X /v u}?? }( ?Z ???UDWK?vK’??Z}??]v?Z?u}?Pv]??}vX t]?Z?Z]??}o??}v  }(ZWU?Zv??o}vv???DWK u????v???(?}uv?K’  ~?Z}?PZ]?]?Z}??? ?Z ?]?}o ZP]}v K’ X dZ]? ??vPuv? ]? ?u?}??? ? DWK]?  ?Z?o ?}]??}o?]v:?v???? X dZ???u  ? ??u]oo]}v?]oo????]  ]v&z?? Xv??o }vv???  ~?Z?}?PZ?Zv}?(?v?v??o}vv???Zr P]}voWovv]vPPv?  ?]???X???u]oo]}vX W?}i???r o???Z?P]}v  ??Z}?v]v do ?? X u]v]????}v}(?Z???}i??Z?v??v?(??}???} ?Z?????u?v]]?o]??[?v?K’XDWKv}  o}vP?Z? v?}v??}o}???Z]?(?v]vP?}??XdZ??]U]?]??]Pv].v? ]v???uv???Z???X  do ?? X>Kd/W??}i??(}????? d}?v Z}?? W?}i? >Kd/W(?v? ?]??}o s?]}?? Z?oo}}???}?????]v????}v? ? ? U ??? U ??? E??]?]v oov^? Z}v?????}v}(oov^??? ? ? U ??? U??? Wo]v?]oo }}l^?X W?uv??Z]o]??}v}(}}l^??? ? ??? U??? Wo?u}??Z u]?^?X Z}v?????}v}(u]?^??? ? ?U??? U??? ^}??Z]vP?}v :?ovX /v????}v]u??}?uv? ? ?U???U??? W?????}v???P?? Z?v????u??}v?v??u?? ??  }( ??? Z?v????u??}v?v ??u?? dZKdZ???}i?&?o,]PZ??v^??(?v?(}???}r i???}P?uu]vP(}?oo?ZZWK?]v?Z^???Z?}?PZ?Z?? ????X d}?o???(?v]vP(}?oo?  D WK?]vo?]vP DWK  ]? ?Z}?v]v do ??  ~?X ?? Xv??o}vv???]?(}????}?r ]??X?9}(?Z?}?o^??(?v]vPU]?] ??v?X?9}( ?Z?}?ou(}?????u]u??}?uv??v?X?9}(?Z?(}? ????u ??????}vX dZ ?P]}v ]? ??? ?} ?]? }vo? ?X?9}(?Z(?v??Z??]oou?]oo(}?ui}???}i?? }(????]?]Pv].vUoo}(?Z]Z?]oo] ??}?Z ??}?}?E??]?]v r ,??}?????XdZ?P]}v[?]???}?}?r ?}v?o? ?uooU ?v u]v]uoU oo}?}v? (}? ??}i?? }( ????] ?]Pv].v ]? ??]}?? v P? ??ov?}vU P]?v ?Z?P]}v[??]?o?}??o?}vv}v}u?Uv??oo}?}v ]v?Z^??Uv(?v?}v?}v?]?u}vPui}?]??v u??}??X /v(????????Z(?v]vPoo}??}  DWK?]oo??o]?r ??v?Zv?K’?X ?}v?}?? o?}vUZK’?]oo  ?]? ??X?9}(DWK [?^dW r hoo}?}vUEsK’?]oo  ?]???X?9U vE,K’?}?o?]??X?9X dZ??}}((?v?(}?]u??}?uv???}?Z?(}???????}v ??]??u?oo??}???Z?P]}v?X&}?]v??vU?Z’??? ?]P?}?? ?P]}vZ?v?o???9}(?Z}?(?v?oo}?(}? ]u??}?uv??U ?Z]o >]?Z.o ,]oo? v E}??Z????v }vr v???ZZ???9}(?Z]?(?v???(}???????}vXW?}r i? (?v]vP ]v v??o }vv??? (?}?? ??????}v ? ?}?PZo???} r ?} r }vu?P] vXdZ]?u?i?]]}??u]?UP]?v ?Z ?P]}v[? u???]??U ?Z P }( ]?? ]v(????????U v ?Z ^??[?Z]??}?]o?v?(?v]vP}(??????}v]v(?}?}(]ur ??}?uv??~ &]P?? ?? X do  ??  ~?X ?? ?l??Z]?(?v]vP}???? r ? r ??}???Z ?Z]??? r ???uZ}?]?}v}(?Z(}???X dZ?  ??}i?}v??r ??u ?]?  ??v?vv?o]v??]v(?v]vPv}v??v? &]P?? ?? X^???]??v??}???}v(?v]vP}???u 0 100,000 200,000 300,000 400,000 500,000 600,000 700,000 800,000 900,000 1,000,000 1957 1961 1965 1969 1973 1977 1981 1985 1989 1993 1997 2001 2005 Dollars (000) Improvement Preservation W?????}v???P?? Z?v????u??}v?v??u?? ??  }( ?? ? ]???]??}v??v]u??}?uv??v??????}vX~/v?or ]??U?}?o(?v]vPv?Z ??}??}vuv???}?]oo???(?}u ???}??U???Z]?o]v???}i?}vP]??v]}(??u? (?v]vP?]oo}???Z?u(?u}(?ZWovX W?????}v???P?? Z?v????u??}v?v??u?? ??  }( ??? do ?? XW?}i??]oo??v??}???}v(?v???P]}v  ~?Z?}?PZ???? Wovv]vP?P]}v ^???u  ]u??}?uv?? ^???u  ??????}v Di}???}i??}( ????]?]Pv].v d}?o? ^}??Z????v  ?U???U???U???  ???U???U???  ?U???U???U???  ?U???U???U??? ,}???}v]soo?  ???U???U???  ???U???U???  ??U???U???  ?U???U???U??? E}??Z???  ,]oo?  ???U???U???  ???U???U???  r   ?U???U???U??? v??oE?P??lsoo?  ???U???U???  ???U???U???  ?U???U???U???  ?U???U???U??? soo?  ???U???U???  ???U???U???  ??U???U???  ???U???U??? ‘????]P?}??  ???U???U???  ???U???U???  ???U???U???  ?U???U???U??? ^}??Zv??o  ?U???U???U???  ?U???U???U???  ?U???U???U???  ?U???U???U??? v??o}vv???  ???U???U???  ???U???U???  ??U???U???  ???U???U??? ?]?}o  ?U???U???U???  ?U???U???U???  ???U???U???  ?U???U???U??? D]???  ???U???U???  ???U???U???  ???U???U???  ???U???U??? dZ]???????  ???U???U???  ???U???U???  ???U???U???  ???U???U??? ^}??Z???v  ???U???U???  ?U???U???U???  ???U???U???  ?U???U???U??? E}??Z???v  ??U???U???  ???U???U???  r   ???U???U??? hv.vd}?v?  ???U???U???  ???U???U???  r   ???U???U??? ^???}?o  ?U???U???U???  ?U???U???U???  ?U???U???U???  ??U???U???U??? W?????}v???P?? Z? v????u??}v?v??u?? ??  }( ??? do ?? XW?}i? ?]oo??v??}???}v(?v???? z? v??od  ]u??}? uv? ????? ?}v d}?o ^???] ]u??}?uv? ??????}v d}?o ???? ? ?U???U??? ? ?U???U??? ? ??U???U??? ? ???U???U??? ? ???U???U??? ? ???U???U??? ???? ? ?U???U??? ? ?U???U??? ? ??U???U??? ? ???U???U??? ? ???U???U??? ? ???U???U??? ???? ? ?U???U??? ? ?U???U??? ? ??U???U??? ? ???U???U??? ? ???U???U??? ? ???U???U??? ???? ? ?U???U??? ? ?U???U??? ? ??U???U??? ? ???U???U??? ? ???U???U??? ? ???U???U??? ???? ? ?U???U??? ? ?U???U??? ? ??U???U??? ? ???U???U??? ? ???U???U??? ? ???U???U??? ???? ? ?U???U??? ? ?U???U??? ? ??U???U??? ? ???U???U??? ? ???U???U??? ? ???U???U??? ???? ? ?U???U??? ? ??U???U??? ? ??U???U??? ? ???U???U??? ? ???U???U??? ? ???U???U??? ???? ? ?U???U??? ? ??U???U??? ? ??U???U??? ? ???U???U??? ? ???U???U??? ? ???U???U??? ???? ? ?U???U??? ? ??U???U??? ? ??U???U??? ? ???U???U??? ? ???U???U??? ? ???U???U??? ???? ? ?U???U??? ? ??U???U??? ? ??U???U??? ? ???U???U??? ? ???U???U??? ? ???U???U??? ???? ? ?U???U??? ? ??U???U??? ? ??U???U??? ? ???U???U??? ? ???U???U??? ? ???U???U??? ???? ? ?U???U??? ? ??U???U??? ? ??U???U??? ? ???U???U??? ? ???U???U??? ? ???U???U??? ???? ? ?U???U??? ? ??U???U??? ? ??U???U??? ? ???U???U??? ? ???U???U??? ? ???U???U??? ???? ? ?U???U??? ? ??U???U??? ? ??U???U??? ? ???U???U??? ? ???U???U??? ? ???U???U??? ???? ? ?U???U??? ? ??U???U??? ? ??U???U??? ? ???U???U??? ? ???U???U??? ? ???U???U??? ???? ? ?U???U??? ? ??U???U??? ? ??U???U??? ? ???U???U??? ? ???U???U??? ? ???U???U??? W?????}v???P?? Z?v????u??}v?v??u?? ??  }( ??? z? v??od  ]u??}? uv? ????? ?}v d}?o ^???] ]u??}?uv? ??????}v d}?o ???? ? ?U???U??? ? ??U???U??? ? ??U???U??? ? ???U???U??? ? ???U???U??? ? ?U???U???U??? ???? ? ??U???U??? ? ??U???U??? ? ??U???U??? ? ???U???U??? ? ???U???U??? ? ?U???U???U??? ???? ? ??U???U??? ? ??U???U??? ? ??U???U??? ? ???U???U??? ? ???U???U??? ? ?U???U???U??? ???? ? ??U???U??? ? ??U???U??? ? ??U???U??? ? ???U???U??? ? ???U???U??? ? ?U???U???U??? ???? ? ??U???U??? ? ??U???U??? ? ??U???U??? ? ???U???U??? ? ???U???U??? ? ?U???U???U??? ???? ? ??U???U??? ? ??U???U??? ? ??U???U??? ? ???U???U??? ? ???U???U??? ? ?U???U???U??? ???? ? ??U???U??? ? ??U???U??? ? ??U???U??? ? ???U???U??? ? ???U???U??? ? ?U???U???U??? ???? ? ??U???U??? ? ??U???U??? ? ??U???U??? ? ???U???U??? ? ???U???U??? ? ?U???U???U??? ???? ? ??U???U??? ? ??U???U??? ? ??U???U??? ? ???U???U??? ? ???U???U??? ? ?U???U???U??? ???? ? ??U???U??? ? ??U???U??? ? ??U???U??? ? ???U???U??? ? ???U???U??? ? ?U???U???U??? d}?o ? ???U???U??? ? ???U???U??? ? ???U???U??? ? ??U???U???U??? ? ?U???U???U??? ? ??U???U???U??? W}?o Z?v????u??}v?v??u?? ??  }( ??? People  W}?o Wov?o]l?Z]??v?}(}??}v??}i??v??uv??X dZ??P?}?v?(}??Z?W](?Z?]o]?]v?Z?]o?U ?Z???}?????????o?o???v] X?? ??v??}???}v????u?}v?]??}(u}??Zv ?Z??]?v.vv?X?]??u}??(?vuv?oU ??v??}???}v]?}???}?ov?o?W ?Z}??Z?}?oU?Z?}?Z?v?}U vZ}?}?P??Zu?Z?M ??}(?Z]?Uv?]????]}v}( ??v??}???}v ????u?]?Z}??uv?}v}(?}?o}??o??}?o ]v}u?o?X~hv???v]vP}(}?Z]???v?o]( ??v??}???}v????u]??}??(}?u?ooXd}?Z]?vU ?Z]?Z?????]???ZZ?uv????}?Z]? ????}vV ^???u?  ~?X ??? }????Z?o??]X W}?o W}??o?}v ??  }( ??? W}??o?}v }?]vP?}?Z????v???U???U????}?oo]?]vv??o }vv???XdZ]?}u????}???U????}(?Z????v??? v???U????}(v ???????XdZ?P]}v[??}??o?}v? ?Z}oZ?????u?lo???o}???Zo????v?????X Kv?Z]v?? r ?P]}voo?oUZ}???U?Z?]???}v]?v}????r oX? do ??  ~?X ?? ul?o?U??]??o??o???o ?}?o?}??o?}vU?Z?P]}v]????]v]vPZ]PZP?}(]vr ??vou]P??}vX  /v?Zo????}?U?Z?}??o?}v}(?Z ?P]}v[?v}o??????]??Z???]~]v?Z?}( ?]??}ovWo]v?]oo}??Z??vlv~E??]?]vXZ?]P?}??Z ]v}??o?]vP??U??Z??Z?????}(?o]vv^}??Z]vP?}vU v??]oo? ?Z???}(??o]vP?}vUZ?ov?Z]?o}??X tZ]o ?Z ??]o]?? }( ?Z ?P]}v[? ?}??o?}v u?U ? .??? PovU?uZo?Z?v????]vo v ?Z??u]?}(??]o]?? L?oo?v?o]?????]v]o]?? v ?Z?]v??vo?Z]L???ov v?]?}vuv??Z?]?v??Z]vP??XdZ??Z]L???v}v?????} ?Z??]v]?o?}(?u??P?}??ZV?Z?????v?u??]??}??r o? }vu]P??}vv?]vP?o?}(??}ou?U]vo?]vPo}?? }((}????U.o?U??ov?Uv?Z?]?o}????u???]? ?Z??Z?}?v?????}?]V]?]v???uv?]vv?Z? }(}?v?}?v?v}o?v]PZ}?Z}}?Vo]v]vP?}]o?]?o v  ??o]Zo?ZVvUo????v}?o??Uui}???v??}???}v ZoovP?U??Z???}u}]o?vv?U}vP??}vUv Z]PZ???o}???X W}??o?}vu?]+??]vP(?}u?Z?P]}v[?Z]??}?]}??]v?} ?????v????U???Z]???}??]?v}???} u?o?Xd}?o do ?? XW}??o?}v?u?v]]?o]?? z? ?o]v ?]??}o ??o]vP?}v E??]?]v Wo]v?]oo Wo?u}??Z ^}??Z]vP?}v d}?o ???? ??U??? ??U??? ?U??? ??U??? ??U??? ??U??? ??U??? ???U??? ???? ??U??? ??U??? ?U??? ??U??? ??U??? ??U??? ??U??? ???U??? ?? ?? ??U??? ??U??? ?U??? ??U??? ??U??? ??U??? ??U??? ???U??? ZvP U???? r ???? ? ?X? 9 r ?X?9 ??X?9 r ?X?9 ?X?9 ?X?9 ??X?9 ?X?9 W}?o W}??o?}v ??  }( ??? ?}??o?}vv?}??o?}vv?]??}v?v???}???}v?]?r o??}???Z?P]}v[?u?v]]?o]??U? &]P?? ??  ~?X ?? ?Z}??X ??]?}v?]?o?Z?]vlP]v?v????UE??]?]v?r u]v??Z?P]}v[?o?P??vv???u?v]]?o]??U(}oo}?? ?]??}oX~/(???v???v?}v?v?U?]??} ou??????Z.??? ??o(?}uE??]?]v]v?Z(}??o(????X W ?}i?}v? ??PP??~ &]P?? ?? 25 U?X ?? ?Z?P]}v?]oo?Z?]vl }???Zv???v???Uo]???o}?????Zv,??}? } ?v??Uv?Zv?}?v?]?ZP?}??Z(????Zv?Z}?v?? 25  ???? r ????P?}??Z????]?(?}uv????}??o?}v  }?v??V???? r ???? ??????????}i?}v?(?}u?Z}vv???^???v??X }???Z??]vPXdZv??(}?????Z??Z?r P]}voP?}??Z???]oooP?Zv?}v????]?Z?Z ????????X,}???UP]?v?Z??????}i?}v?(}??Z?r P]}vZ?}L v(]o?}}u?}???U?Z??}}?Z}?o ?lv?]?Zo?PP?]v}(?o?X/??u?u}??o]lo??Z??Z ?}??o?}v}(?Z?P]}v?]oo?u]v??oXtZ?Z??Z??v? }(??vG]PZ?v????v????o?Z?Z?.v?Z?r P]}v?}?Z]??}]v??]o o}v?v?.?(]o?P???U?]?r ?v?}v}u?o?}((?}???Z?]vo???Z??(}?uv}( &]P?? ?? XW}??o?}vP?}??Z? -2.5% -0.5% 1.5% 3.5% 5.5% 7.5% 9.5% 11.5% 13.5% 1990-2000 2000-2010 2010-2020 2020-2030 Region State National Hartford County W} ?o W}??o?}v ??  }( ??? ?Z?P]}voU???Uvv?}vou?} r }v}u]?U?Z?]?v Z???}(?ZZ}??]vPu?l?vvl]vP??}?~]vo?]vP ????[ ??(?v? v ?Z  ?]o]o]?? }( .vv]vPU(?o v????}o]]?Uo}oov???P?o?}v?v?]o]vP}?U ??o}?uv???}i??Uv?Z}??v?]o]o]??}(??v?r ?}???}v}??}v?X Z>sE dZ Z]PZ ??]?}v ]v v?]?? v ?o}?uv? ???v? ?Z?}? PZ}???Z?P]}vZ? ]u?o]?}v? (}? ]????v??}???}v ????uXZ??ov????v???v}?}?]}??o?ZoovP]vP (}???v?]?X/vu}????U}vv???}v v }(}?]P]v?v??r v?}v? v ]?v????~??v}???8]v?}v]?}v(}???r ??(?o??}? ?]o}???}v?X’]?v?Z]??o??o?Z]PZ?}??r o?}v v?]??U ?]??}o vU ??]oo?U E? ?]?]v Z? ?Z P?????}?v?o}(?Z?P]}v[?u?v]]?o]??(}???v?]?X~dZ }vG?v}(ddZE^/d[????v???o]v?]v?Z?]???r G???Z]?X^  >}o U?X ??? U(}??]o?XdZ??]U](?Z???v? ??v}(]????o}v?v??U?]?Z}?]P]v?v??v?}v?u}?r ]vP?}v??v?]?[??ZU?Z????uu??o]?]v?}?]]}???r o}(?]vo]vP?]? ?Z]?v???]???X/(?????v}??lv ?}?????Z]?U?Zo}vP r ??u?]]o]??}(??v?]?]v?Z?P]}vu? oo]v?}????}vX dZ????o??vo?}Z?]u?o]?}v?(}??Z?}?XtZ?]?r ?v??P??U?}?ovv}??ol} ?]lUv?Zv?Z?]? v}??}???]vU?}?ou????]?XZ?o]vP??]???Z??}?o }?Z??]??lv?(}}?U]?oU??U}???]v]v?v?].?}vr P??}vXo?Z}?PZ?}u??Z???8]v??]???}?}? ]?}vo???]?Z}????]}??}v  ]v??v??}???}v????u ??(}?uvUuv?}(?Z?P]}v[?Z]PZ??????Z?l]vP ?}]v?W?Z??v?U?U}?}??]??X~^ d?8v}vr P??}v U?X ??? X??}?Zv}vo]v?]??}(}vP??}vU]v?Z? ???v ?o]PZ?]?}v?v???vZ????8]v?}P?]o}lX &]P?? ?? XW}??o?}vv?]??~???}v??????? u]o Berlin 754 Bristol 2,281 Burlington 312 New Britain 5,488 Plainville 1,815 Plymouth 564 Southington 1,212 0 10,000 20,000 30,000 40,000 50,000 60,000 70,000 80,000 0 10 20 30 40 Population Area (square miles) High density Low density Medium W}?o }v}u]? ??  }( ??? }v}u]? /v ??? ?U ?Z u]v Z}??Z}o ]v}u (}? ?Z ?P]}v ?? ? ??U???X 26  ?????U  ]?Z?]?v?}  ? ??U??? X 27  dZ]?.P???}?o ?u?}]v]??Z??Z?P]}v]?(?]vP?oo}v}u]oo?U? ]?o]?v}?}vo?}??Z ????]u]vZ}??Z}o]v}u }(? ??U?????]?(?oo??9Z]PZ??Zv?Zv?}vou]v Z}??Z}o]v}u}(???U??? X  ,}???U?Z]?.P?? u?l??Z? ]u?}??v?(??W ?X /vG?}vX/v}u?Z?v}?l????]?Z]vG?}vU?}?o ???Z?]vP?}??]?(oo]vPX ?X ,]PZ}??}(o]?]vPXdZ?P]}v[?}??}(o]?]vP]?Z]PZ??Zv ?Zv?}vU?}?v]vP?}v}?P}?(?]vv??o}vv?r ???v ??ou}?v??}?oo??Z?X ?X hv?v ]???]??}vX o?Z}?PZ ]v}u? ? Z]PZU ?Z? ]? ?]??]?}v?]?Z]v?Z?P]}vX ?X K?? r }( r ? ??????X dZ ]v(???v? }( }v}u] ? }oo?}v uv? ?Z?v} o}vP??G? ??o }v]?}v? ~?Z}}u}(?Z??? ????????ZZ’??Z??]}v[?}?X 26  }?]vP?}v???????X 27  Zd}?vW?}.o?X 28  vv?ohX^X ]vG?}v  (?}u ?Z???}(>}?^?????U}v??u?W?] /v? X  Z??Wll???Xo?XP}?l?l]vG?}vzo?o?}?XZ?u X /E&>d/KE o?Z}?PZ?v]vP?Z??]?v]v?Z?P]}vU?Z?o?}(u}v? Z?(oov??Z?u?uX}?]vP?}?Z???}(>}? ^?????U]vG?}v}???Zo???v???Z?v?}Z]PZ??} u}??Zvv? oo](??Z}?]?P]v?Xd }l????]?Z]vGr ?}v(?}u ?????}???? UZ}??Z}o?v]vP? ??U???  ?}?o Z??}?v ? ??U??? ]v ???? X  28  ‘]?v?Z??Z???]vG?}v ?? v ?Z????]v?Z}??Z}o? 29 v ?v??}o?Z}(r .]o??~?Z(?oP}? ?vuv??v??}?v???????]vr G?}v(}??}o]?o??}v?U?Zo}??]v?o?v]vP?u? }?o ?Z ??U??? ]+?v ??v ?Z ??o ]v}u }( Z}??Z}o?]v?Z?P]}vv?Z??Z??}?oZ??vU Z]v}uu?o?l?????]?Z]vG?}vX  dZ??U] v??u?}( ?o ?v]vP?}??Uu]vZ}?? Z}o]v}u]v}???Pv?}?? ?Zo??V]?(oo????]l]vPu?P]v~o]lo?}v?Z}??}( ? ?U???XdZ?P]}v]?U]v}?Z??}??UP?vP?}}?? v vv}r ?o??}X 29  Dv??]Z}??Z}o??v??Z??v?P}vZ???]vG?}v]v?Zo?? ?v???U}?o]vP}?u}?]v??]UXPXZ}??]vPU (?o UZo?Z? Uvr ??}vX W}?o }v}u]? ??  }( ??? K^dK&>/s/E’ ,}??Z}o?]v?Z?P]}vu??l]vu}?u}v??Zv?Z]? v?}vo }?v??????}U ?? ?Z? u??? o?} P]? }?? u}?X v??o}vv???]?v}’}o}??U??u}??}(?Z?P]}v]? u}???v?]? ?o?}o]??Zv?Zv?}v??Z}oX &]P??  ??  ~?X ?? u???Z}??}(o]?]vP]v?Z?P]}v?o???} ?Zv?}vX  30  }?v?}?vE??]?]vU?]?Z  ?}?}(??X?]? ?X?9Z???Zv?Zv?}vo??PV??o]vP?}vU????X?]? v?o???9u}???v?]?XdZ?P]}v[?Z]PZ?o]?]vP??v?? ???oo??}?Z?v?P]??Z]PZ???P]??X,}??Z}o? ]v?Z?P]}v?.vv]oo???}+?Zv ?Z???}(?Zvr ?}vU??v}?(?oo??9?}X hEsE/^dZ/hd/KE /v}u]?v}??vo?]???]???}???Z?P]}vX &]P?? ??  ~?X ??   ?Z}???Z? v???o}lP?}??? 31  ?]?Z?ZZ]PZ??u]v ]v}u? }vv??? ]v ?Zu}?????vv???o????}( ?Z?P]}vU ??o]vP?}vU?o]vv^}??Z]vP?}v X  dZ}??]?Z?Z o}???u]v]v}u? o???? ]vv??oE??]?]vX 30  }??}(o]?]vP(}??Zhv]?^?????Z}o]? ??? X??lv(?}u ^??o]vP[???Wo?U}??}(>]?]vP}u??]?}vX  Z??Wll???X???o?Xv?l}ol X 31  ?}(????U??v???????Xv? ??o}lP?}???????v?v]v??u]r ?U??u?v]]?oo?o}(PP?P?}v??vv???o}l?v????X &]P?? ?? Xvv?o?vu?o}?uv????  0% 2% 4% 6% 8% 10% 12% 14% 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 Berlin Bristol Burlington New Britain Plainville Plymouth Southington W}?o }v}u]? ??  }( ??? &]P?? ?? 32  ~?X ?? u???Z]v???}(?o?ZU?}????XdZ.Pr ?? ??o? ?Z Z]PZ?? }vv???}v }( o}? r ]v}u Z}??r Z}o?~.v?o}????9}(?Z?}????o]v 33 ]v}?vr ?}?v?]??}ovU}?ooUE??]?]vXW}}?Z}??Z}o??]?? ] v}?Z?????}(?Z?P]}vVZ}???U?vo]l]v?Z???}??U ?Z??v}??]?]o?}vv???X  u?o}?uv?]??Z??]u?? ?}?? }( u}?? Z}??Z}o?[ ]v}uX u?o}?uv? ??? ?Z?(}? Z?  o?P ((? }v ?Z }v}u] ?oo r ]vP }( Z}??Z}o? ?Z?}?PZ }?? ?Z ?P]}vX &]P?? ??  ??o? ?Z? ?vu?o}?uv? ??? Z? o]u }?? }?? ?Z o?? ?Z? ???]voo}(?Z?P]}v[?]?]?v?}?v?XdZ]?}????}v??} ?Z}v??}(?ZZ’??Z??]}vX[tZ]o???Z??]?vu}? }?o??]v??ooo?}???Z?P]}vUE??]?]vv U?}o??? ??v?U Wo?u}??ZU ?]??}oU v Wo]v?]oo Pv ?  Z]PZ? ?o]vX ~?v ]v ?Z ?? }( ?]u?U ?vu?o}?uv? ??  ??}ou(}?E??]?]vX????o?U?vu?o}?uv????? ????v?]oo?Z]PZ?]v?Z?}uu?v]?]? v ?}(?Z]?WovU?Z?  ?}???9]voo(}??}uu?v]?]?XdZ]???PP????Z?Z}??Z}o? ]v?Z?(}????u????]v]vP}v?]?o?P??? (]vv]o????X 32  ?}(????U??v???????X Khd r K& r d^dd/^d/^ ? ?Z??? (???? Z? u}v????U ?Z}v}u?v ???v???] r }?v?u]vPo?}??v]PZ?Xz??]?Z?Z???}v }(?vu?o}?uv???????U}v}u]?}Lv??+?(?}u }v?]?ooPX~dZv???]?Zo}v????v???U(}? ]v??vX? }v???vU?Z?P?}?? r }( r ?XdZo?? v?????}v????Z?]u??Z}(?ZP} r P}[???X? }v???vU?Z??}?????Z?}?o??]? ?? r ? ?v?]}  (}??Z}v}u?V?Z?}v}??G??Z?}?? ?o]???Z??]Pv? ?}(?Z]?Wov[???]?vPX??}(?Z]?U?Z }v????????u??}v?Z}?o?Z??Z?]???}v}v?Z P?}?v]??]Pv].v?o??}???Zvu}??}(?Z??????? Z?]v?}?o}?Z??]?o}v?}o]?X Z>sE /v?v????U?Z?P]}vZ ??o}??Z??]oo?U?]?Z(}?r ???v(?u?P]?]vP???}??]?]?]}v?v???]?uoo?XtZ]o ?Z]????o}(?o}?uv??]o??}uv.??U]?o?}}u? ?]?Z???}???U??Z?}vP??}vU?}oo??}vU??vo]PZ?U vo}??}(}????u???]?X Dv?}(?Z???}ou?? ???}v?Z]v}???W?Z]o?Z?}???}]????Z}oU v}}?]v????o????(}??ZuX 33  /v????XKv r v r  r Zo(?u??Z(?o?}????o]v]?Pv?oo?}v?]r ?u}??o]??u???}(?}?? ???Zv?Z?}????o]v]??o(U??} ?Zo??]vP????.]oo?o}?X W}?o }v}u]? ??  }( ??? ,}???Uv}?oo}?????}Z]vXE??]o]vP?}??u}v?U ?}??v?Z(?o?}?]??ZovP?Zv]vP]??v?r ??v  ?ZuU v ?}? ?} o]vl ?ZuX z? ? ?Z ?P]}v Z? P?}?v ?Z??]oo?U ? ?Z (}?P}]vP ]????]}v ??o?U ]? Z? (]o?}}?}}v}u]oo?X/v}uZ???Pv???Z?u ?u?Z??Z}??}(o]?]vPZ???o}X~,}??]vP?}?PZo?}?r o]v??]] v?Zo??VZo?Z?v??}vZ? ???]v?v?Z???Z???]vG?}vX dZ???v?+?Uv?+??U?Z??v??}???}v???r ?uX^?Pvv?}?o]v]vP]v }uZ?oLZ}??Z}o?v}ur u?v]???]?Zo???}??v}v?????]vPUu]v?]v]vPUv]ur ??}?]vP ?Z ??v??}???}v ????uU (?}u ?Z ??]?? }u]v ~??}u}]o?U(?oU?X?}?Z??o]~]v(????????U???]?U ?Xhv(}???v?o?Uo]l]vZ}??]vPU  Zo?Z?Uvuv?}?Z? ?]?ov?U}???Z?o?}?]?v]v??v??}???}vX&?oU]vr ???vUv}v?????}vu??]o?o]u]v??]Xo??vr ????}?]?]vP??Z??ol]vPU]l]vPUv??v?]?Z???? ??o?(?}u?Z]???]????? ?U??]oo?(}?o}? r ]v}u &]P?? ?? Xd??ou}?]v}uP?}?? 70% 75% 80% 85% 90% 95% 100% under $10,000 $10,000-$14,999 $15,000-$24,999 $25,000-$34,999 $35,000-$49,999 $50,000-$64,999 $65,000-$74,999 $75,000 or more Drove alone Carpooled Transit Walked Bicycle, motorcycle, taxi, or other Worked at home W}?o }v}u]? ??  }( ??? Z}??Z}o?X,}???U? &]P?? ??  ?Z}??U?v?Z?}}???}( ?Z?P]}v[??}}? v ?Z}?o??o?}+}?? v Z?r } u??}u}]o r ?vv?X D}?}??U?Z?P]}v[?}v?v?????o]?o]lo??}??? ?Z]? ??}ouU (}?]vP Z}??Z}o? ?} ???o o}vP? ]??v?U ??vu}??u}v?Z?}~???????}???o?Uv}?v u}???U??oo??]?]vPu?v]]?o]??v ?Z^???} ?]??X/v?Z}??U????ov??Pvv?}v}u?Z?P]?v ?]? ?}  ?]???}v ?Z? v? Z? P?}?v ? uv? Z? ?Z??vlX ‘]?v?ZZ]PZ}??}(}?Z??]??v??o]]v???uv?]v ??v??}???}v~}?v]vP?]v?Z?????v?} ?????U??? ????VZ]PZ???v?]o??}???u]oo]}v??ov r u]oU]( ?Z}v}u]?o(?}(Z}??Z}o?vu?v]]?o]??]??} u]v?]v }?? ?Z o}vP r ??uU v ??v??}???}v ]? v}? ?} ?}?}??oo?Z}?Z?U??v?o?o]?}(?Z?]vl]vP? ]U}?? 8]v??Z}?o??]u??}v?vXdZ??o]?]}(?Z ??v??}???}v????u v ??vv]vPoo????(?}u?ovv]vP?} }???}v?Uv?Z]vP]v?}?o?.o???Z?ov?? v ?Z}?o}?]v??}??ul]vP????}(?]??vP]v???uv??  v ?}u]v]u]?]vP Z}??Z}o?[ }???}( vU ?Z??}??]oU v(}???v??}???}vX W}?o }v}u]? ??  }( ??? &]P?? ?? X}??}(o]?]vP?/W}? W}?o }v}u]? ??  }( ??? &]P?? ?? XD]vZ}??Z}o]v}u?v???o}lP?}?? W}?o }v}u]? ??  }( ??? &]P?? ?? X,}??Z}o?o}????9}(?Z?}????o?o?v???o}lP?}?? W}?o Pv]?]o]?? ??  }( ??? Pv]?]o]?? dZP}(?P]}v[?v]?v?]??]?o?}]??}v}u]??(}?r uv??oo?]????v??}???}vv?XZ]o?vv ?Zor ?o??v?}u}??vv?U}v}u]oo???oo?]v ??u?}(u}]o]??~uv?vv}??]?Vu] r vo? r ??ur ?o}???v?}u}??o( r ??8]v?]v}?Z?P??U?Z}?PZ ?o???u?o}????v?]?}v]v?}???uv?U?o]v} v }???]????}??]v???Xz}?vP?o??u?o???o( r ??8r ]v??Zv?Zu]o r P??}+?P}}v? r ??u??}???? (}? ]v}u P?}??Z v ?? v (}? ??v??}???}v }?r ?}v?X do ??  34  ?Z}???Z??o]PZ?o?}??Zo(?Z?}??o?}v}(v??o }vv??? ~??X?9 (oo? ]v Z?}?l(}?[ P ?vPU ?? ?} ?? ???}oXd?}?Z]??}(?Z]?P?}??]?P???}??Xd}P?Z?U ?]??}ovE??]?]v }?v?(}?u}??ZvZo(}(?Z??r ?}v???v??v??]v?Z?P]}vXdZ}ooPP?}??or ?}v~?? r ?????}o]??Z?uoo???}??o?}v?Puv?X/?? uu?? ? u}?? ??}u]vv?o? ????v? ]v E? ?]?]vU u}??o]lo???}?Z???v}(v?? o}vv???^?? hv]???]??]v?Z]??XdZ]??Puv?}(?Z?}??o?}v?v??} ul??o?P?Z?}(??v?]??]??Z]?XdZ?u}??Z 34  ?(?}uZX Z???]???}(?Z}??]?ZZ]PZ??}?v?]???}?]??v?]?W Z]PZv?]??Uo}?]v}uvol}(??}u}] o??X >]l]v}uUP]???]??}v]?v}?}v?]??v??}???Z?P]}vX &]P?? ??  ~?X ?? P??Z??Z?]?}v?}(]??v?}?v?(?}u ?Z?P]}vo??P(}?ZPP?}??X?](?}u?Z???Z }( }ooP r P ???}v? ]v E? ?]?]v ~v ?Z]? ?o?? r ?v o??Z?U ??Z?? ?Z ?}v ???]l]vP ??]? ]? ?Z }??????v??}v}(Z]o?vv?v?????v??}v}(}o ?}?o]v??o]vP?}vXdZ(}?u?u??G??Z??}(?Z ?}?v[???u?Z}}o?U?Z]o?Zo??u?}??}?Z?or ??v?v??v??}u}]o r ?vv?Z???}(u}??r ? o}?uv?]v?}?vX D?Z}(?Z o?o?~P??v }??v]?o?}??o?}v  vv}? ?]?  ???}vo ??}u}]o v ? ?vv? }v }?Z?uv?}(??v??}???}vU??Z???o]??v??}???}vX  }?]vP?}?Z}vv???}v}u]Z?}??v??Ui ? ?? }??  }v]v??v???}v?]v?Z?P]}v ~ ??X? 9 ]?P??}? }o? X  dZ]?]??o]PZ?o?Z]PZ??Zv?Z??X?9?}?]v?Z???? v???(}??Z?P]}vX?}(????U }v?Z]?~??X?9}(?Z u}r ]o]??]u?]??}??o?}v? ?P??v}??X  dZ]?ul?}??  W}?o Pv]?]o]?? ??  }( ??? }v?Z]?}(?Z ?P]}v[?v?? ?}??o?}vo?o?vl}?]?r oX  &]P?? ??  ~?X ?? ?o}???Z o?o?v]?o 35  ?v??? o}l P?}??U ??o]vP  Z]PZ }vv???}v? }( }?Z ]v ?]??}o vU]v????o?U E??]?]vX Z>sE o?Z}?PZv}v r ?]????]??]v???P?l?U?Z?}?vPU}oU v]?o(??]oZoovP??Zv]? }u??}?]?]vPW ?Z?Z?(?}uoPoU?Z??]oUuv?oUv.vv]o}v???]v?? }?(?}uZ}]U?Z??]??u?Zo}??????Zv?ZPv?o ??o]X/vv??o}vv???o}vU??U????}?o?o???Zv ??}??o???????}oXE?o???}]v. ???]v??~??X?9 35  Z ]?o [  ?(???} ?Zv?u?}(]?o ???}v?  ]v?Z]?]o]vv}v r ]v?????}vo]??}?r ?o?}v?o??????}(PX (oo]v?}]?Z?}(?Z???}P?}???XdZ]?.P??]v]???Z?U}( oou}P??Z](?}??UPZ??ZP????]u?o]?}v?(}? ?Z?P]}v[???v??}???}v????uX dZ?vv}(u]v}??U?v]}??Uv]?o???}v?]v?Z ?P] }v v ]XXU}(v}v r ?]??? v ??PP???uvvv(}? (}?u?}(??v??}???}v?]??Z??]??u}?}??X/v?}(?? ??v??}???}v????u???}v??}?Zuv?vv?}( ]??????v?}?v?o????U}????}v]vPo?Z]PZo?o}(]vr ???uv? ] v ????]v v ?o]?? ]v(???????? ? ?oo ? ???v??]v?]?i???.X do ?? XP]???]??}v P ?o]v ?]??}o ??o]vP?}v E? ?]?]v Wo]v?]oo Wo?u}??Z ^}??Z]vP?}v 9  ?}?o ? r ?? ?U??? ??U??? ?U??? ??U??? ?U??? ?U??? ?U??? ??X?9 ?? r ?? ?U??? ?U??? ??? ??U??? ?U??? ?U??? ?U??? ??X?9 ?? r ?? ?U??? ??U??? ?U??? ??U??? ?U??? ?U??? ??U??? ??X?9 ?? r ?? ?U??? ??U??? ?U??? ??U??? ?U??? ?U??? ?U??? ??X?9 ??= ?U??? ?U??? ??? ??U??? ?U??? ?U??? ?U??? ??X?9 oo ??U??? ??U??? ?U??? ??U??? ??U??? ??U??? ??U??? ???X?9 W}?o Pv]?]o]?? ??  }( ??? /v???uv?]v??v??}???}v]v(????????]?v}??Z}vo??? ?}????Z?}?PZo???9}(?Z??o]?Z?}?v}??]?XW}r ?ouv}?v??v??}???}v ??? V?Z ????}?}(??v?r ?}???}v]?v}??}u}??}?o(}?u}]o]??[??lU???}oo}? ?Zu???}?ZP}}?U???]?Uv??]??v?????} o]?(?ooo](XtZ]o??v??}???}vv(]o]????U?}U?}}U v}uu?v]???]PvX&}?]v??vUv ??Uu]? r ???or }?uv?v o]u]v?  ?Zv(}???v??}???}v???}?]]vP (}? oo }( v ]v]?]?o[? v? v Z}u?U ?}?l?o?U ?Z}}o?U }?}??[}8?U?Z}??]vPUv???]vuv??v??Uv??l? v ?]?Z]v?ol]vP]??vXo?Z}?PZ}uu?v]???]Pv Z????r ]oo? v??? ????o? (?}u ??v??}???}v]v(?????r ???U]v?o]???Z??}]vG?vv?]vG?v?Z }?Z???}(}?vo?X ??}(?Z]?U}vu]PZ?????Z}??vo?}?]??}?? ?}????o??Z?}vvo]??]?Z}???U??Z?}?vr ?}?v?v?]ooPv???X??Z??]vPu???Z}?U?Z]?]? ?Z?]vv??o}vv???W?Z}oU]?oUv?}}? o??r ??]v}?v?}?vE??]?]v.???v(}?u}??U(}oo}?? }?v?}?v?]??}ovU??}u]??vUWo]v?]ooUd????]ooU v^}??Z]vP?}vv???X~^ W???]v?v?o]??? U ?X ??? U (}??]oXdZ]???PP????Z?U](}v]??}vZv?Z??o]??}( o](v?}]}}v}u]???]??}v}(?Zu}??v}v r ?]???? &]P?? ?? XP]+?v???v?Z?P]}vv]??u?v]]?o]? ? -8.0% -6.0% -4.0% -2.0% 0.0% 2.0% 4.0% 6.0% Southington Plymouth Plainville New Britain Burlington Bristol Berlin 65+ 50-64 25-49 18-24 0-17 W}?o Pv ]?]o]?? ??  }( ??? ?Zo??}??U(}}?U]?oUv??v?]?]v???uv????oo? }uu?v]???]Pv+}????Z}?o(}??}v?Z???X W}?o Pv]?]o]?? ??  }( ??? &]P?? ?? X]?ovo?o??v???o}lP?}?? W}?o Zv?Zv]]?? ??  }( ??? Zv?Zv]]?? dZ?P]}v]?]???]v??u?}(?XZ}?PZo?}v]v?]?}(]?? ??]v??~??X?9??????]o]v???}(}?Z??ZvZ?Z]? o}vX[ dZ o?P?? u]v}?]???}??o?}v ]v?Z?P]}vU??U??? ???}v??}(  ????U??]?]vE??]?]vX do ?? 36   ?Z}?? ?Z???X?9}(E??]?}v?o]u?}}(v}v r ?Z]?}?u?o??r ]ov????XdZ]?]??ZZ]PZ????]v  ?Z?P]}vX 36  ?(?}u?ZhX^Xv????? ?Uv???????X dZ]???]??}v}(,]??v]??Z]]???]u]o????vU?]?Z?Z o?P???}o??v?o???}??o?}v?o?}(}?v]vE??]?r ]v~??U???U}???X?9}(?Z]??[??}?o?}??o?}vX &]P ?? ?? 37  ~?X ?? Z????Z]v]v}(,]??v]?o( r ]v?.?}v?}?v r ? r ?}?v]v?Z?P]}vXdlv?}P?Z?U??X?9}(v??o}vr v???[???]v??}(oo???????,]??v]?Zv]]vr ???X 37  ?(?}u?ZhX^Xv??????Uv???????X do ?? X ^o( r ]v?.? 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Southington Plymouth Plainville New Britain Burlington Bristol Berlin White Black American Indian and Alaska Native Asian or Pacific Islander Other Multiracial W}?o ,}??]vPvZ}??Z}o?Z]o? ??  }( ??? &]P ?? ?? X^o( r ]v?.?Zv]]??~E}v r ,]??v]v,]??v]}vo? ,}??]vPvZ}??Z}o?Z]o? >]luv?????v??Uu}??}(v??o}vv???]??}v (}??]vPo r (u]o?Z}??]vPXdZ??]Uu?Z}(?Z?P]} v?or }?(}??Z?v?}(?Z??}u}]oV?Z]?oP?]??]?]o ??Zv?U?olov]PZ}?Z}}?}(?]??}ovE??]?r ]vXdZ?v]PZ}?Z}}?}Lv(???o?Pv?u??}(u?o? r (u]o? ???????? ??Z ? ??o?? v ??]?o r l??X D}? ?Z v??}]v.?~??X?9?oo]vP?v]??]v?Z?P]}v????}( u?o? r (u]o?????????XdZ??v]??o????]v?]??}ovE? 38  ?(?}uZX^^]vPo(u]o? r ?Z_]vo??u}]oZ}u?X ?]?]vX? do ?? 38  ?Z}??U E??]?]v]??Z ?}o u?v]]?o]?? ]v?Z]Zui}?]??~ ??X?9}(?Z?v]??]?  v}??]vPo r (u]o?X ,}??Z}o?]v?Z?P]}v}?vv??P}(??}??X,}???U ?Z?]?}v?]?o??]?}v]v?Z]??????X?]??}ovU]v ????o?UE??]?]vZ? o?P v?u?? }(?o?? Z}??r Z}o?X/vU? &]P?? ??  ~?X ??? ?Z}??U ui}?]??  }(Z}??r Z}o?]v????}(E??]?]v}v}?}?v?X Southington Plymouth Plainville New Britain Burlington Bristol Berlin 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Non-hispanic Hispanic, any race W}?o ,}??]vPvZ}??Z}o?Z]o? ??  }( ??? Z>sE dZ??}(??}u}]o?]??o??}PU]o]??Uv]v}uX? ]?????v? Pv]?]o]??  ~?X ?? U?Z?}?vPU?Z}oU ?Z]?oUv?Z?}}??o ??o?}}?vv?]??X ??}(?Z]?U?Z????]]v?Z???}v??o]?Z?X,}?r ??U?Z???}(Z}??Z}o?o??v??v?]vPo r ?}?v?r ?Z]??Z}??Z}o?]v??]v????}(?Z?P]}vU??].oo? }?v?}?vE??]?]vU]??vZ]PZ ??Zv}vu]PZ???]? ?}v?Zu}P??Z]v?}]}}v}u]????v? ?Z?XZ?]v??}(?Z?????vo?}??}.?(?}u??} r v??]?o}?uv?V](?Z???}?u]vuv]vP(?oo?]v?r P??]v?}?Z?}]}}v}u]o](}(?Z?P]}vU ?Z?u???]r ?Z???}?]??~vZ?+???}?Z????}??(?o v??o????]vU?o]??Uv??v?]?]v(????????U??oo ????}?Z(?oo?vP}(P}}?U???]?Uv??]???Z? }?Z??]v?Z?P]}vvi}?~]XXUo]?o} uu?v]??X do ?? X,}??]vP??? D?v]]?o]?? ?oo]vP? v]?? ^]vPo r (u]o??Z D?o? r (u]o?l?Z ?o]v ?U??? ?U???~??X?9 ?U???~??X?9 ?]??}o ??U??? ??U???~??X?9 ??U???~??X?9 ??o]vP?}v ?U??? ?U???~??X?9 ???~?X?9 E??]?]v ??U??? ??U???~??X?9 ??U???~??X?9 Wo]v?]oo ?U??? ?U???~??X?9 ?U???~??X?9 Wo?u}??Z ?U??? ?U???~??X?9 ?U???~??X?9 ^}??Z]vP?}v ??U??? ??U???~??X?9 ?U???~??X?9 d}?o ??U??? ??U???~??X?9 ??U???~??X?9 W}?o ,}??]vPvZ}??Z}o?Z]o? ???  }( ??? &]P?? ?? XW?v?P}(Z}??Z}o??Z?]??o?? ^???u? ,}??]vPvZ}??Z}o?Z]o? ???  }( ??? Systems dZ]?Z???o??}??]v?](?Z?P]}v[? ??v??}???}v????u?]?Zv??}??? ]v?(?]vPv???]vP?Z]?????Z ????u???]v? ?}?U?}u}??}?U v]v?Z????}}uX ^???u? ^???u? W???]v?v?o]??? ???  }( ??? W???]v?v?o]??? &/>/d/^ ^/t><^E^dZd  ZK^^/E'^ ?ZW(}?v]v]??????Wov(}?d?v??}???}vvo??vr ??,o?Z~Wd,U?]?ol??}uu}v]v?Zv?????? }( ?Z ?P]}vU ?Z ?]??}o v E? ?]?]v }?v?}?v?X ^]r ?ol?(}?u?o??o?}u?o?v??}?l?]v?Z???X^]r ?ol??o? ?(???v?o??Z?]v?Z?P]}vX/v?Z?]ooP v???}(/d/^ E}v}(?Z?P]}v[???vu?v]]?o]??Z??]Pv??r ???]v}?]?o?}??v??}?l?XdZ^??[?]?ovWr ???]v?]?}??}?Z?]v?.?o????}?}?? r ??? ?}????Z?????Z?}?PZ?Z?P]}vVZ}???U?Z????r o? ?]?Z} ?? }v??o??}v }( o}o ??lZ}o??X tZ? ??Z ]v?.?}v?]oouv]v??u?}(?}o]?v(]o]???u]v? ?}  ?vX dZ? ?}???U ?Z]Z ?? }v]? (}? ??r ?}voUo}vP r ]??v?o]vP~XPXUZv?????]]vP[U?vo?P ?v?Z]???  o}vP}?v????}?V?Z??v?}?l]??}?vr ?}?v?U?v]???]??U}uu?]o??Uv}?Z??}?v?oZ}?r ?}(}uu???v??o]???o]vP??]??X E]?Z??Z^??v}??Z?P]}v[?u?v]]?o]??Z?uv? ?Z??]o}?}???}vo]u??}?uv?? ?}?}????]??Z (}?uv?}v??????]u??}?uv???}i??vu?o? r ????]o?Wv}]?oov?U?Z}?o??U}??Z??}???]??]v?Z ?P]}vXdZ]???v?]v}v?????]?Z]??v?}?v???Z? E?,?vvDv?.oU?Z]ZU?Z?}?PZ?Z]? ??v]vP?r ???]vv]?ov??}?l?UZ?u}v?????Z???Z(r ]o]??vv}?}?l]v}vv???X Kv?Z}?Z?ZvU]v???]?Zo}?????]v??8???]r ?ol?U?Zo??}Lv(?}????]?o??Z?Xo?Z}?PZ ?}u}?v? oP]v???]]vP}v?Z?]?olU]v?o?]?v ???}??]?v?(??Zv?]]vP}v?Z?}U??}?]?Z? u]v]u?u}v]?}v??u?X~^]?ol??Z}?o?o??o? u??? }( ????]v? }? ??8]v?o? ?] ?} }uu}? ???]vPV??????Z}?o ?o?o??}??]ov?}??]vP?U ?u?V?o]????Z}?o???o???}vo???U?]Pvo?r ??}ZUv??]???}v?Zv?}??]vP?}?X ^]?ol? u???  ?oo r u]v?]v v }u?o? ?} v??? ?(?]]vPX/u??(?}v?U??Z??l?v ?u??Uv?Z ?o]??? ?} ?Z P?}?v i??? ? ?Z? ??]? ????]v?X /v uv? ??U?Z]vi??]?]l??????]v}v(oo??Z}???+? ??ol??]v???]??X~?o]???[Z]PZ????U?}P?Z??]?Z ?Z]? (}??Z}??v ??}v ?u? v ?Z P? ?? ]??v ?Z?Z??}(ooU??}ou(}??Zo???]?lX/v]?}v ?}???(}v]?}v?U?]?ol?]???????o?o?+? ? }v?P?]??X^]?ol? ?Z? ???v?}P???}?u?U}??Z? ol ?u??? ???U???v? Z????}?]??X ~dZ?v??]l ?]???}?o]}?}u?}v??????}?v(ooX ,/u]vd?]o[~??X ?? X &]P?? ??  ?]??}?Z}(?Z???}i??U]v]?}v?}oo?]??vPv?}r ?v?oo}vP r ]??v??]o?v??}]?}vv?}??]v?Z?r P]}vX D/EdEEEDE ‘DEd ^]?ol?U]l? ?Z?Uv}?Z?(}?u?}(????]vv?o]?? ]v(????????Uo]l?}?v?]o???U???]?u]v?vvv uvPuv?](?Z???}(?v?}v?(o?v8]v?o?X&}? ?Zu}?????U?Z(]o]???Z??]??]v?Z?P]}v?]v???r (?}??}v]? }vX,}???U]v]?]?o?]??}?Z]]??Z(}or o}?]vP??}ou?W ?X v?]?}vuv?XDv??}????u?}Z?v?]Pv ?]?Z?Z??}u}]o]vu]vU?]?Z????]vv?o]??(r ]o]??vL??Z}?PZ?XdZ???o?]?????????Z?? Z}??o}??v? (?}?Z?????XDv??]?ol?U??]oo? ?Z}?o}vPu?o? r ov}uu?]o???]??Uol(?v?}v]vP ????]v?}??]vP?]Pvo?U??}lv????????~XPX (}??]? r ?Z???Uv?????(?}u?Z?}???v} u}??Zv?Z??X ^???u? W???]v?v?o]??? ???  }( ??? ?X }vv??] ??X Dv? ????]v v ?o]?? (]o]?? Z? v]v??oo?]uoU}Lv}v??o?]?X?}vr ???vU P?? ]v?????? ?Z ?]?ol v??}?lX ^}u }( ?Z?}????]?oo}?}v?U]vo?]vP?}v(?}u?}??r o???v?}v?U??Z??Z}}o?U ??l?Uv?Z}??]vPv u?o}?uv?v???X ?X Z?]?? X (??u]v?vv}v??]o?]v??]v??Z? o?}?Z???v}(?l?UZ?u??Uv}?Z?]u?]r uv??Xd}?}uU?Z?u?vvv}?vU???}?Z}? ?]?Z o]u]? u}]o]??U ?Z (?]oU v ? ??}v? ???o]vP ? Z]PZ???~XPXi}PP??v]l??U?Z?v?}??o }??o}?Z??X ?X ^v}??u}?oXD?v]]?o]??}v}??o}?u}??????]v v?o]??(]o]??]v?Z?P]}vXdZ???l]?oL???}??}?r ???}?v??XtZ]o?Z]????u }v?U]?o?}????????]r v?v?o]?????}v r o??]??v??]? r  r ?]???]???U ?Z}? ?}? u?v]]?o]?? } o?W ?Z]o ?}u }?v?? ?Z}?o???]PZ???U}?Z??????XdZ???o?]???(?vr ?}vov??}?l}(?v?o??o]l?v?v}??]L? ?Z??v? ?]?ol?U?}??]vP?Uv?Zo]l??o??v(}???r ??]v??}?ol]v?Z?????X 43  ^ Z??Wll?o]l.?X}u  dZ???}ou?U?Z]o]?}o?U??l??Z}(o??vP?r ?v?}v?}????]vv?o]??]????XE}}v??+}??? Z?v?lv?}???Z ????]vv?o]?????]v ]v?Z?P]}vXo?Z}?PZZW]]v?(?vu??}u}(?Z }?(]o]??v.]v]?(}?Wd,]v????U?Z?ov }v??????}v r ?u?v??Z}?}(v}v r u}?}?]???v??}??r ?}vvv}?v}vP}]vP??}P?u}(]u ??}?uv?X????u? ???}ZU?]??????Z?P]}v[?u?v]]?o]??v?Z ^???]?Z?P??}(]o]??(}? ??}u}]o? UZ?vol]vPX ,}???? }u?o?^????]u?ouv??}v  ~?X ?? o??}??U ?Z]?]????}ZvPW?]?Z?Zv?uv?}(?Z^??[?Z}ur ?o??????[o?U  ????]v?v?o]?????}]v?P?? ]v?}oo??P?}(u?v]]?o]??[v?Z^??[??}uvPr uv?X&???Z?Z}?(}?]u??}?uv?]?P]?v??Z?v?}( ?Zv}o}P?o]l^o]l&]? 43 U?Z]Z?u?oo??]u?o].??Z ??}??}(P?Z?]vP( l(?}u??v??}???}v????u??r ??U ]vo?]vP ????]v? v ?o]???U ??l]vP ]????U v ??}?]]vP???}v??X o?Z}?PZ ??Z?Zv}o}P?]? v}? ?]o? ?? ]v ?Z ?P]}vU P]?v ]?? ?}??o?]?? v ?o}?uv? ]v v??}uu?v]??U?Z?]???}v?}  ????Z?]?u?]v ?Zv?(????X ^???u? W???]v?v?o]??? ???  }( ??? &]P?? ?? X,]l]vP??]o?]v?Z?P]}v ^???u? W???]v?v?o]??? ???  }( ??? t></E'E/ o?Z}?PZ?Z]?o]??u? ?v?U]?o?}]u?o]??Z?o?o?}(?olr ]vPv]l]vPu??o}(?}???XdZo???}?o?ol}? ]lU?Z(????}????]ooP]?v?}(]o]??(}?????]r v?v?o]???UvU?}v???vU?Zo???}?o?]oo ?ol }? ]lJ dZ]? ??P P??? ?Z? ?Z }??}?]? u?  ???U vuo? ?Z? Z]( ?}? ?]o ]?U ?Z? ?]oo }uX[  o}? ?o]v ?Z}?ov}??????????(}?]v?}vX???}i??(?}u^]vr P?}? ?} }?vZPvU(?}uW}??ov ~K?P}v?}E?z}?l ]??Uv(?}uo?l^????}?Z &?u]vP?}vvo,?]?r Pd?]ou}v????U]v???uv??]v????]vv?o]??(r ]o]??U ?Zv }??o ?]?Z ?oo r ?ovv ov ??U v ul ^???u? W???]v?v?o]??? ???  }( ??? ?ol]vPv]l]vP?]oo??v????}?]?]vPXdZ?vo]??r oo???v?(}?u?Z(}(??v??}???}vX d Z?}?v?o(}??ol]vPv]l]vP]v?Z?P]}v??]?X^}u }uu?v]??U??Z???o]vP?}vvWo?u}??ZUu?v??Z? Z]PZo?o?}(]?Z???]????Z]?ol}(v?]??X~E}?}vo? }?o??o?(??}?oo]??Z?U???Z??v?}v??Z? ? Z}??}?o(???v??v?}o]?}v?ol]vPv]l]vP ]??vXK?Z??U??Z?E??]?]vv?]??}oU?]?Z?Z]?Z]?r ?}?] ??v }?? v Z]PZ?U u]? }vv???}v? }( ??]r v?U?}?l?o?U??}??U?Z}}o?Uv?????}v? v???oo? u}???]??}v?Z??}+?u}??}?v?o(}?v}v r u}?}?]???X ,]??}?]oo?U?Z?????Z?]?Zv}v r u}?}?]???v??}??X K???Zo?????o?U?Z???Z?P?}?v]v??r ]vPo?Z}??o?}???????]v?v?o]??????v??}???} v v?ovv]vPZ?(}??}v?Z??}u}]oX,}???Ur ??]??Z???l?U?]??}ovE??]?]v~vU?}o??? ??v?U }?v?}?v Wo]v?]ooU d????]ooU v ^}??Z]vP?}v ??oo u?(??oP?}?v(}?????]v?v?o]???X? &]P?? ?? 45  45  tol^ }?^o?o???Z?ol]o]??}(v????o}?vPv?? ??}??U ? ????v??U ?Z}}o?U ??l?U ?X_ }?]vP ?} ?ol?}?X}u U ? Z ?Zv]???}?l??^???]vP??}]v???}v?Z]??v?}?Zo}??? uv]??]vZ?P}??X/(?Zo}???uv]??]v?P}??]??]?Z]vX?? u ]o? Y  ?]????]Pv????Zu?]u?uv?u?}(?}]v??XdZv?u?}(?}]v?? o]v? ?  ?Z ]??v ???}Z? ? u]oY v} ?}]v? ? ? ?? (}? uv]??(???Z??Zv?u]oXZ?P}??]??]PZ???oo?v?Z ~?X ??? ?Z}??U}?Z?]??}ovE??]?]v}v?v??}}? ?  Z]PZ }vv???}v }( uv]?? ~o]??]?U ?Z}??U ??l?U ?Z}}o?U?X]v?Z]?}?v?}?v?Xt]?Z??}???ovv]vPv]vr ???uv?U?Z???u?}vP]vvi}?Z]PZ(}}?v?o ??8X ^&dz ??Zu?o??U?ol]vPv]l]vP??o??o??(  ??]??W ?Z?]?l??vo?P}v?]??}(??]??U????Uv?Z}r ?]}vo?}lv}vX,}???U(??}?oZ??Z}??}???v]?? ?}?ol}?]l]v?Z]o r (????uXD}???ol]vPv]lr ]vP}????}?vv]v??v??}???}v????u?Z?Z ?v ?]Pv?}(]o]???Z8]v?]??o?}v}(u}?}??Z]o?X dZP??]???v?]vu??v????vu}?}??Z]r o?v????]v?v?o]????????Zo????]Pv].v? ?]?lX??ZZ?? &]P?? ??  ~?X ??? ?Z}??U}oo]?]}v???? ?Z]Z ? ?]??? v ???vP?? ?}?o ????]? }L v u}? o]lo??Zvv}????o?]v?Z(}???ov?o??????Z??r ???]v?v?o]???X ?}]v?????uu vv}?uo]??}?]o  ?}?XXXX dZv?u?}(v?? uv]??]??Zo]vP??]?}?}(?Z?Z??}?o?olX_ dZ?P}?]?]v ?ZoPv]v &]P?? ??  ?.v?(}oo}??Wtol?? [??]?U^]o??r ?v?}v}????]??_Vs???oloU^D}????v?v}ur ?o]?Z}v(}}?_V^}u?Z??oloU^^}uuv]???]?Z]v?ol]vP]?r ?v_V?]?]vP}vo?U^z}?v?ol(?}u?}??Z}???}?}???X_ ^???u? W???]v?v?o] ??? ???  }( ??? &]P?? ?? Xtol?}?u?}(?]??}ovE??]?]v ^???u? W???]v?v?o]??? ???  }( ??? ?????U}??}v?Z}??v????]v?v?o]????]vr i??}?l]oo]v}vv???X^}u}(?Z?]v??}??]v v??o}vv???X do ??  ~?X ??? ?oo]??ol??v]l?? ]vi??}?l]oo]v?Z?P]}v?u?v]]?o]??}??  ?Z?Z? ????]}(?}u????  ?}?? ?? X? ?]vP?Z]???]}U?}?o}(???  ????}??]vi??}?l]oo?  ???o?}(?}]v??X 46  dZ]?]?v]v??(?}u?Z?????}??]vi??]?v(?o]?? (?}u?Z???]}??>ZdW~??]vP???? r ?????X 46  dZ??ov?u?}(??o??u?Z]PZ???}u]??]vP}?]v}??? ??}???X dZ??}?????o?u}??????]v?v?o]?? r (?]vo?u?v]r ]?o]??]v?Z?P]}vU?]??}ovE??]?]vUZ ??Z?}??? ?(???}??(}???Z????XW??}(?Z]?u??G?Z]PZ? ]v]v}(?ol]vPv]l]vP]v?Z}?]??~v?Z???}?vr ?oo? ??l ?v o}?? ?? r u]o ?ol }? ]l ]v? ???VZ}???U?]v]v]???Z???Z???o v}( ?ol]vPv]l]vPP?}??U?o?? v  ?}o??]v???? ?v?}(ooXtZ????Z????Z}(?Zu??U?Z]?WovZ}o? do ?? Xs?ov?o??? ]vi??]?v?Z? D?v]]?o]?? W???]v?Z??? l]oo ?o]???Z??? l]oo ?o]v ? ? ? ? ?]??}o ?? ? ?? ? ??o]vP?}v ? ? ? ? E??]?]v ?? ? ?? ? Wo]v?]oo ?? ? ?? ? Wo?u}??Z ? ? ? ? ^}??Z]vP?}v ?? ? ?? ? d}?o ??? ? ?? ? ^???u? W???]v?v?o]??? ???  }( ??? ?Z?????}??o??]?vo??U???v?oUvP?}?v? (}??}vX ??Z?o??PP???U??ZZ??ov?o???[ ??o???v}? ????vo??}???Z?P]}vv]???}?X? &]P?? ??  ~?X ??? ?Z}??U?Z]o????]v?v?o]????v?}P?Z???}? l]oo u}?? }Lv }v ??? v hX^X ?}??? ]v ??o]vP?}v v 47  }????Z.? r ????]}(?}u?????}????X>}o?}??v}?]vr o?X&?o]??v]vi??]?}vo]u]? r ??????????~XPXU/v????? ??v}??]?? ?}?Z]???}Z]]?}v}v????]v??X Wo?u}??ZU]v?]??}ov^}??Z]vP?}vUo}o?}???Z??}r ouX dZ]? ??PP??? ?Z? ]+?v? ???}Z ? ?} ???]vP ?Z??(??]????u?vX /v]?}vU?}u??????}Z}???}??Uu}???}v?} }oo]?]}v?v?]?l]??}????]v?v?o]???X &]P?? ?? 47  ~?X &]P?? ?? XW?}]o]??}(?Z?????]u???? 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 Impact speed (mph) &]P?? ?? X }oo]?]}v?]v?}o?]vP? ???]v?l ?o]?????}??? 0 50 100 150 200 Southington Plymouth Plainville New Britain Burlington Bristol Berlin Pedestrians Local Road Pedestrians US/State Route Cyclists Local Road Cyclists US/State Route ^???u? W???]v?v?o]??? ???  }( ??? ??? ?o}???Zo}?}v?}(}oo]?]}v?]v?}o?]vP??Z??ov?o ????}v^???}???~]vo?]vPhX^XZ}?????v}?/v?????? v Z]PZo]PZ?? Z?(?? }??]}??[ ~}vv???}v? }( Z ]PZ ]r v???]??]v?Z?P]}vU?Z?]u??}?uv??]v?Zvu }(?(?????]oo?i???.X 48 ??}?o]u]??}v?U &]P?? ??  }?v}?]+?v???]vr i??????]??v}vo??]??}oo]?]}v?}v^??Z]PZ???XdZ]? uv?]?}vo??oo????}(?Z??}??XD}??]v??]v?}o?]vP ??ov?o????}??}vo}o?}?X??v????v????U ??X?9}(}oo]?]}v?]v?}o?]vP?? ??]v??}}l?o}v?}? ?v?u?v]]?o}v??}oV(}??o]???U?Z?u.P??]???X?9X dZ???Z}?}(?Z]?]??Z?U](?Z?(??}(?ol]vPv]l]vP]? ?}]u??}?Uu?v]]?o]?? v ??]oo??]??}ovE??]?r ]v v ]v]?}v?}?Z^??u???? lv???}oX dZ?(??}??]}??]v?.u?P}}????vP?}]v?X ^]vo}o?}??v}?]vo?U]?u????v??}}vr ?????Z}??]}???}v}u???}vv?vPo}o?}?U?]? u?????u?Z?????]v?v  ?o]??????Z^?? ?}????]????]o}o?}?v?Z??o?}???]?l?Z?X 48  ^(??]u??}?uv??u?o?}i???.}???]?Z?P]}vV??Z?? ?}v?Z????]?}(?Z]?WovU?Zu?}?v}?v}??Z?X ^???u? W???]v?v?o]??? ???  }( ??? &]P?? ?? X}oo]?]}v?}v^??Z]PZ????]?Z????]v???]?u???vv?u? ^???u? W?o]??v?]? ???  }( ??? W?o]??v?]? E}?W?Z]?Wov}v?]? ???]??o? r }?v }?  r }??????]? ??v?]?](?Z]???]u??(?v?}v]??}????v?o?uu?? }( ?Z ??o] ??v u?o??o }?]P]v? v ??v?}v?X dZ]? }u??]?? ???]? ??Z ?  ????v?]?U ]o r  r Z]U v }?Z? ?v?}}o? ? ?oo ? ]?  v ?? ??]?? ??Z ? ‘??r Z}?vX ??]?Z]PZ(?o??]?vv?}vo??v]v(?}?}(??? v??]v?U??v?]??]??Z]?]v?Z?P]}v?}??oou}?]?o}? v??Pvv?U](v}??o]??]vPX?]??}ou?Z?}???lvE? ?]?]v??Zo?P??u ?o}?uv?v??]v?Z?P]}vU??? &]P?? ?? 49  u}v?????U?Zo???u]v??Zu?v]]?o]?? ?]?Z?ZP????v?u?v??}?}??}v}(??v?] ? }uu????U ?v??u??U???  ??v?]??]??}??}(??U ????}?l??U(}? ??}(?X? 9 X &?}u?Z??v?}]v?}(????]vPu?]uo}?P?}?]vPu} ?Z?~]XXUP?vP?uv??]???}??}(?Z]?????}??]oU ?Z??v?]? ????u]v?Z?P]}v}u?  ???Z}??X? &]P?? ??  ~?X 49 >Pvv?u???(??}?Z???????U????Uv????U?????o?X?  (?}u?ZhX^Xv??????U????v???Uv???????Uvu?]v}ur u?v]??^???????? r ????X 50  Edvu???]?XK8]ovu??W ?]P?}?? r ^?u(}? r E}?r ?ol V v??? V ,??}? r t??,??}? r ??,??}?V E?,?v Vv tr ??? ul?o?U  ?v?Zu?v]]?o]???]?Z?ZZ]PZ???]r ??Z]?]v?Z?P]}v?(?UE??]?]vU]?]???}?}??}v?o? ??v?]? r ???X ? &]P?? ?? 50  ~?X ??? U ?Z]Z Z??? ??? }( ??v?]??]??Z]??}????]}??]??v?P]}v?]v?Z???U ? Z}??U  ?]??Z]?u}vP}uu????(?}u?Z ]?? }(E??]?]v ]??vo}???Zvu}vP}uu????(?}u?Z (?oo??v?  }( v?  }(}vv???[?u??}?}o]?v?P]}v?U}?E?vPov]??v ?}?v??~Ed?X 51  dZ]?]?v]u?}??v??}]v?U?]v?Z? ?P]}v?  ??vv}?}vo???v?]? r (?]vo?]????o?}o?P???Z? }( ?oo r ?} r } ????? v ]??v? ???o ??U }uu?v]?? ?Z]Z?ZoovP]vP(}???v?]????]X??}(?Z]?U}v u]PZ?U}v?Z(}(]?U????]??Z]?]v]???}?]?]o? Z]PZ ??Zv]v?Z?P]}v??Z?????}?v?ZuU??]v?Z? }(E??]?]vU?Z????]????Xd?v?]?[?}uu???Z?]v oo}(u??},??}????X?9U???????X?9(}??Z]??}( ,??}?v?X?9(}??Z]??}(E??]?]vXdZ]?v}uo?oo? (}?]v? ??P?}vv??PP????Z??Z?P]}v[???v?]?????u u??v?Z]?]vPX ?????Ud  D??}? }o]?vEdXoo?(?}u?ZhX^Xv??????Uu?r ]v}uu?v]??^????????U???]??}ov^}??Z]vP?}vU?Z]Z??}v ??????? r ????}(?Z?????X 51  E?vPov]??v?}?v??U?.v??ZhX^Xv??????X ^???u? W?o]??v?]? ???  }( ??? hv(}???v?o?U o}vP]??]vo u??}?}o]?v ?P]}v ? ? v}? ?]ooU?}v}}u??]?}v}(??v?]v??v?]??}??o?]??}?? ?u]??}??]oX,}???U?}vu?v]]?oo?o?X &]P?? ??  ?Z}???ZZvP]vu}?Z????v  }uu????r ??v????v????? XdZ????o?Z?U?Z]o??}( ??v?]??E??]?]v}uu????]?u?lo?o}???Zv? ,??}?]??vu??}?}o]?v?P]}v}uu? ???U]?Z? ??r oo?P?}?v?Z]o,??}?[??Z?Z?(oov X dZ???o?]v,??r (}?]??????]?]vP ???Z?????Pv?oo??}Pv]? ?}??]}??]vP?Z]Z??v?]?????Pv?}v?]U?? 52  D??Z}??v??}?l(?}u  ????X o?} ?? ?? }( ??v?]? ? E? ,?v }uu????  ??r P}v??Z?u?uX Z/> &?}u?Zu]o}(?Z?? ?Z  ?}?Zu]o}(?Z?? ?Z  v????U v??o}vv???}vv??}v??????v??vr ?]??]ov??}?lU?]?]v &]P?? ?? 52  ~?X ??? XdZv??}?lU ?Z]Z?v?Z?}?PZ????}?vv]??}(]u?}??]v?Z???U ]vo???}o]v?]v?Z?P]}vU}v??vv]vP?? r ???Uv?Z }?Z?Uv}??Z r ?}??ZX &]P?? ?? Xd?v?]??]??Z]????v?}(oo?}?l????o}(??]v 0% 1% 2% 3% 4% Berlin Bristol Burlington New Britain Plainville Plymouth Southington 1990 2000 2013 ^???u? W?o]??v?]? ???  }( ??? dZ .??? o]v ]??o? }vv ? ?Z ?P]}v ?]?Z t?????U ?]P?}??UE}??olU^?u(}?UvE?z}?l]???}?Z?}??Zr ???v,??}?UDvZ???Ut]oo]uv?Uv}??}v?}?Z v}??Z??X d?]v? }v ?Z]? o]v ??? ???o ???}v? ]v v ?}?v?Z?P]}vXdZ?]vo??? t???]ooUd????]ooU  ?]??}oU &}????]ooU Wo]v?]ooU E? ?]?]vU E?]vP?}vU ou?}}UvW?l?]ooX~^}u??]v?o?}u??}??]v’??r ??}vU,v}lUvd}oo?X dZ,]??}?]od]udo? ~?X ??? P]??u?(}???]???}v (?}u?Z?]??Xd?v?(????o?}?}??]o?}}?Z?v?? ]??U]vo?]vPD]o?}?vUE?,?vU???UE?>}v}vU 53  ,}o]???o?X E}??]ZU W?}?]vU ^??]vP.oU v???U d}??]vP?}vU v  t]v??X o?Z}?PZ}???}v?ZvP}???uU? ]??vi}?Z]PZ o?o}(???]?v?o?Zv}vuv?}(???vP????]}v ?Z]?o]vX&}?]v??vU???D}v??Z?}?PZ^????]v?Z u] r ?????U?}u????]v????o(?}ut??????},??r (}?V????]v?u?Z??????]?X 53  ~dZ]??v?? ]v??v^?vr ??X?v?o???Zu] r ?????U???vP??}?oZ}}? (?}u?]???]v?]vZ]??}v}v?l??~?]?Z(}??}v^?r ??????v}v}v^?v??Xo?Z}?PZ???vP?}???}v? &]P?? ?? XZvP]v??v?]?u}?Z?}???u???v }uu???? -4% -2% 0% 2% 4% 6% 8% 10% 12% 14% 16% Hartford New Haven New Britain &]P?? ?? XW?v?}(}uu??????]vP??v?]?]v?o? ?P]}v?v]?? 0% 5% 10% 15% NECTAs (metro regions) ^???u? W?o]??v?]? ???  }( ??? ??vE?z}?l]??vt?????Z??]v???uv ]v ?v?].?v??ZP]?}(D??} r E}??ZU?Zo?????vP? ??]v?]vv??o}vv?????}????vv]vP]v????X 54  ~&?]PZ? }v?v??}v?Z]?o]vU?Z}?PZ?????v?oo?]u]v]?Z?r ]????}??l??]}??}vX????o?UE??]?]vv?]?r 54 ^??]?}}??}vvL??ZG}}?}(????V???]??vt??r ???v,??}?v]v????X ?}ov}?Z}o?Z]??v?}v}(]vP?Zo?P??]????}??r o?}v]v?Z??] r ????~E?z}?lUE?:???Uv}vv?r ]???]?Z}??(?v?}v]vP??]v???}v?X dZ?}vo]vo]vl?Z?P]}v?]?ZP???E?,?vU?Z &?u]vP?}vsoo?UvD??Z????[W]}v?soo?XW??vr P??}?o??]?Z?}?Z?? r ???o]v]vWo]v?]ooV??]v?}v?Z]? o]v o?} ??}?? ? ?Z? ]?}vo ???}v? ]v ?Z ?P]}v &]P?? ?? X,]??}?]o??]vv??}?l &]P?? ?? X,]??}?]o??uv??}?l ^???u? W?o]??v?]? ???  }( ??? ~v uo?D]oooUWov???]ooUv^}??Z]vP?}vU??oo?E? ,?vUD?X?uoUvZ?Z]??}?Z?}??Zv&?u]vP?}vU ?}vU ^]u????U ‘?v?U }vPu}vU ^}??Z?]lU t??]oU ^}??Zu??}vU ??Zu??}v ~D??Z????U E}??Zu??}vU v t]oo]u???P ?} ?Z  v}??ZX ~&oP ??}?? ?? ?]oo ? ?}}l??ovt?}P?Xd?]v?}v?Z]?o]vv????? ?Z]PZ?]??Z]???Z}???vt?????v,??}?V? }v???vU???vP????]?]v????X&?]PZ??v ?v?o?Z?o??????U?ZvG}} ?uP?Z??l?X^]v ?ZvUu?Z}(?Z?]PZ? r }( r ??Z?v}v???]v?}P?vr ??U?Z&?u]vP?}vvo,?]?Pd?]oU?]?Z?ov??}}v??? ?Z? r ???v]u??}???}v??}?]o??]oX&?]PZ?}???}v? ???]??}vo?o}vP????Puv?}(  ?Zo]v??vZ}??r ?}v]??}??]vWo]v?]oov?Zv}??Z?vv}(^}??Z]vP?}vX /v]?}v?}?ZZ???]ov??}?lU?Z}??? r ]??v??u 55  ????u}vv??Z}uu?v]??}(v??o}vv????]?Z Z}?Z?vP???,??}?U?Z}?v]v &]P?? ?? XdZ??u? vo???o}???Z}???]??v?v??v?(???}?ZZ?? ?]o????u?ui}?v}?U]vo?]vP}?v?}?v?o]vU?]??}oU E?  ?]?]vUvWo]v?]ooXt]?Z?Z?]?}(??o???U?Z]????r ?u??]?uv?o]v?Z?????XE}?Z]vP}(]??u]v?X 55  d?u??o?}lv}?v?Z??????[}?Z??}oo??X[  D??Z}??v??}?l(?}u ????X>]v??}d????]oo??]????v? XZ]oo]v?U?}u}(?Z]Z(}or o}??Z?u}??]}??U?v}??Z}?vX/uP?lv(?}u,??}?}?v?? d?}oo??U??o]?Z??Z}vv???d?}oo?D???u~????X o?Z}?PZ?Z?Z?v???oo?}???Z???(}???r ?}??}v}(???vP??]o?}v??o}vv???U]vo?]vP(?}u ?Z]?Wo v~(}??]o?U? /v?P??}v?]?ZE?z}?l U  ?X  ?? U v}  }uu???}????????]v?????Z?P]}vXdZ?}o}uu?r v]???]?Z???vP??]o]??o]vU??Z}?K> d dZE^/d uvP? ?Z ?P]}v[? o}o ?? ????uU ?Z]Z ????????}(?o]vU?]??}oU,??}?&?u]vP?}vUD?]vU E??]?]vUE?]vP?}vUv Wo]v?]ooXK???}v???o]??Z? ???W  ddZE^/d~,E^ ??v??Z,??}?]?]?]}v  ~}v?}??]v ?Z ?P]}vV  ?Z E? ?]?]v d?v??}???}v }u?v? v ddK ? ?v?}v????}}??? ?Z E?  ?]?]vl?]??}o ]?]?]}v???~??}v?v?}???U??? ??o?X^??]]?v}? }+?]v??o]vP?}vUWo?u}??Z~]vo?]vPd????]ooU}?^}??Zr ]vP?}vX &]P?? ??  ~?X ??? ?]??ddZE^/d?}???]vvv? ?Z?P]}vX  ?????vD}v??Z?}?PZ&?]?(?}u}???D ?}?WDU?]?Z??v???]?}?W??WD]v????}(?o]vU E??]?]vUvWo]v?]ooXdZ? ]?v}^?v?}?Z}o]???r ?]X ^]vPo??v?(????vddZE^/d?}???U]vo?]vP?}v (?}u?ZE??]?]vl?]??}oU,??}?UvD?]vltoo]vPr (}? ]?]?]}v? ? ?}??]o ? v} }??X D?o??o ??v?(?? v ??v?(?? ?} }? (?}u D]o?}?v ? d? v?]? ??? ? o?} ?}??]o?????]??Z???Z?}(]?}vo?l?~?XW?r ?vP??u?o?}}?}?o]PZ?(?}uu??l??]v???Z?r o]v r }o???}??? ^???u? W?o]??v?]? ???  }( ??? do ?? X}uu}v?}???v???o?u?~u]v???? u} ??v?}v (?}u?]??}o ?? ? (?}uE??]?]v ?? ? ?]??}o }?v?}?v v v v W ?? ?? &?u]vP?}v Doo W ? ?? ? ^ ?? ?? ^ ?? ?? ,??}? d?]v???}v W ? ?? ? ?? r ?? ??? ?? ?? ? ?? r ?? ?? ?? DvZ??? }?v?}?v W ? ?? ? ?? ??? ?? ?? ? ?? ??? ?? D?]v d?]v???}v W ? Z ?  ??? ?? Z ?  ?? ?? D]o?}?v }?v?}?v W ? ?? ? ?? ??? ?? ?? ? ?? ?? ?? E??]?]v }?v?}?v W ?? ?? v v v E?,?v ‘?v d?]v???}v W ? Z ?  ?  ~}? ? ^ ??? ??? ?? ??? Z ?  ?  ~}? ? ^ ??? ??? ?? ?? ^}??Z]vP?}v ‘?v /u?}??]o L ?? / u?}??]o L ?? d????]oo ‘?v /u?}??]o L ? /u?}??]o L ?? t????? ‘?v d?]v???}v W ? Z ?  ?  ? : ~}? ? ?? ??? ??? ?? ?? Z ?  ?  ? : ~}? ? ?? ??? ??? ?? ?? t??,??}? v?? W ? ^ ? ?? r ?? ??? ?? ^ ? ?? r ?? ?? ?? t]v?}?>}l? ]??}?? W ? ?? ? ?? ??? ?? ?? ? ?? ??? ?? oo??v?]??}???u]v]u]?}v r ???uv????o}??}?W??D??}??]oX}uu??????~??????}????v}?]vo?X?]?]vP]??}v?v  ?u? P]?v?’}}PovZ?v]vG????9?}?]u?o?u}??o]??  ??8}v]?}v?XK?Z???Z???}??]o(}?uv?}(?Z??}??????}Lv ]u???o??}?Z?o]vP}??}??vP?]???}v?X&}?]v??vU?Z< ?  ? (?}uE??]?]v?}D]o?}?v?l?}???Z?u?u}??}?v??]? ???oo?o}vP?] v?Z}?Z?]??}vVZ ?  D r >]vl]?(??????u]v?????}vo???v??Z?]]o?X  ^}??Z]vP?}vvd????]ooolo}o?????]X ^???u? W?o]??v?]? ???  }( ??? ? do ??  ~?X ??? ?Z}??U?Z??v?}(???]]+??????vr ?oo?u}vP?Z??]}??.? r ?}????}???}?????v?o?r ??]v?Z???X~^?????(}????oUG?]o?}??U}uu???U v?Z??o??  }???}???v}?P]?vX?}vu]PZ?????? P]?v??Z]???]??]v}???}v?U?Z}???}??o?}???}vr ?]?o?]vZ}?8]v?o??Z???(}?u?Z]????]?X &]P?? ??  ?Z?}?PZ &]P?? ??  ~?X ???  Z?? ???o }uu}v ??(}?r uvu????X u??????}v}?P?v???v?X/vPv?oU](v}???}? ]??}u?]u]??v]vP?~v?Z???}u]v]u]????]]?U]?]?]v Z]?]v?????}.oo????]?Z?uv???]vP(????}??]o? oo?u?X? &]P?? ??  ~?X ??? ]v]??U?ZE?,?v]?]?]}v }(ddZE^/d??]??Zu}?????vP???]????Z}??}(}?r ??}v}v??P~??X?U(}oo}???Z^?u(}?U,??}?U ?]P?}??Uvt?????????u?]v?Z?}??XE??]?]v d?v??}???}v[? E? ?]?]v ??? (oo ]v ?Z u]o }( ?Z ?lU?]?Z??X???]????Z}??U?o]PZ?o?o}??ZD]o?}?vU D?]vUv???UvE}??ol????u?XddK[?E??]?]v vE??]?]vd?v??}???}v[? ?]??}o ?}?????(}?u ??r ??v?oo??}???Zvu}??}(?Z}?Z?????u?U  ???X?v?X? ??]????Z}??X dZ?.P??? ]u?o??Z??????]]?????o] ?]?Z ???? ?} uv }? ?Z? ?Z ???] }? v}? .? ?Z v?}(?}?v?o???}u??X’]?v?Z??]]o]??ZoovP? &]P?? ?? XW??vP???]????}???vPZ}?? 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 &]P?? ?? X}???????vP???]? $0 $2 $4 $6 $8 $10 $12 $14 ^???u? W?o]??v?]? ???  }( ??? ?Z?P]}v(?U?Z]?Wov}v?]???Zo?? u}?o]lo?X/vv? ?v?U &]P?? ??  ?Z}?oP]?}v???X??u?o?(?}u,??r (}?}v}?vulo?U(?}u?Z??v?}]v?}(.oo]vP???U ?Z? ]??}}u(}?]u??}?uv?]v?Z?P]}vX ???[????]?v}??Z}vo???(}?uvu????}??Z?}( }v?]??}vXsv????u?v}?8]v?}v?? r u]o ?]?U??]v?}u???Z?  v}?? r +??X~/(?Z}??? }(}???}v?o}?U?Zv?l??o?vv}?Z]PZX&?}u ?Z]??}]v? r }( r ?]?U?Z??}???}??]v?Z?P]}v(??}ur ?Z???X &]P?? ??  ?Z}???Z???}???}v?]vE??]?]v ??}?PZo?}u?????]?Zu}??}?Z?}???}v?]v?Z??? ?Zv]?}u??}?Z??o}???}??v??}???]vPo???vP?X W? r ???vP?}????u?lo?Z]PZ?(}??Z? ]??}o???}( ?Z????uV?(}?U?Z]?]u?o]??Z??Z?u?}??}???r v]???}??]vP]?}vo8]v?}??}(?Z??}???X &?U ]( v?U ??v??}???}v (]o]?? v ???]? }?? ?Z]? }???XdZ]?Z}o?v}?}vo?(}?oou}?}(??v?]???o?}(}? ?}?v]??}???X,}???U?ZP??}?Z]Z??v??}??r ?}v(]o]??v???]????]?}???](?v]vP??]??r u? oo?X/v??v?]?U?Z??v?P}(}???vP}????Z??lr ???o???(}?]???u?Z^(?}??}?????}X_??} }( ???9 ?}?o ]v]? ?Z? (?? }?? ?Z v?? }?? }( ??}?]]vP?Z????]V}v}(??}?}?o]u?o??Z???]]? }u?o? o????]]?~]XXUP???X &]P?? ??  ~?X ??? ??o ? P??]???v?u}vP?Z]o]??}(.? r ?}????}??r ?}???}?}??}????Z?}?PZ(???v?~}?U???v}?Z???U ?Z]? ?vv }v P}??vuv? ???]]?X ? &]P?? ?? U ?]P?}??[?’do?]v.vv]o??(}?uvXE??]?]v d?v??}???}v}u?v?[?E??]?]v?}???}u]vo}? ?}vU?]?ZZ]PZ??}}(??X?9XddK[??}???]v?Z]?? v E? ?]?]v d?v??}???}v[? ?] ??}o ?}??? ??(}?u (? ?}??UZ}???U?]?Z??}?}(??X?9v??X?9U?????o?X dZ??}}??Z}?]vP?]v]??Z??Z??}???u?}??o? ?vv?}v???]]?vu???]uv]??(}??r ?]?X &]P?? ?? X&?}??}?????} 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% ^???u? W?o]??v?]? ???  }( ??? do ?? X&]? r ?}? ???}???}v?]v}vv??? }v???}? ZP]}v ??,}??? W??vP?d?]?? D]o? d  dZE^/d~ ,E^  ,??}? ???U??? ??U???U??? ?U???U??? d  dZE^/d~ ,E^  E?,?v ???U??? ?U???U??? ?U???U??? d  dZE^/d~ ,E^  ^?u(}? ???U??? ?U???U??? ?U???U??? ddK E??]?]v ??U??? ???U??? ???U??? ‘d ?]P?}?? ???U??? ?U???U??? ?U???U??? ,Zd v??? ??U??? ???U??? ???U??? D]o?}?vd?v?]?]???]? D]o?}?v ??U??? ???U??? ???U??? D]o(}?d?v?]?]???]? D]o(}? ?U??? ??U??? ???U??? E ??]?]v d?v??}???}v}X ?]??}o ?U??? ??U??? ??U??? E??]?]vd?v??}???}v }X E??]?]v ??U??? ???U??? ???U??? E}??Z r ??d?v??}???}v }X t????? ??U??? ?U???U??? ???U??? E}??Z r ??d?v??}???}v }X D?]v ?U??? ???U??? ???U??? E}??Z r ??d?v??}???}v }X too]vP(}? ?U??? ??U??? ??U??? E}??old?v?]?]???]? E}??ol ??U??? ???U??? ???U??? E}??old?v?]?]???]? t???}?? ??U??? ??U??? ???U??? ^}??Z???d?v?]? ^}??Z?? ??U??? ???U??? ?U???U??? ddK=Ed }u]v ?]??}olE??]?]v ??U??? ???U??? ???U??? ^???u? W?o]??v?]? ???  }( ??? dZ????????]v??]???}(????u?Z?(?v?}v??? }?o(?v?}v??X^??o??}ou?Z?v]v?.? ?}?v?oZu????}?Z??o]??}(v????}???}?]??Z]? ]v?Z ????uXdZ?]vo??Z(}oo}?]vPW ?X }v?}o???}???XDv????}???]v?Z?P]}v}v}? (}oo}?o]v???Z?????(?}u?Zu]v?]?}(???o?} ?]????Z?]P}???]o??U}8??l?Uv???uv? }u?o??Xo?Z}?PZ?Z??]??vPv? ???]??]v??vr ???U???]vP?Zuv??]????l]vP?}????Z?}v?]?r o?]v???Z}u?o?]??}(?Z?}??v???Z ??}(???]XdZ?(?}?????Z+??o?o}( ???]?}??Zv??v??Z??Z?u??]???u}? ?} ?v?o?]???Zv?Z???X ?X >l}(????}??X/vu}??}(?Z?P]}vU?????v}vGP r }?v????u?]?Z}??v?.v?????}??XtZ]o?Z]?]v ?Z}?? v ul ???o u}? }v?v]v? ? oo}?]vP ?]l???v?}? r }+?o}???}}?]P]v?v??v?} v?U]v ?o]??]???}??????u?Z???}????v?o]o~?Z ??u]v?}v?Z?Z??}??}?]?u??Z]???}v}( ?Z?]??v?Z?o]vP?v??]?o~?Z]o]??}(?]r ???}u?lv]?u?l?v??}]v?}Lv?]o??]?r ??}v?Z ????Z??}??}????o}l}???}UP??o? ?o}?]vP???]X ?X >l}(?]PvPXtZ??Z??v}????}??U?Z?o?} ?v?}v}?]Pv?XdZ?v}(???}??]??]PvP~]vr o?]vP?u?o?vu??]v?Z?P]}vul?(}??? ????u?Z? ]? ???oo?]v?]?]o X ?X W}}?}vv??]??X?]????Uo?Z}?PZ???]v?Z?r P]}v } oo}? ??v?(??U ??v?(?? ? }Lv }u?o? v o}vP]v???}vU??Z?o??v}?o???}}?]v?X /v]?}vU?Zol}(?Z?}?PZ?}??vPv?o??]?o? o}o v??? }( ?Z ?? ???] ul? ]v???P]}vo v ]v??r u}o??]??ovP?Z?v]u???oX oo}(?Z?(?}???v?u]v?Z??o]??U8]v?U?]??Z]?U v?}o?v?}(?Z??v?]?????uX,}???Uv}v}(?Zu? ]v?}o?oUv W?o]d?v?]?  ~?X ?? ??}?}????P???}Zo? .??ZuX yWZ^^ dd ZE^/d??v???]?}(????????(}?}uu????XdZ? }(?Z?????Z?P]}vX,}???}(???]vo}?}v?(}??Z ?}???????uo?o]u]?X??????????]u?]o???v??]vP ???ZZ}??v???o??v?Z??}??o]??v}?v?}?v ,??}? }vo?Xt]?Z?Z???}v}(?ZWo]v?]oo>]???U?Z? }v}???}??}?v?}?v?}??}?vv???X????v?Uv}?r ???? ?? ?]?]?? ?Z }?? }( }?v?}?v ?]??}oU ^}??Z]vP?}v v??Uvd????]ooXdZ?P??u???????v?]??]??Z]? v??]vo?  o]u]??Z??o]??}(?Z???????????u(}?v}v r ?]?]vP}uu????X ^???u? W?o]??v?]? ???  }( ??? &]P?? ??  u?? ?Z ?}??? }( ?Z? ???U ?? ??yX ~d dZE^/d????o}o????Z?ul?}u???????v???r ??o?(?}u?Z}??Z?}vo???}?]????????]X  &]P?? ? ?  ?Z?}?PZ  &]P?? ??  ~?X ??? ]oo??????Z 8]v?}(?Z?r P]}v[??????????o???}?]u]o?}???}v??Z?}?PZ}?? ?Z^??X??Z.P????Z}?U?Z??}???????]o?]v?]r ??Z]?v}?? r 8]v?X/ vPv?oU???????????(?? ???vP????Z}??vv?]oZ]PZ?}????????vP???]? ~???}????X??J?Zvo}o???XtZ]o?l???]?vU]v uv???U(?}??}????Z]PZ?U?????????u]v ??v?]??}??}?]}v??? vP? r ??]??]?X/(?Z8]v? }(?Z?}??? r ??(}?u]vP?}???vv}?]u??}?U]?u? ?}??Z????]vP?oo}?vP?Z???]]?Z]v?Zu?}}?Z? ??v??}???}v???]??Z?o]??u}?vP(}??Z?lX &]P?? ?? X,??}? r ????????v??}?l ^???u? W?o]??v?]? ???  }( ??? &]P?? ?? X }???????vP???]? &]P?? ? ? X&?}??}?????} $0 $20 $40 $60 $80 $100 $120 $140 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% 45% 50% ^???u? W?o]??v?]? ???  }( ??? &]P?? ?? XW??vP???]????}???vP Z}?? do ?? X????????}??? E}X Eu ^?}?? /v r l}??}?v??v? ? hv]}v?]oo ^?XD??[?W?l?Z]Uhv]}v?]oo &?u]vP?}vW?l?Z]U?X?vd}?v&?uZ} ?l? ?l? ?? Wo]v?]ool?]??}o >l?X?Z?X???U?]??}o Wo]v?]oo>]???U??D]v^?XUWo]v?]oo ?l? ?l? ?? Z?Z]?l^}??Z]vP?}v W?l?Z]UZ?X?? v}??Z}(/ r ???UZ?Z]? W?l?Z]UZ?X??UWov???]oo~^}??Z]vP?}v ?l? ?l? ??y ,??}?lE??]?]v ?]E?]vP?}v ^u ? ?? U ?? v} ?]l??? ??v E??]?]vlE?]vP?}v??vv??oZ}? ?l? 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 ^???u? W?o]??v?]? ???  }( ??? do ?? X}uu????? }???}v?  ]v}vv??? }v???}? Z}??~????]v]?,??}???v?}v ??  ,}??? W??vP?  d?]?? D]o? ??}???}u?v? t]oo]uv? ? ?U??? ??U??? ???U??? }oo]v???}u?v? s?v}v ? ??U??? ???U??? ???U??? ddZE^/d~,E^ ,??}? ? ??U??? ???U??? ?U???U??? ddZE^/d~,E^ ^?u(}? r tZ]?Wo]v? ??U??? ???U??? ???U??? ddK Z?Z]? ? ?U??? ??U??? ??U??? ddK ,??}? r Ko^??}}l ?U??? ??U??? ???U??? ddK ?]??}o ? ?U??? ??U??? ???U??? ddK ,??}? r E?,?v ?U??? ??U??? ???U??? ‘d ^Zo?}v&o?? ?U??? ??U??? ??U??? :}ZvE?}v}vP r ]??v????u]vo? d?u]vo E??]?]v &?u]vP?}v ??? :]uu?[?^u}l^Z}? ??  tD]v^?X E??]?]vUd????? }vv??? d?u]vo ??  ???}vW?lZX &?u]vP?}vUd????? ,}??? }( }???}v ?W??D t  ??WD]o? ?W??  D t  ?W??  WDD}v r &?] ?W??D t  ?W??WD^? r ^?v ^???u? W ?o]??v?]? ???  }( ??? &]P?? ?? X d(???l  ?}?? ^???u? W?o]??v?]? ???  }( ??? Kd,ZWZKs/Z^ WZdZE^/d hv??Zu?]v??]?Z]?]o]???U?Z???o]??v?]? ]???}?]??]?uv}??}??]o?}???}v??]?Z ]?]o]??U ??]?ov?U ]?o r ??]o ???] u???  u?]oo~Z????v?]?[XW???v?]?}Lv?l??Z(}?u }(  uv r ???}v?]??v?XdZ??Z]o?U?Z]Z??]Pv ?}u}???]o?}???}v??]?Zo]u]?u}]o]??}?}?Z? Zv]??U ??? ?]?? ?]?Z]v  .? ???] ?U Pv?oo? ?Z? r ??????}(u]o(?}uv?]??vP??v?]?o]vX~^??] ?? v?]}v??}u?u?P}?}v?Z]?X??}?Z???uo? Z]PZ}??vo}P]??o}u?o?]??}(??}?]]vP?Z???]U??r ??v?]?]?}vo?}?v?}?Z}??Z}Z?v??.?o]P]r o 58  ?v??Z?[?P?]o]v?v}}l??]??]v?vX dZ’??? ,??}?d?v?]?]???]?v}?  uvP?????v?]? (}?v??o}vv???  ~?Zv??o}vv???ZP]}voWovr v]vPPv?(}?u?o?uvP?Z???] X &]???d?v?]?  ]??vr ? }v??? ?} }??? ?Z ???]U ]vo?]vP ??]? }}l]vPU ?Z?o]vPUv??} ???}vXdZ???]}???oo}(?]??}oU Wo]v?]ooUvE??]?]vU??oo??Z????}(?o]vU??r 58  ??.?}vu???(}?u?DWK}?v}?Z???v?]?]???]?]v?Z ^??X do ?? X>}?}v??]?Zo}vP r ]??v?????] ‘??Z}?v>]v? W??Wv?? ?]P?}?? ?}}lo?v vv v??? v]o?}v v.o &?u]vP?}v &}??}}??]v} ,??}? DvZ??? D}ZPv^?v?]v} D??? E??]?]v E?,?v E?>}v}v ^}??Z??? ^?u(}? ^?}??? d}??]vP?}v t????? t]oo]uv? t]v?? ?v(}? ?]P?}?? ?}}lo?v vv v??? ??,??}? v.o &]?.o &?u]vP?}v ‘o??}v??? ,??}? DvZ??? D]o(}? D??? E??]?]v E?,?v ^}??Z??? ^?u(}? ^?}??? ^???}? d}??]vP?}v t????? t]oo]uv? t]v?? ^???u? W?o]??v?]? ???  }( ??? o]vP?}vU?}u?ooU&?u]vP?}vUD?]vUD]o?}?vUE?]vPr ?}vUvt??,??}??Z?(oo?]?Z]v?Z? r ?????u]o?}(d dZE^/d?]??}olE??] ?]v]?]?]}v???}???X????? ? v??o}vv???[?  ????v?]???v?P?vv?oo}? ]v &]P?? ??  ~?X ??? X>]l?Z??o]???U????v?]???v?(?}u ?D?}?W??WDUD}v??Z?}?PZ^????U???]v?oo}? v????o??}v?Zu?U?Z????]??v?(?}u?D?} ?WDv?D?}?W DU?????o?XdZ?]?v}???]}v ^?v??}?Z}o]??X~W???v?]?u]??}???ZZ}???}(?P?o? ??v?]????]V?E??]?]vo}o?}?????vo??U?}U?}}U }?????v?]??Z?X ,]??}?]oo?U??]???Z??}???P]}vo}?v?]?~XPXU(?}u E? ?]?]v?},??}?Z?vi}]v???vP???v?(??X’]?v ?Z?Z??]ovuv?oZoovP??Z?uv??]??(U? ?oo??Z(???v?o?o}?u?P]vo}??}(??v??}??vP?]? oo?Z???}Z]?.vo??v?}v]v}v?Z]o U?Z  ‘???  ,?? }?d?v?]?]???]?~’,dZ?  P?v}+?]vP?]vPo r ?? ?]??}?}uo}?}v?X /v?Z}u]vP???U?Z,??}???r ??v?]?]???]?v?Zv??o}vv???????v?]?]???]? ?]oou?PUvP?vP?Zv(}??Z]????] X ???Z?  ?]vPo r ???]????}?] U?Z]Zv}u???????}(&?ur ]vP?}vvt??,??}?U??oo?oo}(,??}?UE?]vP?}vU t?Z??.oUZ}l?,]ooU?}u?ooUvD?]vU??v?? 59  dZ??Po]v?ul?X????]?????l?vX?????lvX ]v &]P?? ?? X  dZv??o}vv????P]}v  ?]oo}+???v?(? r (??]??}}?(?}u?Z?Z??v[?? ??}?]?Z}?]P]v }???v?}vo]??]?Z]v?ZP?v}??oo}?? Xd?]???Z? }?]P]v?v??u]v??o??]?o??]?Z]v ?Z??o]}??r ?]?Zv??o}vv????P]}v  v}v?v??}Zvo ?’,d [?,??}????]X~>]l?]?U?Zv??o}vv??? ?P]}v???]}(’,d  ?]oo}v?v??}????Z}??Z ??u]v ?}oo?]v?ZP?vv?oo}???X ??v???v??????}v?ul??}( v??o}vv??? ?P]}v[?  ????v?]? ???] ]v  P]?v ?Z? r u}v?Z ??]}U ?Z}?PZ?Z]?.P??]??]?]vP??]lo?X 59  dZv?u?}(o}oo]v?? v?}oo]vP]v?Z?? ?]]v???? r ????]??????X?9}???Z??r ]vP.?o??X 60  dZ?oo?}(???vP???]??u??Z??r ?]]?????X?9}???Z?u??]}XdZ?]v???o]lo? }??}P?}?]vP??v??}(?Z???]U??}???}vo(r .]v?Uvu}P??Z] ?Z]L?]v?Z?P]}v~vuo?P]vPX t]?Z}v?v?]u??}?uv???}?Z???]vP??]vP}(?Z ?}??o?}vUuv]?????}???P(???Z?X 60  dZ]?.P??}?v}?]vo?,??}??P]}v???}u????v??}?? ??Z v??o}vv????P]}v????v?]????]?}}?(?}u?Z?P]}vX ^???u? W?o]??v?]? ???  }( ??? &]P?? ?? XW???v?]????]? ] ^???u? W?o]??v?]? ???  }( ??? W???v?]?]?v}??8]v??}?Z?(}?u?}(??v?]?XW?r ??v?]??v??}v?]?o??uoo??Zv}?Z???v?]??Z]o? v u??? ??}?] ?? (}? ?ol? ?ZoZ]?? v ?}}???X dZ]?o]u]???Z]????vP??]???}(??}v}(?Z???o] ? ??v??]v??v???X/v]?}vU????v?]??Z]o? }v}?(}oo}?}v]?U????]?}????Z?Z?v?or }??}u?]u]??]??Z]?}v?? r u]o}??? r }oo?}??r ?]?X /v??U ?Z? ??}?] }v r uvU ?? r ?} r ?? ???] do ?? X ????v?]?}???}v?]v}vv??? }v???}? ZP]}v ??v?? ??,}??? W??vP ?d?]?? D]o? ZW E??]?]v r ?]??}o ? ?U???U??? ??U??? ??U??? ???U??? ‘????]P?}??d?v?]???Z}?]?? ?]P?}?? ? ?U???U??? ??U??? ??U??? ???U??? ‘??? ,??}?d ,??}? ? ?U???U??? ???U??? ???U??? ?U???U??? ‘???E?,?vd E?,?v ? ?U???U??? ??U??? ???U??? ?U???U??? ,Zd v??? ? ???U??? ?U??? ??U??? ??U??? D]o?}?vd D]o?}?v ? ???U??? ?U??? ??U??? ??U??? D]o(}?d D]o(}? ? ???U??? ??U??? ??U??? ???U??? E}??Z r ??d?v??}???}v}X t????? ? ?U???U??? ??U??? ??U??? ???U??? E}??Z r ??d?v??}???}v}X D?]v r too]vP(}? ? ???U??? ?U??? ??U??? ???U??? E}??old ^?u(}? ? ?U???U??? ??U??? ??U??? ???U??? E}??old E}??ol ? ???U??? ??U??? ??U??? ???U??? E}??old t???}?? ? ???U??? ?U??? ?U??? ??U??? ^d E?>}v}v ? ???U??? ?U??? ?U??? ??U??? soo?d ?? r ^?u}?? ? ???U??? ?U??? ??U??? ??U??? t]vZuZP]}vd t]vZu ? ??U??? ?U??? ?U??? ?U??? ^???u? W?o]??v?]? ???  }( ??? u?Zo]l ?Z?XdZ]?uv??Z?????v?]??Z]o? u???}Lv???oo}vP]??v??}?]l??v?}?}+?]??X ? ?Z &]P?? ??  ~?X ??? ?Z}??U ????v?]? ]v }v???v ??v??}???(?(?????vP????Z}???Zv v ??v }v Zo(v}v?v?Z?uv?? v ???XdZ?P]}v[?????v?]? ul?v??P}(?X?????vP???]????Z}??}(}???}vU ?Z]Zov??oo}??Zu]o???[?????v?]????]? ????ooo}??Zo??X dZ?(?}??}v??]??}ul????v?]?]???v?]?XdZ?}r ?o}??}(??vv]vP?Z????v?]????]]v?Z?P]}v(}??Z ???? r ????.?o ????  ? ?X?u]oo]}vV(}??Z ???? r ????.?o 61  dZ]?o]lo?}??U?o??]v???U?}?Z]??PZ?o? r ]??u??]???]?X ??]?????X?u]oo]}v XKv r ???l??}????X??U?Z]Z]? }?o?Z}????}v]vP??(?X?v??Z]???]U?Z?}vo? }??}??}v r ?v?Z}(?Z}??}(??}?]]vPZ??]?X &]P?? ??  ?]v??Z??Z?P]}v[?????v?]????]Z?o}???Zv ??P}????????vP???]?~???X??????oooP??Zor ??]v?Z????o?Pu?P]vX~soo?vD]o(}?d?v?]?  ]???]???o?}}+???]??(}??v????ZX 61  /v}vv???U?Z???vP?(?(}?????v?]?Z?v?? ?}?o?Z?(}?v??]?ov?o}o????]?X’]?v?Z?o}o ???Pv?oo?Z?P??v}vv??}}oo??(}??]U &]P?? ?? XW??vP???]????}???vPZ}?? 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 &]P?? ?? X}???????vP???]? $0 $10 $20 $30 $40 $50 $60 ^???u? W?o]??v?]? ???  }( ??? ?Z]?o ??Z?PP???v]v}uv??v??(}?oo??r ??v?]?}???}??X^??]]?(?}u?Z???ul???Z]+?r vX &]P?? ??  ]v]???Z??Z ?????ui}?]??}(}??? (}?oo????v?]????]]v}vv???XKvP]vUD]o(}? v soo? d?v?]? ]???]?? o ?Z ?lV ?Z ?P]}v[? ??r ??v?]????](oo?????o?]v?Zu]o?]?Z???]?}(??9U (}??? r ?]???]?}(???X? ?X dZ??o}?? v v?Z?????]???]v]?]?o??]? v ?v? }vuv](}o(?}??U]vo?]vP?Z??v???U??]vPUvo}r ?}v}(?]l???v?}? r }+?Vvo?}v?vv} r ?Z}??V??8 }v]?}v?V?Z??Z?Vv?Zo]v??[]?]o]??XKv]v. ? ~??X?9 ????v?]? ??]?? ]v?}o??  o]v? ]v  ?ZoZ]? }? ?}}??XdZ?u]v]vP??X?9?u?o?}??XdZo??~??oo ? ?ZoZ]? ???? ?Z} ? ?vv?u? ? ]?}vo Zv]??????v?v}??}???v]??W](?Z?v????(?oo? Zo? ?}?l?v?P}(?]??vP?????]U????v?]??r ?v]????u???}?]vPo?X ‘?}??Z ]v ?]??Z]?Z? ????Z ?Z????v?]? ????uX ? &]P?? ??  ~?X ???  ??o?U????ZZ}??U?Z????v?]?G?]? ??v?oo?u?}??U?]?Zv]o?]??(}??????]?????]v ?u?~?W???}?W??Dv?W???}?W??WDX  62  dZ???o?]?o}? ?}v}?}o ?v(}?]v]v??U??Z???????}u??U??8 62  Z]v???o]vo???]v}?}(}v?????Z}??(}?vL??Z ??]v??uX/v}?Z??}??U?Z}o?uvooZ?W??[}u??]??oo??]?? }}l(}??]l????v?W??v?W??Xtlv??]???^?????}vo?X }vP??}vU }? ?l}?v?X tZv ??Z  }v?vPv? }? ?]?U ?Z ???o?? ? }Lv }v?]?o o?? ?Z? ? ?Z?}?PZ?ZG?(}??Z?u]v?}(?Z?Xvo?P]vP?Z ?]?}(?ZG?}? o?u??Z]???}ouU??]??}?oo?} }u?o?P}??X/?u?o?}?vv????U(}??ZG? vi}??}v?]?o}???]????]vPoo}?Z?Z}???}(?Z ?Xu}?}?? r +?????}Z?}???Z???}v?]?r &]P?? ?? X^??]???Z?}(?}?o}??}(}???}v? 50% 55% 60% 65% 70% 75% 80% 85% 90% 95% 100% ^???u? W?o]??v?]? ???  }( ??? v??}(???]?}?o?}  ?????v?]? r uvuvPr uv?U?Z?o]v???v}??P?}}}l?Z]???]??(}??Z ??}?PZ???Z??Zv?Z?l?Z??]v &]P?? ?? X ? &]P?? ??  ??o?U?]??Z]????v?]+?}v^????Xv? uv r  uvPuv?????P?}???]ooZ??}?l?Z]? ]v?}}?v?X /> r  r Z/ oo??vu?v]]?o]??]v?Z?P]}vv?ZZ?}??}??? ]o r  r Z]???]?(}??v]}?]??v?vU]v?}u??U?Z ]?oX dZ? ???]?U ?Z]Z ? ??? r ???]]?U ]v ??? }??o??]?Z?Z?P]}v[? ????v?]?~?Z?}???]v?Z?u ??]?Z?]u]o?}???vPZ}??????v}?]v?P???]?Z ?Z????]X/v?P??}v??v?Z????]?u?}+??]Pr v].v?}??}???v]??(}?]u??}????}u????]U??r ???}}?]P]v?v??v?} v?Uv}????]vP??Z?}?PZ}vr }u]?}(?oX &]P?? ?? X??P?l???]????Zo( r Z}?? 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 &]P?? ?? X??P?lv??]????Z o( r Z}?? 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 ^???u? W?o]??v?]? ???  }( ??? do ?? XD?v]]?o]o r  r Z]???]o]v?oU?Uv?u? D?v]]?o]?? o]P]o?]?? 63 ?}?? ,}???}(}???}v &? 64 ?o]v Z?]v????= ?o]v D} r &??W??D t  ? WD E}v ?]??}o Z?]v????= ?]??}o D} r &??W?? t  ?WD E}v ??o]vP?}v Z?]v????= ??o]vP?}v D}d?dZ ?W??  t  ?  WD t ?W??  t  ?W??  WD &??W??D t  ?W??WD E}v E??]?]v Z?]v????= E??]?]v D} r &??W??D t  ?WD E}v 65 Wo]v?]oo Z?]v????=  v  ?P]??? ?]??}oU&?u]vP?}vUE??]?]vU ^}??Z]vP?}vUE?]vP?}vsXX D} ?  D t  ?  WD d?tdZ ?  D t  ?  WD &? ?  D t  ?  WD ^? ~(}????]? E}vl ? ?X?? 66 Wo?u}??Z Z?]v?? ??=  v  ]?o ??]v?? ?]??}oUd}??]vP?}vUt?????  E?]vP?}vsXX D} r dZ  ??W??  D t  ?W??  WD &? ?W??  D t  ?W??  WD ^??W??D t  ??W??D E}v ^}??Z]vP?}v Z?]v????= ^}??Z]vP?}v D} r &??W??D t  ?W??WD E}v Z?}?? Z?]v??  ??=}(?o]vU E??]?]vUv Wo]v?]oo &?u]vP?}vU?o]vU?]??}oU E??]?]vU E?]vP?}vUWo]v?]oo D} r &??W r ??D t  ?W??WD ? ?X?? l ? ?X?? ?? 63  oo???]?oo}?]?o? ]??](?Z?v??]VZ}???U}vo?Wo?u}??Zo?}oo}??v}v r ?v]}?]?o???}v??}?]X 64  }???}?]??(}??]vPoU}v r ????]?X 65  ^?PP??}v?}v}(??X??X 66  E}(?????X??Z?P(}?^?v??]?X ^???u? W?o]??v?]? ???  }( ??? ^z^dZd dZ}vv???Kdo?}??}v?}??????u}(?v?(}?}ur u????vu  Z??????X[dZ??v?U?Z]Z?}???? dZZ]?Z?}u?v?Uv?Z}?????]?o?v?}v?Z ?]??}(??]vP?]?Z???v?Z?]o]o]??}(?]oo]vP?]?r ??U???v?o?????Z(}oo}?]vP?}???]v?Z?P]}vX~dZ? ???i??}Z vP?v??uXZ?}??ul?}v??v ]o?X do ?? X???????}??? E}X K?]P]v ^?}?? ??vr ?}v ?????? E??]?]v ,??}? v.o ?????? E??]?]v E?]vP?}v t??,?v ?????? ^}??Z]vPr ?}v ,??}? 67  d?]???]?Z]v?Zo}o?U  ?Z]Z}u??]???o]v~]vo?]vP???o]v vh^^ oo??vu?v]]?o]??]v?Z?P]}v]??o?}???}?}vr ????]?Z??]????}?]???}}??? ?Z}}o??G??XdZ? ???]?U?Z]Z???? r ???]]?U]vP?????}??o??]?Z ?Z?P]}v[???o]?????]?X/v?P??}vu}vP?Z???r ?]?u?}+??]Pv].v?}??}???v]??(}?]u??}????}u? ???]U ?? ?} }?]P]v? v ??v?} v?U v }?? ??]vP? ?Z?}?PZ}v}u]?}(?oX ^???u? W?]???Z]o? ???  }( ??? W?]???Z]o? d?v??}???}v]v?Z?P]}v?l??Z?]o??}????Z??}u}r ]oX? &]P?? ?? 68  ~?X ??? u}v?????U??}?v?(}??Z }???Zou]vP ui}?]??}( ??v??}???}v ?? ]v ?Z ? P]}vX  D}?? }( ?Z ?uU ?Z? ?Z]o? ? ??lV Z}??? ?Zv ?Z??]v??U?Z?Pu?P]v?Z?u}?}Lv?Zvv}?}vr ?]v?]vPo?]??vv}???vP??XD}????}v???}}o ?Zv?]??v?]??}?}?l]v?Z?P]}vU??}?Z??o??o? ?? ?Zv}uvX dZ??}?}??}v}(?}?l???Z}}uu???}?Z]?i}????}r u}]oZ?ZvP}???uX,}???U}u??]?}v}( &]P?? ??  ?]?Z???}(? ol]vPU]l]vPUv??v?]??]]vP~ &]P?? ??  v &]P?? ?? U?X  ???  v ??? }?v}???ov}???Z]vP??v ?}??}v????o?(}?u}(??v??}???}vX tZ]o  ?Z??}( ?]?]vP]v??]v????U]??u??}}v?Z????]v????X ^uoo]v???}???Z???????o?}?Z}?v(}??ol]vPU ]l]vPUv??v?]?~]v?}uu?v]]?o]??X K??ooU?Z??v (?}u?????}??????v]v??]v?]vPo}?? v??Z]o ????Z??v?}(?ol]vPU]l]vPUv??v?]?V(?}u?????} ????U?Z???vZ??????}?}u??v?X 68  >Pvv?u??? (??}?Z???????U????Uv????U?????o?X ?(?}u?ZhX^Xv??????U????v???Uv???????Uvu?]v }uu?v]??^???????? r ????X K??ooU???}(?]?]vPU??]oo?}(?]vPo r }??v??Z]o? ~?]?]vPo}vU?u]v???Z]PZXdZ?}}??}(?Z?}}??Z}?]vP (}? ??}}o?U ?Z]Z ?o?vP ? ? 9  ?}?? ?Z ?P]}v ? ?v ????v????  ~ &]P?? ?? 69 U?X ??? v?ol]vPU]l]vPUv ??v?]??uv](}o??o]lo?]vo?U?]????}?U?or ???v?]v???uv?]vo??v????}?]?]vPU??oo??Z ?o}?uv?}( v?? ????v ov???Z? }? v}?ov ]??o(?}??}}o?}???v?]?Uu]P??}v}(i}?}??}(?Z ?P]}vUv?Z??v?]}v}(o}?v??]v?ou?l??XdZ? ]?Uv}?}vo?Z???]v???u}??}????]v r U?o]?? r Uv ??v?]? r ?v(?]vo?}8v]v????]o??l?}???]}(Z]??}? ] }?v?}?v?U???Z?o?}???Z]?u?o}??(?}uo?P? P}P??Z]o?U}?Z?}?l?ZX[ &]P?? ??  ~?X ??? ]oo?u]v???Z??v??}?Z]Z?}?lvo]( Z?]??PXtZ]o?Zui}?]??}(?}?v[?v]?v?}v 69  ?(?}u?ZhX^Xv??????U????v???vu?]v}uu?v]?? ^???????? r ????X ^???u? W ?]???Z]o? ???  }( ??? o]? v  ?}?l?]?Z]v]??}?v?]?U?}? 70  ?Z?]??Z? ]v }vo??v }(?Z ? ??[? ??? ?}?v? v ]??X? &]P?? ??  ?Z}??U}vo??Z]???}(?Z???}?]v}?PZu?o}?uv??}??r ]?(??Z??]v?o}?(}?~]XXU?o??}v  i}???}?l? ?Z}o]??]v?}?vX/v}?Z??}??U(??}v}(?Z^??[???r ]v??o]??]?Z]v?Z}???]?}(?Z]??}?lV?v(??o]? ?]?Z]v?olX W??}( ?Z]?u??]?U??}?]v?}v(?}U?G??]v]?]?o?[ o](???oZ}]?X^}u??(?v}??}o]?o}??}?}?lX,}?r ??U???}(]?u????o?(?}u???o]???]o]?]?u??v 70  ? (?}u ?Z hX^X v??? ???U KvdZD? ??o]?}v v >, K?]P]v r ??v?}v u?o}?uv? ^????? ~P]vv]vP }( ? ????  u?o}?r uv?U?vY???? U  ???? X u?o}?uv?U?Zo}?u?l?UvZ}??]vPX&}???]}???r ?}v?U ]vo?] vP ?o??]}v?? ?}v]vPU ??v??}???}v ????u?U u}vP}?Z??}o]]?v???]]?UZ}??]vPv??]v???? }Lv?????P??]??v?X tZ????Z??Uu}??}(}vv???[?u?v]]?o]?? v oo ?Z}??}?v?v]???Z]v?]v &]P?? ?? v Z?r }u?}}u??????}?uoov?u?}(?P]}vou?o}?r uv?v???W?Z/ r ??}??]}???vE?,?vvD?r ?Z???? ~??]oo? ,??}?U &?u]vP?}vU v ?Z ????? &]P?? ?? XW?v?}(?}?l??}uu??vP???}u}]o 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Berlin Bristol Burlington New Britain Plainville Plymouth Southington Drive alone 1990 Drive alone 2000 Drive alone 2013 Carpool 1990 Carpool 2000 Carpool 2013 ^???u? W?]???Z]o? ???  }( ??? v}??Z}( ,??}??}?o?/v??v?}vo]??}??U?Z}??}r ??v.vv]ov???}(?}??Z???&]?.o}?v??Uv?Z u?]?uUPuo]vPUv?Z?u??ov???}(?}??Z??r ?v}vv???X v??o}vv???]?v}???}v?}?Z]????vX &]P?? ?? ??  ?]??o]??Z}??vov?Z?]???]?X&?u]vP?} v????}??? ?X??i}?(}?Zuu?}(?Zo}?(}??Z}??]?]v ?}?vV]v}v????U?]??}oZ??X??Uv??o]vP?}vUu??X??X ??Z]v???}o?uv?]v]?U?]?Zv}v}(?Z?P]}v[?u?r v]]?o]????(}??o]v??}?]?i}???8]v?(?oo ??}u?o}? ]????]v??}?l(}?Xt]?Z??Z?P]}vo?Z}??Pv}??r oo????]]uov}(i}?UZ]PZ???}(}uu??vPUo?o? }(}vP??}vUv??v??}???}v??v????}???X ? &]P?? ??  ~?X ??? ?Z}??Uv}?Z?]v?Z?P]}v}?v}v ]v(}?? }(v??}?v[? u?o}? ??]v?? ?}?l ] v ?Z? ?u ?}?vX?]??}oZ??ZZ]PZ????u??v?}vU?]?Z??X?9}( ]??u?o}???]v???}?l]vP]v?}?vX??o]vP?}v~??}?o ???UP]?v]?????v?o}?uv????vZ??Z o}???U ?]?Z ?X?9X E? ?]?]v ??]o? ?]??}o ?  ????v? o u?P]vU???X?9XdZ]?]??????]?]vPUP]?v?Z]??[?v?U?olr o ??v (}?uV }?Z? ]?? ]v ?Z ??? ?Z]]? u?lo? Z]PZ????X~dZo}??}(u?Z}(E??]?]v[?}v}u]? v]????}?]u]??v?oov?Z]PZ??}vv?}v??}u?o}?r uv ?v???u???o]v?Z]?XK??ooU?Z???v?P???r ??v?o]v(?}u?o]???]}?X&?}u?????}????U?Z ?P]}vo}??i}?(}???]v??(????Zv]?P]v??]v??X &]Pr &]P?? ?? X:}?]v?}?v? ???]v??}?l? 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 &]P?? ?? XZvP]v??v?}(?}?l??}uu??vP? ??}}oU???? r ???? -60% -50% -40% -30% -20% -10% 0% ^???u? W?]???Z]o? ???  }( ??? ?? ??  ~?X ??? Z????Z??v?ZvP]v?Z(??}v}(ur ?o}???]v???Z}?}?l]vZu?v]]?o]??X&]P????vP  (?}u?X?9]v??o]vP?}v~?Z}vo?]v???} r ??X?9]v?o]v ~?ZP??????X/v}?Z??}??UP?}?]vPv?u???U ]?Z??v}?Z}]UZ?]vP?}P}}???]?Z?P]}v(}? ?}?lX tZ]o?Z]?????}vvo]??]v]?]?oZ}??Z}o??}u v.??U ??Z ? ?? ?} Z]PZ? r ?vl ?Z}}o?U ?Z ??? 71  Kvo?G}??}(?o????}Z?v?}uu??????]?X  ?(?}u?Z hX^Xv??????Uv???????X u}?v?}(???o]?v??]???v}????v?Z??v??}??r ?}v????uv]v????]Pv].v?}???(}??Z}v}u?U?}]r ??Uv?Zv?]?}vuv?X &]P?? ?? 71  ~?X ??? }vv???Z}????v?}?l??[}?]P]v? v??v?}v?X??Z.P??ul?o?U ‘???,??}?U ]vo?]vPv??o}vv???U]?}v}(?Z}uu?? r Z?]?? ????}(?Z???XKvo??Z/ r ??lE?,?v>]v}??]}?r ??v?ZE?z}?l???o]vv?Z,?v??]?o?]?(}?}ur u???}o?uX~>]v?Z]lv????u}o]???Zv?u?}( ?}?o ???o]vP ??v v? ??} u?v]]?o]??X dZ .P?? o?} &]P?? ?? XW?v? P}(?}?l]vP??]v???Z}?}?l]v?Z ?u?}?v &]P?? ?? XZvP]v??v?P}(?}?l]vP??]v???Z} ?}?l]v?Z?u?}?vU???? r ???? 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% -30% -25% -20% -15% -10% -5% 0% 5% 10% ^???u? W?]???Z]o? ???  }( ??? ?Z}???ZP?}(]v??}vv?}v]v’???,??}?v ?Z]??o??]?}vv?}v?}?ZE?z}?lu??}?}o]?v?W ?Z]o ,??}? v ]?? ????}?v]vP }uu?v]?? ? ? ?}r P?Z? ??Z]lo]v?U}vo??]???}v???v(?}uv????}(]??} E?,?vvt?????X &]P?? ?? ??  ~?X ??? vo?P??ZG}???}?Z}??]o??Z?r P]}voo?oXdZu?]v]???Z??Z}uu?v]??}(v??o }vv ??????}Z}?Z???oo?????}?v]vPu?r v]]?o]???}uu??G}??X~P]vUo]v?]?Z]???}?}??}vo ?}G}??}o?uU?]?Z?Z?Z]vv??o]v????v?vPG}?}( ??} r Z?v????}v?XdZZ?]??}uu??G}??]v?Z?r P]}v }?]v? ?}? ?Z??? r v}??Z??X dZ]? ]? }?v?? (}? ?Z Z??o?o?}(??8v}vP??}v}v?ZZ]PZ????Z??o? ?Z]?}??]}?Uv}?o?Z}????v??U/v???????Uv??ooo ???]o?X o?Z}?PZ?ZZ?]??G}??}?]v?v}??Z??Uv}????}? }uu???  ]v ?Z? ]??}vX Dv? ?}?o o?} ?}?l ?} ?Z ?}??ZXdZu}???}??o??}?l?o??v?}v?~]XXU?Z}?r v}???Z]lo]v??t?????UD?]vUvD]o?}?vU ??oo? v ?}?o]PZ?o?o?????v? v Z?Z]?vtoo]vPr (}?X’]?v?Z?]?}( ?Z?}uu?v]??U?Z]???}?]u]???}?Z ?P]}vUv?ZZ]PZ??]v(????????o]vl]vP?Zu?]?Z?Z?r P]}vU?Z????v???}???X &]P?? ??  ~?X ??? o?} ??o??]?o}uu??G}????vv]vP(?}u?}?v?]v?Z?r P]}v(??Z??}??Z?Zv?Z]?.?????}(??v?}v?XdZ?Z]lr ??}(?Z???v? ?}E?,?vU??G}???},uvvE}??Z ,?vU??oo??]P?}??Uv???UE}??olU^?u(}?Uv t???}???o?}?]?]oX ^???u? W?]???Z]o? ???  }( ??? D}??}(?Z?]??v?}?v?U?}P?Z??]?Z,??}?UZ? }uu}?]u?}??v??}uu????v?}v?(}??Z?r P]}v]v?v????X do ?? 72  ?Z }???Z??Z?uv?}(?Z? ??Z?????}?l??(?}u?Z?P]}vX^}u}(?Z? u?v??}?Z?}?l(}?U??P]?v?Zu?o}?uv?o}??? ?]v?]v?Z?o~oo}(?Z?P]}v?[u?v]]?o]??U???r o]vP?}v?Zi}?U]?]?u}?o]lo??Z ??Z?P]}v[??}?l?? ?  Z?]vP?}P}(??Z??}.v?}?l XdZ(]o??}(?Z?P]}v?} ??}?i}?(}?]???]??vPo}?(}?Uo?o}v(}?v??}?lr ??UZ???]}??]u?o]?}v?(}?^??[?o?? r ??v??v?r ?}???}v????uU??oo?(}??} ]??v?Zv?]?}vuv?U ??]oo?P]?v?Z??]???oo?oo?Z???ou???U?vr ??]??UZ??lv?Z(}?u}(??}u}]o?X~tol]vPv]lr ]vP?v}?(?]o}????ZP??]??v?VvU? /v?P?r ?}v?]?ZE?z}?l  v W?o]??v?]? U  ?X ??  v ??? U???r ??o? U]???? U??v?]?}vv?}v??}?Z?o}?}v??olr ]vPX 72  Kvo?G}??}(?o????}Z?v??}?l????Z}?vX?(?}u?Z hX^X v??? ???U KvdZD? ??o]?}v v >, K?]P]v r ??v?}v ur ?o}?uv?^?????~P]vv]vP}( ? ????  u?o}?uv?U?vY???? U  ???? X &]P?? ?? X}uu??G}???]?Z]v}vv??? ^???u? W?]???Z]o? ???  }( ??? &]P?? ?? X:}?]v?}?v????]v??}?l?~????] ^???u? W?]???Z]o? ???  }( ??? &]P?? ?? X}uu??G}???}l(?}u?Z?P]}v ^???u? W?]???Z]o? ???  }( ??? do ?? X d}?}uu????v?}v?(}??}?l??(?}u?Z ?P]}v D?v]]?o]?? t}?l?? (?}u?P]}v ZvPU ???? r ???? 9  }(oo?}?l?? (?}u?P]}v 9  ZvPU ???? r ???? ?]??}o ????? r ???? ??X?9 r ?X?9 E??]?]v ????? r ??? ?X?9 r ?X?9 ,??}? ????? ???? ?X?9 ??X?9 &?u]vP?}v ???? ?? ?X?9 ?X?9 ^}??Z]vP?}v ???? r ??? ?X?9 r ??X?9 Wo]v?]oo ???? r ??? ?X?9 r ??X?9 ?o]v ???? r ??? ?X?9 r ??X?9 E?]vP?}v ???? ??? ?X?9 ?X?9 t??,??r (}? ???? ??? ?X?9 ?X?9 t????? ???? ??? ?X?9 ??X?9 D]o?}?v ???? ?? ?X?9 ?X?9 D?]v ???? r ? ?X?9 r ?X?9 ??,??}? ???? r ?? ?X?9 r ?X?9 Z?Z]? ???? ??? ?X?9 ??X?9 too]vP(}? ???? ??? ?X?9 ??X?9 Z}l?,]oo ???? r ??? ?X?9 r ?X?9 o}}u.o ???? r ?? ?X?9 r ?X?9 t]v?}? ???? ?? ?X?9 ?X?9 E?,?v ???? ??? ?X?9 ??X?9 DvZ??? ???? ??? ?X?9 ?X?9 D?v]]?o]?? t}?l?? (?}u?P]}v ZvPU ???? r ???? 9  }(oo?}?l?? (?}u?P]}v 9  ZvPU ???? r ???? ?}v ???? r ?? ?X?9 r ?X?9 ^]u???? ???? r ?? ?X?9 r ?X?9 Wo?u}??Z ???? r ??? ?X?9 r ?X?9 ‘o??}v??? ??? ??? ?X?9 ??X?9 ?}u?oo ??? ?? ?X?9 ?X?9 d}??]vP?}v ??? r ??? ?X?9 r ??X?9 t?Z??.o ??? r ? ?X?9 r ?X?9 E}??Z,?v ??? ??? ?X?9 ??X?9 ^?u(}? ??? ?? ?X?9 ?X?9 ,uv ??? ??? ?X?9 ??X?9 ^}??Zt]vr ?}? ??? ?? ?X?9 ??X?9 v??? ??? r ? ?X?9 r ?X?9 t???}?v ??? r ?? ?X?9 r ?X?9 ??o]vP?}v ??? ?? ?X?9 ??X?9 D]o(}? ??? ?? ?X?9 ?X?9 E}??ol ??? ??? ?X?9 ??X?9 ?]P?}?? ??? ?? ?X?9 ?X?9 dZ}u??}v ??? ?? ?X?9 ?X?9 v?}v ??? ??? ?X?9 ??X?9 DvZ?v U Ez ??? ??? ?X?9 ??X?9 E?P??l ??? ? ?X?9 ?X?9 ^Zo?}v ??? ?? ?X?9 ?X?9 ^???u? W ?]???Z]o? ???  }( ??? D?v]]?o]?? t}?l?? (?}u?P]}v ZvPU ???? r ???? 9  }(oo?}?l?? (?}u?P]}v 9  ZvPU ???? r ???? v.o ??? r ?? ?X?9 r ?X?9 ^???}? ??? ?? ?X?9 ??X?9 t}o}? ??? ?? ?X?9 ??X?9 t???}?? ??? ??? ?X?9 ???X?9 s?v}v ??? ??? ?X?9 ??X?9 E}??]Z ??? ?? ?X?9 ??X?9 t]v?}? >}l? ??? r ?? ?X?9 r ??X?9 d??u?oo ??? ?? ?X?9 ??X?9 K?vP ??? ?? ?X?9 ??X?9 ^}??Z??? ??? r ?? ?X?9 r ??X?9 &]?.o ??? ?? ?X?9 ??X?9 ?v(}? ??? r ?? ?X?9 r ?X?9 ZK^ dZ????v??}?l]v?Z?P]}v]????}?]u?o??U???u]o?]v ovP?Zv}u??]??????Z]vP(?}u]???}??}o]u]? r r ??????????XDv??}?]v?Z?P]}v(oo?v??Z(r ?o]????u~???}?]u?o???X?9?u]oPX 73  do ??  ~?X ??? o]????Z?}?ou]oP}(?}?]v?Z????u??}?vU(?vr ?}voo??].?}vUv???ol??v??o]?X 73  d}?ou]oP(}?oo?}?v(?v? }voo? r o??].?}?u?o?r o?]+?v?o?X ??Z.P??? o}?  ]u?o?Uu]oP]?v}?oo}??vo?}v ???]??]??Z?}?PZ}???Z?P]}vXdZ]?]??}???U P]?v ?Z ]+?v? ]v o?o? }( ?o}?uv? u}vP  ?Z ?}?v?U ?Z]Z ?vP (?}u  v?U ??v v?]?}vuv? ~E? ?]?]v?}????o? r ?}??o????v}v~??o]vP?}vX &]Pr ?? ??  ~?X ??? ?Z}???Z??v??}?Z]Z?Zv?u?}(o]v? ?}(????]?~}?Z?}?ov}v? Z(?o????uU]XX (?v?}voo? r o??]. ?Puv?? ??]? ??v ?Z ?P]}v[? u?v]]?o]??X  74  ]????Z?E??]?]vv?]??}oU??]??? }(?Z]?v?]??U.?u}??}?o]v?}???v]?}(??vU? ?Z.P????Z}?U???v]?}(?}Xd Z]???o]v??Zo}???}? P??Z]v &]P?? ?? X/v?Zu?o??U??Zo}?v?u???v}? ?Z]vPV]vU?Z?]vP?Z?u??}???u}vPu}? ? }?o]??}o?}vP?}?v?}(.?o8]v?v?u?? P?}??ZX,}???Uu}?]v?v???o]??}vu?o?}??i?]vr (?????????}P?????????v??]?}??(???X W}??o?}vU?}P?Z??]?Z?Z]+?v?]vo]P]ou]oP? ?}?vUu?  ]v?????o]v?Z????v?o]v?? r u?v]]?o??]r ?}v]v(?o]?]???Z?P]}v[?]??v?}?v?}?? ?uX~^ &?o(?v]vP U?X  ?? U(}??]o?X 74  dZ?.P????G??Puv?ovP?Z}vo?Vv}?ov r u]o?}?}?Z?u?o?]r uv?]}vou????}(?}???]??X ^???u? W?]???Z]o? ???  }( ??? dZ&&/EKE’^d/ KE o?Z}?PZ??8iu?}l???Z?P]}v[?o]u]? r ???r ???????(?}u?u?}?uU}vP??}v]?v}?????]vP  ??}r ou(}??ZuX~dZv???Z}l?}]v??]v?Z^??[??????r ??????uv??}v]?? ?}v  ?Z?P]}v[?}?v?]?U XPX/ r ???Z?}?PZt?????vZ?Z]???oo???v t?? ,??}? v ??,??}?U / r ?? ??vt]v?}? v t?Z??.oUvZ}???]vD]o?}?vX &]P?? ??  v &]P?? ??  ~?X ???  v ??? U?????o?U?????o??Z}???8}vr ]?}v?(}??Z?P]}v??]vPD}v?u}?v]vPv&?]??vr ]vP???ZZ}???X??Zu???Z}?U?] ?Z?Z???}v}(?Z ????v ??u]v?? }( ?Z ??????? ??}v }( Z}?? ?? ]v Wo]v?]ooU ?Z]Z (?v?}v? ?  ?u?U ??? ? ? o?? ?? u]o???Z}???Z?}?PZ}???Z?P]}v[????????????uX tZv?Z??v?}(????]??}v?}??voo????}???U v}?i???o]u]? r ??????????U?Z?]???ZvP?u?lr o?X^}u?}???]}?vV?Z]o}?Z???}LvZ}l ?]?Z??8X &]P?? ??  ~?X ??? ]oo???????Z]??]?Z?}o?u r ?} r ?]????}?X~dZ?}v???Z??P ]o???8}v?} ???v?P}(?Z?]Pv?]??}(?Z?}V?ZZ]PZ? ?Z??}U?Zu}?Z?]o???8lv?}?v?oo?}vP?? 75  ???u??U?Z?.P????Z}?ov}????}i???(?}v?????}v??}r i??W?}o?u r ?} r ?]????}?}v}?v???]o??o??}o?o?}(}vP?r ?}v???]vX^}u?}????Z??Z]]?Z]PZ??}?u?}+?????]}? ?]?]vP???]v?Zv}v ??Z}???}v??o}??X ?Z?}]?X? &]P?? ??  ~?X ??? ?Z}??U?Z]o?}o?u r ?} r r ?]????}????o]vu?Z}(?Z?P]}vU??????}or ?uo??v?}????????] ??}v???o}(?Z?r P]}v[?l???v??}???}v}??]}??X }?]vP?}Kd??}i?}v?U?Z?]????]oo??]}??? ????XDi}??Z}?}?PZ(??]v?Z?P]}v?]oo?Z?]?oo?r o?U?]?Z?}o?u?}?}??]??XdZ???o??]oo o]lo? &]P?? ?? XZ}(??? ?]???}?v 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 On federal system Not on federal system ^???u? W?]???Z]o? ???  }( ??? ????]vP}vP??}v??lZ}???U](v}???]vP?Zv???X ??]vPv?o?P r ?o?]????v?]}vU]u?ouv??}v}( ??v??}???}vuvuvPuv?????P]?~dD}????]? ov r ??}v??}o?U}???}?]?]}v}(o??v????}?]?]vP U]?]??r ???Z?}??????u}(?Z?P]}v?]ooZ?]???X[dZ]?]? v]?Z??v]??v}??????]?]vPW??8]??Z??]?o???o?}( ?Z ?v????]vo ??} r v??] ???v? }( ?o}?uv? ?Z? ?Z?P]}vvU]vUu}??}(?Zv?}vZ?????? }???Z o?????o?X’]?v?Z]v(?]]o]??}(?]????vr ?]}v]v?P]}v??o}??v??o}vv???U](dDv ??v??}???}v}??}v??v}??}oo}??U]?]?v?]???Z? v ???u]vP?Z?Kd[?}?v??v??}i?}v??? ?? ?? v ?}??v]vP ??8 ?]oo ??]}??o? ]u?]? ?Z ??o]?? r }( r o]( v }v}u]?oo]vP}(?Z?P]}vX??Z??]vPu??ul o?U??}?}v}?}vo?? ????}??v?Puv?V?Z?o?} ZvP}???uX?????UZ}???U oo  ????}???]v?Z?r P]}v????U??U??U???U???Uv????]oov?U?U}?}? ?]??XdZ]?]vo??u?Z}(?Z?P]}v[????????u]oP do ?? X&?v?}voo??].?}v}(?}? d}?v &?v?}voo?? Z??o  u]X h?v  u]X d}?ou]X ?o]v K?Z?&???}???????? ?X?? ?X?? K?Z?W?]v]?o???]o ??X?? ??X?? D]v}????]o ?X?? ??X?? ??X?? }oo?}? ??X?? ??X?? Di}? }oo?}? ?X?? ?X?? D]v}?}oo?}? ?X?? ?X?? ?o]vd}?o ?X?? ??X?? ??X?? ?]??}o K?Z?W?]v]?o???]o ??X?? ??X?? D]v}????]o ??X?? ??X?? }oo?}? ??X?? ??X?? ?]??}od}?o ??X?? ??X?? ^???u? W?]???Z]o? ???  }( ??? d}?v &?v?}voo?? Z??o  u]X h?v  u]X d}?ou]X ??o]vP?}v K?Z?W?]v]?o ???]o ?X?? ?X?? D]v}????]o ?X?? ?X?? ?X?? }oo?}? ?X?? ?X?? Di}?}oo?}? ?X?? ?X?? D]v}?}oo?}? ?X?? ?X?? hvo??].~>}oh?P ?X?? ?X?? ??o]vP?}vd}?o ?X?? ??X?? ??X?? E??]?]v /v????? ?X?? ?X?? K?Z?&???}???????? ?X?? ?X?? K?Z?W?]v]?o???]o ?X?? ?X?? D]v}????]o ??X?? ??X?? }oo?}? ??X?? ??X?? Di}?}oo?}? ?X?? ?X?? E??]?]vd}?o ??X?? ??X?? Wo]v?]oo /v????? ?X?? ?X?? K?Z? &???}???????? ?X?? ?X?? K?Z?W?]v]?o???]o ?X?? ?X?? D]v}????]o ??X?? ??X?? }oo?}? ?X?? ?X?? hvo??].~>}oh?P ?X?? ?X?? ^???u? W?]???Z]o? ???  }( ??? d}?v &?v?}voo?? Z??o  u]X h?v  u]X d}?ou]X Wo]v?]ood}?o ??X?? ??X?? Wo?u}??Z K?Z?W?]v]?o???]o ?X?? ?X?? D]v}????]o ?X?? ?X?? }oo?}? ??X?? ??X?? Di}?}oo?}? ?X?? ?X?? Wo?u}??Zd}?o ?X?? ??X?? ??X?? ^}??Z]vP?}v /v????? ?X?? ?X?? K?Z?&???}???????? ?X?? ?X?? K?Z?W?]v]?o???]o ?X?? ?X?? D]v}????]o ??X?? ??X?? }oo?}? ??X?? ??X?? D]v}?}oo?}? ?X?? ?X?? ^}??Z]vP?}vd}?o ?X?? ??X?? ??X?? ‘?vd}?o ??X?? ???X?? ???X?? ^???u? W?]???Z]o? ???  }( ??? &]P?? ?? X?????????8UD}v?U?W??D ^???u? W?]???Z] o? ???  }( ??? &]P?? ?? X ?????????8U&?]?U?W??WD ^???u? W?]???Z]o? ???  }( ??? &]P?? ?? Xs}o?u?}?]????}?U???? ^???u? W?]???Z]o? ???  }( ??? &]P?? ?? Xs}o?u?}?]????}?U????~??}i? ^???u? W?]???Z]o? ???  }( ??? WZ</E' E}]v?v?}??}(??l]vP????o?vuvZ ?v?v?r ?lv]v?Z?P]}vU?}}vo??]}v??]8?o??}?ZX? ??}vv}?o?]vU]??????Z?U?]?Z(????}v?U ?Z?]?v}??l]vP?Z}??P]v?Z?P]}vX/(v??Z]vPU]vuv? ??U??l]vP(]o]??u?Z?v}???]o?X  K????}?]?]}v }(v???}??]?}Lv}?v????}???U??]?oUu]v?r vvUv}??}???v]??}????]v?}o?Xv??.]o???(]? }(??l]vPU?Z]Zu?v]]?o}?]vv?}Lv(}??o}??? ?}?]oU}LvZ?vP??}v???v?U??]v P?Z}?? }(????Z]o]v??]vP}?Z?}???XdZ]????o??]v??.]oo? r o??o?o?}(?]?]vPU?]?Z]???vv?]oo?~??8}vP?r ?}vU]?U???Uvv}]??}oo??}vV??8}vP??}vV??ZuU ?????U}?]??Uv?]}???o?]? ?Vo}??}(}?v?? ??oo?}uu?v]???Z???v(?]vo??}????]v?v ?o]???X d?}??l]vP???]?Z?v}v??]vv??o}vv?r ??]v?Z???(????XdZ.???????Zv??o}vv?r ??^??hv]???]??]vE??]?]vX dZ??????Z}??Z?? o????9}(?Z??l]vP???Uv}Lv}????9U???]or o?v?P]?v?uXdZ?}?PZ}??u}??}(?Z?U?o?? ?U?????}???u???XdZ?}v??????]v?ZWov???]oo ??}v}(^}??Z]vP?}vXdZ?????Z?]u] o????o??U?Z}?]vP ?Z? ??l]vP??o]??}v???(}??????]v}????9X /v?}u??]v]?]?o?????]vZ]PZ????~???} ??9X WZKd^ dZ}?PZ(???l]vP?v??}?]??Z?]?]vP??U??lv ?]o}??vo}??  ?Z]ou]o????oXKdu]v?]v????o ??lv?]o}??]vv?}?v?Z?P]}vXdZ?o}??oo}? }uu?????}u?(}???}}o?v?}}?o}ov????? ???XdZ?o?}???]u?}??v?}+ r ?l???}u??U?}}U??Z ? ???}v? ?v??}??] vP (}? ?Z? ]v????? ?Puv?? }v u] r  ?}o}vP r ]??v??]??X do ??  o]????Z??lv?]o}??}(?ZP??????}o??? ?} }uu?????}v(?}uv??o}vv???V}?????o]r ??}v]?o?}P]?vX??Z?o??o?U??lv?]o}???]?Z ?ZZ]PZ????o]??}v?o}??????????u??~Z]G? / r ??U??o?}Z}???X^??o}(?Z?o}????Z]??r ] ??}v(???v??]?Uv?]vP}uu?????Z]o]???}??l v?Z?(}??]U]?Z????}}o}???v?]?XtZ??}??]oU ?Z]?WovZ}o??Z???v?]}v}(o}????]??vl}??Z?r ?}v}(v?o}???}????Z?uv~XPX??}?}?v?Z  Z]PZ???v?]?}???}?Z}?o}v?]?X ^???u? W?]???Z]o? ???  }( ??? do ?? XW?lv?]o}??}(???}?Z?P]}v D?v]]?o]?? >}?}v ??]??? 76 ?]?? }?v? 77 ? ? ? ? ??P ??o]??}v 78 ?o]v }? W ?? ? ?? ?? ? ??9 ?]??}o Z}?????~D]o^?X?>l?X W> ?? hl hl hl hl v 79 ?]??}o d}^?X hl 80 ?? ?? ??? hl v Z?Z]? / r ???Z}????~?]??? W>d ??? ?? ?? ?? ?? ??9 Z?Z]? Z}????U,u]Xv}??Z}(/ r ???~?]?? W>d ??? ?? ?? ?? ?? ??9 &?u]vP?}v / r ??U&]vuvvZX~?]??? W>d ?? ?? ?? ?? v ??9 &?u]vP?}v Z}???/ r ????~?]??? d ?? ?? ? ?? ?? ??9 &?u]vP?}v Z}????^?XD????Z??Z W> ?? ?? ?? ?? ? ??9 &?u]vP?}v Z}????d}?v&?uZX >^ ?? ?? ?? ?? ?? ??9 E??]?]v Z}?????}??Z  }(t??&?u?Doo W>^ ??? ?? ?? ?? v ??9 Wo]v?]oo ‘?>??Z?vZ??Z E}? ? ? ? ? v ^}??Z]vP?}v / r ???Z}????~?]??? W>d ??? ?? ?? ?? ?? ??9 76  WW??V>Wo]?VdW?o?Z}vV^W?Zo??VW??????????]VWo}o?????]VZW?]o???]VZZ^W?]o?}??? ]X 77  ^]vPo r ?u?}]v??Z]o}?v??(?}u?Z(}oo}?]vP?}???W?U]?[??U]vPD??V?U?] oU]vPD??V?U^?oo]?U’}}PoD??V?U^???s]?U’}}Po D??X 78  ?}???(?}u}?v??? r ?X 79  dZ]?o}????o}?U?}??u?Z?v??.]oo?????X 80  hv?}v?????}vX ^???u? W?]???Z]o? ???  }( ??? ^}??Z]vP?}v Z}??????t?????d??v?]l W> ??? ?? ?? ?? ?? ??9 dZ}u??}v Z}????Z}???~?]??? W>d ?? ?? ?? ?? ?? ??9 ^&dzE^ddh^ /Ed^ Kd??o??]v??}v^??Z]PZ???X]v????? o?o?}v???Z]o r u]o?]?v}u???}?]?o ]v???(}?P]?vo}?}vX 81  ^Z}?o?Z??o]v? ????Z?]?o]v???Uv?o??. Lv]r v??Z?}???U?P]?vo}?}vU?ZZ]PZ??}(]r v??]?u?}?????oo??]Pv].v?~]XXU??}o?v}? G?lUv?Zo}?}v]??}Kd[?^?PP??>]??}( ^???]oov^]??~^>K^^X &]P?? ??  ~?X ??? ?o}??oo?}?Pr uv??v]v????}v?]v?Z^??Z]PZ??????u?Z??}v ?Z^>K^^X>]v?v?}]v?????}?}??}vo?}?Z??}}(?Z ??o?}?Z?]?o]v???U?}?Z ?Z]l??Zo]v}? ?}]v?U?Zu}????}?]v???Z??]?X ??Zu??Z}??U  82  ?]???]?Zv}?uoo?Z]PZ]v???? (oo]v?}?Z?????U]v}??}(?v]vP???ovW ?X }uu?]o ???]??X >v r ?? ]?]}v? ? u?v]]?o]?? Z?o?}u? ?]??o}?uv?}vui}??Z}?}?PZ(??X 81  dZo??]?}u?????Z?? r v?u???o]??}v??}ou ?Z}X 82  ?(?}uKd[?d?8]v?^???]oovZ?}??U???? r ????U(}??Zv??o}vv???ZP]}vX dZ]??o}?uv?Z???}u]vv?o??lv?Z(}?u}(???]? ??]oXtZ]o??Z?o}?uv?v????}??u?v]]?o]??[? P?vo]??U]?o?}]u?]???Z??o]??}(?Z^??[?v?u? ?}??????v??}???}vv??} ?lX^??]???]ov}?}vo?Pvr ???o?Pu}?}??Z]o??8?}o?u?X/?o?}?v??} ??}???}o](??}vv?u?}?????v]vPu}?uv??v ov?U?????U?]Pvo?Uv??}??]vPU?Z]Z]u??Z ?(v8]v?G}?}(?Z]?o??Z?}?PZ r ??8 vv}v r u}?}?]???v??}???}v??Z??ol]vPv]l]vPXZ]PZ ]v]v}(]v??]?}v???vX?u?o?}(vr P?}?????]??]v?Z?P]}v]vo?Z}?????]vE??]?]v ??v}?]v?v?vZ????]v?v?UZ}???]v ?]??}oUZ}?????  ]vWo]v?]ooUvZ}?????v???]v ^}??Z]vP?}vX ?X Zu??U]v??ZvP?Uvv?]?}v?X??}Z]PZ??8?}or ?u?U(???v????v]vPu}?uv??Uvo?P]???]??]v ??U???????????u??U]v??ZvP?Uv?Z?}? ?Z?(]v?}U??]oo? ?Zv?Z??}uu?]o???]?? vu?o?ovZ]PZ???Uo?}?v?}?Z?]?}(v}?r uoo?Z]PZ]v????XdZ?u????vZ}????v ^???u? W?]???Z]o? ???  }( ??? ?? ?}??Z }( t???u? Doo ]v E? ?]?]vU ?Z Z}?? ??l????u??v???????????u]v??]vWo]v?]ooU? Z / r ??l??  ]v??ZvP ]v Wo]v?]ooU ?Z / r ??l??? ?u?? ]v ^}??Z]vP?}vUv?ZZ}????l???]v??ZvP]v?o]v?r u?o](??Z]?X ?X Z??o v o}?? r ??8 ?}? ?]?Z ?]Pv ??}ou?X o?r Z}?PZ]v(???v?U??]v?}?]v?Z?P]}v??+?(?}u ?]Pv]??? ??Z?U?Z]o?Z?}v}??v??Z?}?v?( ???Uu?]?}v??}?]v??]????}}????Z]??r Z]o?]vv?v?(uvv?XdZ?]vo??Z????r ?}v?}(Z}?????v?]v??o]vP?}vU??oo?Z}??? ???}Z]vP?ZWo?u}??Z?}?vo ]vUv???o]v???r ?}v?]v?Z?P]}v~XPX?ZZ}????v???]v??o]vP?}vU Z}?????vE}??Z????]?]vWo]v?]ooUZ}????v ?? Z} ]v ?]??}oU Z}??? ??? v t}}ov ^??? ]v ?]??}oUZ}?????v??^???]vE??]?]vUv ?Z Z}??????]? r ??]v????}v]v?o]vX hv(}???v?o?U}u??o]v??(}?o}o?}?]?v}? ?]ooX?}v???vU?Z]o?Z^>K^^u????} i???(??(??]u??}?uv??U]??Z}?ov}??????Z?}o?]r ??]}vX~d}??}?] ???]?(}???}i??o??}vv?r o?}vU?Z]?Wov??}?}???} /u??}??}oo?}v U?X ??  ^???u? W?]???Z]o? ???  }( ??? &]P?? ?? X^]???]?Zv}?uoo?Z]PZ]v???? ^???u? W?]???Z] o? ???  }( ??? WsDEdKE/d/KE dZ?P]}v[???v??}???}vv??}?lu???uo]??o?}?? ????uU???vo]l???]?v?]v?U]? }?v}?Zo]??o(X/(]? ]??}}v?v?(?v?}v]vP]v?(U8]v?uvv?U]?u??? u]v?]vXZ}?ul???Zo?P?????}(?Z??v??}??r ?}v v??}?l vU ? ??ZU ???]? ?Z u}?? ?v?}v ~v (?v]vP]v}???}u]v?]v?Zu]v ??o}v]?}vX Z}u]v?vv?Z?o????u]v?}v??r uv?}v]?}vXdZ??}??]u??u??]?Kd????}???? ??uv? }v]?}v ? ?Z W?uv? }v]?}v /v? ~W/ v/v??v?}voZ}?PZv??/v?~/Z/X 83  Kdu????v ?}??  ??uv??(}????u]o?}(?}?Puv??]v?Z ?P]}vX do ??  P]???]PZ???P?}(?Z??uv?}vr ]?}vu??]?}(?Z?}?Puv??]v  Z?}?vv?Z?P]}v ??Z}oXdZ.P???]v]??Z??Z?}?]v?Z?P]}v? Pv?oo?(]??}P}}Uo?Z}?PZ?Z?]???]?}vu}vP?Z ?}?v?X??o]vP?}v?}??]v?Z??}v]?}vU?Z]o?]??}o ?}??vl?Z?}}???X~dZ?? ??]?(?}u}vo? ?u?o }( ?} ?Puv?? v ?Z}?o  ]v????? }?r ]vPo?XE}?}?Puv??Z?W/o}???Zv?U?????Pr uv?????}???}Z?v/Z/Z]PZ??Zv???U?Z]Zul? 83  dZW/]?v?u?]o]v???v?v??Z?u?????Z???????o }???}vo}v]?}v}(?Z??uv?X/?]??????ou???v ?r ??]??uv?o?????}(?Z??uv?XdZ?o?}v?Z]???vW/v ?Z}??oo??vP}(?Z??uv?]??Z}?v]v?Z?oo}?X ?ZuZ?v??oX[dZ?oo?}P]???Z??P ??uv? ??U ?Z]Z ????v?? ?Z uv ? }( o?? ??]vP (}? oo u????Puv??]vZ?}?vXKv??P?Z??uv?}v ?Z?}???]v?Z?P]}v]?}???v???}oX do ?? XD?????uv?}v]?}v??}?v D?v]]? o]?? ??P W/ ??PX /Z/  ~]vXlu]X ?PX W?uv? z? ?o]v ?X?? ???X?? ????X? ?]??}o ?X?? ???X?? ????X? ??o]vP?}v ?X?? ???X?? ????X? E? ?]?]v ?X?? ???X?? ???? X? Wo]v?]oo ?X?? ???X?? ???? X? Wo?u}??Z ?X?? ???X?? ????X? ^}??Z]vP?}v ?X?? ???X?? ????X? ZP]}v ?X?? ???X?? ????X? Z/’^ ?]P??v]v?P?o???}(v???v??}???}v????uU}?Z ?} ?}?? ov (???? v ?} ??}?] P? ????}v }?? dZ/Z/]????}.vZ???]??}(?Zo}vP]??]vo??}.o}(???r o ?Zo??l v }v??????  ?? v?]? ?}?PZv?? u???uv?X dZ]v?]?u???]v]vZ???u]oXdZ&,to??v/Z/??r o](]?]?o???Zv???vP}}](]?]??v???X ^???u? W?]???Z]o? ???  }( ??? }?Z???v??}???}v]v(????????XdZ??????]P??}?o ]v ?Z ?P]}vX E]v?? r ??v }( ?Z? Z?  ??v }( ? o?? ??v??(?U?Z]Z]??Zu]v]u?uv????]v}???}??o](? (}?(?o(?v]vPX,]PZu??]ovo}?]v????ul?]P?  }??o??}?]ov??]?VZ}???U?Z?]?l?P]vP?]P??}? o?}uv??Z????]??(??u}v]?}?]vPvU?Zvoo(}?U ?Z]o]??}v }? ??ouv?X Kd ]v???? v ]???? ??8r ]v???vP?(}?oo?]P?]v?Z?P]}vX do ??  ~?X ??? P]?? v }???]? }( ?Z ?P]}v[? ?]P ??}l ? u?v]]?o]??X ~ ?]P? U?X ??? Uo]???oo?]P?]v?Z?P]}v}(?o????v?? (?X t]?Z ]v?Z?P]}v??Z?Z]??}?]?]P?W ?X E??]?]vW???? v }v???Z?]P}v^?vo?Y??r ??W?lZ}X ?X E??]?]vW???? v }v???Z?]P}v^?vo?W?l Z}^_X ?X Wo?u}??ZW???? v }v???Z?]P}vd?vvoZ}U oov^???v^}??Z D]v^???X 84 dZ ??]u?? ??}v? ?]P? ??]}?? ? ??Z?U o}?U ?}o?u}(??8Uv]]vP}???}v?X??]P??]}r ???U]??}v]?}v??vP?P??oo?o]v?}?}}?XW??v?? u]v?vvv??v?Z??(?oo](}(???????  ????vr ?oo?X,}???Uui}??Z]o]??}v}???ouv??]oo?o?r u?o?  ???]?X tZv  ??????? ?]??  ?}}? ??8r ]v???vPU?Z?]P]?]v?.?v]?(}??Z]or ]??}v}???ouv?X 85  do ??  ~?X ??? o]???oo??Z?]P? ]v?Z?P]}v?}(??]?vPX do ?? X?]P??u?v]]?o]?? ?]PovP?Z ?o]v ?]??}o ??o]vP?}v E??]?]v Wo]v?]oo Wo?u}??Z ^}??Z]vP?}v ZP]}v E?u? }(?]P? D??LX ?? ?? ?? ?? ? ?? ?? ??? H??LX ?? ?? ? ?? ? ?? ?? ?? 84  }vv???,]??}?]?]P/v?v?}??U&]voZ?}??W/v?v?}??WZ?X^?? }(dU???uv ?}(d?v??}???}vXu?U????X 85   ?]P?]?Z ??8]v???vP}(o???Zv????v?]?o]P]o(}??r Z]o]??}v X  Kv?]?Z??vP}( o???Zv?? ]? o]P]o(}???ouv?X ^Z}?o?Z?]Pu ??(?o U?Z?]P]???}P?uu (}?  ?Z]o]r ??}v}???ouv?X~^}u?]P?u?v}o}vP?v????X dZ]?v ?l???o??? ??}?}]ovv?]?}vuv?o]??????oo?oPov vP]v?]vP }v?v??Z?u?????? ??]}??} }v?????}vX / v]??vP ?Z]???}??  ?Zv?Z.????}}???vP]?]v?. Pv?oo? oo}????8]v? ?u(}??]Pvv}v?????}vX ^???u? W?]???Z]o? ???  }( ??? oo ?? ?? ?? ?? ? ?? ?? ??? ??P ??8]v???vP D??LX ??X?9 ??X?9 ??X?9 ??X?9 ??X?9 ??X?9 ??X?9 ??X?9 H??LX ??X?9 ??X?9 ??X?9 ??X?9 ??X?9 ??X?9 ??X?9 ??X?9 oo ??X?9 ??X?9 ??X?9 ??X?9 ??X?9 ??X?9 ??X?9 ??X?9 ??Pd D??LX ???X? ???X? ??X? ???X? ???X? ???X? ???X? ???X? H??LX ?U???X? ?U???X? ???X? ?U???X? ?U???X? ???X? ?U???X? ?U???X? oo ?U???X? ?U???X? ???X? ?U???X? ?U???X? ???X? ?U???X? ?U???X? ??P ???]o? D??LX ????X? ????X? ????X? ????X? ????X? ????X? ????X? ????X? H??LX ????X? ????X? ????X? ????X? ????X? ????X? ????X? ????X? oo ????X? ????X? ????X? ????X? ????X? ????X? ????X? ????X? do ?? X?]P??]?Z?}}???8]v???vP? E}X d}?v &?????] &????}?? >}?]}v z? ?]o? z? ?}vX /v???X? Z?]vP ???? ?o]v ??vZu^?X ^?ZZ]?? ???(?X???}(Z?X??? ???? ???? ?l?l???? ??X??9 ???? ?o]v &?u]vP?}v?X ^?ZZ]?? ???(?X(?}ui?X?lZ?X??? ???? ?l??l???? ??X??9 ???? ?]??}o :?}u?X EP?},]oo?}}l ???(?X?}??Z}(}}o]P^?X ???? ??l?l???? ??X??9 ???? ?]??}o Z}?? ?? ~D]v^?X W???lZ]?? ??vX Z]???]?X?^Z}}o ^?X ???? ?l?l???? ??X??9 ???? ?]??}o D?o?X W}ol?]oo?}}l X??u]X??}(Z?X?? ???? ?l??l???? ??X??9 ???? ?]??}o Du}?]oo?X W???lZ]?? K??W???lZ]?? ???? ???? ?l??l???? ??X??9 ???? ??o]vP?}v s]v?? ZX ??o]vP?}v?}}l ???(?X???}(Z?X? ???? ?l??l???? ??X??9 ^???u? W?]???Z]o? ???  }( ??? E}X d}?v &?????] &????}?? >}?]}v z? ?]o? z? ?}vX /v???X? Z?]vP ???? E??]?]v W?oDv(}???X ^??u ?X?u]???}(i?X?lZ?X??? ???? ???? ?l??l???? ??X??9 ???? E??]?]v l?U D]???U v W]. }?? ?}???X ~u]?o?U ?}u}??}?vvU]v????o?U]v}?v(?]PZ?o?}???? ?Z?o}?}v?XdZ]?]v]???Z??Z?P]}v[?}?Z?Z]PZ???U ?v??????????Z??U ??Uv/ r ???U?}(o]u]???o]?? ?}?Zu??}(?Z?}?PZ(?]PZ?X &]P?? ??  ~?X ??? ?Z}??????}?????Z??v?P}(?r Z]o? ?Z? ? ???l?X /v?????? ?? v ??? ?Z]]? ?Z]o u]???]?Z?ZP??????}?}??}v}(???l?XZ}?????v ?? v ??? v Z}?? ??? o?} ?}???? }? r ??P Z]PZ ???l?Z??U?}?Z}?????}??Z}(<v?]vP?}vXo?Z}?PZ }?Z??}???]v?Z?P]}vu?v}????o?Pu}?v?}( (?]PZ?]v?}o????u?U???l?}}?v?(}??]Pv].v???}r ?}??}v}(?Z?Z]o??Z????o}v?ZuX &]P?? ??  o?}?]???ZZ]??}?]?]ov??}?l]v?Z?P]}vXdZ ?]o?}? ?Z? (??] ???vP?? ? ??] ?v? Z]o  ~ ? X ???  o?} ??] (?]PZ?X Z]o?}? ????? ?Z? ]v??}vr v??}????Z?}?PZ?Z?P]}vW ?X ?]P?}???Z?}?PZt?????v}?ZE?]vP?}vv <v?]vP?}v ~?]t???]ooU,v}ll'????}vUW ???lU?]??}oU &}????]ooUWo]v?]ooUvE??]?]v ?X E?,?v?}^??]vP.o ~?]D?]vUZdWX dZ >ZdW]?]v?v?}(}??]?r ???]}v?]v?Z?P]}v?]v?(?]vP???v?v(????v? ]v??u?}(Pv?o v??]. ZvP??}?Z??v??}???}v ????uX dZ >ZdW  }??? ?? r ?? ??]}~??? ? r ????(}??Z]? }?uv?vu??????v}?????(}?????X dZ o?? >ZdW??}??]vD?????X dZ >ZdW  ????? ?Z?]?(}?uv?}?Z?DWK +}?? ?U]vr o?]vP ?Zd?v??}???}v/u??}?uv?W?}P?u~d/WX  dZd/W ]? ?Z?Z?o(}??Z??v]vP}((?o (?v? }v??v??}??r ?}v]v?Z?P]}v}?? .? r ????]}X  dZ d/W ?]??(?}u ?Z]?WovU]v?Z(}?u}(??o??}i???]?Z??]Pv (?v]vPX WZKhd/KEE/DW> DEdd/KE dZ Wov]??Z??}??}(}oo}??}v??v DWK U ]?? uu? ?Uv?Z??o]X~DWK [? W?o]W??]??}vWov  ?]o?  ?Z??o]]v?}o?uv???}???Z DWK  (}oo}??]v?Z ?o}?uv?}(?Z]?WovXdZ]?Wo vZ?v]v(}?u??r ??Zvvo??]???oo?}v??o??}v?]?Z??lZ}o?? ?Z?}?PZ}?? ?Z ?P]}vX ~ DWK  P?Z? ]v??? (?}u ?Z ]r ???P?}????Z?ul???Z?P]}v?]??]??}(uv?V }?v?? }( ?Z]? }v??o??}v v  (}?v ]v ?Z } ?uv? W?o]]v???}v?Z>}vP r ZvPd?v??}???}vWo v(}?v??o }vv???U???? r ???? X W????}v}(?ZWov]????}v]v ?Z}u??Zv?]?U}v?v?]vP U  v}}?]v???v??}???}v ?ovv]vP??}P?u  ????DWKX  d} v??? ?Z? ?Z Wo v ?u]v ? v ??U o]?]vP }?uv?U DWK  u}v]?}???Z?P]}v}vv}vP}]vP?]?XdZPv?[? ??]???}?Z]?v]vo?W ?X /v?(?]vPU ??v?(?]vPU v ??]}?]??]vP ??v??}???}v v?]v?Z?P]}v ?X ?o}?]vP??}?}?o?v????v]?]vP??}i?? ?X t}?l ]vP?}????Zv??Wov??? ?X }}?]v?vP  ?]?Z  Kdv}?Z?^??v?P]}voPvr ]? U ?Z &?o ,]PZ?? u]v]????}vU ?Z &?o d?v?]?u]v]????}vU?Z?P]}v[? uu??U v ]????v?r ?}???}v??}?]?? lP?}?v ^??????v??}?? ???  }( ??? Kd,ZW>EE/E’ /v ]?}v?}?Z> ZdWvd/WUDWK  ?v??l???]??}( }?Z??ovv]vP??l?XdZ?  ??l?  ???oo}??]v?]o]v?Z Pv?[?hv].Wovv]vPt}?lW?}P?u~hWtWXdZhWtW o??}???Z??v??}???}v?ovv]vP??]???ZPv??r ????}?v??l}????} r ????]}XdZ???v?hWtWU ?Z]Z }????Z???? r ????.?o?? U??v?}vP}]vPv}v r ?u??]??U}?Z??]o??}i??[XDv?}(?Zo??}??r ??}v?}??}i??]v?.]v?Z]?WovXdZ?]vo?W Z???]vP??]?? ?X W???]vU?o]?? Uv?Z]?o???8}?v?? ?X }vP??}vu}v]?}?]vP ?X d?v??}???}v???]? ?X ^????ov??v????vo??? Kv r ?u??]?? ?X ZP]}vo]?o?ovW?o}?uv?}(?P]}v r ?]]?o ?}???U ]vo?]vP  u??? u? v ?}uuv ???r uv??U(}? ]u?ouv??}vXdZ?}????]oo}vv?}?vr ?}?v?U?}?vv???Uvui}???v?}v?~XPX}uu?r ]ovu?o}?uv?Z??U??oo?o]vl???]?Z?]??vP ??]o?vv]PZ}?]vP?P]}v?X ?X v??o }vv??? ^?? hv]???]?? d?v??}???}v WovW }v?v ?]u?ouv??}v}(}u??Zv?]??o??}v}( ?Z?v]???]??[???v??}???}v????uv?ov(}?ul]vP Z]PZ???}vu}???]ov+}?oU??]vP }vP??}vUvvZv]vP8]v?v????]v]o]??X ?X  d?v?]? }uu?v]?? }ooP d?v??}???}v WovW }u??r Zv?]? ?o??}v }( ?Z }ooP[? ??v??}???}v ????u v?ov(}?ul]vPZ]PZ???}vu}???]ov +}?oU ??]vP }vP??}vU v vZv]vP 8]v? v????]v]o]??X ?X ??o]vP?}vd}?vv??????W?? ??}(]u??}?uv???} Z}????v????oo?iv??}?v]v????}v? ?}(]o]?????}?Z?ovv?}?vv??v]u??}? ?(??Xd}???]?v?U????]v r (?]vo??u}??Z? v??}vP??}vU(}?uv]v??vo]??o?}v?] oo }v?]?????}(?Z??}i?X ?X &?u]vP?}vvo,?]?Pd?]oP?o}???W?ov?}?o?P ?ZP?]vWo]v?]oov^}??Z]vP?}vXdZ?ov]?]v?v ?}?ou]v?]v?Z?o?}(.vo?]Pv?}?Z??Z??}i? v?v?}?Z}v?????}v? ?PX ?X Wo?u}??ZZ???}]???]o}vv?}vW?ov(}?v?o?}v }(  .vo ?}?? ?} o]vl ?Z ????}]? ??}???? ?]?Z ?Z dZ}u??}vuv?ZE?P??lZ]??’?v??U}vr v?vP?Z?}?v?}ui}?u?o? r ????]oXdZ]???}i??]oo  }u?o???ZE?P??lsoo?}?v]o}(’}??vr uv??]v???v??Z]??]?Z?Zd}?v}(Wo?u}??ZX lP?}?v v?]?}vuv?ov?}]o}v?v? ???  }( ??? v?]?}vuv?o v?}]o }v?v? tZ]o??v??}???}vvvv]v]??o( v ?}?]?}?o?? ??]???V??vv??Ui}PP??U?ol??Vv??? }vo?]o}??U?]or }??Uv?o]??? 86 v ?vo?P]?????? uv?  ?}vvX /vU?Z?}?PZu?]vZ]??}??U}v}u]?o}?uv?Z? ??}}??Z??]u??v}(??v??}???}vXdZ]????]??G? ]v?Z?}(?Z?o??o]?U?}?lUv?o?U (?}u?}?????Z u}??Z?}(?]???U?}]???ui}??]o?}i?v?}v?U?}}ur u?]o ???]?? v o????? }v ???]o? v ? ??????? ?u??X tZ]ov}?oo??v??}???}v??}i??Z??]o}v}u]r ?o}?uv? v ?}}? ]v???uv?? ?o}u??}+ v ?Z? oo Z? }v???v?X^}u}(?Z????v]??XZ?}????o]ur ]?Uul]vP?? r }+?]v?]?oX}oo???v?}v??v??}??r ?}v]?}oo??Z?}?oZ?v??v?o??Z?U?}?v?oo? ?]?ZZ]PZ???}(????vXd?v??}???}vvP}}  ]vr ???uv?U]u??}?]vP}??o}?U??]?vo?}??]v}??}vU ??]?]vP}?Z?v?v?Z}??ZvP]vP?Z(????X???]vr ???uv?]v}v??}i?????v??]?]}v v}?  ?}]v???]v }?Z??}??]o??U](v}?u}?Uu?]?}?]}??}v?XdZ?]?U??v?r ?}? ??}vZ?v }??}???v]??}?? X 86  ?v]v?Z???U??v??}???}v]?v}?o????Z?}ovXK?Z?}ur u}vv?]vo??o???U.?v??Uv]v}uX /(??v??}???}v]v???uv???Z?U?Z}??}???v]??}?? ?}?ov}??}??Z??]?vP}??X,}???U?Z?]???o??Z ?Xd?v??}???}v]v???uv??U??]oo?ui}??]?o??}r i??U Z? ?o? ]v ??] ?} ?Z ??v? ?Z? }??]vP oo ??v??}???}vv?}?o????oo?l?ZvlXtZ]or }?v?vP????u?}????Z]P?]???U(?v???v }v}v??v??}???}v??}i?}v}?i????????(?}uv}?Z? ??v??}???}v ??}i?V ]v ?Z vU ?Z? ? l ?? (?}u oo ??v]vP}voo?Z}?Z????]?????vuv}(}?? P}??vuv?XtZ]o]?u?]u???o.v]??o??}??v?(? ?Z}??}???v]??}???}(v?]v???uv?~}??}???v]???o]ur ]?o??U ?Z? }??? ?Z}?o}?v]v u]v ?Zv  ??]?]vP ??v??}???}v]v???uv??X dZ]?Wov?u????}}?}???}r ?}?]vP}vo???}i???Z? ]???u]v? (?]oU]XX.??]?Z]v ?Z?P]}v[?.vv]o}v???]v??v}v}?????v?]???}r ?}??}v?  }?]v??]?o  ?]v}v]????}???X  ~&} ?u}?]vr (}?u?}vU? &]vv? U?X  ?? X ,}???U?Z??v}??Z}vo?}????Z?]v???uv?]v??v?r ?}???}vX d?v??}???}v ??}i??U o]l oo ?}v?U Z? ?o }v???v??}v?ZZ?Z? r ]([???o?}v}???Z?Z? lP?}?v v?]?}vuv?ov?}]o}v?v? ???  }( ??? ???(?v??}?o????v?}v?}u?Z]vPo?X^}u} ( ?Z?}v???v??]v?vU??Z????}v]v}vr P??}v~(}?]v??v????o?}(?]????v?]}vU??}?Zr ???v}?U??Z??????v??}?v]v}vP??}v~XPXU ??}?Zuv?Z???v?]}vv]v?XE}???Z? v??? ]o?}v.v?}?Z??v??}???}v??}?v????u o}vXd?v??}???}v??}i??vvZ?Z}v???v? (}? ?Z }v}u?U ?}]??U v ?Z v?]?}vuv?X ^?Z }v?r ??v?U ?Z]Z ?}?v ?} v }?Z??]? ?v]v?}o? ?Z]? ????U ? oo ???vo]?? X ???vo]?? u?  ?}?]?? ~v.??}?vP??~}???X}?Z?}????P?o?o?]v??v?r ?}???}vX???vov.??~(}??u?oU??}???????]?}v v?o}?uv?Z?}Lv.P??U}???o?}?}???o?U]v?Z ???Z(}?}v}?u} ???v??}???}v??}i??~XPXUZ]PZ?? ?u?V}v???o?U???vo}???Z]??}?]oo?Z?vPo}?? }??}?]Pv}?XtZ]o???vov.??U?Z?v???}.?vP}( ??]v????u???u??vlo}v??]??P?}?v?U?Z?} v}?v?]ov?}o ??o}??}vv?}?[?Zo(X???vo}???U ]v}v????U}W?Z?o??}?o}??o??}??}+XdZ?r ?v?v]v?v?]?v??}(?Z??v??}???}v????uul?(}? v??]oo?Z]PZ?}?v?o(}???Zo}??V]vU?ZP?}??Z v}???}v}(?Z?? v??}???}v????u?P?o?Z?]ur ?}??ZP???????vo}???}(v?Z?uv?}v}???Z }???}(?Zo??v????X dZ]???}v?????Z?}v?v?XtZ]o]?u?v}?o ?}P]??}o??}v?U]??l??}P]v]????]}v}(?Z??}ou ? ?Z???v??}???}vv??}?XdZ]v?v?]??}???v?}v ?}?Z?vP?????vo]???}?Z?(????]v???uv?u? }v]?}(v?????]v??Z???Z?]v??vo]??~]XXU ???Z?o}???}?U?v??U???v???ZuX Es/ZKED Ed>KEZE^ d?v??}???}vvZ????]u???}v]?UovUv???X dZ?u??]?]voo??P?}(????u?o}?uv?v??U (?}u}v?????}v?}}???}v?vu]v?vvX???]ur ???v]vo?U???v}?o]u]??}W ? ]??}oo??}v ? ]?]v ? o]u?ZvP ? ????](??Z?P ? ]?????}v}(?]oo](}??]}??vu]P??}v ? vvP?uv?}(]v]Pv}????]? ? &o}}]vP ? ,]??(?Puv??}v ? ,?]?ov? ? >v??ZvP ? >]PZ??}oo??}v ? >}??}(]}u? ? >}??}(}?v?? ? E}]? ?}oo??}v ? K]o??]oo? ? Z?}???Z???}v lP?}?v v?]?}vuv?ov?}]o}v?v? ???  }( ??? ? ^}]o?}?]}v ? ^??}(]v??]???]? ? ^???o ? ^??(vP?}?v????}oo??}v ? t]oo](u}??o]?? /?]? DWK [??}o]??}??]?]v???uv?]v?Z??v??}???}v ????u(}????]u?????Z??Z}?o]??} ?v?}U ?Z P???? ??v? (?]oU ?}] ?ZuX ~D]?P?}v u? }v?]??Z?]u?????v?}]oX >E/ZdED EDEd^ Z]PZ??v?P}(?Zv?}v[?]???o]????}ou??o?]r ??o??}?}oo??v?? u]? ???v??}???}v? }???X   }v?v }???Z]???}ou P??]??} ?Z ( ?oov]??}(????U ?Z]Z??o]?Zv?}vou]v?]???o]????v??(}??Z ?}v u}v}?] ~KU }?]? }( v]??}Pv ~EK y  v }?Z??X  EK y Uo}vP?]?Z??]}??Z? ?}?}v?~,U]? ??(}? }vr ?v??}]????}v]v?Z???v}(??vo]PZ??}(}?u v}?r ]}?? ?Z}?}Zu]o}?]v? ? U}?Z??]? lv}?v?Z?u}P X [ dZov]??U?uv}???Z???U  ??o]?Z??}r ??}(?]Pv?}vvo??].?}v(}????}?v?Z} ?vr ????]?Z?P??} ?Z ?]vuv?}(v?}vou]v?]???o]?? ??v?? (}? }?}vU?}vu}v}?]Uv????o?u??X  dZ?? .?  o?o?}(v}v r ?]vuv?Wu?P]voU u}??U ?r ?]}??U ??? v ???uX  dZ ,??}? h?v]? ? U }( ?Z] Zv??o}vv???]????U  ]?o??].? u}??  v} v r ?]vuv??(}?}?}vv>]u]?D]v?vvWov ?????  ?(}??}vu}v}?]X ZP]}vo ?? v??}???}v?ov?v??}P?u?U]vo?]vP?Z]?WovU u??? }v?]??v?? ]?Z(?ov ^??o??U?P?o?}v?Uv ?ov??o?vP?}]???o]??Xoo>}vP r ZvPd?v??}???}vWov? vd?v??}???}v/u??}?uv?W?}P?u?]????}??]v ?Z]v??}v}(?Z]???}P?uZ?v(}?v]v}v(}?u]?? ?]?Z?Z????]?uv??XKdZ???]? ?Zui}???}i?? v?u??]v?Z]?Wovv??u]v?Zu?}]v}v(}?ur ]???]?Z?Z?P??]v?Z???v?^??/u?ouv??}vWov (}?]???o]??X}??}(?Z???vv?vo??]?v(}?v]v ?Z}?uv? K?}v]?Y?o]????u]v?}v} ( ?Z????Zr P]}vod?v??}???}vWov?v?Z&z???? r ????d?v??}??r ?}v/u??}?uv?W?}P?u?uvuv??(}??Z}vv??? ?}??}v}(?ZE?z}?l r E}??Z?vE?:??? r >}vP/?ovUEz r E: r dK?}vE}v?]vuv??v?Z’???}vv??? K?}vE} v?]vuv??X ^K/>KEZE^ d?v??}???}vu?o?}Z?vP??+??}v?}]??U?or ???Uv?Z}v}u?X??]?Z?Zv?]?}vuv?U+??u? ?]? ?v??}]v? ]v ????u?o}?uv? v ??X W}?v?o vP??+??]vo?W ? ??}u}]o? vv ? ?ZU]vi???Uv??}????uP lP?}?v v?]?}vuv?ov?}]o}v?v? ???  }( ??? ? ???Z??]o??]?? ? ?vv}v(}?]Pv??}??? ? ]?]v???uv?]v?]??vP?? ? ?}?]}v}(??}?????o?? ? ?o??]}v}(]??v?PP?}???(?}u???]??}v]v?}r ]??v?Z}v}u?~XPXUv}v r ?]? ??U?]??? ? ,o?Z}u?o]?}v?~XPXU???]??}??]??? ? ,]PZ?Z}??Z}o??v?? ? ,]PZ???o]???]}??? ? >](???o r ?o?]oov???~XPX}?]??U]?? ? >}??}(?v?}(?o ? >}??}(o]?o]Z}}? ? >}??}(???}vouv]?? ? >}??}( ?}]o?]?o ? >}??}(?v]?o? ? >}??}(??}????v??o???? ? >}??}(?u ? W?o]v??]??? ? ^}]}}v}u]v?o???o?P?P?}v ? ^???o ? ^???? /?]? DWK [??}o]??}??]?]v???uv?]v?Z??v??}???}v ????u(}????]u????? Z??Z}?o]??}?v?}U 87  hX^X???uv?}(:???U  Z??Wll???X??}iXP}?l??l}?l}}?l??o?]XZ?u X ?Z P???? ??v? (?]oU ?}] ?ZuX ~D]?P?}v u? }v?]??Z?]u?????v?}]oX ????K???????Ud]?os/}(?Z????]?]oZ]PZ???Uv ?o? (?ov^?? P?]v Z?]v(}?u?Z]? WovU]vr o?]vP??}i??o?}vv?o}?uv?XdZ???]G? ??]o}?X&???Z??]o}v DWK [?d]?os/vv?]r ?}vuv?oi?????]??u?(}?v]v]?? W?o]W??]?r ?}vWov(}??Zv??o}vv???ZP]}v  v hv]. Wovr v]vPt}?lW?}P?u X d/d>s/K&d,????  /s/>Z/’,d^d d]?os/}(?Z????]?]oZ]PZ?????}Z]]??]??]u]v?}v}v ?Z?]?}(?U}o}?Uvv?}vo}?]P]v]v??}P?u?vr ??]?? ?]?]vP (?o .vv]o ??]??vX 87  dZ]? ]v]?? ?Z?]?]?]u?}??v??}ul????Z?(?oo? r ??}v?}???}r i??}v}??????]vP?}???v]Pv}?}?vP??o?+? }?Z??X  d?v??}???}v??}i???uv??}]v??u}]o]?? v?(??(}??Z???o]vP??o]X  /((?v]vP}vo?Zo??~}?] ?r ??}?}??}v?o?Z?????}?o}(????o?P?}??}?P?}???U d]?os/Z?v?]}o?X lP?}?v v?]?}vuv?ov?}]o}v?v? ???  }( ??? Es/ZKEDEd>:h^d/  ????K?? ????? ]?????(?oPv??}ul v?]?}vuv?oi??????}(]??u]??]}v?]v?(?]vPvr ???]vP?Z+? ?}(oo??}P?u?U?}o]]?v??]??}v u]v}?]??vo}? r ]v}u?}??o?}v?X  +????v??}???}v ]?]}vul]vP?v???}v?v???v]vPv??}??o?r ???]vP?Z?v]??v?}(]+?v??}]}}v}u]P?}???X  dZ???Z???]v]?o?}(  v?]?}vuv?oi????Z?u??? ??? W 88 ?X ?}]Uu]v]u]?}?u]?P?]???}?}??}v?o?Z]PZvr ???Z?uvZo?Zvv?]?}vuv?o+??}vu]v}?]?? vo}? r ]v}u?}??o?}v?X  /v??v??}???}v?ovv]vP?Z]? uv??o??vP?Zu}?v?}(] ????v?????r 88  h X^XKd  v?]?}vuv?o:??? U  Z??Wll???X,?X}?XP}?lv?]?}vuv?li????XZ? u  ]}????v??}???}v??}i???}??u]v?Z?Z?]???}r ?}??}v??Z?}(?Z]?]????v]?}???]vP]vu]v}?]?? vl}?o}? r ]v}u?}??o?}vo?????X ?X W??v??Zv]o}(U???}v]v}??]Pv].v?o?]v?Z ?]??}(  v.???u]v}?]??vo}? r ]v}u?}??o?}v?X  ,??Z?]??v}(??o]??v??}???}v]vu]v}?]??v o}? r ]v}u?}??o?}vo?????v?o??X ?X v????Z(?oov(]????]??}v?oo?}?v?oo?(r (?}uu?v]??]v ?Z??v??}???}v]?]}v r ul]vP ??}??X  dZ ]v?v? ]??} vZv ?Z??o] r ]v?}o?uv? ??}??U ???vP?Zv }uu?v]?? r ? ???v??Z]?? v ??}?]u]v}?]??vo}? r ]v}u?}??o?}v??]?Z}??}?r ??v]???}o?v}??v]u??}??Z??o]??v??(? or v??}(??v??}???}v]v?Z]?o]??X lP?}?v ^&d r >hWovv]vP(?}?? ???  }( ??? ^&d r >hWovv]vP(?}?? dZ???]}??Z]PZ??(?v]vP]ooU ^&d r >h U  }v?]v   ]PZ? ?ovv]vP(?}???Z]Z??]Pv?}P?]?Z]??}v}( DWK?]v??u?}(}u?}vv??}(??v??}???}v?Z ??Z}?o }v?]? ]v ??? ?ovv]vP ??]??X tZ]o ^&d r >h Z? v ??????DW r ??U ?Z ?ovv]vP (?}?? ?u]v ]v ?oX Wov??Z}?oW ?X ^???}?? ?Z }v}u] ?]?o]?? }( ?Z hv]? ^???U ?Z ^???Uv}vu??}?}o]?v??vu??}?}o]?v ??U?r ?]oo? ? vo]vP Po}o }u????v??U ??}???]??U v8]v?X  ?}?v??v??}???}v????u]??]?o(}??Z ?P]}v[?}v}u]Zo?ZX  Z}?U??o]??v??}???}vU?]oU o??v????v??}???}vv]???v??}???}voo?}?l?} ] v??8]v?]v?]vP]vPP}}?v?}?l??]v?}v }??}(?Z?P]}vX ?X /v???Z?(??}(?Z??v??}???}v????u(}?u}?}?r ]?vv}v r u}?}?]?????X  ?????Uuv??Z?v ]vi??]?}??}v?Z??v??}???}vv??}?lX  /?]?]u?}??v? ? Z? ??v??}???}v (?v]vP v ??}i? ??]}?]???}v ]vr o?u?????}??]vi??]?v(?o]??U?Z]Zu? }??}v?}????Z?}v}?Z??Z Z]PZ?? ]v?v?ur ??X  /?]???oo?]u?}??v??}?u]vv?ov(}??Z ?(??}(v}v r u}?}?]?? ?v??}???}v??????Z?}?]?? ?]?Z?Z??}u}]oX ?X /v???Z???]??}(?Z??v??}???}v????u(}?u}r ?}?]?vv}v r u}?}?]?????X  /v?Zo]PZ?}(?Z?v?? }(?l??v?????v???v?]? r ????}?]?u]v>}v}v v D?]U ?Z ??v??}?? ?}v ????u v? ?} ??? (?}u}u??v]v??v?}vo???}?]?uX  dZ]?o]vP}( ??v??}???}v????u?]??oo r ?}?v??]vv???X  /vr ?? ?]P]ov ? ??}?]?? v ???? }( oo u}? }( ??v??}???}v]???v?o?}???????uX ?X /v ???Z??]]o]??vu}]o]??}??}v??]oo?} ?}?ov(?]PZ?X  /?]?]u?}??v??}]v??u}]o]??]v}?r ? ?} ]u??}? ???}vo  u}]o]??X  ? Z?uv u}]o]?? ]vr ???U?}}????}i}?U?Z}??]vPv???}vX  ? (?]PZ?u}]o]?? ]v???U?}}?}v}u]?]]o]??X  /?]? ]u?}??v??}?}Pv]??Z?uv???]v??}v}?Z??r ?}u}]o??v?Z???o]??v??}???}vU]?ov ????]v??}i??v]v??u}]o]??X ?X W?}?? v vZv ?Z v?]?}vuv?U ??}u}? v?P?  }v????}vU]u??}??Z??o]??}(o](Uv??}u}?}vr ?]??v???v??v??}???}v]u??}?uv??v^?? vo}o?ovvP?}??Zv}v}u]?o}?uv???r ??v?X  tZ]o ??v??}???}v ????u? P? ?}?o ?} ?Z? ?Z??v??}P}v??}?](}? }v}u]?o}?uv?U]? ]?]u?}??v??}?uu??Z??Z?o?}v???}oo?r lP?}?v ^&d r >hWovv]vP(?}?? ???  }( ??? ?}vU}?? r }v??u??}v}(v?P?v}?Z?vP?????r vo]??X  d?v??}???}v ????u? v  ?ovv ]v  ?? ?Z?u]v]u]??v?]?}vuv?ouPv?ZvP??(r (??}v  ??o]??}(o](X ?X vZv?Z]v?P??}vv}vv??]??}(?Z??v??}??r ?}v ????uU ?}?? v ??v u}? ?Z?}?PZ}?? ?Z ^??U(}??}?ov(?]PZ?XDv???]??]v?}o?u}??Zv }v ??v??}???}v u}X /? ]? ]u?}??v? ?} }vv? oo u}? ?(o ? v 8]v?o?X ?u?o? ]vo?W ]u??}? ??}u}]o???}v]??}??U]u??}????l???} ?]o?}v?Z]vo??]}v}(]?o?l?}v??o]??v?r ?}???}v?Z]o?X ?X W?}u}?8]v?????uuvPuv?v}???}vX8r ]v?????uuv Puv?v}???}v]v????Z???r ?u[?}??oo?(??v8]v?X ?X u?Z?]??Z??????}v}(?Z?]??vP??v??}???}v ????uX/v?Zvu}(Z]?]vPvZvu}]o]??U]?]? v???o?}?v??}??v??}v?Z???v???v?? }???}v ????uX,}???Uo]u]???}???v???Zv?} ?]PZ  ????u??v?]}vP]v??u]v?vv}(?Z???v? ????uXt]?Z}??u]v?vv}(?Z?]??vP????uU?Z ????uvv}???(}?u}??uoo? X lP?}?v W?}i??o?}v ???  }( ??? W?}i? ? o?}v ??]v ( ?o??v??}???}v ??}P?u?oo}?(}?DWK ?  ?}?r o???}i?? ]??o? (}?(?v]vPX  d }  v????Z?(?v??]r ???}?Zu}?????]vPv(?]o??}i?? U DWK  Z? ?o}? ?o??}v?]??] (}? v]? ??}i??X 89  dZ?r o?}v??}??]? ?]Pv?}???(?(?o???]?uv??(}? ?Z?????(?v]vP??}P?uU??oo?u?^??v(r ?o?P?o?}v?(}???o]]v?}o?uv?X 90 ?}(??]?vPU ^dW r h ?vv]??d?v??}???}vo??v???~d ???P}?? ????v?  ?Z }vo? (?o (?v?  }?? ?Z]Z 89  dZ}?uv? W?}i??o??}v?]??]  ?]o??Z?o??}v??}??X  DWK  Z?]????Z}?]?? XDWK  ]?Pv?oo? oo}? r ??v?Z?v(}??u]oo]}v}oo??]v ^dW r h v r d (?v ??? ?? X ?]??]??}(??}i??u?(?v?v?^dW r hv dX?]o?^dW r hvdW??}i?o]P]]o]??u?(}?v ? Z??Wll???X,?X}?XP}?lu???lP?]vlP?]???X(u  v Z??Wll???X,?X}?XP}?lu???lP?]vlP?]??X(u X 90  dZ}?uv? W?o]W??]??}vWov  ?]o?DWK[???o]]v?}o?r uv???]??X ??v]??  ?}v?u? ???  }( ??? Appendixes ??v]?? ?}v?u? dZ(}oo}?]vP?}v?u????]v?Z]?WovX  u?]v??]?Z]?]o ]???  ov]??  ov]??uvuv?? DY }vP??}vD]?P?}vv]?Y?o]??W?}P?u D,^ }vv??? ???uv? }( u?Pv? DvPr uv?v,}uov^??]?? Kd }vv??? ???uv?  }(d?v??}???}v : v?]?}vuv?o :??? W v?]?}vuv?oW?}??}vPv? & &?o?]?}vu]v]????}v ‘/^ ‘}P??Z]/v(}?u?}v^???u? ‘W^ ‘o}oW}?]?}v]vP^???u? >ZdW >}vPZvPd?v??}???}vWov DWK D??}?}o]?vWovv]vPK?Pv]??}v E,^ E?}vo,]PZ??^???u ZWK ZP]}voWovv]vPK?Pv]??}v ZZ Z]o?} ^/W ^??/u?ouv??}vWov ^d/W ^??d?v??}???}v/u??}?uv?W?}P?u ^dW ^??(d?v??}???}vW?}P?u d d?v?]?]???]? dD d?v??}???}vuvDvPuv? d/W d?v??}???}v/u??}?uv? W?}P?u dD d?v??}???}vDvPuv?? dK d?v?]? r K?]v??o}?uv? hWtW hv].Wovv]vPt}?lW?}P?u h^Kd hv]?^??????uv?}(d?v??}???}v sDd sZ]oD]o?d??o ??v]?? ????(?}u?ZE}??Z??}??]}?D???Wov ???  }( ??? ????(?}u?ZE}??Z?? }??]}?D???Wov dZ(}oo}?]vP]??lv(?}u W??//W???v?v&????^??] v/v(?????????^Puv?  ~ ? X?? r ??}( dZE}??Z??}?r ?]}?/v(????????D???Wov W W,z^/>^^d^ dZ]?  ?? ? u]o  ?vZ  }(  ?Z  E  ]?  }?v  v  }???  ?  u??l  v  ??v?  ??ooo  ?}  /v?????  ??  ?Z?}?PZ  ,??}?X  dZ  ^??]vP.o  >]v  }vv??  ?}  ?Z  E  D]v  >]v  ?  D]oo  Z]??  :?v?}v  v?  E?  ,?v  v  ^yd[?  }??}v  ^?]?]?]}v  ?  ^??]vP.oX  dZ  ?vZ  o]v  ]?  ??}  ??l?  ??v  D]oo  Z]??  v  ?  ]v??o}l]vP?  v  ?]vPo ? ??l  ?]?Z  ?]]vP?  ??v  ?  /v??o}l]vP  v  ^??]vP.o  hv]}v  ^??}vX ^??]vP.o  hv]}v  ^??}vU  ?  ?Z  v}??Z?v  ??u]v??  }(  ?Z  ?vZU  ]?  ???  ?  ??}  u??l  ]v??]??  ?}???  ]vo?]vP  ?Z  >l?Z}?  >]u]?  }???vP  ??v  Z]P}  v  }??}v  v   s?u}v??  ??v  t?Z]vP?}v  v  ^?X  ov?U  s?u}v?X  hvr ]}v  ^??}v  E?  ,?v  ?  ]?  ?Z  ?vZ[?  ?}??Z?v  ??u]v??  v  ?Z?  ?  u??l  o  ?????U  ZP]}voU  ?Z  s?u}v??  v  ]v??]??  ???]?U  ?  ?oo  ?  ^>  v  DEZ  }uu???  ?]o  ??r ?]?X  dZ  ?Puv?  ]?  ???  }(  ?Z  o?P?U  (?oo? ?]Pv?  u?o? ? ?}??  E}??Z?v  E?  vPov  ,]PZ ? ^?  Z]o  }??]}?  ?Z]Z  ??v?  ?Z?}?PZ  ?Z  ????  }(  s?u}v?U  E?  ,u??Z]?U  D]vU  D??Z????U  }vv???U  v  E?  z}?lX hZZEd  KWZd/KE^ u??l  ~???vP?  v  ^ydU  }vv???  ^}??Z?vU  v  Wv  u  ^}??Z?v  ~(?]PZ?  }???  ]v  ?Z  ?Puv?X  u??l  }????  ??  ??]v?  ~?]?  ?}?v  ??]??  ]o?  ??v  ^??]vP.o  v  E?  ,r ?v  ]vo?]vP  ?}?v  ??]??  (}?  s?u}v??  v  ZP]}vo  ???]?U  ??}?]]vP  ???]  ?}  E?  z}?l  v  ?}]v??  ?}??ZX  dZ  ?u]v]vP  ]PZ?  ??]v?  ~(}??  ?}?v  ??]??  ?  ^Z??o  ?}???  ?Z]Z  }???  Z  ?l?  ??v  E?  ,?v  v  ^??]vP.o  }vv?vP  ?}  E  ZP]}vo  ??]v?  ?  E?  ,?vX  dZ?  ]?  v}  }uu???  ?]o  ???]  ???v?o?  }???vP  }v  ?Z  ?Puv?X  ???v?  v  (????  ???vP?  ?]o  }???vP  ??????  ?  ??}?]  ]v  do  ??  ??????? }?X &????  Wov?  }vv???  ]?  ?o}?]vP  ?ov?  (}?  E?  ,?v ? ,??}? ? ^??]vP.o  ~E,,^  }uu???  ?]o  ???]  o}vP  ?Z]?  ?Puv?X  /v]?o  ?ov?  oo  (}?  ??  ??]v?  ~??  ?}?v  ??]??  Z  ?U  ??}?]]vP  Zo( Z}??o?  ???]  ??]vP  ?Z  ?l  Z}???  v  ???}?r ]u?o?  Z}??o?  ???]  ?Z?}?PZ}??  ?Z  ?X  dZ]?  ???]  ?}?o  ??v]?? ????(?}u?ZE}??Z??}??]}?D???Wov ???  }( ???   ????}??  ?  v  o??].U  }?o ? ??l  ]v(????????X  /v]r ?oo?U  ???]  ?}?o  }???  o}vP  ?Z  ^??]vP.o  >]vU  ?]?Z  r ]?}vo  ???]  ?}??]o  ?}  ^?u(}?U  dX  dZ  ^??]vP.o  >]v  ]?  ???  }(  ?Z  (?oo? ? ?]Pv?  E}??Z?v  E?  vPov  ,]PZ ? ^?  Z]o  }??]}?X ]o?  u??l  ???]  ??v  ^??]vP.o  v  E?  ,?v  ?]oo  ]v??  (?}u  ??  ??]v?  ~?  ?}?v  ??]??  ?}  ??  ~??  ?}?v  ??]??  ??}?]]vP  v?  Z}??o?  ???]  ?Z?}?PZ}??  ?Z  ?X  o??v?  ??]v?  ?]oo  ??u]v?  ?  E?  ,?vU  }?  }v?v?  ?}  Wvv  ^??}v  E?  z}?l  }?  t?Z]vP?}v  XX  ^??]  }v  ?Z  o]v  ?}?o    (??r ?Z?  ]v?P??  ?]?Z  u?P]vP  }??]}??  ??Z  ?  ?Z  /vov  Z}??  ?]  }??}v  v  t}????  v  ?Z  ]v  ]vo??  ]v??or o?}v  }(  ^^  ???]  ??v??}v??  ]v}??}??vP  ?}?]??  ??}?  v  ]?]o  ??  }v??}o  ]v  ??  }(  ?Z  }??]}?  ?Z?  ^^  ]?  v}? ???v?o?  ]v??oo  ~}???vP  ???  P???  ?Zv???  u?Z  ?  uv?  ?  dZ  Z]o  ^(??  /u??}?uv?  ?  }(  ????X  Wd  ?]Pv  (}?  ?Z  <v}?oP  }??]}?  v  /vov  Z}??  ?]oo    ??u]v  ?  Wv  u  ^}??Z?v  v  ^yd  (}?  ?Z]?  ?????  ?}???X ^??}v  /u??}?uv?? ? ? ???u X  ^??}v  ]u??}?uv??  ?  r ?]Pv  ?}  u?    v  ^'Z  ???]?uv??U  (]o]??  ?}(  ???oU  v}??P  ]v??u}o]?uU  v  ]v?P??  ???}v?  ]v?}  ?Z  }v}u]  (?]  }(  ?Z  }uu?v]??  ?Z?  ???X  dZ?  ?  ??v  ??}i??  ]v  ?Z]?  ??}P?uU  ?]?  }(  ?Z]Z  ??o?  ?}    v  ^'Z  ]u??}?uv??X  dZ  ]??  }(  ^??]vP.o  v  ]?? u??}?}o]?v  ?ovv]vP  }?Pv]??}v  ?  ???v?o?  ?o??vP  o??v???  (}?  ?Z  ?}?v?o  ???}??}v  }(  Z]??}?]  ^??]vP.o  hv]}v  ^??}vX/(    ]?]}v  ]?  u  ?}  ?Z  ?Z  Z]??}?]  ???}vU?o?}?u  v  ??l  u}].?}v?  ?]oo    ]vo?  ?}  +??o?  ???  ??]v?  }???vP  ?]  ?Z  ]v  v  /vr ov  Z}??  ?}  }??}vX  oo  ?]??vP  ]v??]??  ???}v?  ]vo?]vP  ,??}?  ?]oo  ???]?  ?r ?v?]}v  v  u}].?}v?}  }uu}?  }?o  ??l]vP  }(  ?Z  o]vX  D}].?}v?  ?]oo  ]vo?  ]?}vo  ? o?}?u?U    }u?o]v  v  (]o]??  ?}  }uu}?  ???  ]uv?]}v  (?]PZ?  ??8  ?Z]?uv??X  /v  ]?}vU  ?Z?  v?  }uu???  ??r ?}v?  ?  ??}?}?  o}vP  ?]?Z??v?]}v  }(  ^??  ^???  ^??}v  ]v  E?  ,?vX ??v]?? ,]??}?]o?]o?}?u?o? ???  }( ??? ,]??}?]o?]o?}?u?o? Kvo?]?? }vv?}v???]?X~W??vP???Z}}?o?}o???Z}???}u}??o?}????o?}?]o?Zu?o??}( ???ou}?]o???]????v?Z?P]}vv?ZE?z}?lv}??}vu??}???]??Z}??Z}?vX&}??Z?l}(?? ?vr ??}vU?Z ?u?o?o}?Z?v?]PX 91 do ?? Xd?]v?(?}uE?z}?l]???}?Z?P]}vU???? ^??}vl??]v ??? ??? ??? ? l ??? ?? l ??? ??? ??? ?? D} r &? ^ D} r &? D} r ^ D} r ^ D} r ^ D} r &? d]u}(? D D D D WD WD WD Ez’?v v??o ?W?? ??W?? ^?u(}? ?W?? ??W?? E}??ol ??W?? ?]P?}?? ?W??l?W?? ?W??l?W?? t????? ?W?? ?W?? ?W?? ??W??l??W?? ?W??l?W?? ?W?? d????]oo ?W?? ?W?? ?W?? ?]??}o ?W?? ?W?? ?W?? ??W?? ?W?? ?W?? ?W?? &}????]oo ?W?? ?W?? ?W?? ??W?? ?W?? ?W?? Wo]v?]oo ?W?? ?W?? ?W?? ??W?? ?W?? ?W?? 91  dZ(}oo}?]vP]v(}?u?}vZ?v}u]?W ??}????vt?????vE?z}?l]??’? vv??o}?Z??Zv?]P?}??UE}??olUv^?u(}?V??}?? ??vt]oo]uv?v}??}vVv}??}v}(GP??}??v??]vZvP?V ??]oZ}o]??Z?o?V  PPP??]P]v?????}v?V?????Vv?u?(}???]v? ?}l(?}udZ}u??}vUd}??]vP?} vUvt]v??vW?}?]vX ??v]?? ,]??}?]o?]o?}?u?o? ???  }( ??? E??]?]v ?W?? ?W?? ?W?? ??W?? ?W?? ?W?? ?W?? E?]vP?}v ?W?? ?W?? ?W?? ?W?? W?l?]oo ?W?? ?W?? ,??}? ?W?? ?W?? ?W?? ??W?? ?W?? ?W?? ?W?? do ?? Xd?]v?(?}u?Z?P]}v?}E?z}?l]??U???? ^??}vl??]v ??? ??? ??? l ??? ??? ??? ??? ?? D} r ^ D} r ^ D} r ^ D} r &? D} r ^ D} r &? d]u}(? D D WD WD WD WD ,??}? ?W?? ??W?? ?W?? ?W?? ?W?? ?W?? W?l?]oo ?W?? ?W?? E?]vP?}v ??W?? ?W?? ?W?? ?W?? E??]?]v ?W?? ??W?? ?W?? ?W?? ?W?? ?W?? Wo]v?]oo ?W?? ??W?? ?W?? ?W?? ?W?? ?W?? &}????]oo ?W?? ??W?? ?W?? ?W?? ?W?? ?W?? ?]??}o ?W?? ??W?? ?W?? ?W?? ?W?? ?W?? d????]oo ??W?? ?W?? t????? ?W?? ??W?? ?W??l?W?? ?W?? ?W?? ?]P?}?? ?W??l?W?? E}??ol ?W?? ^?u(}? ?W?? ??v]?? ,]??}?]o?]o?}?u?o? ???  }( ??? Ez’?vv??o ?W?? do ?? Xd?]v?(?}u?Z?P]}v?}}??}vU???? ^??}vl??]v ??? l ??? ??? l ??? ??? l ??? ??? ?? D} r &? ^ D} r &? D} r ^ d]u}(? D D D WD t????? ?W?? ?W?? ?W?? ?W?? ?]??}o ?W?? ?W?? ?W?? ?W?? &}????]oo ?W?? ?W?? ?W?? ?W?? Wo]v?]oo ?W?? ?W?? ?W?? ?W?? E??]?]v ?W?? ?W?? ?W?? ?W?? ,??}? ?W??l?W?? ?W??l?W?? ?W??l?W?? ?W??l?W?? DvZ??? ?W?? ?W?? ?W?? ?W?? t]oo]uv? ?W?? ??W?? ??W?? ?W?? }??}v^}??Z^?X ??W?? ??W?? ??W?? ?W?? do ?? Xd?]v?(?}u}??}v?}?Z?P]}vU???? ^??}vl??]v ??? ??? l ??? ??? ?? D} r ^ D} r &? D} r ^? d]u}(? D WD WD }??}v^}??Z^?X ?W?? ?W?? ?W?? ??v]?? ,]??}?]o?]o?}?u?o? ???  }( ??? t]oo]uv? ??W?? ?W?? ?W?? DvZ??? ??W?? ?W?? ?W?? ,??}? ??W??l??W?? ?W??l?W?? ?W??l??W?? E??]?]v ??W?? ?W?? Wo]v?]oo ??W?? ?W?? &}????]oo ??W?? ?W?? ?]??}o ??W?? ?W?? ??W?? t????? ??W?? ?W?? ??W?? do ?? Xd?]v?(?}uE?,?v?}t]oo]u???PUD??Z????U???? ^??}vl??]v ???? ???? ?? D} r ^ D} r ^ d]u}(? D WD E?,?v ?W?? ?W?? D?X?uo ?W?? ?W?? ?}}l??o ?W?? ?W?? Z?Z]? ?W?? ?W?? D]ooo ?W?? ?W?? Wov???]oo ?W?? ?V?? ^}??Z]vP?}v ?W?? ?W?? Wo]v?]oo ?W?? ?W??l?W?? ??v]?? ,]??}?]o?]o?}?u?o? ???  }( ??? &?u]vP?}v ?W?? ?W?? ?}v ?W?? ?W?? t?}P? ?W?? ?W?? ^]u???? ?W?? ?W?? ‘?v? ?W?? ?W?? }vPu}v ?W?? ?W?? ^}??Z?]l ?W?? ?W?? t??]o ?W?? ?W??l?W?? ^}??Zu??}v ?W?? ??Zu??}v ?W?? E}??Zu??}v ?W?? t]oo]u???PZ:?v?}v ?W?? do ?? Xd?]v?(?}ut]oo]u???PUD??Z?????}E?,?vU???? ^??}vl??]v ???? ???? ?? D} r ^ D} r ^ d]u}(? D WD t]oo]u???PZ:?v?}v ?W?? E}??Zu??}v ?W?? ??Zu??}v ?W?? ^}??Zu??}v ?W?? ??v]?? ,]??}?]o?]o?}?u?o? ???  }( ??? t??]o ?W?? ?W?? ^}??Z?]l ?W?? ?W?? }vPu}v ?W?? ?W?? ‘?v? ?W?? ?W?? ^]u???? ?W?? ?W?? t?}P? ?W?? ?W?? ?}v ?W?? ?W?? &?u]vP?}v ?W?? ?W?? Wo]v?]oo ?W?? ?W?? ^}??Z]vP?}v ?W?? ?W?? Wov???]oo ?W?? ?W?? D]ooo ?W?? ?W?? Z?Z]? ?W?? ?W?? ?}}l??o ?W?? ?W?? D?X?uo ?W?? ?W?? E?,?v ?W?? ?W?? ??v]?? ?]P? ???  }( ??? ?]P? dZ(}oo}?]vP?o o]???oo?]P??]?Z??v}(?o????v??(?]v?Z?P]}vX ?]P v}X d}?v &?????] &????}?? >}?]}v z? ?]o? z? ?}vX d ^?????? ovP?Z ?? r ?? ?]?Z /v???}v ? ^?((]]v? ??]vP ???? ?o]v E}??}vZX u??l ???[}(}??>vZX ^?ZZ]?? X??u]X^}(i?X&?u]vP?}v?X ???? ? ?U??? ?? ?? ??l??l???? ??X??9 ???? ?o]v t}??Z]vP?}vZXE}X? ^?ZZ]?? X?u]E}(t?Z??(]oZX ???? ???? ??? ?? ??X? ?l??l???? ??X??9 ???? ?o]v uo?lZX u??l X??u]X}(<v?]vP?}vZX ???? ???? ??? ?? ?? ?l?l???? ??X??9 ???? ?o]v D]o?}?vZX ^????}}l ?X??u]X}(i?X?l^Z?? ???? ? ??? ?? ??X? ??l??l???? ??X??9 ???? ?o]v t?Z??(]oZX ^?ZZ]?? :?X}(lo?D]oo?ZX ???? ? ?U??? ?? ??X? ?l??l???? ??X??9 ???? ?o]v K?Z?ZX u??l ????[ti?XKod??v?]lZX ???? ? ??? ?? ?? ?l?l???? ??X??9 ???? ?o]v K?Z?ZX ?}}l X?u]Xt}(?o]vd?lX ???? ? ?U??? ?? ? ?l??l???? ??X??9 ???? ?o]v ?o]v^?X ^?ZZ]?? ???[D??????^?X ???? ? ??? ?? ?? ??l??l???? ??X??9 ???? ?o]v t]o?u?ZX oZ??}}l ?X?u]X}(i?X?l?Z}ZX ???? ? ??? ?? ? ?l?l???? ??X??9 ???? ?o]v vX ???? ? ??U??? ?? ? ?l??l???? ??X??9 ???? ?o]v ??vZu^?X ^?ZZ]?? ???[t}(Z?X??? ???? ???? ?U??? ?? ??X? ?l?l???? ??X??9 ???? ?o]v &?u]vP?}v?X ^?ZZ]?? ???[(?}ui?X?lZ?X??? ???? ? ?U??? ?? ?? ?l??l???? ??X??9 ???? ?o]v E}??}vZX oZ??}}l ?X?u]X}(i?X?l^Z?? ???? ???? ?U??? ?? ??X? ?l??l???? ???? ?]??}o ??]?v^?X }???D]v?}}l ???[(?}ui?X?lZ}}??X ???? ? ?U??? ?? ??X? ?l?l???? ??X??9 ??v]?? ?]P? ???  }( ??? ???? ?]??}o :}?^?X W???lZ]?? ?X??u]Xt}(Z?X?? ???? ???? ?U??? ?? ?? ??l??l???? ??X??9 ???? ?]??}o Doov^?X W???lZ]?? ???[^}(Z?X??i?X ???? ? ?U??? ?? ?? ?l??l???? ??X??9 ???? ?]??}o >}?]?]v?X }???D]v?}}l ???[(?}ui?X?l?}}l^?X ???? ???? ?U??? ?? ?? ?l??l???? ??X??9 ???? ?]??}o ol?o^?X }??}v?D]vZ]o r ?} X?u]Xt}(Z?X?? ???? ???? ?U??? ?? ?? ??l??l???? ??X??9 ???? ?]??}o Do??^?X }???D]v?}}l X?u]Xt}(^?((}??X ???? ? ?U??? ??? ?? ??l??l???? ??X??9 ???? ?]??}o ???]??^?X }??}v?D]vZ]o r ?} X?u]Xt}(Z?X?? ???? ? ?U??? ?? ?? ??l?l???? ??X??9 ???? ?]??}o &??]l^?X }???D]v?}}l ??[(?}ui?X ?l???]???X ???? ???? ?U??? ?? ?? ??l??l???? ??X??9 ???? ?]??}o v??o^?X?? W???lZ]?? :?XZ?X???v??o^?X? ???? ? ??U??? ?? ??X? ??l?l???? ??X??9 ???? ?]??}o ^??v?^?X }???D]v?}}l X?D}(:?}u?X ???? ? ?U??? ?? ?? ?l??l???? ??X??9 ???? ?]??}o ??^?X W???lZ]?? E?i?XDu}?]oo?X ???? ???? ?U??? ?? ?? ?l?l???? ??X??9 ???? ?]??}o }?v?^?X W???lZ]?? E?i?XDu}?]oo?X ???? ???? ?U??? ?? ??X? ?l??l???? ??X??9 ???? ?]??}o :?}u?X }???D]v?}}l ??[(?}ui?X?l^Z??ZX ???? ? ?U??? ?? ?? ?l??l???? ??X??9 ???? ?]??}o E}??ZW}v^?X }??}v?D]vZ]o r ?} E????]?^?X ???? ???? ?U??? ??? ?? ??l?l???? ??X??9 ???? ?]??}o E}??ZD]v^?X?Z]?? r ?]?X W???lZ]?? :?XE}??ZD]v^?X?Z]???]?X ???? ? ??U??? ?? ? ??l??l???? ??X??9 ???? ?]??}o v???^?X W???lZ]?? ??[(?}ui?X?l&??]l^?X ???? ???? ?U??? ?? ?? ??l??l???? ??X??9 ???? ?]??}o >l?X v??v>l}u?}?v ?]??}o r ^}??Z]vP?}vd}?v>]v ???? ? ?U??? ?? ??X? ??l?l???? ??X??9 ???? ?]??}o t??t?Z]vP?}v^?X }???D]v?}}l X?u]X}(Z?X??? ???? ? ?U??? ?? ??X? ?l??l???? ??X??9 ???? ?]??}o :?}u?X EP?},]oo?}}l ???[^}(}}o]P^?X ???? ? ?U??? ?? ??X? ??l?l???? ??X??9 ???? ?]??}o Z}????~D]v^?X W???lZ]?? ??vXZ]???]?X?^Z}}o^?X ???? ? ?U??? ?? ? ?l?l???? ??X??9 ???? ?]??}o D?o?X W}ol?]oo?}}l X?u]X}(Z?X?? ???? ? ?U??? ?? ??X? ?l??l???? ??X??9 ???? ?]??}o Du}?]oo?X W???lZ]?? K??W???lZ]?? ???? ???? ??U??? ?? ??X? ?l??l???? ??X??9 ????? ?]??}o W?l]v?^?X ]?PW}v?}}l X?u]X^}(i?X?lZ?o^?X ???? ??? ?? ??X? ?l?l???? ????? ?]??}o ??ZX ^}??ZD}?v?]v?}}l ?X?u]X}(i?X?lZ?X?? ???? ??? ?? ??X? ?l??l???? ??v]?? ?]P? ???  }( ??? ????? ?]??}o D]?^?X W}ol?]oo?}}l ?X?u]XE}(i?X?lZ?X? ???? ?U??? ?? ??X? ?l??l???? ???? ??o]vP?}v Z???}]?,]ooZX tZ]P?]oo?}}l :?X^?}v?,]ooZ} ???? ? ??? ?? ?? ??l??l???? ??X??9 ???? ??o]vP?}v ovZX?? ??o]vP?}v?}}l ???}?X????[E}(Z?X? ???? ???? ??? ?? ??X? ??l??l???? ??X??9 ???? ??o]vP?}v &}}?ZX ??o]vP?}v?}}l ????[E}(Z?X? ???? ? ??? ?? ??X? ?l??l???? ??X??9 ???? ??o]vP?}v ?v?,]ooZX ??o]vP?}v?}}l ???[E}(Z?X?i?X ???? ? ??? ?? ?? ?l??l???? ??X??9 ???? ??o]vP?}v ^}??ZD]v^?X }???D]v?}}l ????[}(Z?X?? ???? ? ??? ?? ??X? ?l??l???? ??X??9 ???? ??o]vP?}v s]v??ZX ??o]vP?}v?}}l ???[t}(Z?X? ???? ? ?U??? ?? ??X? ?l??l???? ??X??9 ????? ??o]vP?}v D]v^?X tZ]P?]oo?}}l ?X?u]X^X}(i?X?l^?}vZX ???? ??? ?? ??X? ?l?l???? ???? E??]?]v ^}??Z^?X u??l ???? ? ??U??? ??? ?? ?l??l???? ??X??9 ???? E??]?]v >]v}ov^?XE}X? t]oo}??}}l ???[^}(Z?X??? ???? ? ?U??? ?? ?? ??l??l???? ??X??9 ???? E??]?]v ]o?u}?^?X ^v??}}l ???? ???? ??? ?? ?? ?l??l???? ??X??9 ???? E??]?]v oo]?^?X }??}v?  D]vZ]o?} ?v}(??X??Z?X?E ???? ? ??U??? ?? ?? ?l??l???? ??X??9 ???? E??]?]v ^?vo?W?lZX ???}}l^?]oo?? ???[X}(^?vo?X^?X ???? ? ??? ?? ?? ?l??l???? ??X??9 ???? E??]?]v W?oDv(}???X ???u ?X?u]Xt}(i?X?lZ?X??? ???? ???? ??? ?? ?? ?l??l???? ??X??9 ???? E??]?]v X ???? ? ??? ?? ??X? ?l??l???? ??X??9 ???? Wo?u}??Z vo^?X W???lZ]?? X?u]Xt}(Z?X?? ???? ???? ?U??? ?? ?? ?l??l???? ??X??9 ???? Wo?u}??Z u]?^?X W???lZ]?? ?u]Xt}(Z?X?? ???? ? ??? ?? ?? ?l??l???? ??X??9 ???? Wo?u}??Z :?ZX W}ovZ]?? ???[}(Z?X?? ???? ? ??? ?? ??X? ?l??l???? ??X??9 ???? Wo?u}??Z E}??ZD]v^?X W}ovZ]?? ???[t}(Z?X?? ???? ? ?U??? ?? ?? ??l??l???? ??X??9 ???? Wo?u}??Z E?}?X W???lZ]?? X?u]X}(,??]v?}v?X ???? ? ??? ?? ? ?l??l???? ??X??9 ???? Wo?u}??Z W???}vZX W}ovZ]?? ???[t}(Z?X?? ???? ? ??? ?? ?? ??l??l???? ??X??9 ?????? Wo?u}??Z ^}??ZD]v^?X ?vvu?}}l X?u^}(Z?X? ???? ? ?U??? ?? ??X? ?l??l???? ???? ^}??Z]vP?}v Kod??v?]lZX Y?]vv]?]Z]?? K??Y?]vv]?]Z]?? ???? ???? ?U??? ?? ?? ??l??l???? ??X??9 ???? ^}??Z]vP?}v t??v??^?X Y?]vv]?]Z]?? ???[(?}ui?X?l^?uv?^?X ???? ???? ?U??? ?? ?? ??l??l???? ??X??9 ???? ^}??Z]vP?}v ^??]vP^?X Y?]vv]?]Z]?? X?u]Xt}(Z?X?? ???? ? ?U??? ?? ?? ??l?l???? ??X??9 ???? ^}??Z]vP?}v t??D]v^?X Y?]vv]?]Z]?? ???[t}(Z?X?? ???? ? ??U??? ?? ?? ??l??l???? ??X??9 ???? ^}??Z]vP?}v t??v??^?X??X ]PZ?D]oZ]?? iv?d}/ r ?? ???? ? ?U??? ?? ?? ?l??l???? ??X??9 ???? ^}??Z]vP?}v D?]}v?X ]PZ?D]oZ]?? /v????]}v}(t??^?X ???? ???? ??U??? ?? ??X? ??l??l???? ??X??9 ???? ^}??Z]vP?}v v??^?X Y?]vv]?]Z]?? ???[t}(t??^? ???? ? ?U??? ?? ?? ??l??l???? ??X??9 ???? ^}??Z]vP?}v >??>vZX Y?]vv]?]Z]?? ???[t}(i?X?lZ?X?? ???? ? ?U??? ?? ?? ??l??l???? ??X??9 ???? ^}??Z]vP?}v E?oo^?X Y?]vv]?]Z]?? ?X?u]XE}(t??Y?v^? ???? ? ?U??? ?? ??X? ?l?l???? ??X??9 ???? ^}??Z]vP?}v D]oo^?X Y?]vv]?]Z]?? X?D]o?t}(Z?X?? ???? ? ?U??? ?? ?? ??l?l???? ??X??9 ???? ^}??Z]vP?}v ???]??^?X Y?]vv]?]Z]?? X?u]Xt}(Z?X?? ???? ? ?U??? ?? ??X? ??l??l???? ??X??9 ???? ^}??Z]vP?}v ,??^?X Y?]vv]?]Z]?? X??u]Xt}(Z?X?? ???? ? ?U??? ?? ?? ??l??l???? ??X??9 ???? ^}??Z]vP?}v Kod??v?]lZX dvD]oZ]?? ???[E}(Z?X??? ???? ???? ?U??? ?? ?? ?l??l???? ??X??9 ??v]?? ?]P? ???  }( ??? ???? ^}??Z]vP?}v W?}???^?X ]PZ?D]oZ]?? ???[}(/ r ?? ???? ???? ?U??? ?? ??X? ?l??l???? ??X??9 ???? ^}??Z]vP?}v t??v??^?X??X ??}v?}}l X?u]Xt}(:?]o^?X ???? ? ?U??? ?? ? ??l??l???? ??X??9 ???? ^}??Z]vP?}v ????^?X Y?]vv]?]Z]?? K((Z?X???/ r ???]??? ???? ???? ??? ?? ?? ??l??l???? ??X??9 ???? ^}??Z]vP?}v :?>v ]PZ?D]oZ]?? X?D]ot}(i?X/ r ?? ???? ? ?U??? ?? ? ??l??l???? ??X??9 ???? ^}??Z]vP?}v ^}??ZvZX D]????}}l ???[(?}ui?X?lD??ooE}o?X ???? ???? ?U??? ?? ?? ??l??l???? ??X??9 ???? ^}??Z]vP?}v t??Y?v^?X Y?]vv]?]Z]?? ???[(?}ui?X?l Z??}v^?X ???? ? ?U??? ?? ??X? ??l??l???? ??X??9 ??v]?? }u?o?^????o?~’^?? r ???( ???  }( ??? }u?o?^????o?~’^?? r ???( (a) &}??Z????}??}(?Z]???]}v (1) ????uv??uv??Z???uv?}(d?v??}???]}vV (2) ?&?v??uv?v?(?v?(?}u?Z^?]o d?v??}???]}v &?vU}voo}?]}v?vv?}?Z??}???Z?]??]or o(}??Z}v?????]}vUu]v?vvv??]?}(?}?]v ?Z]????V (3) ^h???uv?u}?}?]??U??v?]????U????]v}?]?r o]??V (4) ?]l???uv?v??}U????U??Z}??? ?Z]Z]v ?}uuvv?]???](]oo??]Pv?(}?]?o???oU]vr o?]vP ?Z ??}?]?]}v }(  ]?o ovU ?P?o?? }( ?Z?Z???Z(]o]??]??]Pv?(}??Z?o??]???}( ]?o?}?]??}?Z??]?Z}?Z?u}?}(??v??}??r ?]}vVv (5) ?d }?o??}i?}???uv??Z}??}(?Zv?]?}??]}? ?ov??}i?X (b) }uu}?]}v?(}?oo?????Zoo?}??]v???}(?Z?ovr v]vPU?]PvU}v?????]}vv}???]vP?]?]?]?}(ooZ]PZr ???U?(]v]v??]}v?? r ?U]v?Z]????X (c) &?}u(?v ??]???Z???uv?}?v?u?v]]?o]??(}? ?Z }v?????]}vU ???}??]}vU ?Z]o]??]}v }? ?o}?]}v }( Z]PZ???U?}?}??????U??}vou}?v??Zoo?r ?v?}??}?](]o]?]?(}?oo????U]vo?]vPU??v}?o]ur ]??}U]l? ??v?]?ol??]?Z???}??]??????v ?u??XKvv(??K?}??U????Uv}?o???Zv}v??v? }(?Z?}?ou}?v?}(v???Z(?v??]?]vv?(]?o?? ?Zoo?}??vXdZ???uv?}?u?v]]?o]???Zoo?l (??????v?]?  ??v?]}v?ov?]v?}}?v??Z????}??]?X E}??]?Z??v]vP?Z??}?]?]}v?}(?Z]?????]}vU??Z??}?]r ?]}v??Zoov}???o?]v?Z?v?}(???}?u?v]]?o??v?r ?}???]}vu?Pv?X (d) }u}?]}v???]??????v??}????]}v  ~}(?Z]???]}v v?Z??}?]?]}v}((]o]?]??????v??}????]}v~}(?Z]? ??]}v?Zoov}????]?](?Z}uu]??]}v?}(d?v??}?r ??]}v}?u?v]]?ooP]?o?]?}???u]v?U?]?Z???? ?}Z]PZ??U?}}??????Z?W~?E}vu }?}?]???P]???}r Z]]?V~??Z?]?u}v?????v}(vV~??Zr }uu}?]}v}(oo?????}?ov???]?o???v?]? }u?}vv?}(?Z?}?o??}i?}??V}?~??Z}uu}?]}v }(oo????]?v}?}v?]??v??]?Z?Z?????}?  ??Zu?v]]?o]r ????U????]?o?U??}P?u}(}v?????]}vUu]v?vvv?r ?]?X ??v]?? W}o]?}?v}v??/v(}?u?}v ???  }( ??? W}o]?}?v}v??/v(}?u?}v DhE//W>ZWZ^Ed d/s^ D?v]]?o]?? >}v??v??o d/  uu?? ?o]v v]?DE]?U d}?vDvP? ??^]u}v]v ?]??}o U d}?vDvP? :}Zv}??] Wo?u}??Z ?]D?Zv?U D?}? Z?o? t]P?? ^}??Z]vP?}v ‘?????ulU d}?vDvP? :]u’???}v ??v]?? W}o]?}?v}v??/v(}?u?}v ???  }( ??? KEdd/E&KZDd/KE D]o]vP??? ???D]v^???U&}???Z&o}}?U,??}?Ud????? do?Z}vl(?  ~?????? r ???? /v??v? Z??Wll???X?}PX}?Pl??v??}???}vlu?}XZ?uo /v? &]P??? ???  }( ??? Index /v? /v? &]P??? &]P???X^v]?}?]vv?}?v?Z?P]}v ……………….. ?? &]P???X?]Pv??}??v??}?lv??]ou? …………….. ?? &]P???Xo}? r ??}(?}?v?o?]??]o? …………………………. ?? &]P???XZP]}v?~}? r ??????o?? ………………… ?? &]P???X,?uvv}v}u]?Z??]?Zo}(E?z}?l ]??v,??}?u??}??lu?l?? ………………. ?? &]P???X/v???P]}vo??v?]?]v?P??}v …………………………. ?? &]P???XE?,?v r ,??}? r ^??]vP.o?]ou? …………… ?? &]P???XW}?v?ov]??(}????? ………………………….. . ?? &]P???XW}?v?oo??v??}???  v?]Pvo}?}v? ………. ?? &]P????X&? oZ]PZ????v]vP}???u ………………… ?? &]P??  ??X^???]??v??}???}v(?v]vP}???u ……… ?? &]P????XW}??o?}vP?}??Z? ………………………….. ?? &]P????XW}??o?}vv?]??~???}v???????u]o ……. ?? &]P????Xvv?o?vu?o}?uv???? ………………………….. . ?? &]P????Xd??ou}?]v}uP?}?? ………………………….. ?? &]P????X}??}(o]?]vP?/W}? …………………………. ? ? &]P????XD]vZ}??Z}o ]v}u?v???o}l P?}?? ………………………….. ………………………….. …….. ?? &]P????X,}??Z}o?o}????9}(?Z?}????o?o? v???o}lP?}?? ………………………….. ……………… ?? &]P????XP]+?v???v?Z?P]}vv]?? u?v] ]?o]?? ………………………….. ……………………… ?? &]P????X]?ovo?o??v???o}lP?}?? ……… ?? &]P????X^o( r ]v?.?Zv]]??~E}v r ,]??v]v ,]??v]}vo? ………………………….. ……………………… ?? &]P????XW?v?P}(Z}??Z}o??Z?]??o?? …………. ??? &]P????XD?v]]?o?]?olv??}?l? …………………………. ??? &]P????XW}?v?o???v??ol??vv??]?ol? ??}?Puv? ………………………….. ………………… ??? &]P????X,]l]vP??]o?]v?Z?P]}v ………………………….. ….. ??? &]P????Xtol]vPv]l]vP}???u ………………………… ??? &]P????Xtol?}?u?}(?]??}ovE??]?]v ………. ??? /v? &]P??? ???  }( ??? &]P????X}oo]?]}v?]v?}o?]vP????]v?l?o]???  ??} ??? ………………………….. ………………………….. ……… ??? &]P????XW?}]o]??  }(?Z?????]u???? ………… ??? &]P????X}oo]?]}v?}v^??Z]PZ????]?Z????]v? ??]?u???vv?u? ………………………….. …. ??? &]P????Xd?v?]??]??Z]????v?}(oo  ?}?l??? ?o}(??]v ………………………….. ……………… ??? &]P? ???XZvP]v??v?]?u}?Z?}???u? ??v}uu???? ………………………….. ………………. ??? &]P????XW?v?}(}uu??????]vP??v?]?]v?o? ?P]}v?v]?? ………………………….. ……………….. ??? &]P????X,]??}?]o??]vv??}?l ………………………….. ……. ??? &]P????X,]??}?]o??uv??}?l ………………………….. ……. ??? &]P????X>}o???}??? ………………………….. ………………. ??? &]P????XW??vP???]????}???vPZ}?? …………………. ??? &]P????X}???????vP???]? ………………………….. …….. ??? &]P????X&?}??}?????} ………………………….. ……… ??? &]P????X,??}? r ????????v??}?l ………………… ??? &]P????X}???????vP???]? ………………………….. …….. ??? &]P????X&?}??}?????} ………………………….. ……… ??? &]P????XW??vP???]????}???vPZ}?? …………………. ??? &]P????Xd(???l?}?? ………………………….. ………………… ??? &]P????XW???v?]????]? ………………………….. …….. ??? &]P????X}???????vP???]? ………………………….. …….. ??? &]P????XW??vP???]????}???vPZ}?? …………………. ??? &]P????X^??]???Z?}(?}?o}??}(}???}v? ….. ??? &]P????X??P?l???]????  Zo( r Z}?? ………………. ??? &]P????X??P?l v??]????Zo( r Z}?? ……………… ??? &]P????XW ?v?}(?}?l??}uu??vP???}u}]o … ??? &]P????X:}?]v?}?v????]v??}?l? …………………… ??? &]P????XZvP]v??v?}(?}?l??}uu??vP? ??}}oU???? r ???? ………………………….. ……………. ??? &]P????XW?v?P}(?}?l]vP??]v???Z}?}?l]v ?Z?u?}?v ………………………….. …………………… ??? &]P????XZvP]v??v?P}(  ?}?l]vP??]v?? ?Z}?}?l]v?Z?u?}?vU???? r ???? …………… ??? &]P????X}uu??G}???]?Z]v}vv??? ……………….. ??? &]P????X:}?]v?}?v????]v??}?l?~????] ….. ??? &]P????X}uu??G}???}l(?}u?Z?P]}v ………………… ??? &]P????XZ}(????]???}?v …………………………. ??? &]P????X?????????8UD}v?U?W??D ……………… ??? &]P????X?????????8U&?]?U?W??WD …………………. ??? &]P????Xs}o?u?}?]????}?U???? ……………………… ??? &]P????Xs}o?u?}?]????}?U????~??}i? …….. ??? &]P????X^]???]?Zv}?uoo?Z]PZ]v???? ……….. ??? &]P????Xvv?o?}v?}(???l(?]PZ???8(?}u?Z ,??}?u??}? ………………………….. …………… ??? /v? do? ???  }( ??? &]P????Xvv?o?}v?}(???l(?]PZ? ??8?}?Z ,??}?u??}? ………………………….. …………… ??? &]P????Xvv?o?}v?}(???l(?]PZ??Z?}?PZ?Z ,??}?u??}? ………………………….. …………… ??? &]P????X&?]PZ??]oo]v?v???l?Z?}v^??  ?}? .. ??? &]P????Xv??o}vv? ???P]}v ………………………….. .. ??? do? do?XE?}vo??(}?uvP}o? ………………………….. …….. ? do?Xd?]o??}?}?v?? ………………………….. ……………………. ?? do?Xd?]ou]oPv???????}?v …………………………. ?? do?XZZ r (?v??}i??]v?Z?P]}v …………………….. ?? do?X&?oZ]PZ??(?v]vP???]?? }uu?v]??U???? r ? ??? ………………………….. ………… ?? do?X^dW r h???v?P}(ood/W r o]??(?v? …………. ?? do?XW?v?}(^dW r h?Z??]???}?v ……………… ?? do?X^dW r h(?v]vP?u?v]]?o]??  ~???? …………………. ?? do?X^dW r h(?v]vP?u? v]]?o]?????]? ……………… ?? do??X &????^dW r hW?}i??~????v}v?? ………….. ?? do??X>Kd/W??}i??(}????? ………………………….. ……… ?? do??XW?}i??]oo??v??}???}v(?v?? ?P]}v~?Z?}?PZ???? ………………………….. ………….. ?? do??XW?}i??]oo??v??}???}v(?v???? ……. ?? do??XW}??o?}v?u?v]]?o]?? ………………………….. …… ?? do??XP]???]??}v ………………………….. ………………….. ?? do??X^o( r ]v?.? ………………………….. ………………. ?? do??X,}??]vP??? ………………………….. ………………………. ?? do??Xs?ov?o???]vi??]?v?Z? …………………. ??? do??XK???vP??????(}??ZE?,?v r ^??]vP.o?]o}??]}? ………………………….. ……….. ??? do??Xu??l??]v?Uv}??Z}?v ………………………….. …. ??? do??Xu??l??]v?U?}??Z}?v ………………………….. …. ??? do??X}uu}v?}???v???o?u?~u]v???? u} ………………………….. ………………………….. …… ??? do??X&]? r ?}????}???}v?]v}vv??? ……….. ??? do??X????????}??? ………………………….. …………….. ??? do??X}uu?????}???}v?]v}vv??? ………… ??? do??X>}vP r ]??v????u]vo? ………………………….. .. ??? do??X>}?}v??]?Zo}vP r ]??v?????] ………….. ??? do??X????v?]?}???}v?]v}vv??? ……….. ??? do??XD?v]]?o]o r  r Z]???]o]v?oU?U v?u? ………………………….. ………………………….. ??? do? ???  }( ??? do??X ???????}??? ………………………….. ……………… ??? do??Xd}?}uu????v?}v?(}??}?l??(?}u?Z ?P]}v ………………………….. ………………………….. ….. ??? do??X&?v?}voo??].?}v}(?}? …………………….. ??? do??XW?lv?]o}??}(???}?Z?P]}v ……………… ??? do??XD?????uv?}v]?}v??}?v …………… ??? do??X?]P??u?v]]?o]?? ………………………….. ……… ??? do??X?]P??]?Z?}}???8]v???vP? ……………….. ??? do??Xd?]v?(?}uE?z}?l]???}?Z?P]}vU???? …… ??? do??Xd?]v?(?}u?Z?P]}v?}E ?z}?l]??U???? …… ??? do??Xd?]v?(?}u?Z?P]}v?}}??}vU???? …………….. ??? do??Xd?]v?(?}u}??}v?}?Z?P]}vU???? …………….. ?? ? do??Xd?]v?(?}uE?,?v?}t]oo]u???PU D??Z????U???? ………………………….. ………….. ??? do??Xd?]v?(?}ut]oo]u???PUD??Z?????} E?  ,?vU???? ………………………….. ………………. ???

Summary PM 2.5 Air Quality Conformity Determination May 2017

PM2.5 Air Quality Conformity Determination Page | 1 Emissions Results Summary REGIONAL AIR QUALITY EMISSIONS ASSESSMENT PM2.5 NAAQS for the Conn ecticut portion of the NY -NJ -CT PM2.5 Attainment/Maintenance Area May 201 7 The Clean Air Act Amendments (CAAA) of 1990 and the federal transportation regulations and legislation r ecognized the major contributions of transportation sources to the overall air quality problem evidenced throughout the country. To effectuate a reduction i n transportation – related emissions and a corresponding improvement in air quality, areas designated as non – attainment or maintenance for a criterion pollutant were required to demonstrate that their transportation plans, programs and projects contributed t o the attainment of National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) and would not cause a new violation or delay attainment of the NAAQS . This process is referred to as Air Quality Conformity . The US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) promulgated national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) for fine particulate matter in 1997. Fine particulate matter is referred to as PM2.5 and is a mixture of microscopic solids and suspended liquid solids in the air. It is formed directly as a by -product of combustion, such as smoke or automobile exhaust, or indirectly from chemical reactions in the atmosphere. Fairfield and New Haven Counties are included in the New York -New Jersey -Connecticut (NY -NJ -CT) P M2.5 non -attainment area. On April 17, 200 7 the Connecticut Department of Energy and Environmental Protection (CTDEEP) submitted a revision to the State Implementation Plan to establish interim progress for achieving the NAAQS for fine particulate matter and motor vehicle emission budgets. The annual emission budgets for the Connecticut portion of the NY -NJ -CT non -attainment area were determined to be adequate and are used in future analysis years. The EPA has also determined Connecticut’s PM2.5 attainment demonstration SIP to be administratively and technically complete as of January 8, 2009. Effective October 24, 2013, the Connecticut portion of the multi -state PM2.5 non -attainment area was re -designated as “attainment /maintenance.” EPA’s guidance for mai ntenance plans calls for a demonstration of continued compliance by showing that future emissions during the maintenance period will not exceed the level of emission in the attainment inventory. The end of the maintenance period is 2025. The Connecticut D epartment of Transportation is responsible for conducting the air quality emissions assessments for the metropolitan planning organizations in Connecticut. The CTDOT uses the statewide travel demand model to estimate vehicle miles of travel for various cla sses of highways and during various time periods. The future transportation network includes all planned improvement projects and is based on the complete implementation of the transportation improvement program (TIP) and the long range transportation plan s. The MOVES2010b emissions model is used to establish emissions budgets for the 2017 and 2025 analysis years. Emission estimates were developed for each scenario year using PM2.5 Air Quality Conformity Determination Page | 2 Emissions Results Summary MOVES2014a for direct PM2.5 and indirect PM2.5 emissions based on the estimate of NOx emissions, the most critical precursor of PM2.5. The conformity test requires the emissions from the future transportation system expected to be in place in 2017 to be less than the EPA -approved budget for 2017 and the emissions from the 2025 build scenario and subsequent years to be less than the 2025 budget. The emissions analyses were conducted for the following years: • 2013 – Attainment year • 2017 – Motor Vehicle Emissions Budget year • 2025 – Motor Vehicle Emissions Budget year; End maintenance per iod • 2035 – Interim modeling year • 2040 – Long range transportation plan horizon year The results of the quantitative emis sions analysis conducted by CT DOT are shown i n the following table and the analysis year trends are depicted in the charts following the table. CENTRAL NAUGATUCK VALLEY PLANNING REGION 2015 -2040 LONG RANGE TRANSPORTATION PLAN REGION EMISSIONS ANALYSIS RESULTS Fine Particulate Matter (PM 2.5 ) Annual NAAQS Connecticut Portion of the NY -NJ -LI -CT Area Direct PM 2.5 Emission Analysis NO x Emission Analysis Analysis Year Action SIP Budget Difference Action SIP Budget Difference 2018 Emissions 284.10 575.80 -291.70 7,192.70 12,791.80 -5,599.10 2025 Emissions 202.30 516.00 -313.70 4,361.80 9,728.10 -5,366.30 2035 Emissions 154.40 516.00 -361.60 2,726.30 9,728.10 -7,001.80 204 0 Emissions 144.60 516.00 -371.40 2,572.00 9,728.10 -7,156.10 PM2.5 Air Quality Conformity Determination Page | 3 Emissions Results Summary 0.00 100.00 200.00 300.00 400.00 500.00 600.00 700.00 2018 2025 2035 2040 Estimated Direct PM 2.5 Emissions by Analysis Year Compared to Approved EPA Budget CT Portion of the NY -NJ -LI-CT Attainment/Maintenance Area Estimated Direct PM 2.5 Emissions (Tons/Year) SIP Budget (Tons/Year) 0.00 2,000.00 4,000.00 6,000.00 8,000.00 10,000.00 12,000.00 14,000.00 2018 2025 2035 2040 Estimated NOx (Indirect) Emissions by Analysis Year Compared to Approved EPA Budget CT Portion of the NY -NJ -LI-CT Attainment/Maintenance Area Estimated Nox (Indirect) Emissions (Tons/Year) SIP Budget (Tons/Year)

Summary Ozone Air Quality Conformity Determination May 2017

Ozone Air Quality Conformity Determination Page | 1 Emissions Results Summary REGIONAL AIR QUALITY EMISSIONS ASSESSMENT OZONE NAAQS for the Connecticut portion of the New York -Northern New – Jersey -Long Island Ozone Nonattainment Area and the Greater Connecticut Ozone Nonattainment Area May 201 7 The Clean Air Act Amendments (CAAA) of 1990 and the federal transportation regulations and legislation r ecognized the major contributions of transportation sources to the overall air quality problem evidenced throughout the country. To effectuate a reduction in transportation – related emissions and a corresponding improvement in air quality, areas designated as non – attainment or maintenance for a criterion pollutant were required to demonstrate that their transportation plans, programs and projects contributed to the attainment of National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) and would not cause a new violati on or delay attainment of the NAAQS . This process is referred to as Air Quality Conformity . Connecticut is divided into two non -attainment area for the 8 -hour ozone NAAQS , both are classified as “ Moderate ” non -attainment areas . Fairfield, New Haven and M iddlesex counties are included as part of the New York -Northern New Jersey -Long Island (NY -NJ -CT) non – attainment area. The remainder of the state is designated as the Greater Connecticut non – attainment area. In June, 2004, the EPA finalized the 8 -hour co nformity for Ozone non -attainment areas and the designated the Connecticut portion of the New York -Northern New Jersey -Long Island non – attainment area as a “moderate” non -attainment areas for the 8 -hour Ozone standard. Subsequent decisions by the EPA and r evisions to the approach for classifying non -attainment areas re -designated both of Connecticut ’s non -attainment area s as a “marginal” non – attainment area s with an attainment date of December 31, 2015. Based on 2012 -2014 air quality data, the EPA determined that Connecticut’s non -attainment areas did not attain ozone standards by July20, 2015. Both the Greater Connecticut and the New York -New Jersey -Long Island areas were reclassified as “Moderate,” eff ective June 3, 2016. The new attainment date for these two areas is July 20, 2018. The Connecticut Department of Transportation is responsible for conducting the air quality emissions assessments for the metropolitan planning organizations in Connecticut. The CTDOT uses the statewide travel demand model to estimate vehicle miles of travel for various classes of highways and during various time periods. The future transportation network includes all planned improvement projects and is based on the complete implementation of the transportation improvement program (TIP) and the long range transportation plans. The MOVES201 4a emissions model is used to calculate emissions from transportation travel . The 8 -hour budgets were developed jointly by CTDOT and CTDEEP . The budgets were found to be adequate by EPA and can be used in comparing future transportation -related emission to determine conformity. Ozone Air Quality Conformity Determination Page | 2 Emissions Results Summary The conformity test requires the emissions from the future transportation system to be less than the EPA -approved budgets for all analysis years. The emissions analyses were conducted for the following years: • 201 8 – New attainment year and near term analysis year • 2025 – Interim modeling year • 2035 – Interim modeling year • 2040 – Long range transportation plan horizon year The results of the quantitative emis sions analysis conducted by CT DOT are shown in the following tables and the analysis year trends are depicted in the charts following the tables. CENTRAL NAUGATUCK VALLEY PLANNING REGION 2015 -2040 LONG RA NGE TRANSPORTATION PLAN REGION EMISSIONS ANALYSIS RESULTS 8-Hour Ozone NAAQS Connecticut portion of the New York -Northern New Jersey -Long Island, NY -NJ – CT Ozone Nonattainment Area VOC Emission Analysis NO X Emission Analysis Analysis Year Action SIP Budget Difference Action SIP Budget Difference 201 8 Emissions 16 .56 27.4 0 -10 .84 22.39 54.6 0 -32 .21 2025 Emissions 12.3 3 27.4 0 -15.0 7 13.2 6 54.6 0 -41.3 4 2035 Emissions 7.2 6 27.4 0 -20.1 4 7.8 6 54.6 0 -46.7 4 2040 Emissions 6.6 8 27.4 0 -20.7 2 7.3 5 54.6 0 -47.2 5 1. A small reduction in VMT and emissions in the Greater Connecticut area will occur from the ECO program in the Connecticut portion of the NY -NJ -LI area due to travel between the areas. 2. VOC & NOx e mission s are in tons per summer day and are calculated using Connecticut’s vehicle mix . 3. HMPS 14 Functional Class system used. 4. National Low Emission Vehicle (NLEV) program included in 2008 and future years. 5. Eight Hour Ozone emission budgets effective June 27, 2008. 6. Series 31C with 20 iterations equilibrium assignment. Ozone Air Quality Conformity Determination Page | 3 Emissions Results Summary 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 2018 2025 2035 2040 Estimated VOC Emissions by Analysis Year Compared to Approved EPA Budget CT Portion of NY -NJ -LI-CT Non -Attainment Area Estimated VOC emissions (Tons/Day) EPA VOC Budget (Tons/Day) 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 2018 2025 2035 2040 Estimated NOx Emissions by Analysis Year Compared to Approved EPA Budget CT Portion of NY -NJ -LI-CT Non -Attainment Area Estimated NOx Emissions (Tons/Day) EPA NOx Budget (Tons/Day) Ozone Air Quality Conformity Determination Page | 4 Emissions Results Summary CENTRAL NAUGATUCK VALLEY PLANNING REGION 2015 -2040 LONG RANGE TRANSPORTATION PLAN REGION EMISSIONS ANALYSIS RESULTS 8-Hour Ozone NAAQS Greater Connecticut Non -Attainment Area VOC Emission Analysis NO X Emission Analysis Analysis Year Action SIP Budget Difference Action SIP Budget Difference 201 8 Emissions 15. 07 26.3 0 -11.23 19 .74 49.2 0 -29 .46 2025 Emissions 11.3 8 26.3 0 -14.9 2 11.8 6 49.2 0 -37.3 4 2035 Emissions 6.65 26.3 0 -19.6 5 6.9 1 49.2 0 -42 .29 2040 Emissions 6.1 5 26.3 0 -20.1 5 6.4 8 49.2 0 -42.7 2 1. A small reduction in VMT and emissions in the Greater Connecticut area will occur from the ECO program in the Connecticut portion of the NY -NJ -LI area due to travel between the areas. 2. VOC & NOx emissions are in tons per summer day and are calculated using Connecticut’s vehicle mix. 3. HMPS 14 Functional Class system used. 4. National Low Emission Vehicle (NLEV) program included in 2008 and future years. 5. Eight Hour Ozone emission budgets ef fective June 27, 2008. 6. Series 31C with 20 iterations equilibrium assignment. Ozone Air Quality Conformity Determination Page | 5 Emissions Results Summary 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 2018 2025 2035 2040 Estimated VOC Emissions by Analysis Year Compared to Approved EPA Budget Greater CT Non -Attainment Area Estimated VOC emissions (Tons/Day) EPA VOC Budget (Tons/Day) 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 2018 2025 2035 2040 Estimated NOx Emissions by Analysis Year Compared to Approved EPA Budget Greater CT Non -Attainment Area Estimated NOx Emissions (Tons/Day) EPA NOx Budget (Tons/Day)

PM 2.5 Air Quality Conformity Determination May 2017

1 Table of Contents Con n e ct ic u t Department of Transpo rta tion Ce nt ra l Naugatu ck Valley M etropolit an Plannin g Organiza tio n Grea ter Br idg epo rt Valley M etropolit an Plannin g Organi zatio n Sout h C ent ra l Re gion Me tropolit an Planni ng Organiza tio n Sout h W estern Re gio n Me tropolit an Plannin g Organi zatio n Hous atoni c Valley M etropolit an Plannin g Organi za tio n PM 2.5 Air Q u al ity C o n fo rm ity D eterm inati on of the 201 5 Region al Tra nspo rtation Plans and the FY 2018 -2021 Tra nspo rtation Im prove m ent Pr og ra m s A m endme nt s for the Connec ticut po rtio n of the NY -NJ-CT PM 2.5 Attainm ent/ Ma int enance Area May 2017 Note: The five Connecticut MPOs (CNVMPO, GBVMPO, HVMPO, SCRCOG and SWRMP O) are pa rt of the larger NY – NJ-CT PM2.5 Attainment/Maintenance Area and this do cume nt incl ud es the do cume ntation of the regional analysis for the entire Connecticut po rtion of the Attainm ent/Mainte nance area, as well as do cumentation and info rmation on the processes an d procedu res undertaken by CTDOT, coo rdinator of the Air Qua lity Con formity for the five Connecticut Met ropo litan Planning Org anizatio ns. 2 Table of Contents 1) Overview…………… … …………………………… ……………………… … … 4 2) Purpose and Need…… ……………………………… …………………… …….. 5 3) Conne ctic ut PM2. 5 Attainment Mai ntenance Area……………………………… 12 4) Interagency Consultation…………………………… ……….……… … …… …. 12 5) Public Consultation………………………………… …..… ………………… ….. 13 6) PM 2.5 Emission Analysis…………………………… ………….… .…… ………. 14 7) Connecticut PM2.5 Regional Emissions Analysis Compo nents………… … …… 15 8) Annu al Inventories for PM2.5………… ……………… ………….……… … ……. 15 9) VMT and Emission Analysis………………………… ……………… … ……… … 16 10) Analysis Results……… ……………………………… …………………………… 39 11) Conclusion………… ……………………………… ………………… …… … …… 40 3 Lis t of Tabl es Table 1: Adequate Motor Ve hicle Emission Budgets – MOV ES2 010 b……… … …… … …. 14 Table 2: List of Connecticut Ne twork Changes…… … …… … …… … ……… … …… … …. 17 Table 3: Direct PM2.5 and NOx Emissions Budget Test Results (tons per year )……… … … 40 Lis t of Figu res Figure 1: Connect icut Portion of the NY-NJ-CT PM 2.5 Attai nment/M aintenance Area… …… 10 Lis t of App endice s App endix A: Interagency Consultat ion Mee ting Minutes…… … …… …… ……… … …… … … 41 App endix B: PM2.5 and NOx Precursor Emission Outputs By Analysis Year………… … ……. 45 App endix C: PM2.5 Input Files to MOVES 2010 b………………… … …… ……… … …… … …. 47 App endix D: Acronyms……………………………………………………. .…… 104 4 R egio n al Em issions A na lysis 1) OVER VIEW In March 20 07, th e Me trop olitan Plann ing Organizations (M POs) in Conn ecticut proposed to up date th eir Long Range Tr anspo rtation Plans (LRTPs). These revision s to Con ne cticut’s LRTPs req uired a new multi-state transportation conf ormity de termination for fine particulate matte r (PM 2.5). Therefore, th e Novemb er 2006 NY-NJ -CT PM 2.5 no n-attainmen t area conf ormity determination was revised to reflect emission projections from th e new or revised, non -exempt projects in Conn ecticut ’s 200 7-2035 LRTPs. On April 17, 2007, the Conne cticut De partmen t of Energy and Environ ment al Prot ection (CTDEEP) submi tted to th e U.S. En viro nmen tal Prot ection Age ncy (EPA) its State Implemen tation Plan (SIP) Re vision for Establishment of Interim Progress for the Fine Particle National Am bien t Air Qual ity Standard (NAA QS) and early fine particulate (PM 2.5 ) transportation conformity emission budge ts. The SIP revision ide ntified year 2009 annu al direct PM 2.5 and annu al nitrogen oxides (NO x) M otor Ve hicle Emission Bud gets (M VE Bs) associa ted with the Interim/ Early Progress SIP. The annu al 2009 M VEBs for th e Conn ecticut portion of th e New Yor k-Northern New Jer sey-Long Island, NY-NJ-CT PM 2.5 Area we re 360 tons per year of dire ct PM 2.5 and 18,279 tons per year of NO x.1 Th ese emissi ons bu dgets were foun d adeq uate as of Jun e 20 , 2007 and were approved into the Con necticut SIP on August 30, 2007. The annu al 2009 mot or vehicle emissions bu dgets for the Con ne cticut portion of th e New Yor k- North ern New Jer sey-Long Island, NY-NJ-CT PM 2.5 Area were de termined adeq uate through a May 24, 20 07 letter from Anne E. Arn old, M anager Air Quali ty Planning Uni t, EPA New England Reg ional Office to Anne Go bin, Chief CTDEE P and a June 5, 2007 Federal Regist er Notice of Adeq ua cy. The adeq uacy pro cess ma de the MV EBs effe ctive June 20, 2007 for transportation con formity dete rminations. The annu al 2009 motor vehicle emissions bu dgets for th e Conn ecticut portion of the New Yor k- North ern New Jersey-Long Island, NY-NJ -CT PM 2.5 Ar ea we re app roved into th e Con ne cticut SIP through a direct final rulemaking Fed eral Register on August 30, 2007 (72 FR 50029). This SIP element “2009 Early Progress Direct PM 2.5 and NOx M otor Vehicle Emission Budgets (M VEB s) for Tran sportation Conformity Pu rposes; Conne cticut; New Yo rk-Northern New Jer sey-Lon g Island, NY -NJ-CT PM 2.5 Area” became effective on Octo ber 29, 20 07. On Decemb er 14, 2009, EPA ’s final rule desi gna ting areas for th e 2006 PM 2.5 NAAQS became effective. This Air Quality Conformity analysis is being prepared to meet bo th th e 1997 Ann ual PM 2.5 NAAQS and the 20 06 24 -hou r PM 2.5 NAAQS . 1 Lett er from U.S. EPA to Anne Gob in, Chief CTDE P, dated May 24 , 200 7. 5 This rep ort was prep ared to documen t th e emission s analysis that was com pleted to evaluate Fis cal Year 201 5-20 18 Conformity of th e Statew ide Transportation Improvemen t Program (STIP) Ame ndments and the 2015 LRTPs to the SIP for air quality. This submi ttal incorporates th e FY 2015 – 2018 STIP and 2015 LRTPs from Con ne cticut ’s Regional Planning Organi zations (R PO), and the 2017 and 2025 M OVES2 010b emi ssions budgets dee med ade quate by EPA and effective as of February 20, 20132. EPA’s guidance for mainten ance plans calls for a demo nstration of cont inue d compliance by s howing that futu re emi ssions du ring the mainte nance pe riod will not ex ceed the level of emi ssion in th e attainment inven tory. The en d of the mainten ance period was established as 20 25, consistent with th e CAA section 175A (a) requ iremen t that the plan provide for mainten ance of th e NAAQS for at least 10 yea rs after EPA formally approves the red es ignation req uest. Emi ssion estimate s were develope d for direct PM 2.5, as well as for th e most im portant PM 2.5 pre cursor NO x. Em issio ns are projected to dec rease from the levels in the 20 07 attainment inven tory th rough th e en d of th e mainten ance period in 2025, including in the selected inte rim year of 201 7, thu s prov iding for cont inuing mainte nance of th e NAA QS. The rep ort is sub mitt ed to sa tisfy th e req uirements of th e SIP, as revi sed. 2) PURPOSE AND NEED a – What is Transp or tation Conformity? Transportation Con formity is the process, establishe d by joint guidance from th e United States Department of Tran spo rtation (USDOT) and th e United States Env ironmen tal Prot ection Agency (EPA) that ensures that transportation investmen ts will con tribute to improv ing air qu ality in areas whe re concen trations of certain pollut ant s ex cee d national air quality stand ard s. Transportation conformity as it curren tly exists emerg ed from the passage of env ironmental and transportation leg islation in th e early 19 90s (Clean Air Act Amen dments of 1990 and the Int ermod al Surface Transportation Efficienc y Act of 19 91). EPA promulgated a transportation con formity rule initially in 1993. The latest amen dmen t to th e tran spo rtation conf ormity rule, Transportation Conformity Rule, Amen dmen ts to Implemen t Provisions Containe d in the Safe, Ac count able, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Eq uity Act: A Legacy for Users, Final Ru le was pu blished Janu ary 24, 20 08 (73 FR 44 20). Oth er rec en t con formity rules related to particulate matter include: PM 2.5 and PM 10 Hot -Spo t Analyses in Project-Level Transportation Con formity De termination s for th e New PM 2.5 and 2 Federal Register, February 15, 2013 . EPA-R01-OAR-201 3-0020 ; A-1-FRL -9776-2 Adequacy Sta tus of Motor Ve hicles Emission Budgets for Transportation Conformity Purposes; Connecticut http:/ /ww w.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2013 -02-05/pdf/2013-02492.pdf 6 Exi sting PM 10 National Ambient Air Qual ity Stand ards; Final Rule M arch 10, 2006 (71 FR 12468); Transportation Con formity Rule Amend men ts for th e New PM 2.5 National Am bient Air Quality Standard: PM 2.5 Precursors; Final Ru le M ay 6, 2005 (70 FR 24 280), [Note: On Jun e 1, 2005, (70 FR 31354), EPA pub lished a Fina l Rule correc tion effective June 6, 2005 for Transpo rtation Conformity Rule Amen dme nts for the New PM 2.5Nation al Am bient Air Qua lity Standa rd: PM 2.5 Precurso rs]; and, Transportation Conformity Rule Am end men ts for the New 8-hour Ozone and PM 2.5 National Am bien t Air Quality Standards and M iscellaneou s Revisions for Ex isting Areas; Transportation Conf ormity Rule Amend ment s: Res ponse to Court Decision and Addition al Ru le Ch an ges; Final Rule July 1, 2004 (69 FT 40004). Re cently E PA pub lishe d Transportation Conformity Ru le PM 2.5 and PM 10 Amend men ts, Final Rule March 24, 201 0 (75 FR 1425 9-14 285). Transportation Conformity rulemaking action s can be foun d on EPA’s Office of Transpo rtation and Air Quali ty we b s ite at URL add ress: htt p://www .epa.gov/o taq/statere sou rces/trasconf/con f-regs .htm Transportation con formity wor ks in th e following way:  EPA establishes Nation al Am bient Air Quality Standards (NAAQ S) ba sed on pu blic health research. The standard s set maxim um concentrations of six criteria pollut ants in the am bient (outdo or) air.  EPA designates parts of th e cou ntry where th e NAAQS are ex ceede d as a “non- attainmen t area.” States th at have non -attainment areas with in th eir bo und aries are req uired to submi t State Im plemen tation Plans (SIPs) to EPA to demon strate how the non-attainment areas will im prove the ir air quality and meet th e NAAQS in the tim eframe spe cified by the Clean Air Act.  Non-attainment areas must conf orm their tra nspor tation plans, programs and projects to th eir area’s mot or vehicle emissio ns bu dget that is containe d within its SIP. If a sta te does no t yet have SIP emi ssions bu dgets in place, interim emi ssion tests must be pas sed to show conf ormity. Un der th e Conformity Rules, th e following test for PM 2.5 and NOx must be me t:  TEST: Emissions from fut ure Action Scenarios from 20 17 on, must be less than th e 2017 Mo tor Ve hicle Emission Budg ets  TEST: Emissions from fut ure Action Sc enarios from 2025 on, must be less th an the 2025 Mo tor Ve hicle Emission Budg ets 7 To do this, MPOs use a model create d by the EPA th at applies emission factors to th e region ’s vehicle flee t. These emissi on factors are combined with vehicle miles traveled data, which is gen erated by an MPO’s travel deman d model. The trav el de man d mod el uses the region’s highway networ k, estimated trav el con ditions and demographic data to es tima te where trips begin and end. It is im portant to note th at th e transportation con formity de termination is based on the mix of new and ex isting projects and th e current infrastructure. Some projects, par ticularly highway capacity expansions, may be individually de leterious to air qu ality but are offset by be neficial initiatives such as new transit projects and engineering imp rovem ents th at mitiga te local congestion or red uce vehicular travel. The conformity regulations rec ognize th is balance betwee n projects that increase and red uce emissions by req uiring that M POs de monstrate that the overall set of investmen ts moves th e reg ion to ward cleane r air, in kee ping with EP A policies. b – Ba ckground on Fi ne Pa rticulate Matter ( PM 2.5) Fine particulate matte r, also called PM 2.5, is a mixture of microsco pic solids and liquid droplets su spen ded in air, where th e size of the particles is equal to or less than 2.5 micrometers (abou t one-thirtieth th e diamet er of a huma n hair). Fine pa rticles can be emitted direc tly (such as smoke from a fire, or as a componen t of auto mobile exhaust) or be forme d indirectly in the air from powe r plant, ind ustrial and mobile sour ce emissio ns of gases such as sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxides. The health eff ects associa ted with exposure to fine pa rticles are serious. Sc ien tific stu dies ha ve shown significant a ssociations between eleva ted fine particle levels and premature death . Effects associated with fine particle exposure include ag grav ation of resp iratory and card iovas cular disease (as indicated by increased hospital admissions, emergency ro om visits, absences from school or wor k, and restricted activity da ys), lung disea se, dec reased lun g function, as thma attac ks, and certain card iovas cular problems such as heart attac ks and card iac arrhythmia. W hile fine particles are un healthy for anyone to breath e, peo ple with heart or lung disease, asth matics, olde r adults, and children are es pecially at ris k. c – PM 2.5 National Ambient Air Quality Standard s In July 1997, EPA issue d NAAQS for PM 2.5, designed to prot ect th e pu blic from exposure to PM 2.5 at levels that may cause he alth problem s. The stand ard s include an annu al standard set at 15 microgra ms per cub ic meter, bas ed on the th ree year average of ann ual PM 2.5 8 concent ration s and a 24-hour standard of 65 mi crograms per cubic meter based on the thre e- year average of 24 -hou r concentrations. In gene ral, areas nee d to mee t both standards to be cons ide red to attain PM 2.5 NAAQS. Ar eas not mee ting the PM 2.5 NAAQS are called PM 2.5 non -attainmen t areas. These areas have had or con tribu ted to PM 2.5 levels higher than allowed und er the N AAQS. No n-attainmen t areas are subject to transportation con formity, through wh ich local transportation and air quality officials coordinate plann ing efforts to en sure that transportation projects do no t hinde r an area’s ability to reach its clean air goals. Transportation conf ormity requiremen ts become effective on e year after an area is designated as a no n-attai nment area. EPA issued official designations for the PM 2.5 standard on Decemb er 17, 2004 and mad e mod ifications in April 2005. On April 5, 2005, de signations un der the nation al air qu ality standards for fine particle pollution or PM 2.5 became effective. Th erefore, by April 4, 200 6, all PM 2.5 non-attainment areas we re req uired to implemen t transpo rtation con formity. Under the EPA designation, non -attainmen t areas are req uired to me et the PM 2.5 NAAQS as soon as pos sible, but no later th an 2010. EPA may gran t attainmen t date extensions of up to five years in areas with mo re se vere PM 2.5 problems and where emissions cont rol measures are no t availa ble or fea sible. EPA has de termined that mee ting the PM 2.5 NAAQS nationwide will ann ually prevent at least 15,000 premature deaths; 75,000 cases of chronic bronchitis; 10,000 hospital admissions for respiratory and cardiova scular disease; hund red s of tho us and s of occurrences of ag grava ted asthma; and 3.1 million pers on-days of missed work due to sympt oms rel ated to particle pollut ion exposure. On April 17, 2007, Connecticut Dep artment of Environ ment al Prote ction submi tted a SIP Re vision for 200 9 Early Progress Direct PM2.5 and NOx M oto r Vehicle Em ission Budg ets fo r Transportation Conformity Purposes; Connecticut; New York -Northern New Jersey -Long Island, NY-NJ -CT PM2.5 Ar ea. (Se e http://www.regulations.gov search on docket number EPA -R01 – OAR – 2007 -0373). States with designated PM 2.5 non -attainmen t areas had to submi t SIPs that out line how the y will me et the PM 2.5 NAAQS within th ree years of April 5, 200 5. On Nov ember 18, 2008 CTDEE P sub mitt ed a SIP Rev ision “Attainmen t Demo nstration for th e 199 7 Ann ual PM 2.5 Nation al Am bient Air Quality Standard for the Con ne cticut portion of the New Yor k-No rthern New Jersey-Long Island, NY-NJ-CT PM 2.5 Non -attainmen t Area”. EPA dete rmine d Con ne cticut’s PM 2.5 attainmen t demonstration SIP to be admi nistratively and te chn ically com plete on Janu ary 8, 2009. 9 On Octobe r 17, 2006, EPA issued a final rule which tighte ned th e 24-ho ur PM 2.5 NAAQS from the 1997 level of 65 mi crograms per cubic meter (ug/ m3) to 35 ug/m 3 (71 FR 611 44). In this final rule, EPA retained the 1997 ann ual PM 2.5 NAA QS of 15.0 ug/m3. EPA ’s final rule designating non-attainment areas for the 20 06 PM 2.5 NAAQ S, pu blishe d in the Fe deral Reg ister on Nov em ber 13, 20 09, was effective Decemb er 14, 2009. A MPO and the U.S. Department of Transportation (U.S.DOT) must ma ke a conf ormity determination with regard to the 2006 PM 2.5 NAAQS for the metrop olitan transportation plan and TIP with in on e year after the effective date of the initial non-attai nme nt designation for this NAAQS, as stated in 40CFR Part 93, “Transportation Conformity Rule PM 2.5 and PM 10 Ame ndments; Final Rule”, dated M arch 24, 2010. On June 22, 2012, CT DE EP submitte d a “PM 2.5 Redesignation/ M ainte nance State Implemen tation Plan” which establishe d new Mo tor Vehicle Emission Budgets for 20 17 and 2025 using new EPA req uired software, M OVES 2010b. These budgets were dee med adequ ate by EPA and effective as of Feb ruary 20, 2013. M onitoring da ta show that th e NY-NJ-CT multi-state area has achieved com plia nce with bot h th e 1997 annu al and 2006 24-hour PM 2.5 NAAQS since 2009. On Novemb er 15, 20 10, EP A pu blished a formal de termination that the NY -NJ-CT multi-state area had achiev ed mea sured attainmen t of the 1997 annu al PM 2.5 NAAQS. EP A pu blished a similar finding for th e 2006 24 – hour PM 2.5 NAAQS on Dec ember 31, 20 12. DEEP monitoring data also ind icate that Conn ecticut com plies with th e 2012 ann ual NAA QS. On June 22, 2012, DE EP formally submi tted to th e EPA, th e final PM 2.5 red esignation reque st and maint enance plan State Implemen tation Plan (SIP) for Connecticut’s portion of th e NY -NJ – CT PM 2.5 Non attainmen t Area. The plan demo nstrated that Conn ecticut’s air quality met bot h th e 19 97 annual and the 2006 24 -ho ur PM 2.5 NAAQS due to a combination of national, region al and local cont rol measures im plemen ted to red uce emissions and presented a mainten ance plan th at ensures con tinu ed attainmen t th rough th e year 202 5. On Sept emb er 24 , 2013, EP A pu blished its approv al of th e PM 2.5 red es ignation req uest, establishing Octobe r 24, 2013 as the effective date of redesignation to attainment/ mainte nance for Conn ecticut’s portion of the NY – NJ -CT Area for bot h the 1997 ann ual and 2006 24-hour PM 2.5 NAAQS. This report was prepared to show conf ormity for th e 1997 Ann ual PM 2.5 NAAQS and the 2006 PM 2.5 24 -hou r NAAQS by me eting new M OVES2 010b 2017 and 2025 mot or vehicle bu dgets as discus sed above. 10 The Me trop olitan Planning Organ izations (M POs) with in this area are as follows: 1. Sou th We ste rn Regi on M etropoli tan Pla nning Organi zation (SWRM PO) 2. Housat onic Valley M etropoli tan Pla nning Org anization (HVMPO) 3. Central Nauga tuck Valley M etropo litan Planning Organ ization (CNV M PO) 4. Greater Bridgeport Valley M etropolitan Planning Or ganization (GBVM PO) 5. Sout h Cent ral Region Me trop olitan Plann ing Organization (SCRM PO) Figure 1 bel ow shows the Connecticut count ies include d in th e PM 2.5 attainment /maint enance area . Figure 1: Connecticut Portion of the NY -NJ-CT PM 2.5 Attainment /Ma intenance Area 11 d – PM 10 Attain me nt/M aintenance Area EPA previou sly designated the City of New Hav en as No nattainmen t with respect to the Nation al Ambien t Air Quali ty Stand ard s (NAAQS) for particulate matter with a nominal diamet er of ten microns or less (PM 10). The PM 10 Nonattainmen t statu s in New Hav en was a local problem stemming from activities of several busines ses located in the Stiles Stree t section of th e City. Numero us violation s in the late 1980’s and early 19 90’s of Se ction 22 a-174-18 (Fugitive Dust) of CTD EEP re gulations in that se ction of the city led to a no nattainmen t des ignation (CTDE EP, 1994: Narrative Con necticut De partment of En ergy and Env iron mental Prot ection, State Implemen tation Plan Re vision For PM 10, March 19 94). Corrective a ction s were subseq uen tly iden tified in th e State Implemen tation Plan and implemen ted, with no violation s of the PM 10 NAAQS since the mid-1990’s. All construction activities un dertaken in the City of New Haven are required to be performed in com plia nce with Section 22 a-174-18 (Con trol of Particulate “Emissions”) of the CTDEE P regulation s. All reasonable available con trol measures must be implemente d du ring construction to mitiga te particulate matt er emi ssions, including wind -blow n fugitive dust, mud and dirt carry out , and re-en traine d fugitive emi ssion from mobile eq uipmen t. Th e projects contained in th e STIP and Plans, designated wi thin the City of Ne w Haven, are exp ected to have little effect on the overall projected vehicle mi les of trav el for the area and are not exp ected to cause significant add itional air borne particulat e matter to be generated. Th e transportatio n projects initia ted in Ne w Hav en are not designed to enh ance developme nt in th e area. There fore, th e projects und ertaken in this area will no t hav e a detrimental effect on PM 10 in Ne w Haven . On October 13 , 200 5, EPA pub lished in the Federal Regis ter (Vol. 70, No. 197 ), approval of a requ est by CTDEE P for a Limited Mai ntenance Plan and redesignatio n of th e Ne w Haven No nattai nme nt Area to Attainme nt for th e National Ambient Air Quality Stand ards for PM 10. This direct final rule became effective on De cembe r 12, 2005. As with limited mainten ance plans for oth er po llut ants, emissions bud gets are con sidered to satisfy transportation con formity’s “b udget test”. However, fut ure “p roject level” conf ormity determination may req uire “h ot spot ” PM 10 analy ses for new tran spo rtation projects with significant die sel traff ic in ac cordance with EPA’s Final Rule for “PM 2.5 and PM 10 Hot -Spo t Analyses in Pro ject-level Transportation Conformity Rule PM 2.5 and PM 10 Amend men ts; Final Rule (75 FR 42 60, M arch 24, 2010) which beca me eff ective on April 23, 20 10. 12 3) CON NECTICUT PM 2.5 ATTAIN M ENT M AIN TENANCE AREA The New Jersey – New York – Conn ecticut multi-state non-attainment area was des ignated by EPA beca use th is region’s air quality fails to me et th e ann ual PM 2.5 NAAQS. As EPA Ne w England has det ermined th e M OVES2010 b 2017 and 2025 moto r vehicle emissio ns bu dgets sub mitt ed on June 22, 2012 to be adequ ate for transportation conform ity purposes, the emissio ns analysis in this repo rt will be limited to these areas only and the bu dgets effective as of February 20, 2013. The non-attainment areas un der th e 2006 PM 2.5 24 -hou r NAAQS are the same as unde r the 1997 PM 2.5 non -attainmen ts areas. Since the 1997 PM 2.5 non -attainmen t area has an adequ ate bu dget, E PA states th at to be consistent with the Clea n Air Act, the areas must mee t the bu dget test for th e 20 06 PM 2.5 NAAQS using existi ng ade quate or approved SIP bu dgets for th e 1997 PM 2.5 NAAQS. Effective Octo ber 24, 2013, the Connecticut portion of the New Jersey – New York – Conne cticut multi-state PM 2.5 No n-Attainmen t Areas were red esignated as Attainmen t M ainten ance. 4) IN TERAGEN CY CO NSULTATION An Int eragency Consultation M ee ting was he ld onFebruary 7, 2 0 17 to review th e air quality codes for projects fun ded in th e regions ’ Transpo rtation Im provemen t Plans and the 2015 Lon g Range Tran spo rtation Plans. The mee ting also discussed the analysis years to be mode led. The project Air Quality coding is as follows: CC – Con formity Analysis Complete d M – Mod eled in the Dep artmen t’s highway or transit networ ks NM – Requ ires mod eling and will be included int o th e De partmen t’s highw ay and transit networks prior to conf ormity analysis NRS –a highway or tran sit project on a fac ility that does no t ser ve reg ion al nee ds or is not normally include d in th e regional travel simulation model and does not fit int o an exem pt project category in Table 2 or 3 of th e Final Rule (40 CFR 93). RS – Regio nally significant refers to a t ransportation project in th e TIP and /or STIP (othe r than an exemp t project) that is on a fac ility which ser ves regional tran sportation nee ds (su ch as access to and from th e area out side of th e region , major activity centers in the regio ns, major p lanne d devel opm ent such as new retail malls, sports complexes, etc., or 13 transportation terminals as well as most terminals themselves) and would normally be included in the mode ling of a metrop olitan area’s tran spo rtation networ k, includ ing at a mi nim um all principal arterial highways and all fixed guide-way transit facilities th at offer an alternative to regional high way tra vel (40 CFR 93.101). Once a pro ject is iden tified as region ally si gnificant , it must be include d in th e analysis regar dless of fun ding source. Ex em pt Project – a project listed in Table 2 or 3 of the Final Rule (40 CFR 93) th at primarily enh ances safet y or aesthe tics, maint ains mass tran sit, con tinu es curren t levels of ridesharing, or bu ilds bicycle and ped estrian facilities . X6 – Project exem pt from the req uirement to de termine con formity und er 40 CFR 93.126 X7 – Project ex empt form regi onal emission s analysis requiremen ts unde r 40 CFR 93.127 X8 – Traffic synchron ization projects may be app roved, funde d and im plemente d withou t satisfying conf ormity requ iremen ts un der 40 CFR 93.128 It was agreed up on that the 201 1 vehicle reg istration data file wo uld be utilized for this Conformity De termination a nd CTDEEP and CT DOT staff would discuss u pdate of this file at a May 2016 me eting . A copy of th e mi nut es of th e Int eragency Consultation Mee ting is includ ed in Appen dix A, as well as a list of attende es and call-in participants. The final emissions analysis was prepared and th e rep ort was distribu ted for th e 30 -day pub lic commen t period. 5) PUBL IC CONSULTA TION As req uired by the Final Ru le, the transportation confo rmity pro cess must includ e public consultation on th e emissio ns analysis and conf ormity dete rmination for PM 2.5 determinations. This includ es posting of releva nt document ation and analysis on a “c learingho use” we bpage maintaine d th rou gh the interagency consultation process. All M POs in the Conn ecticut PM 2.5 non-attainmen t area must provide thirty-day pu blic commen t pe riods and address any commen ts receive d. For th is PM 2.5 transpo rtation conf ormity determ ina tion , all Conn ecticut M POs will hold a thirty-day pub lic commen t peri od. 14 6) PM 2.5 EM ISSIONS AN AL YSIS As stated above, EPA has foun d that the 20 17 and 2025 M VEBs in th e Jun e 22, 2012 Conne cticut SIP re vision are adequ ate for transportation con formity purposes and effective as of February 20, 20 13. Table 1 shows th e M OVES2010 b M VE Bs for 2017 and 202 5. Table 1: Adequate M oto r Vehi cle Emission s Bud gets – M OV E20 10b Direct PM 2 .5 NOx (Tons/Year) (Tons/Year) Ye ar 201 7 MVEBs for the Connecticut 57 5.8 12,791 .8 porti on of the New York- Northern New Jersey-, Lo ng Island, NY-NJ-CT PM 2.5 Area Ye ar 202 5 MVEBs for the Connecticut 51 6.0 9,728 .1 porti on of the New York- Northern New Jersey-, Lo ng Island, NY-NJ-CT PM 2.5 Area The PM 2.5 bu dget emissions are th e am oun t to which projected fut ure emissions resulting from implemen tation of Plans and TIPs will be compared. Per 75 FR 14271, as the non-attainment bound ary for th e 2006 Conn ecticut portion of the NY – NJ -CT PM 2.5 Non -attainmen t Ar ea is exactly th e same as th e 1997 PM 2.5 boun dary, th e bu dget test for th e 20 06 PM 2.5 NAAQS must use th e existing adequate or app roved SIP bu dgets for the 1997 PM 2.5 NAA QS. EPA regu lations require that emissions analysis be cond ucted for spec ific analysis years. Se ction 93.119(g) of the Final Rule states th at the se analysis years must include :  Attainmen t or near term year  The last (horizon) year of th e region s’ lon g range transportation plan  An int ermed iate year or years such that the analysis ye ars are no more than 10 years apart 15 The attainmen t year is based up on the Clean Air Act section 172(a)(2) which states that the attainmen t year for the 2006 PM 2.5 areas will be 2014, five years after th e eff ective date of des ignations (December 14, 2009). The year 20 17 is also with in five years (nea r-term) of the year in which th e analysis is being perfo rme d (2015). Furthermore, because th is attainment /mainte nance area includes multiple MPOs, the last year of all of the M PO s’ Plans must be include d as analy sis years. W ith in the Co nn ecticut PM 2.5 attainmen t area, the plan horizo n year is 2040. Int ermed iate years of 2025 and 2035 have be en selected so that no two- analysis years are more than 10 years apart. Th erefore, the analysis years for this conf ormity determination are 2017, 2025, 203 5 and 2040. 7) CON NECTICUT PM 2.5 RE GIO NAL EM ISS IONS ANAL YSIS CO M PONEN TS PM 2.5 emissions can result from bot h direct and indirect sources. Ga soline and diesel on -road vehicles em it bot h direct PM 2.5 and oth er gases that react in the air to form PM 2.5 . Direct PM 2.5 emissio ns can result from particles in exhaust fume s, from brake and tire we ar, from road du st kicke d up by vehicles, and from highway and transit construction. Ind irect PM 2.5 emissio ns can result from one or more of several exhaust com pone nts, including nitrogen oxides (NOx), vola tile orga nic compoun ds (VO Cs), sulfur oxides (SO x), and ammonia (NH3). For the region al analy sis of direct PM 2.5 emissions, EPA has ruled th at bot h exhaust and brake/tire we ar must be include d. However, EPA has also ruled that emissio ns analysis for direct PM 2.5 sho uld includ e ro ad du st only if road dust is foun d to be a significant contribut or to PM 2.5 by either the EPA Regio nal Admi nistrator or a state air quality age ncy. For the Conne cticut PM 2.5 no n-attainmen t area, ne ithe r th e EPA Region al Admi nistrators nor th e state air quality agency have found that road dust is a significant PM 2.5 contribut or. For th e regional analysis of indirect PM 2.5 emission s (also called PM 2.5 precursor s), EPA has iden tified fou r poten tial transportation-related PM 2.5 precursors: NO x, VO Cs, SO x, and NH3. The only indirect PM 2.5 compo nen t that nee ds to be considered in th e Con necticut PM 2.5 non – attainmen t area is NO x. 8) ANNUAL IN VENTO RIES FOR PM 2.5 Bec ause th e multi-state PM 2.5 non-attainment area did no t me et th e ann ual PM 2.5 NAAQS, the emissio ns analysis for PM 2.5 cons idered ann ual emi ssions. Gu ida nce from EPA (dated Nov em ber, 2015) presen ted two possible op tions for deve lop ing an ann ual invento ry before a SIP is develope d: using a typical seas onal day or an annual inve nt ory th at is based on mon thly es timtes. The twelve-mont h app roach for the Conn ecticut PM 2.5 no n-attainmen t area was utilize d. 16 9) VEHICLE M ILES OF TR AVEL AND E M IS SIONS ANALYSIS Ve hicle M iles of Tra vel (VMT) estimates we re de ve lop ed from th e Conne cticut Department of Transportation’s (CTDO T’s) statewide network-bas ed travel model sup plemen ted by off-mode l analysi s. The 20 15 travel model networ k, to th e exten t practical, represen ts all state highways and major conn ecting non-state streets and roads as well as th e rail, local bu s and express bus systems th at current ly exist. Future highway ne two rks for 2018, 2020, 2025 and 20 30 and transit networ ks for 2016, 2020, 2030 and 2040 we re bu ilt by adding STIP, TIP and LRT P projects (prog ramme d for op ening after 2 015) to th e 2015 ne twor k. Th ese networ ks we re used to run trav el models and cond uct emi ssions analysis for the years 20 18, 2025, 2035 and 2040. Ta ble 2 lists th e projects for ea ch mod el analy sis year for wh ich ne two rk cha nges we re req uired. 17 TABLE 2 LIST OF NETWORK CHANGES 2018 NETWORK CHANGES NEW MPO DESCRIPTION LANES PROJECT NUMBER FROM TO HIGHWAY NAME TOWN IMPROVEMENT CAPITAL REGION 0131 -0190 Remove Bridge Number 00518 Reconstruct 10/322 Intersection 1/1 0/0 ROUTE 10 SOUTHINGTON CCD 11/2017, TIP BRIDGE REMOVAL GREATER BRIDGEPORT 0015 -TMP1 Realignment of Lafayette Circle and establishment of bidirectional traffic on Fairfield Avenue 0/1 1/1 LAFAYETTE CIRCLE BRIDGEPORT CCD 2017, TIP REALIGNMENT 0036 -0184 Main Street Derby from Bridge Street to Route 8 South Exit15 On/Off Ramps (Ausonio Street) 1/1 2/2 ROUTE 34 DERBY CCD 2018, TIP WIDENING HOUSATONIC VALLEY 0034 -0347 State Route 806 (Newtown Road) from Old Newtown to Plumtrees & from Eagle to Industrial Plaza, Danbury – Widening from 1 lane each direction to 2 lanes each direction 1/1 2/2 SR 806 NEWTOWN ROAD DANBURY CCD 2016, TIP SOUTH CENTRAL 0079 -XXXX Multiple lane and directional changes in the center of town. Conversion of multiple one way streets to two ways. Conversion of a two way street to one way. Reduction of one lane in each direction for one street CCD 2018, TIP VARIOUS WEST MAIN STREET MERIDEN DIRECTIONAL AND LANE CHANGES 18 TABLE 2 LIST OF NETWORK CHANGES (CONT’D) 2018 NETWORK CHANGES NEW MPO DESCRIPTION LANES PROJECT NUMBER FROM TO HIGHWAY NAME TOWN IMPROVEMENT SOUTH CENTRAL (CONT’D) 0092 -0531 Q Bridge Replacement and demolition; Contract E 3/3 5/5 I-95 CCD 2016, TIP NEW HAVEN BRIDGE REPLACEMENT 0092 -0532 Q Bridge Replacement and demolition; Contract B 3/3 5/5 I-95 CCD 2016, TIP NEW HAVEN BRIDGE REPLACEMENT 0092 -0627 Q Bridge Replacement and demolition; Contract B2 3/3 5/5 I-95 CCD 2016, TIP NEW HAVEN BRIDGE REPLACEMENT 0092 -XXXX Removal of North Frontage Road between State Street & Orange Street 1/1 0/0 NORTH FRONTAGE ROAD NEW HAVEN CCD 2016, TIP ROADWAY REMOVAL 0100 -0175 Project to widen Sackett Point Road from 1 lane to 2 lanes CCD 2018, TIP 1/1 2/2 SACKETT POINT ROAD NORTH HAVEN WIDENING 19 TABLE 2 LIST OF NETWORK CHANGES (CONT’D) 2018 NETWORK CHANGES NEW MPO DESCRIPTION LANES PROJECT NUMBER FROM TO HIGHWAY NAME TOWN IMPROVEMENT SOUTH WESTERN 0102 -0325 Addition of a through lane on Route 1 Northbound from France Street to Route 53 1/1 1/2 ROUTE 1 NORWALK CCD 2018, TIP WIDENING 0135 -0301 Reconstruction of I -95 off ramps and Atlantic Street in vicinity of Metro North Railroad Bridge No. 08012R 2/2 3/3 ATLANTIC STREET STAMFORD WIDENING CCD 2018, TIP GREATER BRIDGEPORT 0138 -0211 Addition of a through lane on Route 1 Southbound from Nobel Street to Soundview Avenue 1/2 2/2 ROUTE 1 STRATFORD CCD 2018, TIP WIDENING CENTRAL NAUGATUCK VALLEY 0017 -0182 Addition of a second through lane on Route 6 Eastbound from Carol Drive (Mix Street/Brook Street) to Peggy Lane (Camp Street) 1/1 2/1 ROUTE 6 BRISTOL WIDENING CCD 2018, TIP 20 TABLE 2 LIST OF NETWORK CHANGES (CONT’D) 2020 NETWORK CHANGES NEW MPO DESCRIPTION LANES PROJECT NUMBER FROM TO HIGHWAY NAME TOWN IMPROVEMENT CAPITAL REGION 0051 -0259 Interchange improvements at Routes 4, 6, and 9 including a new EB C/D Roadway N/A I84/RT4/RT6 FARMINGTON BID 12 -31 -08, CCD 2019, TIP INTERCHANGE BSWY 0063 -0703 Relocation and Reconfiguration of Interchange 29 on I-91; New additional lanes Rte. 15 NB from 2 to 3 lanes exit 90 to 0.5 miles beyond Exit 91 3/3 4/3 I-91, EXIT 29 HARTFORD WIDENING CCD 2020 Long Range Plan 0155 -0156 Add an Operational Lane WB between Interchanges 42 & 39A; Add an Operational Lane EB between Interchanges 40 & 41 CCD 2018 3/3 4/4 I-84 WEST HARTFORD OPERATIONAL LANES CENTRAL NAUGATUCK VALLEY 0151 -0273 Interstate 84 2/2 3/3 I-84 CCD 11/2020, TIP WATERBURY WIDENING 0151 -XXXX TIGER Grant includes various roadway changes including reconstruction/extension of Jackson Street. Extension will meet at Freight Street and continue to West Main N/A 1/1 DOWNTOWN AREA WATERBURY ADDED ROADWAY CCD 2019, Long Range Plan 21 TABLE 2 LIST OF NETWORK CHANGES (CONT’D) 2020 NETWORK CHANGES NEW MPO DESCRIPTION LANES PROJECT NUMBER FROM TO HIGHWAY NAME TOWN IMPROVEMENT GREATER BRIDGEPORT 0015 -HXXX Reconstruct and widen Route 130 from Stratford Avenue bridge to Yellow Mill bridge 1/1 2/2 ROUTE 130 BRIDGEPORT Long Range Plan WIDENING 0124 -0165 **As of 2/15/2011current scope from consultant is spot improvements for from Swan Avenue to Franklin Street Project Manager** Bank Street from West Street to North Main St is full scope being reviewed by consultant 1/1 2/2 ROUTE 67 SEYMOUR MAJOR WIDENING Long Range Plan 0124 -XXXX Between Interchange 22 and 23 to improve access N/A ROUTE 8 Long Range Plan SEYMOUR INTERCHANGE 0124 -XXXX Realign interchange with new extension of Derby Road N/A ROUTE 8 SEYMOUR Long Range Plan INTERCHANGE 0126 -XXXX Interchange 11 – Construct new SB entrance ramp, Widen Bridgeport Avenue N/A ROUTE 8 SHELTON Long Range Plan MAJOR WIDENING 22 TABLE 2 LIST OF NETWORK CHANGES (CONT’D) 2020 NETWORK CHANGES NEW MPO DESCRIPTION LANES PROJECT NUMBER FROM TO HIGHWAY NAME TOWN IMPROVEMENT GREATER BRIDGEPORT (CONT’D) 0126 -XXXX Between Huntington Avenue and Constitution Boulevard 1/1 2/2 ROUTE 714 SHELTON Long Range Plan MAJOR WIDENING NEW MPO 0138 -0248 Reconstruct Interchange 33 on I -95 to provide full interchange from partial to full diamond interchange N/A I-95, EXIT 33 STRATFORD INTERCHANGE RECONSTRUCTION CCD 2020, Long Range Plan HOUSATONIC VALLEY 0008 -XXXX Operational Improvements on White Street at Locust Avenue and Eighth Avenue 1/1 1/2 WHITE STREET DANBURY CCD 2020, Long Range Plan WIDENING 0096 -0204 Addition of a through lane on Route 34 EB from Wasserman Way to Toddy Hill Road. Addition of I -84 WB and EB on -ramp from Route 34 WB 1/1 2/1 ROUTE 34 NEWTOWN WIDENING CCD 2020, TIP SOUTH CENTRAL 0092 -XXXX Intersection Improvements at Route 69 and Pond Lily Avenue N/A ROUTE 69 NEW HAVEN Long Range Plan INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS 23 TABLE 2 LIST OF NETWORK CHANGES (CONT’D) 2025 NETWORK CHANGES NEW MPO DESCRIPTION LANES PROJECT NUMBER FROM TO HIGHWAY NAME TOWN IMPROVEMENT CAPITAL REGION 0042 -0317 Removal of the Cambridge Street to Route 2 Westbound On -Ramp and the Sutton Avenue to Route 2 Eastbound Off -Ramp. New through lane on Main Street Northbound underneath Route 2 at the approach to the Route 2 Westbound Off -Ramp 0/1 0/2 ROUTE 2 EAST HARTFORD WIDENING CCD 2021, TIP 0055 -0142 Addition of a second through lane on Route 20/189 Westbound from Route 10/202 to Route 20 and Route 189 split. Addition of a second through lane on Route 20 Westbound from Hungary Road to Route 10/202. Addition of a second through lane on Route 10/202 Northbound from Route 189 to Route 20/189. VARIOUS ROUTE 10 & 202 GRANBY WIDENING CCD 2022, TIP LOWER CT RIVER VALLEY 0082 -0316 Reconfiguration and realignment of Route 17 On – Ramp onto Route 9 from Main Street. Removal of the Harbor Drive to Route 9 Northbound On -Ramp N/A ROUTE 17 MIDDLETOWN INTERCHANGE RECONFIGURATION CCD 2025, TIP 0082 -0318 Removal of a through lane on Route 9 Southbound from just North of Miller Street to just South of Washington Street. Route 9 access to Washington Street/DeKoven Drive has been limited to an on – ramp to Route 9 Southbound. N/A ROUTE 9 MIDDLETOWN REMOVE LANE CCD 2021, TIP 24 TABLE 2 LIST OF NETWORK CHANGES (CONT’D) 2025 NETWORK CHANGES NEW MPO DESCRIPTION LANES PROJECT NUMBER FROM TO HIGHWAY NAME TOWN IMPROVEMENT SOUTHEASTERN Addition of a second through lane on Route 85 Northbound from just North of Chesterfield Road to just South of Deer Run. CCD 2024, TIP 1/1 2/1 0120 -0079 ROUTE 85 MONTVILLE WIDENING SOUTH WESTERN 0102 -0358 Reconfiguration of the interchanges between Route 7, Route 15, and Main Avenue. These changes include multiple new and reconfigured on and off ramps designed to allow access to and from all three major roadways CCD 2025, TIP N/A ROUTE 7 AND ROUTE 15 NORWALK INTERCHANGE RECONFIGURATION 25 TABLE 2 LIST OF NETWORK CHANGES (CONT’D) 2028 NETWORK CHANGES NEW MPO DESCRIPTION LANES PROJECT NUMBER FROM TO HIGHWAY NAME TOWN IMPROVEMENT SOUTHEASTERN ROUTE 82 Removal of a through lane on Route 82 Eastbound from just West of Pine Street to just West of Fairmont Street N/A NORWICH REMOVE LANE CCD 2027, TIP 26 TABLE 2 LIST OF NETWORK CHANGES (CONT’D) 2030 NETWORK CHANGES NEW MPO DESCRIPTION LANES PROJECT NUMBER FROM TO HIGHWAY NAME TOWN IMPROVEMENT CAPITAL REGION VARIOUS TOWNS New Haven/Hartford/Springfield Rail Service Governor’s Transportation Initiative Long Range Plan N/A NEW COMMUTER RAIL 0109 -XXXX New Britain Avenue Cooke Street to Hooker Street 1/1 2/2 PLAINVILLE Long Range Plan ADD LANE CENTRAL NAUGATUCK VALLEY 0080 -0128 Add auxiliary lanes at Int. 17 and on Routes 63/64 1/1 2/2 I-84, Routes 63 -64 Long Range Plan MIDDLEBURY/WATERBURY WIDENING GREATER BRIDGEPORT 0036 -0179 Interchange 18 – Construct New NB entrance ramp. N/A ROUTE 8 Long Range Plan ANSONIA INTERCHANGE 27 TABLE 2 LIST OF NETWORK CHANGES (CONT’D) 2030 NETWORK CHANGES NEW MPO DESCRIPTION LANES PROJECT NUMBER FROM TO HIGHWAY NAME TOWN IMPROVEMENT GREATER BRIDGEPORT (CONT’D) 0036 -XXXX Route 8 Interchange 16 and 17; Construct new NB ramps. Close old ramps N/A ROUTE 8 DERBY Long Range Plan INTERCHANGE 0126 -XXXX Interchange 14 – Construct new SB entrance ramp N/A ROUTE 8 Long Range Plan SHELTON INTERCHANGE HOUSATONIC VALLEY 0018 -0124 South of Old State Road to Route 133 1/1 2/2 US 202 Long Range Plan BROOKFIELD WIDENING 0034 -0288 From Kenosia Avenue easterly to I -84 (Exit 4) 1/1 2/2 ROUTE 6 Long Range Plan DANBURY ADD LANES 0034 -XXXX From I -84 (Exit 2) East to Kenosia Avenue 1/1 2/2 ROUTE 6 Long Range Plan DANBURY ADD LANES 0034 -XXXX From Route I -84 (Exit 6) Northerly to Jeanette Street 1/1 2/2 ROUTE 37 DANBURY Long Range Plan ADD LANES 28 TABLE 2 LIST OF NETWORK CHANGES (CONT’D) 2030 NETWORK CHANGES NEW MPO DESCRIPTION LANES PROJECT NUMBER FROM TO HIGHWAY NAME TOWN IMPROVEMENT HOUSATONIC VALLEY (CONT’D) 0034 -XXXX Between Interchanges 3 and 4.Between Interchanges 12 and 13 3/3 4/4 I-84 DANBURY, NEWTOWN, SOUTHBURY Long Range Plan ADD LANES 0034 -XXXX Widen Kenosia Avenue from Backus Avenue to Vicinity of Lake Kenosia 1/1 2/2 DANBURY ADD LANES Long Range Plan 0034 -XXXX Widen Backus Avenue from Kenosia Avenue to Miry Brook Road 1/1 2/2 DANBURY ADD LANES Long Range Plan 0034 -XXXX From South Street northerly to Boughton Street; 1/1 2/2 ROUTE 53 Long Range Plan DANBURY ADD LANES 0034 -XXXX From Route 53 (Main Street) northerly to I -84 (Exit 6) 1/1 2/2 ROUTE 37 DANBURY Long Range Plan ADD LANES 0096 -XXXX New Road across Old Fairfield Hills Hospital Campus, From Route 6 South to Route 860 0/0 1/1 NEWTOWN NEW ROAD Long Range Plan ADD LANES 29 TABLE 2 LIST OF NETWORK CHANGES (CONT’D) 2030 NETWORK CHANGES NEW MPO DESCRIPTION LANES PROJECT NUMBER FROM TO HIGHWAY NAME TOWN IMPROVEMENT SOUTH CENTRAL 0014 -XXXX East Haven Town Line to Alps Road (Echlin Road Private) 2/2 2/3 ROUTE 1 BRANFORD Long Range Plan WIDENING 0014 -XXXX Route 146 to Cedar Street 2/2 2/3 ROUTE 1 Long Range Plan BRANFORD WIDENING 0014 -XXXX Cedar Street to East Main 1/1 1/2 ROUTE 1 Long Range Plan BRANFORD WIDENING 0014 -XXXX East Main to 1 -95 Exit 55 1/1 1/2 ROUTE 1 Long Range Plan BRANFORD WIDENING 0014 -XXXX I-95 Exit 55 to Leetes Island Road 1/1 1/2 ROUTE 1 Long Range Plan BRANFORD WIDENING 0059 -XXXX Bullard Road extension to Route 77 0/0 1/1 BULLARD RD Long Range Plan GUILFORD WIDENING 30 2030 NETWORK CHANGES NEW MPO DESCRIPTION LANES PROJECT NUMBER FROM TO HIGHWAY NAME TOWN IMPROVEMENT SOUTH CENTRAL (CONT’D) 0059 -XXXX State Street to Tanner Marsh Road 1/1 1/2 ROUTE 1 Long Range Plan GUILFORD WIDENING 0061 -XXXX Washington Avenue to Route 40 2/2 2/3 ROUTE 10 Long Range Plan HAMDEN WIDENING 0061 -XXXX Route 40 to Todd Street 2/2 2/3 ROUTE 10 Long Range Plan HAMDEN WIDENING 0061 -XXXX Todd Street to Shepard Avenue 1/1 2/2 ROUTE 10 Long Range Plan HAMDEN WIDENING 0061 -XXXX River Street to Cheshire Town Line 1/1 2/2 ROUTE 10 Long Range Plan HAMDEN WIDENING 0061 -XXXX Olds Street (Hamden) to Sackett Point Road 1/1 2/2 ROUTE 5 Long Range Plan HAMDEN, NORTH HAVEN WIDENING 31 TABLE 2 LIST OF NETWORK CHANGES (CONT’D) 2030 NETWORK CHANGES NEW MPO DESCRIPTION LANES PROJECT NUMBER FROM TO HIGHWAY NAME TOWN IMPROVEMENT SOUTH CENTRAL (CONT’D) 0073 -XXXX New Rail Station near Salemme Lane in Orange N/A ORANGE CCD 2030 Long Range Plan NEW RAIL STATION 0079 -XXXX Wallingford Town Line to Olive Street (Route 71) 1/1 2/2 ROUTE 5 Long Range Plan MERIDEN WIDENING 0083 -XXXX From West of Old Gate Lane to Gulf Street/Clark Street to Route 1 1/1 2/2 ROUTE 162 MILFORD Long Range Plan WIDENING 0092 -0649 Long Wharf access Plan Widen I -95 (in separate project), Eliminate Long Wharf Drive to expand park, add new road from Long Wharf Drive VARIES NEW HAVEN Long Range Plan 0092 -XXXX From Route 63 to Landin Street 1/1 2/2 ROUTE 69 Long Range Plan NEW HAVEN, WOODBRIDGE WIDENING 0092 -XXXX From Dayton Street (NH) to Landin Street (Wdbg) 1/2 2/3 ROUTE 63 Long Range Plan NEW HAVEN, WOODBRIDGE WIDENING 32 TABLE 2 LIST OF NETWORK CHANGES (CONT’D) 2030 NETWORK CHANGES NEW MPO DESCRIPTION LANES PROJECT NUMBER FROM TO HIGHWAY NAME TOWN IMPROVEMENT SOUTH CENTRAL (CONT’D) 0098 -XXXX From East Haven Town Line to Doral Farms Road and Route 22 to Guilford Town Line 1/1 1/2 ROUTE 80 NORTH BRANFORD Long Range Plan WIDENING 0106 -XXXX From West Haven Town Line to US 1 1/1 2/2 ROUTE 162 Long Range Plan ORANGE WIDENING 0148 -XXXX From South Orchard Street. to Ward Street and Christian Road to Meriden Town Line 1/1 2/2 ROUTE 5 WALLINGFORD Long Range Plan ROUTE 5 0148 -XXXX From Route 71 overpass South of Old Colony Road to Route 68 1/1 1/2 ROUTE 150 WALLINGFORD Long Range Plan ROUTE 5 0156 -XXXX Route 1 to Elm Street 1/1 2/2 ROUTE 122 Long Range Plan WEST HAVEN WIDENING 0156 -XXXX Campbell Avenue to Orange Town Line 1/1 2/2 ROUTE 1 Long Range Plan WEST HAVEN WIDENING 33 TABLE 2 LIST OF NETWORK CHANGES (CONT’D) 2030 NETWORK CHANGES NEW MPO DESCRIPTION LANES PROJECT NUMBER FROM TO HIGHWAY NAME TOWN IMPROVEMENT SOUTH CENTRAL (CONT’D) 0156 -XXXX Elm Street to Greta Street 2/2 2/3 ROUTE 162 Long Range Plan WEST HAVEN WIDENING 0156 -XXXX Bull Hill Ln to Orange Town Line 1/1 2/2 ROUTE 162 Long Range Plan WEST HAVEN WIDENING VARIOUS TOWNS New Haven/Hartford/Springfield Rail Service Governor’s Transportation Initiative Long Range Plan N/A NEW COMMUTER RAIL SOUTH WESTERN 0035 -XXXX Add Lane from Stamford Exit 8 to Darien Exit 10, Operational Lane 3/3 4/4 I-95 Darien -Stamford Long Range Plan WIDENING 0102 -0269 Upgrade to full interchange at Merritt Parkway (Route 15) BID 01 -09 -08 N/A US 7/RT 15 NORWALK CCD 2030, Long Range Plan UPGRADE EXPRESSWAY 0102 -0297 East Avenue from the vicinity of the I -95 Ramps southerly to the vicinity of Van Zant Street 1/1 2/2 EAST AVE #1 NORWALK WIDENING Long Range Plan 34 TABLE 2 LIST OF NETWORK CHANGES (CONT’D) 2030 NETWORK CHANGES NEW MPO DESCRIPTION LANES PROJECT NUMBER FROM TO HIGHWAY NAME TOWN IMPROVEMENT SOUTH WESTERN (CONT’D) 0102 -0312 Reconstruction of Interchange 40 Merritt Parkway and Route 7 (Main Avenue). Breakout of 0102 -0269 Phase 1 N/A ROUTE 7/15 NORWALK UPGRADE EXPRESSWAY CCD 2030, Long Range Plan 0102 -XXXX Express Bus/BRT between Norwalk and Greenwich N/A NORWALK -GREENWICH Long Range Plan BRT 35 TABLE 2 LIST OF NETWORK CHANGES (CONT’D) 2040 NETWORK CHANGES NEW MPO DESCRIPTION LANES PROJECT NUMBER FROM TO HIGHWAY NAME TOWN IMPROVEMENT GREATER BRIDGEPORT 0015 -XXXX New Rail Station near Barnum Street in Bridgeport N/A NEW RAIL STATION CCD 2040 Long Range Plan 36 The PM 2.5 inpu t file int o MO VES20 14a for each analysis year con sisted of “annual ave rag e” scenari o. All mont hs were selected for an “a nnual avera ge” evaluation. Approp riate minim um/ma ximu m temp eratures were emp loyed, as well as annu al average FUEL RVP, SPEE D VMT, and DIESEL SULF UR values. Annu al emission facto rs we re ob taine d for each coun ty by roadway clas sifica tion. In add ition, mod el run s incor por ate th e effect of the Emp loyer Commut e Opt ions (EC O) Program in Sou th west Co nn ecticut (Fairfield County). In respo nse to federal leg islation , Conne cticut has restructured the ECO program to emph as ize volunt ary participation , combine d with positive incent ives, to encourage emp loyees to rideshare, use transit and con tinu e to expa nd the ir trip red uction activ ities. In addition , th e program has bee n mad e available to all employers. It is felt that this pro cess is an effective me ans of achieving Connecti cut’s clean air targe ts. Fund ing of this effort und er th e Congestion M itigation and Air Quali ty Improvemen t (CM AQ) prog ram is included in th e TIP for FY 2018 -2021 . It is es timat ed th at this prog ram, if fully succes sful, could red uce VM T and mob ile source emi ssions by 2% in Sout hwest Conne cticut. It should be noted that TIP and LRT P projects, which have negli gible imp act on trip distribu tion and/or highway capacity, have not been incorporated into th e network. These includ e, bu t are not lim ited to, geo me tric improveme nts of existing interchanges, short section s of climbing lanes, interse ctio n improveme nts, transit projects dealing wi th equ ipme nt for existing faciliti es and vehicles, and transit operating assistance. Essentia lly, those projects that do no t im pact th e travel demand forecasts are not includ ed in the netwo rk and/ or analysis. The ne two rk-ba sed travel mo del used for this analysis is the mod el th at CTDOT utilizes for transportation planning, programming and design req uiremen ts. This travel demand mode l u ses demograp hic and land use as sumptions based on the 2010 Census po pulation and C onne cticut Dep artmen t of Labor 201 0 employmen t estimates. Pop ulation and employ men t projection s for th e years 2020, 203 0 and 2040 were de velope d by th e Connecticut De partmen t of Transpo rtation, Travel Deman d and Air Quality M od eling Unit and app roved by all th e regio nal planning agenc ies in early 2012. Th e model uses a constrained equ ilibrium app roa ch to alloca te trips among links. The model was cali brated using 20 13 groun d counts and 20 13 HPM S VM T data. Pe ak hour directio nal traffic volume s were estimated as a percentage of the Average Dail y Traffic (ADT) on a link-by-link basis . Based on automatic traffic recorder data, 9.0 percent, 8.5 percent, 8.0percent and 7.5 percent of th e ADT occurs during the fou r highest hours of the day. A 55:4 5 directio nal split was assumed. Hourly volume s were then converted to Service Flow Levels (SF L) and Vo lume to Capacity (V/ C) ratios calculat ed as follows: 37 SF L = DHV/PHF*N VC = SFL / C whe re: DHV = Directio nal Hourly Vo lume PHF = Peak Hour Factor = 0.9 N = Number of lanes C = Capacity of lane Pe ak pe riod spee ds were estimated from th e 2000 Highway Capacity M anu al based on th e design spee d, facility class, area type and calculat ed V/ C ratio. On th e expresswa y system, Conne cticut- based free flow speed data was av ailable. This data was deeme d more app ropriat e and sup erse ded the ca pacity ma nual speed value s. The ex press way free flow speeds were upd ated in 2005 . For th e off – peak hours, traffic volume is not the controlli ng facto r for vehicle speed. Off-peak link spee ds were based on the Highway Capacity M anual free flow spee ds as a function of facility class and area type. As before, Conn ecticut-based speed data was sub stit uted for exp ressway trav el, whe re availa ble, and was als o updated in 200 5. Two special cas es exist in th e trav el demand modeling process. The se are centroid conn ectors and intrazonal trips.  Centroid conn ectors represe nt the local roads used to gain access to th e model netwo rk from centers of activity in each traffic analysis zon e (TAZ). A spee d of 25 mph is ut ilized for these links.  Intrazonal trips are trips that are too sho rt to get on to the model network. VM T for intrazonal trips is calculat ed based on th e size of each ind ividu al TAZ. A speed of 20 to 24 mph is utili zed for peak period and 25 to 29 mph for off – peak. Th e Dail y Vehicle M iles of Travel (DVM T) is calculat ed using a methodolo gy based on disaggreg ate spee d and summ arized by inventory area, fun ctional classificatio n, and spee d. The annual VM T and speed profiles de veloped by this process are then combined with the em ission factors from th e M OVES 2014 a model to produ ce emission estimates for each scenario and time frame . M OVES 2014 a PM 2.5 and NOx ann ual emis sions by County ma y be found in App end ix B. Th e M OVES 2014 a inpu t files are in App end ix C. Appendix D lists va rious ac ronyms used in the repo rt. In all cas es the transportatio n program and plan meets the requ ired conform ity tests:  For years 201 7 to 2024, Direct PM 2.5 in th e Conn ecticut portion of th e Ne w Yo rk-No rthern Ne w Jerse y-Lo ng Isl and attai nme nt/maintenance area must be less than 575.8 ton s per year. 38  For years 2017 to 2024, NOx in th e Conn ecticu t portio n of the Ne w Yo rk-No rthern Ne w Jerse y-Lo ng Isl and attai nme nt/maintenance area must be less than 12 ,791.8 tons per year.  For year 2025 and sub se qu ent years, Direct PM 2.5 in th e Conn ecticut portion of th e Ne w Yo rk-No rthern Ne w Jers ey-Lo ng Isl and attai nment/maintenance area must be less than 516.0 tons pe r year.  In year 2025 and sub sequ ent years, NOx in th e Conne cticut portio n of th e Ne w Yo rk- No rthern Ne w Jersey -Lo ng Isl and attai nme nt/maintenance area must be less than 9,728.1 tons pe r year. This analysis in no way reflects th e full benefit on air quality from th e transportatio n plan and program . The network-based modeling process is capable of as sessing the impact of majo r ne w highway or transit ser vice. It does not reflect the impact from th e many projects, which are categ oricall y ex clud ed from th e requ irement of confo rm ity. These projects includ e nu mer ous im provements to inters ections, which will allow traffic to flow more efficiently, thu s redu cing de lay, fue l usa ge and emissions. Includ ed in the TIP, but not reflected in this analysis , are many projects to maintai n existing rai l and bu s systems . Wi thout these projects, those system s could not offer th e high level of ser vice the y do . W ith them, the mas s transit systems fun ctio n more efficiently, improve safety, and provide a more dependable and aestheticall y app eali ng servi ce. These advantages will retai n existing patrons and attract add itio nal riders to the system . Th e techno logy to quantify the air quality benefits from these program s is not currently availa ble. As sho wn in this analysis, tra nsportatio n emiss ions are de clining dramati call y and will continu e to do so. This is primarily du e to programs such as reform ulat ed fuels, enhanced inspectio n and maintenance programs , stage two va por recovery (area source), the low emissions veh icles (LEV) program , and th e Tier 2 / Sulfur-in-Ga s redu ctio n program . M OVES2014a includes there new em iss ion control program s ass ociated with regulation promulgated since the re lea se of M OVES2010b:  Tier 3 emiss ion standar ds that phase in beginning in 2017 for cars , light-duty truck s, m edium -du ty pass enger vehicles, and some hea vy-duty trucks, and Tier 3 fuel standards th at re quire lower sulfu r gas oling beg inning in 2017 .  Hea vy-du ty engine and vehicle greenhouse ga s (GHG) re gulations that phase in during model years 20 14-2018.  The second phase of light-dut y vehicle GHG re gulations that phase in for mo del 39 year s 2017 -20 25 cars and light truck s. M OVES2014a estimates exhaust and evapo rative emissions as well as brake and tire wear emission s from all type s of on-road vehicles. M OVES2014a also uses a vehicle classification system based on the way vehicles a re clas sified in th e FHW A’s High way Performance M on itoring Sy stem (HPMS). Other parameters include vehicle miles traveled (VMT ) by vehicle and road type, vehicle hou rs traveled (VHT) by vehicle and road type, the numbe r of each type of vehicle in th e fleet, vehicle age distribut ion , model year, travel spe ed, roadway type, fuel information , meteor ological data, such as ambient tempe ratur e and hu midity, and applicable cont rol measures such as reformulated gasoline (RFG) and inspe ction and mainten ance (I/M ). Local inpu ts were coo peratively developed by CTDE EP and CTDOT, where app lica ble, using EP A Recomme nde d methods .3 Changes in th e transportation system will not produ ce significant emiss ions redu ctions be ca use of the massive ex isting rail , bus, highway systems , and land development already in place. Ch ange in these aspects is always at the mar gin, producing very small impacts. 10) ANAL YSIS RESUL TS As part of th e red esignation request, th e State submi tted a mainte nance plan as req uired by se ction 175A of the Clean Air Act. Elemen ts of th e section 175A mainte nance plan includ e a con tingency plan and an obliga tion to submit a sub sequ ent mainte nance plan revision as req uired by th e Clean Air Act. The PM 2.5 maint enance plan also establishes 2017 and 2025 M VEBs for the Ar ea. Con necticut is establishing 2017 MV EBs of 575.8 to ns per year (tpy) for direct PM 2.5 and 12,79 1.8 tp y for NOX, and 2025 M VEBs of 516 tpy for direct PM 2.5 and 9,728.1tp y for NOX, for the Sout hwestern CT Ar ea for mainten ance of th e 19 97 ann ual and 2006 24 – hour PM 2.5 standards. The emissions analysis re sults for the Connecticut portion of the Ne w Yo rk-No rthern Ne w Jerse y-Lo ng Island multi-state attainment/mainte nance area are presen ted in Table 3 on the next pa ge. 3 “MOVE S201 4 and MOVES2 014a Technical Gui dance: Us ing MOV ES to Prepare Emission Inventori es for State Impl eme ntation Pla ns and Tra nsport ation Con formity”, EPA-42 0-B-15-093. November 2015 40 Table 3: Direct PM 2.5 and NOx Emission Budget Test Results (tons per year) Series 31C Bud gets Difference Ye ar Direct PM 2.5 NO x Direct PM 2.5 NO x Direct PM 2.5 NOx 2018 284.1 7,192.7 575 .8 12, 791. 8 -291.7 -5,599.1 202 5 202.3 4,361.8 516 .0 9,728. 1 -313.7 -5,366.3 203 5 154.4 2,726.3 516 .0 9,728. 1 -361.6 -7,001.8 204 0 144.6 2,572.0 516 .0 9,728. 1 -371.4 -7,156.1 11) CON CLUSION This em issions analy sis transpo rtatio n conform ity has been dem onstrated for th e Conn ecticut portio n of the NY -NJ-CT PM 2.5 Attai nment/Mai ntenance Ar ea based upon the direct PM 2.5 and the NOx emis sion bud ge ts for 2017 and 20 25 effective as of February 20, 2013 . The region has attained National Am bient Air Qualit y Sta nd ards and EP A pub lished its approva l of th e PM 2.5 redesignatio n reque st, establishing October 24, 2013 as the effective date of redesignatio n to attai nme nt for Conn ecticut ’s portio n of th e NY-NJ-CT Area for both th e 1997 annual and 2006 24- hour PM 2.5 NAA QS. Pleas e direct any questions you ma y have on the air quality emission analysis to: Conn ecticut Department of Transportatio n Bureau of Policy and Pla nn ing Division of Coo rdina tio n, M odeling and Crash Data – Unit 5753 1 2800 Berlin Turnp ike Ne wi ngton, CT. 06111 (860) 594-2032 Ema il: Jud y.Raymond @ ct.go v 41 APPE NDIX A Inte ragency Consultation Me eting Minutes 42 IN TERAGEN CY CONSU LTATION MEETI NG Stat ewide T ransport ation Impro vement Program Co nne cticut Departm ent of Transportat ion Ro om 2307 – February 7 , 20 17 Go To Meeting Atten dees : Eloise Powell – FHW A Ken Shooshan-Stoller, FHW A Leah Sirmin – FTA Ariel Garcia – EPA Je nnifer Carrier – CRCO G C a r a R a d z i n s – CRCOG R o b A l o i s e – CRC OG Mark Nielson – CN VMPO Christian Meyer – CN VMP O Ben Muller – CNVMPO Meghan Sloan – CT Metro COG Robert Haramut – LCRV CO G Stephen Dudley –SCRCOG Chris Rappa – SCRC OG Ri cha rd Guggenheim – SECC OG Kate Rattan – SECCOG Rob Sachnin – W es tern COG Mari beth W ojenski – CTDOT Ju dy Raymond – CTDO T Robbin Cabelus – CTDOT Roxane Fromson – CTDOT Grayson W right – CTDO T Sara Radacsi – CTDO T Matthew Cegielski- CTDOT Rya n Dolan – CTDOT Greg Pacelli – CTDOT Kara Chandler – CTDOT 43 Th e Interagency Consu ltation Meeting was held to review projec ts su bmitted for the 2018 – 2021 STIP. Both the Ozo ne and PM 2.5 reports will be elect ronica lly distributed to the MPOs in the appropriate Nonattainment/Maintenance areas, FTA, FHW A, DEE P an d EP A. The MP Os will nee d to hold a 30 da y public comm ent and review period. At the end of this review period , the MP O will h old a Policy Board meeting to endorse the Air Quality Con formity determination. There was also a brief discuss ion on the trav el mo del an d emissions software planning assumptions emp loyed in the conform ity analysis. Th e sch edule for the 2018 -2021 Regional Transp ortation Impro vem ent Plans Conform ity Determina tion Analysis is as follow:  MPOs transmit signed and dated Concurrence Form to judy.raymond@ ct.gov by F e b r u a r y 1 0 , 201 7.  CTDOT Travel Demand Model Unit perform s the air quality analysis an d se nds the Air Qu ality Conformity Determina tion Reports electronica lly to all MPOs in e a r ly s umme r 20 17  MPOs adve rtise and hold a 30 -da y public rev iew an d co mm ent pe riod for the Air Qu ality Conformity.  MPOs hold a Policy Board meeting approving an d endo rsing the Air Quality Conformity and transmit resolutions to judy.raymond@ct.gov after Policy Board meeting . It is importan t tha t all MPOs follow this schedule to ensu re that the TIP/STIP Con formity Determ inations can go forward on schedule. 44 PLANNING ASSUMPTIONS Ozone and PM2.5 2018 -2021 Statewide Transportation Improvement Program February 7, 2017 Planning Assumptions for Review Frequency of Review * Responsible Agency Year of Data Socioeconomic Data At least every 5 years CTDOT 2010 Census Data available 2012 DMV Vehicle Registration Data At least every 5 years CTDEEP 2011 Data available 2012 State Vehicle Inspection and Maintenance Program Each conformity round CTDEEP Same as currently approved I&M SIP State Low Emission Vehicle Program Each conformity round following approval into the SIP CTDEEP Same as SIP VMT Mix Data At least every 5 years CTDEEP 2010** Analysis Years – PM 2.5 Each conformity round CTDOT/CTDEEP 2018, 2025, 2035, 2040 Analysis Years – Ozone Each conformity round CTDOT/CTDEEP 2018, 2025, 2035, 2040 Emission Budget – PM2.5 As SIP revised/updated CTDEEP 2017 / 2025 PM 2.5 Emission Budget – Ozone As SIP revised/updated CTDEEP 2009 SW 2017 Gr.CT Temperatures and Humidity As SIP revised/updated CTDEEP X Control Strategies Each conformity round CTDEEP X HPMS VMT Each conformity round CTDOT 2013 * Review of Planning Assumptions does not necessarily prelude an update or calibration of the travel demand model. ** Data not available until 2011 45 APPE NDIX B PM 2.5 A ND NOx PR ECURSOR EM ISSION OUTPUTS BY ANALYSIS YE AR 46 MOVES2014a 2018 County Summary: County Total Energy Consumption Pollutant Emission Quantities (Tons/Day) 91 NOx PM 2.5 (Joules/Day) 3 110 116 117 County Oxides of Nitrogen Engine Exhaust Breakwear Tirewear Total Fairfield 4.11827E+16 3586.62256 106.55599 24.77817942 11.09023355 142.42441 New Haven 4.09128E+16 3606.08619 107.63560 23.09482299 10.93306084 141.66348 Totals 8.20955E+16 7192.70875 214.19159 47.87300 22.02329 284.08789 MOVES2014a 2025 County Summary: County Total Energy Consumption Pollutant Emission Quantities (Tons/Day) 91 NOx PM 2.5 (Joules/Day) 3 110 116 117 County Oxides of Nitrogen Engine Exhaust Breakwear Tirewear Total Fairfield 3.52662E+16 2160.90967 64.00689 26.31050899 11.59185784 101.90926 New Haven 3.53198E+16 2200.86379 64.07627 24.81785853 11.5051571 100.39929 Totals 7.0586E+16 4361.77346 128.08316 51.12837 23.09701 202.30855 MOVES2014a 2035 County Summary: County Total Energy Consumption Pollutant Emission Quantities (Tons/Day) 91 NOx PM 2.5 (Joules/Day) 3 110 116 117 County Oxides of Nitrogen Engine Exhaust Breakwear Tirewear Total Fairfield 2.96699E+16 1311.95123 35.35190 28.14450918 12.16987 75.66628 New Haven 3.1165E+16 1414.39240 36.81089 29.27745982 12.63104337 78.71939 Totals 6.08349E+16 2726.34363 72.16278 57.42197 24.80091 154.38567 MOVES2014a 2040 County Summary: County Total Energy Consumption Pollutant Emission Quantities (Tons/Day) 91 NOx PM 2.5 (Joules/Day) 3 110 116 117 County Oxides of Nitrogen Engine Exhaust Breakwear Tirewear Total Fairfield 2.90795E+16 1231.66300 29.59599 28.6206817 12.31633363 70.53301 New Haven 3.0721E+16 1340.38513 31.07283 30.073911 12.85454305 74.00128 Totals 5.98005E+16 2572.04813 60.66882 58.69459 25.17088 144.53429 47 APPE NDIX C PM2.5 and N Ox INPUT FILES TO M OVES201 4a 48 2018 Fairfield 49 51 54 55 2018 New Haven 56 58 61 62 2025 Fairfield 63 65 68 69 2025 New Haven 70 72 75 76 2035 Fairfield 77 79 82 83 2035 New Haven 84 86 89 90 2040 Fairfield 91 93 96 97 2040 New Haven 98 100 103 104 APPE NDIX D ACRO NYMS 105 Acron yms Acronym Me aning CA AA Cle an Air Act Am endments (1990) CO Carbon Mon oxide COG Coun cil of Gov ernm ent CTD OT Conn ecticut Departm ent of Trans portation CT DEEP Conn ecticut Departm ent of Env ironme ntal Prot ection EPA U.S. En viron me ntal Protec tion A gency FSD Final S cope Developm ent (Now PD) ISTEA Inte rmodal Surface Trans po rtation E fficien cy Act MA P-21 Moving Ah ead for Pro gress in the 21 st Centu ry Act MO VES Mobile Vehicle Emission Simulator MPO Met ropolitan Pl anning Organization NAAQS Nation al Ambient Air Quality Sta ndards NH 3 Ammonia NOx Ni tro gen Oxides PD Pr eliminary Design (Forme rly FSD) PDWP Pr oject D evelopm ent W ork Pro gram PM 2.5 Fine Particulate Matt er PMT Person M iles T raveled RA Regional Admi nist er ROP Rate of Pro gress RTP Regional Transp ortation Plan (generally refers to Regional Transp ortation Plan Upd ate) SA FETEA-LU Safe, Accoun table, Flexible, Effici ent T ransport ation Equi ty Act: A Legacy for Us ers SD Stu dy and D evelopme nt SIP State Impl eme ntation Plan SOx Sulfur Oxides STIP St atewide Transpo rtation Improv eme nt Pro gram TCM Transpo rtation Co ntrol Me asure TIP Transpo rtation Improv ement Pro gram USDOT U.S. D epartm ent of Transport ation USEPA U.S. En viron me ntal Protec tion A gency VMT Vehicle M iles T raveled VOC Vol atile Organic Comp ound

Ozone Air Quality Conformity Determination May 2017

Co n n e c ti c ut Dep a rtm en t of T ra n sp o rt a tion O Z O NE Air Q u a lity C o n fo rm ity D eterm in at ion of the 201 5 Regio nal Tr ansport atio n Pla ns and th e FY 201 8-2021 Tr ansp ort atio n Im prov em ent Prog ram s Am end m ents for th e Conn ect icut portion of th e New York-Nort her n New Jer sey-Long Isl and , NY -NJ-CT Oz one Nonattai nm ent Are a and th e Gre ate r Connect icut O zone Nonattai nm ent Area May 2017 Note: The Conn ectic ut po rtion of the New Yo rk-Northern New Jersey-Lo ng Island Nonattainme nt area (Fairfield, New Haven an d Mid dlesex counties) an d the Greater Conn ectic ut Nona ttainme nt area (Hartford, New Lo ndon , Tolland, Win dha m and Litchfield counties) ha ve been desi gna ted as Mo derate Nona ttainme nt areas. This do cume nt incl udes the do cume ntati on of the regiona l ana lys is for bo th nona ttainme nt areas within the State of Connecticut, as well as do cume ntati on and information on the processes an d procedu res und ertaken by Conn ectic ut De pa rtme nt of Tran spo rtatio n, coordinator of Air Qua lity Con formity for the Conn ectic ut Re gional Planning Org an izatio ns. Table of Contents 1) Introduction…………… ……………………………… ………………… 4 2) Vehicle Emissions…..…… …………………………… ………………… .. 8 3) Ozone Nonattainment Areas…………… ……………… …………………. 9 4) CO Attai nment/Mai ntenance Areas… ………………… ………………… 11 5) Conformity Test s……………………………………………………………………………. 11 6) Interagency Consultat ion……………………………… ………….… .…. 13 7) Public Consultation…… ……………………………… ……. ..……… …. 14 8) VMT and Emissions Estimates.…… ………………… ……………. ……. 15 9) PM 10………………… ……………………………… …………………. 40 10) PM 2.5………………………………………………………………………………………… 41 11) Other Planning Documents………………………… ………………… .. 42 12) Tra nsportation Planning Work Program..………… …………………… 42 13) Conclusions…… …………………………………… ………………… .. 43 2 3 List of Tables Table 1: Classificati on Categories and Attai nment Dat es…… …… … ……… … …… … …… 6 Table 2: List of Connectic ut Ne twork Changes…… … …… … …… … ……… … …… … …… 16 Table 3: VMT Ozone Emissions SIP Budgets ………………………………………………………………. 38 Figure 1: List of Fig ures Connect icut Ozone Nonattai nment Areas and PM2.5 Attai nm ent/Mai ntenance Area 10 Figure 2 Connect icut CO Attai nment/ Mai ntenance Area s……… …… ……… … …… … ……. 11 List of App endices App endix A: Interagency Consultat ion Mee ting Minutes…… … …… …… ……… … …… … …… 44 App endix B: MOVES 2014 a Tabulatio ns… ……… … …… … …… … …… ……… … …… … …… 48 App endix C: MOVES 2014 a Input Ozone Emission Runs…… … …… … ……… … …… … …….. 50 App endix D: Acronyms………………………………………………………………………… … 258 4 INTR O D UC TIO N This report was prepared to do cum en t the em iss ions an alysis that was completed to evaluate Transportation Co nformity of the Metropolitan Re gional Plan ning Or ga nizat ions’ Fiscal Year 2018-2021 Transpor tation Im provem ent Program s (TIP ) and the 201 5 Re gional Long Range Transpor tation P lans (L RTP) to the S tat e Implem entation Plan (SI P) for air quality. Th is sub m ittal incorporates the FY 20 18- 20 21 TIPs an d 201 5 LRTPs from Conn ecticut’s Re gional P lanning Or ganization s (RPOs), and Mobile Ve hic le Em iss ion Budg ets (MVE Bs ). The rep ort is sub m itted to satisfy the requirements of the SIP , as revised . The statewi de travel de m and m od els were reru n, along with accompa nying Ve hicle Miles of Travel (V MT) and the MOVES2014 a em ission s m odel. The results of these runs show a dec rease in em iss ions in the affected area an d therefore the transpor tation program an d plan continue to con form to the St ate’s air qu ality pla n. On Novem ber 15, 199 0, the Clea n Air Act Amend m en ts (CAAA) of 199 0 was signe d into law. On Au gust 15, 199 7, the En viron m ental Protection Agency (EP A) publis he d the Final Co nformity Rule. Effective Feb ruary 17, 20 04, EPA appro ved a revision to the Con necticut SIP for the attainm en t an d maintena nce of the one-hour National Ambien t Air Quality St andard (NAAQS) for groun d level ozone.1 Em iss ions budgets for the 2007 Volat ile Or ga nic Com po und s (VOC) and Nitroge n Oxide s (NO x) m ot or vehicle em iss ions were calcu lat ed using MOBI LE6. 2 for the Conn ecticut portion of the New Yor k-Northern New Jerse y-Long Island Nonat tainm en t area an d the 2007 m otor vehicle em iss ion s bud get s (M VEB s) for the Greater Con necticut Nonattainm en t area . Procedures an d criteria contained in that docum ent provided the basis for this Con form ity determ inat ion. Implementa tion of these rules has been accomplishe d through a coop erative effort of the Region al Plan ning Or ganization s (RP Os), EPA, Fe der al Transit Ad ministration (FTA ), Fed eral Highway Ad m inistration (FHW A), 1 40CFR Part 52 5 Con necticut Dep artm ent of Transpor tation (CTD OT) and the Conne cticut Dep ar tm en t of Ener gy and Environm ental Protection (CTDEEP). In June of 20 04, EP A finalized eight -hour conform ity rules for ozone nonat tainmen t areas in Conn ecticut, which becam e effective in June of 2005 . These ar eas were desi gnated as ‘Moderate’ Non attainment for the eight -ho ur standa rd: the Conn ecticut portion of the New Yor k-Northern New Jersey-Lo ng Island eight-hour ozon e Non attainment Area, cons isting of Fairfield, New Ha ven and Middlesex count ies an d the Gre ater Conn ecticut eight-hour ozon e Non attainment Area, cons isting of Hartford, Litch field, New Lon don , Tolland an d W indh am cou nties. Em issions were tested against the new eight-ho ur budg ets, which were de velo ped jointly by C TDE EP an d CTD OT, a nd foun d ade quate by EP A on Jun e 27, 200 8. The 20 09 MVEBs establishe d in 200 8 for each of Conn ecticut’s n on attainm ent areas represented CTDEEP’s planning estimate at that time of the level of motor vehicle em iss ions that would be necessary to prod uce tim ely atta inment of the 19 97 8-hour ozon e NA AQS. The ap propr iaten ess of the 20 09 MVE Bs was con firm ed by ac tual m onitored 2009 desi gn values, which de m on strated that both nonat tainm en t ar eas had achieved timely attainm ent of the NAAQ S. On August 23, 2010 , CTDEEP requ ested EPA to retain the 200 9 MVEBs as ad equat e ozon e pr ec ur sor bu dgets for future transportat ion c on form ity determ ination s and for EPA to withdraw the ade quacy determ ina tion for the 201 2 MVEBs, which were set at lower em iss ion levels in case attainm ent was not achieved by 2009 . On Decem ber 30, 2010 EPA inform ed CTDE EP that it was withdrawing its previous ade quacy finding on the 201 2 out year MVEBs contained in Conn ecticut’s 8-hou r ozone attainm en t de m onstration SIP. Conne cticut ’s withdra wal of the 201 2 MVE Bs was pu blishe d in the Fe deral Register on February 15, 2011 and the bu dget chan ge became effective 15 days after publication of the an nou ncem en t. On May 21, 20 12, the Fed eral Register (77 FR 30 160) established the ap proach for class ifying nona ttainment areas, set attainment dea dlines, and revoked the 199 7 Ozon e 6 standard for transpor tation conform ity pur poses. Areas designate d nonat tainment for class ifying nona ttainment areas, set attainment dea dlines, and revoked the 199 7 Ozon e standard for transpor tation conform ity pur poses. Areas designate d nonat tainment for the 20 08 Ozon e NAA QS were class ified into one of the followi ng categories, ba sed on the severity of their ozone problem: Mar ginal, Moderate, Ser ious, Severe, or Extreme. EPA establishe d attainment dates for the 20 08 pr imary ozone NAAQ S ba sed on the area’s class ification , as sho wn in Tab le 1.2 Both of the St ate’s nona ttainm ent areas were classi fied as “Mar ginal” for the 2008 Ozon e NAAQ S. TABLE 1: Class ificati on Cat eg ories and Atta inm ent Da tes Classif icatio n Attainment Date Marginal Decem ber 31 , 2015 Moderate Decem ber 31 , 2018 Serious Decem ber 31 , 2021 Severe Decem ber 31 , 2027 Extreme Decem ber 31 , 2032 The EPA has determ ined that 11 Mar ginal areas did not at tain the 20 08 ozone stan dards by the July 20, 2015, attai nment da te, and that the se ar eas do not qual ify for a 1-year attai nment date extension, and that they m ust be reclass ified as Moderate bas ed on their 20 12-20 14 air qual ity dat a. Both the Gre ater Co nnectic ut and the New Yor k-Nort hern New Jersey -Long Isl and (NY-NJ-CT) are as were two of the ele ven ar eas .3 The “bum p- up” d esignation to Mod erate was effecti ve on June 3, 20 16. In this action, the EPA is also est ablishing a due date of January 1, 2017, by which states with new ly-reclassi fied Moderate areas m ust su bm it St ate Implem entation Pl an (SIP) re visions to address Modera te nonatta inm ent area re quire m ents for those area s. The 2Source: Table 4 in 77 FR 30160 3 http s://ww w.epa. gov/sites/prod uctio n/files/201 6-04/docu ments/20160411 fact sheet.pdf 7 reclassi fied ar eas m ust atta in the 2008 ozone standards as exped itiously as practica ble. On March 20, 2017, EPA notified C TDEEP that EPA has determined the M VEBs for the Greater Connecticut Ozone non -attainment area , submitted as a SIP revision by CTDEEP to EPA on Jnauar y 17, 2017, to be adequate for transportation conformity purposes. The VOC and NOx emissions shown for the Greater Connecticut area do not exceed the new ly determined adequate budgets. These new budgets will be effective fifteen days after EPA publishes a Notice of Aduquacy in the Federal Register. Final ly, for the New Yor k-Northern New Jerse y-Long Island, NY -NJ-CT, ar ea, the EPA is rescin ding the clean data determ ination iss ued in June 20 12, and is issuing a new SIP cal l, for t he 1997 ozone NAA QS. The states in the New York City area m ay satisfy the SIP call for the 1997 NAAQS by m aking tim ely sub m ittals to m eet the Modera te area SIP re quirem ents that now apply to this area for the 2008 ozone NA AQS .4 MOVES 2014 a inc lude s three new em ission con trol program s ass ociate d with regulat ion p rom ulgate d since the re lease of MOV ES2010 b:  Tier 3 em ission standards tha t ph ase in beg inning in 201 7 for cars, light- du ty t ruc ks, m edium -du ty passenger vehicles, and som e he avy-duty trucks, and Ti er 3 f uel sta ndards that require lower sulfur gasoline beginning in 201 7.  Heavy -duty engine an d vehic le greenho use gas (GH G) re gulations that ph ase in dur ing m od el years 201 4-2018 .  The secon d ph ase of light-du ty ve hic le GHG regu lations tha t ph ase in for m odel yea rs 20 17-202 5 cars and light trucks. MOVES 2014 a also includ es new an d upd ated em ission s da ta from a wide range of test p rogram s an d other sour ces. The most significant cha nge s includ e new effects of fuel p rope rties such as ga soline sulfur and etho anol, new data on evap orative em ission s from f uel leaks and from vehicles par ked for m ultiple days, new analysis of particulate 4ht t ps : / / ww w. f edera lreg ist er.go v /a rt ic les/ 2 0 16 / 0 5/ 0 4 /2 0 16 -0 9 7 29 / det erm inat io ns -of-a tt a inm ent -by-t he – a t t a inm ent – da t e -ext ensio ns -of-t he -a t t a inm ent -da t e -a nd#h -41 8 m atte r (PM) data related to PM spec iation an d temperature effects on running PM em issions and new real wor ld in-use em issions for heavy-duty ve hicles using data from portable em iss ion m onitor ing system s. MOVES 2014 a estim ates exha ust and evapo rative em ission s as well as brake and tire wear em iss ions from all typ es of on -road vehicles. MOVES20 14a also uses a vehicle class ification system based on the way veh icles are classified in the FHW A’s Highway Perform ance Monitoring Sys tem (HPMS). Other param eters inc lud e vehicle m iles 5 traveled (VM T) by vehic le and ro ad type , vehicle ho urs traveled (VH T) by veh icle and road type, the nu m ber of each typ e of vehicle in the fleet, veh icle age distribu tion , m od el year, t ravel spe ed, roadway type, fuel inform ation, m ete orological da ta, su ch as ambient tem perature an d hu m idit y, and ap plicable control m ea su res such as reform ulate d ga soline (RFG) and inspe ction and m aintena nce (I/M). Local inp uts were coop eratively develope d by CTDEEP and CTDOT, where ap plicable, using EPA 5 re comm end ed method s. Em iss ions are now tested against the establishe d eigh t-hour bu dge ts, which were developed jointly by CT DE EP and CTD OT, and found adequate by EPA on June 27, 2 008 . In No vem ber 20 12, EP A con firm ed by teleph one to CTDEEP that future con form ity det erm inations utilizing the MOVES201 0b model can be made by comparing e m iss ion results to the existing MOB ILE 6.2 bu dge ts for Ozo ne. Therefore, as the 200 9 MVE Bs are ad equat e ozon e precursor budge ts, this Air Qual ity C on form ity anal ysis will com pa re future year em iss ions to this ba se. Ve hicle Em iss ions Ozone Gro und level ozon e is a m ajor componen t of sm og. It is form ed by sunligh t and heat 5 “MOVES201 4 and MOVES2014a Techn ical Guidance: U s i ng MOV ES to Prepare Emiss ion Inventories for State Implementation Plans and T r a nsportation Conf o rmity”, EPA-420 -B-15-09 3, November 20 15 9 acting up on fuel com bustion products such as nitrogen oxides and hydrocarbo ns. Ozo ne occurs naturally in the up per atmosph ere and shields the ear th from ultraviolet radiation . However, at ground level, ozon e is a se vere irritant. Because ozone form ation is directly related to atm ospheric tem pe ratures, problem atic ozone levels occur m ost frequently on hot summ er afternoo ns. Ozo ne exposure is linked to respiratory illnesses such as as thm a and lung inflamm ation and can exacerbate e xisting respiratory ailm ents. Ozo ne pollution can a lso se verely da m age veget at ion , including agricultural crops an d forest habitats. Nit rogen Oxides (NOx) Mob ile sou rce nitrogen oxides form whe n nitroge n and oxy gen atom s che mically react inside the high pre ss ur e and tempe rature cond itions in an en gine. Ni troge n oxides are precursors for ozon e and can also con tribu te to the forma tion of acidic rain. Hydro carbo ns or Volatile O rganic Co m poun ds (VOC) Hydr oc ar bon em ission s are a product of pa rtial fuel combustion , fuel evap or ation and ref ueling loss es caused by spillage an d vapor lea ka ge. VOC reacts with nitroge n oxides and sunlight to form ozon e. Carbon Mon oxide (CO) Carbon m ono xide is produced by the incomplete bu rning of carbon in fuels, including gasoline. High conc en tratio ns of CO occur along roadsi des in heavy traf fic, particularly at m ajor inter sections and in enclosed ar eas such as gara ges and poo rly ven tilate d tunn els. Peak concentrat ions occur dur ing the col der m on ths of the year whe n CO veh icular em iss ions are great er. O zone No nattainme nt Area s On Mar ch 27 , 200 8, EPA finalized new ozone standards which tight ened the stand ard to 0.075 parts per m illion (pp m ) from the previous, 19 97 ozon e standard of 0.0 8 pp m. 10 On May 21, 2012 , EP A finalized designa tions for this new ozone standard, effective July 20, 201 2. The nona ttainm ent areas ha ve chan ged un der the latest 200 8 ground-level ozon e eigh t-ho ur stand ard. The Conn ecticut portion of the New Yor k-Northern New Je rsey-Long Isla nd Non attainment Ar ea (Fairfield, New Ha ve n an d Middles ex counties) a n d the Gre ater Con necticut Ar ea (Hartford, New Londo n, Tollan d, W indham and Litch field coun ties) ha ve been designate d as Mod er ate Non attainm ent areas, effective Jun e 3, 201 6. Figure 1 below shows the two Moderate Non attainment areas in Con necticut. Fig ure 1: Conne ctic ut Ozone Nonat tainment Areas and PM2.5 Attainmen t/Maintenance Area 11 CO No natta inm ent Area s There were form er ly three CO Non attainment Areas in the state. These were the Southwest portion of the state, the greater New Ha ven area, an d the greater Ha rtford area. The rem ainder of the state was in attainm ent for CO. At tainm en t was de m onstrated in each of these ar eas an d, subsequently, they were designa ted as Full Maintena nce areas. On Septe m ber 13 , 2004 , EPA approved a CTDEEP sub m ittal for a SIP revision for re-design at ion of these areas to Lim ited Maintena nce Plan status, thus elim ina ting the nee d for bud get testing. Effecti ve Ja nuary 2, 201 6, the Gre ater Hartford Area was in full attai nament status. In the future, “hot-spo t” ca rbo n m onoxide analyses will be perform ed to satisfy “project level” conformity det erm inations. Figure 2 below shows the CO attainm ent/maintena nce areas in Conne cticut. Fig ure 2: Conne cticut Carbo n Mono xide Maintenac e and Attainme nt Area s 12 Con for m ity Test s Un der the Con form ity Rules, the following test for VOC/NOx must be m et:  TES T 1 For VOC an d NOx, transpor tation em ission s from the Action Scen ar ios m ust be less t han the 200 9 transpo rtat ion em iss ion budgets if analysis year is 2009 or later. As the CO areas have be en ap proved by EPA for Lim ited Maintena nce Plan status, no t ests for CO are required. The ACTION SCE NARIO is the future tran sportat ion sys tem that will result from full i mplem entation of the Transpo rtation Im provem en t Programs (TIP) and Long Range Transportat ion Plans (LRTP ). VOC/NOx em iss ion an alysis was con ducted for summ er con ditions and for the following yea rs:  2009 (eigh t-hour MVE B yea r)  2018 (New Attainment year and near term an alysis year)  2025 (Interim m od eling year)  2035 (Interim m od eling year)  2040 (Long Range Transportation Pl an hor izon year) At this time, the following eight -hour em ission budgets have been appro ved by EPA for use in this con form ity an alysis: 1. In 200 9 and subseque nt years, VOC in the Con necticut portion of the New York- Northern New Jerse y-Long Islan d Moderate Non attainm ent area must be less than 27.4 tons per summer da y. 2. In 200 9 and sub se que nt year s, NOx in the Conn ecticut portion of the New 13 York- Northern New Jerse y-Long Islan d Moderate Non attainment area m ust be less than 54.6 tons per summer da y. 3. In 2017 and subseq uen t years, VOC in the Greater Conn ecticut Moderate Non attainm ent area m ust be less than 15.9 tons per summer day. 4. In 2017 and subseq uen t years, NOx in the Greater Connecticut Moderate Non attainment area m ust be less than 22.2 tons per summer day. Inte ragency Con sul tat ion An Intera gency Consultation Mee ting was held on February 7 , 2017 to ad dress the need to prep are an Air Quality De term ination Anal ysis for these TIP am end m en ts. All Metrop olitan Planning Or ga nization s (MPO ’s), rural COGs, FHW A, FTA, EP A, and CTDEEP were invited to review and comm ent on the project’s Air Quality codi ng, analysis years to be m od eled , and comm ents on the latest plann ing ass um ptions to be utilized for this con form ity. The project Air Quality coding is as follows: CC – Con form ity An alysis Com pleted M – Mod eled in the Dep ar tmen t’s highway or tra nsit networks NM – Re quires m odeling and will be inclu de d into the Dep artm en t’s highway and tra nsit net works pr ior to conformity analysis NR S –a highway or tra nsit project on a faci lity that do es not ser ve re gional needs or is not normally inclu ded in the region al travel sim ulat ion m odel and does no t fit into an exem pt project category in Tab le 2 or 3 of the Final Rule (40 CFR 93). RS – Re gionally Si gnifican t refers to a tran sportat ion project in the TIP and /or STIP ( other tha n an exem pt pro ject) that is on a facility which ser ves re gion al transpo rtation nee ds such as access to an d from the area outside of the re gion , m ajor a ctivity ce nters in the re gion s, m ajor planne d develop ment such as new ret ail m alls, sports complexes, etc., or transportation term inals as well as m ost term inals t hem selves) and would norm ally be inc luded in the modeling of a m etropolitan a rea’s transpor tation net work, inclu ding at a m inim um all pr incipal arterial highways and all fixed guid e-way tra nsit faci lities that offer an alternati ve 14 to re gion al highway t ravel (40 CFR 93.10 1). Once a pro ject is iden tified as region ally significa nt, it must be included in the an alysis re gardless of funding sour ce. Exem pt Project – a pro ject listed in Ta ble 2 or 3 of the Final Rule (40 CFR 93) that pr im ar ily en han ces safety or ae sthetics, m aintains mass transit, cont inu es curren t le vels of rideshar ing, or b uilds bicycle and ped estrian faci lities . X6 – Project exempt from the requ irem ent to det erm ine conform ity und er 40 CFR 93.12 6 X7 – Project exem pt form regional em iss ions anal ysis re quirements under 40 CFR 93.12 7 X8 – Traffic synchr onization projects may be ap proved , funde d and implem ented without satisfying con formity re quirem ents un der 40 CFR 93.12 8 It was agreed upo n that the 201 1 vehic le reg ist ration dat a file wou ld be utilized for this Con form ity De termi nation and CTDEEP and CTDOT staff would discuss up date of this file. A copy of the Interagency Co nsultat ion Meeting m inut es is include d in Appen dix A. The final em ission s an alys is was pre pared an d the rep ort was distributed for the 30 day public comm ent per iod . Public Con sultat ion As re qu ire d by the Final Rule, the transportation con form ity proce ss m ust include public consultation on the em iss ions an alysis and conform ity determ ina tion for Ozon e determ ina tions. This includes post ing of relevan t docum en tation and analysis on a “clea ringho use” webpag e m ainta ined through the interagen cy con su ltation process. All MPOs in the Conn ecticut Ozon e Non attainm ent areas m ust provide thirty day public comm en t per iods and address any comm ents rec eived. For this Ozo ne transportat ion con form ity de term ination, all Con necticut MPOs will hold a thirty day public comm ent per iod. 15 VM T and Em iss ions Estim ates VMT estimates were developed from CTDOT’s statewide net work -based travel m odel. The 2015 travel mode l n e t w o r k , to the extent practical, represen ts all state highways and m ajor conne cting non-state str eets an d roads, as well as the ra il, loc al bus, and express es bus sys tems that cur rently exist. Future highway net works for 2018 , 202 0, 2025 an d 2030 and trans it ne twor ks for 2018, 2020 , 203 0 and 2040 were built by adding Sta tewide Transportat ion Improvem ent Program (STIP), TIP and LRTP projects (p rogramm ed for open ing after 201 7) to the 2017 network year. Th ese networ ks were used to run travel m od els and cond uct em iss ions an alysis for the years 2018, 2025 , 2035 , an d 2040 . Projects for each m odel an alysis year for which net work chan ges were re quired are sho wn on Table 2 as follows: 16 TABLE 2 LIST OF NETWORK CHANGES 2018 NETWORK CHANGES NEW MPO DESCRIPTION LANES PROJECT NUMBER FROM TO HIGHWAY NAME TOWN IMPROVEMENT CAPITAL REGION 0131 -0190 Remove Bridge Number 00518 Reconstruct 10/322 Intersecti on 1/1 0/0 ROUTE 10 SOUTHINGTON CCD 11/2017, TIP BRIDGE REMOVAL GREATER BRIDGEPORT 0015 -TMP1 Realignment of Lafayette Circle and establishment of bidirectional traffic on Fairfield Avenue 0/1 1/1 LAFAYETTE C IRCLE BRIDGEPORT CCD 2017, TIP REALIGNMENT 0036 -0184 Main Street Derby from Bridge Street to Route 8 South Exit15 On/Off Ramps (Ausonio Street) 1/1 2/2 ROUTE 34 DERBY CCD 2018, TIP WIDENING HOUSATONIC VALLEY 0034 -0347 State Route 806 (Newtown Road) from Old Newtown to Plumtrees & from Eagle to Industrial Plaza, Danbury – Widening from 1 lane each direction to 2 lanes each direction 1/1 2/2 SR 806 NEWTOWN ROAD DANBUR Y CCD 2016, TIP SOUTH CENTRAL 0079 -XXXX Multiple lane and directional changes in the center of town. Conversion of multiple one way streets to two ways. Conversion of a two way street to one way. Reduction of one lane in eac h direction for one street CCD 2018, TIP VARIOUS WEST MAIN STREET MERIDEN DIRECTIONAL AND LANE CHANGES 17 TABLE 2 LIST OF NETWORK CHANGES (CONT’D) 2018 NETWORK CHANGES NEW MPO DESCRIPTION LANES PROJECT NUMBER FROM TO HIGHWAY NAME TOWN IMPROVEMENT SOUTH CENTRAL (CONT’D) 0092 -0531 Q Bridge Replacement and demolition; Contract E 3/3 5/5 I-95 CCD 201 6, TIP NEW HAVEN BRIDGE REPLACEMENT 0092 -0532 Q Bridge Replacement and demolition; Contract B 3/3 5/5 I-95 CCD 2016, TIP NEW HAVEN BRIDGE REPLACEMENT 0092 -0627 Q Bridge Replacement and demolition; Contract B2 3/3 5/5 I-95 CCD 2016, TIP NEW HAVEN BRIDGE REPLACEMENT 0092 -XXXX Removal of North Frontage Road between State Street & Orange Street 1/1 0/0 NORTH FRONTAGE ROAD NEW HAVEN CCD 2016, TIP ROADWAY REMOVAL 0100 -0175 Project to widen Sackett Point Road from 1 lane to 2 lanes CCD 2018, TIP 1/1 2/2 SACKETT POINT ROAD NORTH HAVEN WIDENING 18 TABLE 2 LIST OF NETWORK CHANGES (CONT’D) 2018 NETWORK CHANGES NEW MPO DESCRIPTION LANES PROJECT NUMBER FROM TO HIGHWAY NAME TOWN IMPROVEMENT SOUTH WESTERN 0102 -0325 Addition of a through lane on Route 1 Northbound from France Street to Route 53 1/1 1/2 ROUTE 1 NORWALK CCD 2018, TIP WIDENING 0135 -0301 Reconstruction of I -95 off ramps and Atla ntic Street in vicinity of Metro North Railroad Bridge No. 08012R 2/2 3/3 ATLANTIC STREET STAMFORD WIDENING CCD 2018, TIP GREATER BRIDGEPORT 0138 -0211 Addition of a through lane on Route 1 Southbound from Nob el Street to Soundview Avenue 1/2 2/2 ROUTE 1 STRATFORD CCD 2018, TIP WIDENING CENTRAL NAUGATUCK VALLEY 0017 -0182 Addition of a second through lane on Route 6 Eastbound from Carol Drive (Mix Street /Brook Street) to Peggy Lane (Camp Street) 1/1 2/1 ROUTE 6 BRISTOL WIDENING CCD 2018, TIP 19 TABLE 2 LIST OF NETWORK CHANGES (CONT’D) 2020 NETWORK CHANGES NEW MPO DESCRIPTION LANES PROJECT NUMBER FROM TO HIGHWAY NAME TOWN IMPROVEMENT CAPITAL REGION 0051 -0259 Interchange improvements at Routes 4, 6, and 9 including a new EB C/D Roadway N/A I84/RT4/RT6 FARMINGTON CCD 2019, TIP INTERCHANGE BSWY 0063 -0703 Relocation and Reconfiguration of Inter change 29 on I-91; New additional lanes Rte. 15 NB from 2 to 3 lanes exit 90 to 0.5 miles beyond Exit 91 3/3 4/3 I-91, EXIT 29 HARTFORD WIDENING CCD 2020 Long Range Plan 0155 -0156 Add an Operational Lane WB between Interchanges 42 & 39A; Add an Operational Lane EB between Interchanges 40 & 41 CCD 2018 3/3 4/4 I-84 WEST HARTFORD OPERATIONAL LANES CENTRAL NAUGATUCK VALLEY 0151 -0273 Interstate 84 2/2 3/3 I-84 CCD 11/2020, TIP WATERBURY WIDENING 0151 -XXXX TIGER Grant includes various roadway changes including reconstruction/extension of Jackson Street. Extension will meet at Freight Street an d continue to West Main N/A 1/1 DOWNTOWN AREA WATERBURY ADDED ROADWAY CCD 2019, Long Range Plan 20 TABLE 2 LIST OF NETWORK CHANGES (CONT’D) 2020 NETWORK CHANGES NEW MPO DESCRIPTION LANES PROJECT NUMBER FROM TO HIGHWAY NAME TOWN IMPROVEMENT GREATER BRIDGEPORT 0015 -HXXX Reconstruct and widen Route 130 from Stratford Avenue bridge to Yellow Mill br idge 1/1 2/2 ROUTE 130 BRIDGEPORT Long Range Plan WIDENING 0124 -0165 **As of 2/15/2011current scope from consultant is spot improvements for from Swan Avenue to Franklin Street Project Manager* * Bank Street from West Street to North Main St is full scope being reviewed by consultant 1/1 2/2 ROUTE 67 SEYMOUR MAJOR WIDENING Long Range Plan 0124 -XXXX Between Interchange 22 and 23 to improve a ccess N/A ROUTE 8 Long Range Plan SEYMOUR INTERCHANGE 0124 -XXXX Realign interchange with new extension of Derby Road N/A ROUTE 8 SEYMOUR Long Range Plan INTERCHANGE 0126 -XXXX Int erchan ge 11 – Construct new SB entrance ramp, Widen Bridgeport Avenue N/A ROUTE 8 SHELTON Long Range Plan MAJOR WIDENING 21 TABLE 2 LIST OF NETWORK CHANGES (CONT’D) 2020 NETWORK CHANGES NEW MPO DESCRIPTION LANES PROJECT NUMBER FROM TO HIGHWAY NAME TOWN IMPROVEMENT GREATER BRIDGEPORT (CONT’D) 0126 -XXXX Between Huntin gton Avenue and Constitution Boulevard 1/1 2/2 ROUTE 714 SHELTON Long Range Plan MAJOR WIDENING NEW MPO 0138 -0248 Recon struct Intercha nge 33 on I -95 to provide full interchange from partial to full diamond interchange N/A I-95, EXIT 33 STRATFORD INTERCHANGE RECONSTRUCTION CCD 2020, Long Range Plan HOUSATONIC VALLEY 0008 -XXXX Operational Improvemen ts on White Street at Locust Avenue and Eighth Avenue 1/1 1/2 WHITE STREET DANBURY CCD 2020, Long Range Plan WIDENING 0096 -0204 Addition of a through lane on Route 34 EB from Wasserman Way to Toddy Hill Road. Addition of I-84 WB and EB on -ramp from Route 34 WB 1/1 2/1 ROUTE 34 NEWTOWN WIDENING CCD 2020, TIP SOUTH CENTRAL 0092 -XXXX Intersection Impr ovements at Route 69 and Pond Lily Avenue N/A ROUTE 69 NEW HAVEN Long Range Pl an INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS 22 TABLE 2 LIST OF NETWORK CHANGES (CONT’D) 2025 NETWORK CHANGES NEW MPO DESCRIPTION LANES PROJECT NUMBER FROM TO HIGHWAY NAME TOWN IMPROVEMENT CAPITAL REGION 0042 -0317 Removal of the Cambridge Street to Route 2 Westbound On -Ramp and the Sutton Avenue to Route 2 Eastbound Off -Ramp. New through lane on Main Street No rthbound underneath Route 2 at the approach to the Route 2 Westbound Off -Ramp 0/1 0/2 ROUTE 2 EAST HARTFORD WIDENING CCD 2021, TIP 0055 -0142 Addition of a second through lane on Route 20/189 Westbound from Route 10/202 to Route 20 and Route 189 split. Addition of a second through lane on Route 20 Westbound from Hungary Road to Route 10/202. Addition of a second through lane on Route 10/202 Northbound from Route 189 to Route 20/189. VARIOUS ROUTE 10 & 202 GRANBY WIDENING CCD 2022, TIP LOWER CT RIVER VALLEY 0082 -0316 Reconfiguration and realignment of Route 17 On – Ramp onto Route 9 from Main Street. Removal of the Harbor Drive to Route 9 Northbound On -Ramp N/A ROUT E 17 MIDDLETOWN INTERCHANGE RECONFIGURATION CCD 2025, TIP 0082 -0318 Removal of a through lane on Route 9 Southbound from just North of Miller Street to just South of Washington Street. Route 9 access to Washington Street/De Koven Drive has been limited to an on – ramp to Route 9 Southbound. N/A ROUTE 9 MIDDLETOWN REMOVE LANE CCD 2021, TIP 23 TABLE 2 LIST OF NETWORK CHANGES (CONT’D) 2025 NETWORK CHAN GES NEW MPO DESCRIPTION LANES PROJECT NUMBER FROM TO HIGHWAY NAME TOWN IMPROVEMENT SOUTHEASTERN Addition of a second through lane on Route 85 Northbound from just North of Chesterfield Road to just South of Deer Run. CCD 2024, TIP 1/1 2/1 0120 -0079 ROUTE 85 MONTVILLE WIDENING SOUTH WESTERN 0102 -0358 Reconfiguration of the interchanges between Route 7, Ro ute 15, and Main Avenue. These changes include multiple new and reconfigured on and off ramps designed to allow access to and from all three major roadways CCD 2025, TIP N/A ROUTE 7 AND ROUTE 15 NORWALK INTERCHANGE RECONFIGURATI ON 24 TABLE 2 LIST OF NETWORK CHANGES (CONT’D) 2028 NETWORK CHANGES NEW MPO DESCRIPTION LANES PROJECT NUMBER FROM TO HIGHWAY NAME TOWN IMPROVEMENT SOUTHEASTERN ROUTE 82 Removal of a through lane on Route 82 Eastbound from just West of Pine Street to just West of Fairmont Street N/A NORWICH REMOVE LANE CCD 2027, TIP 25 TABLE 2 LIST OF NETWOR K CHANGES (CONT’D) 2030 NETWORK CHANGES NEW MPO DESCRIPTION LANES PROJECT NUMBER FROM TO HIGHWAY NAME TOWN IMPROVEMENT CAPITAL REGION VARIOUS T OWNS New Haven/Hartford/Springfield Rail Service Governor’s Transportation Initiative Long Range Plan N/A NEW COMMUTER RAIL 0109 -XXXX New Britain Avenue Cooke Street to Ho oker Street 1/1 2/2 PLAINVILLE Long Range Plan ADD LANE VARIOUS TOWNS New Haven/Hartford/Springfield Rail Service Governor’s Transportation Initiative Long Range Plan N/A NEW COMMUTER RAIL CENTRAL NAUGATUCK VALLEY 0080 -0128 Add auxiliary lanes at Int. 17 and on Routes 63/64 CCD 2030 1/1 2/2 I-84, Routes 63 -64 Long Range Plan MIDDLEBURY/WATERBURY WIDENING GREA TER BRIDGEPORT 0036 -0179 Interchange 18 – Construct New NB entrance ramp. N/A ROUTE 8 Long Range Plan ANSONIA INTERCHANGE 26 TABLE 2 LIST OF NETWORK CHANGES (CONT’D) 2030 NETWORK CHANGES NEW MPO DESCRIPTION LANES PROJECT NUMBER FROM TO HIGHWAY NAME TOWN IMPROVEMENT GREATER BRIDGEPORT (CONT’D) 0036 -XXXX Route 8 Interchange 16 and 17; Construct new NB ramps. Close old ramps N/A ROUTE 8 DERBY Long Range Plan INTERCHANGE 0126 -XXXX Interchange 14 – Constru ct new SB entrance ramp N/A ROUTE 8 Long Range Plan SHELTON INTERCHANGE HOUSATONIC VALLEY 0018 -0124 South of Old State Road to Route 133 1/1 2/2 US 202 Long Range Pla n BROOKFIELD WIDENING 0034 -0288 From Kenosia Avenue easterly to I -84 (Exit 4) 1/1 2/2 ROUTE 6 Long Range Plan DANBURY ADD LANES 0034 -XXXX From I -84 (Exit 2) East to Kenosia Av enue 1/1 2/2 ROUTE 6 Long Range Plan DANBURY ADD LANES 0034 -XXXX From Route I -84 (Exit 6) Northerly to Jeanette Street Long Range Plan 1/1 2/2 ROUTE 37 DANBURY ADD LANES 27 TABLE 2 LIST OF NETWORK CHANGES (CONT’D) 2030 NETWORK CHANGES NEW MPO DESCRIPTION LANES PROJECT NUMBER FROM TO HIGHWAY NA ME TOWN IMPROVEMENT HOUSATONIC VALLEY (CONT’D) 0034 -XXXX Between Interchanges 3 and 4. Between Interc hanges 12 and 13 3/3 4/4 I-84 DANBURY, NEWTOWN, SOUTHBURY Long Range Plan ADD LANES 0034 -XXXX Widen Kenosia Avenue from Backus Avenue to Vicinity of Lake Kenosia 1/1 2/2 DANBURY ADD LANES Long Range Plan 0034 -XXXX Widen Backus Avenue from Kenosia Avenue to Miry Brook Road 1/1 2/2 DANBURY ADD LANES Long Range Plan 0034 -XXXX From South Street northerly to Boughton Street; 1/1 2/2 ROUTE 53 Long Range Plan DANBURY ADD LANES 0034 -XXXX From Route 53 (Main Street) northerly to I -84 (Exit 6) 1/1 2/2 ROUTE 37 DANBURY Long Range Plan ADD LANES 0096 -XXXX New Road across Old Fairfield Hills H ospital Campus, From Route 6 South to Route 860 0/0 1/1 NEWTOWN NEW ROAD Long Range Plan ADD LANES 28 TABLE 2 LIST OF NETWORK CHANGES (CONT’D) 2030 NETWORK CHANGES NEW MPO DESCRIPTION LANES PROJECT NUMBER FROM TO HIGHWAY NAME TOWN IMPROVEMENT SOUTH CENTRAL 0014 -XXXX East Haven Town Line to Alps Road (Echlin Road Private) 2/2 2/3 ROUT E 1 BRANFORD Long Range Plan WIDENING 0014 -XXXX Route 146 to Cedar Street 2/2 2/3 ROUTE 1 Long Range Plan BRANFORD WIDENING 0014 -XXXX Cedar Street to East Main 1/1 1/2 ROUTE 1 Lo ng Range Plan BRANFORD WIDENING 0014 -XXXX East Main to 1 -95 Exit 55 1/1 1/2 ROUTE 1 Long Range Plan BRANFORD WIDENING 0014 -XXXX I-95 Exit 55 to Leetes Island Road 1/1 1/2 RO UTE 1 Long Range Plan BRANFORD WIDENING 0059 -XXXX Bullard Road extension to Route 77 0/0 1/1 BULLARD RD Long Range Plan GUILFORD WIDENING 29 TABLE 2 LIST OF NETWORK CHANGES (CONT’D) 2030 NETWORK CHANGES NEW MPO DESCRIPTION LANES PROJECT NUMBER FROM TO HIGHWAY NAME TOWN IMPROVEMENT SOUTH CENTRAL (CONT’D ) 0059 -XXXX State Street to Tanner Marsh Road 1/1 1/2 ROUTE 1 Long Range Plan GUILFORD WIDENING 0061 -XXXX Washington Avenue to Route 40 2/2 2/3 ROUTE 10 Long Range Plan HAMDEN WIDEN ING 0061 -XXXX Route 40 to Todd Street 2/2 2/3 ROUTE 10 Long Range Plan HAMDEN WIDENING 0061 -XXXX Todd Street to Shepard Avenue 1/1 2/2 ROUTE 10 Long Range Plan HAMDEN WID ENING 0061 -XXXX River Street to Cheshire Town Line 1/1 2/2 ROUTE 10 Long Range Plan HAMDEN WIDENING 0061 -XXXX Olds Street (Hamden) to Sackett Point Road 1/1 2/2 ROUTE 5 Long Range Plan HAMDEN, NORTH HAVEN WIDENING 30 TABLE 2 LIST OF NETWORK CHANGES (CONT’D) 2030 NETWORK CHANGES NEW MPO DESCRIPTION LANES PROJECT NUMBER FROM TO HIGHW AY NAME TOWN IMPROVEMENT SOUTH CENTRAL (CONT’D) 0073 -XXXX New Rail Station near Salemme Lane in Orange N/A ORANGE CCD 2030 Long Range Plan NEW RAIL STATION 0079 -XXXX Walling ford Town Line to Olive Street (Route 71) 1/1 2/2 ROUTE 5 Long Range Plan MERIDEN WIDENING 0083 -XXXX From West of Old Gate Lane to Gulf Street/Clark Street to Route 1 1/1 2/2 ROUTE 162 MILFORD Long Range Pla n WIDENING 0092 -0649 Long Wharf access Plan Widen I -95 (in separate project), Eliminate Long Wharf Drive to expand park, add new road from Long Wharf Drive Long Range Plan VARIES NEW HAVEN 0092 -XXXX From Route 63 to Landin Street 1/1 2/2 ROUTE 69 Long Range Plan NEW HAVEN, WOODBRIDGE WIDENING 0092 -XXXX From Dayton Street (NH) to Landin Street (Wdbg) 1/2 2/3 ROUTE 63 Long Range Plan NEW HAVEN, WOODBRIDGE WIDENING 31 TABLE 2 LIST OF NETWORK CHANGES (CONT’D) 2030 NETWORK CHANGES NEW MPO DESCRIPTION LANES PROJECT NUMBER FROM TO HIGHWAY NAME TOWN IMPROVEMENT SOUTH CENTRAL (CONT’D) 0098 -XXXX From East Haven Town Line to Doral Farms Road and Route 22 to Guilford Town Line 1/1 1/2 ROUTE 80 NORTH BRANFORD Long Range Plan WIDENING 0106 -XXXX From West Haven Town Line to US 1 1/1 2/2 ROUTE 162 Long Range Plan ORANGE WIDENING 0148 -XXXX From South Orchard Street. to Ward Street and Christian Road to Meriden Town Line 1/1 2/2 ROUTE 5 WALLINGFORD Long Range Plan ROUTE 5 0148 -XXXX From Route 71 overpass South of Old Colon y Road to Route 68 1/1 1/2 ROUTE 150 WALLINGFORD Long Range Plan ROUTE 5 0156 -XXXX Route 1 to Elm Street 1/1 2/2 ROUTE 122 Long Range Plan WEST HAVEN WIDENING 0156 -XXXX Campbell Avenue to Orange Town Line 1/1 2/2 ROUTE 1 Long Range Plan WEST HAVEN WIDENING 32 TABLE 2 LIST OF NETWORK CHANGES (CONT’D) 2030 NETWORK CHANGES NEW MPO DESCRIPTION LANES PROJECT NUMBER FROM TO HIGHWAY NAME TOWN IMPROVEMENT SOUTH CENT RAL (CONT’D) 0156 -XXXX Elm Street to Greta Street 2/2 2/3 ROUTE 162 Long Range Plan WEST HAVEN WIDENING 0156 -XXXX Bull Hill Ln to Orange Town Line 1/1 2/2 ROUTE 162 Long Range Plan WEST HAVEN WIDENING VARIOUS TOWNS New Haven/Hartford/Springfield Rail Service Governor’s Transportation Initiative Long Range Plan N/A NEW COMMUTER RAIL SOUTH WESTERN 0035 -XXXX Add Lane from Stamford Exit 8 to Darien Exit 10, Operational Lane 3/3 4/4 I-95 Darien -Stamford Long Range Plan WIDENING 0102 -0269 Upgrade to full interchange at Merritt Parkway (Route 15) BID 01 -09 -08 N/A US 7/RT 15 NORWALK CCD 2030, Long Ra nge Plan UPGRADE EXPRESSWAY 0102 -0297 East Avenue from the vicinity of the I -95 Ramps southerly to the vicinity of Van Zant Street 1/1 2/2 EAST AVE #1 NORWALK Long Range Plan WIDENING 33 TABLE 2 LIST OF NETWORK CHANGES (CONT’D) 2030 NETWORK CHANGES NEW MPO DESCRIPTION LANES PROJECT NUMBER FROM TO HIGHWAY NAME TOWN IMPROVEMENT SOUTH WESTERN (CO NT’D) 0102 -0312 Reconstruction of Interchange 40 Merritt Parkway and Route 7 (Main Avenue). Breakout of 0102 -0269 Phase 1 N/A ROUTE 7/15 NORWALK UPGRADE EXPRESSWAY CCD 2030, Long Range Plan 0102 -XXXX Express Bus/BRT between Norwalk and Greenwich N/A NORWALK -GREENWICH Long Range Plan BRT 34 TABLE 2 LIST OF NETWORK CHANGES (CONT’D) 2040 NETWORK CHANGES NEW MPO DESCRIPTION LANES PROJECT NUMBER FROM TO HIGHWAY NAME TOWN IMPROVEMENT GREATER BRIDGEPORT 0015 -XXXX New Rail Station near Barnum Street in Bridgeport N/A NEW RAIL STATION CCD 2040 Long Range Plan 35 In ad dition, the travel m od el incorporates the effect of the Em ployer Comm ute Option s (ECO) Program in S ou thwest Conn ecticut (part of the Conne cticut Portion of the NY-NJ- LI Mar ginal Nona ttainm ent area). In respon se to federal legislation, Conn ecticut has restructured the ECO Program to empha size voluntary participat ion, combine d with pos itive incentives, to encourage em ployee s to rides hare, use transit, and con tinue to expa nd their trip re du ction activities. This pro gram has bee n m ad e available to all employer s. It is felt that this pr oc ess is an effective m ea ns of achieving Co nnecticut’s cle an air tar gets. Funding for this effort un der the Congestion Mitiga tion and Air Quality Impro vem ents (CMAQ) Pro gram is incl uded in the TIP for FY 201 8-20 21 . It is esti m ated that this program , if fully successf ul, cou ld redu ce Ve hicle Miles of Travel (VM T) an d mobi le source VOC em issions by two percent in So uthwestern Con necticut. It sho uld be noted that TIP an d LRTP projects which have ne gligible impact on trip distribu tion and/or highway capac ity have not bee n incorporated into the network. These inc lud e, but are not lim ited to, geo m etric impro vem ents of exist ing interchan ges, short secti ons of climbing lanes, inter section improvem ents, and trans it projects dealing with equipm ent for exist ing facilities and vehicles, an d tra nsit op erating assistance. Essen tially, tho se p rojects that do no t im pact the tra vel dem an d forecasts are not included in the net works and /or analysis. The ne twor k-ba sed travel mode l used for this ana lysis is the mo de l that CTDOT utilizes for tra nspo rtation plann ing , program m ing and design requiremen ts. This travel de m and m ode l uses de mogr aph ic an d lan d use ass um ption s ba sed on the 201 0 Cen sus popu lation an d Con ne cticut Depa rtmen t of Labo r 20 10 em ploym en t estim ate s. Popu lation an d employm en t projection s for the yea rs 2020 , 203 0 an d 204 0 were de velope d by the Conne cticut Depa rtm en t of Tran spo rtat ion , Travel Dem an d an d Air Qua lity Mode ling Unit and app roved by all the regiona l plann ing agencies in ea rly 2012 . The mo de l uses a constraine d equilibr ium app roa ch to allocate trips amon g links. The model was calibra ted using 20 13 grou nd counts an d 201 3 Highway Pe rforma nce Mon itoring System (HPMS) Veh icle Miles of Travel data. 36 Pea k hour dire ctional traffic volum es were estima ted as a pe rcen tage of the ADT on a link by link ba sis . Based on autom atic traffic recorde r dat a, 9.0 pe rcen t, 8.5 percent, 8.0 pe rcent and 7.5 percent of the Average Daily Traffic (ADT) occ urs dur ing the fou r high est hours of the day. A 55:45 directional split was assum ed . Hou rly volum es were then converted to Service Flow Le vels (SFL) an d Volum e to Capa city (V/ C) ratios calculated as follows:  SFL = DH V/PHF* N  VC = SFL / C whe re:  DH V = Directiona l Hourly Vo lume  PHF = Peak Hou r Factor = .9  N = Numb er of lane s  C = Capa city of lane Pea k period speeds were estima ted from the 200 0 Hi ghway Capa city Manua l ba sed on the de sign spe ed, facili ty class , are a type an d the calculated V/ C ratio. On the express way system , Conne cticut-ba sed free flow speed data was available. This data was deem ed more appropr iate an d supe rseded the cap acity manual spe ed value s. The express way free flow spee ds were updated in 200 5. For the off-peak hours, tra ffic volum e is no t the con trolling factor for veh icl e speed. Off- pea k link spee ds were based on the Hi ghway Cap acity Ma nual free flow spe eds as a function of facil ity class an d are a type. As be fore , Conne cticut-ba sed speed dat a was substituted for expressway facili ties and was updated in 20 05. Two spe cial cases exist in the mo deling process: cen troid con nectors an d intrazona l trips.  Centroid conn ectors represen t the local road s used to gain access to the m od el network f rom cen ters of activity in ea ch traffic analysis zone (TAZ). A speed of 25 37 m ph is assum ed for these links .  Intrazona l trips are trips tha t are too short to get on to the m ode l networ k. VMT for intrazonal trips is calculated based on the size of each individual TAZ. A speed of 20 to 24 mph is assum ed for the pea k pe riod an d 25 to 29 mph for the off–pe ak pe riod. The Daily Vehicle Mil es of Travel (DVMT) is calculated using a method ology ba sed on disaggregate spe ed, converted to sum mer an d winter VMTs, an d summa rized by Nonattainm ent area, functiona l class, and spe ed. The VMT and spee d pro files develope d by this process are then comb ine d with the em ission factors fro m the MOVES2014a model to produce em iss ion estim ates for ea ch sc ena rio and tim e fram e. The MOV ES 201 4a input an d output dat a may be found in the Append ices. Tab le 3 on the following pa ge sho ws the 20 18 thro ugh 20 40 Action Emissi ons an d Eight- Hou r Budge ts for Volatile Org an ic Com pou nds (VO C), an d Ni troge n Ox ide s (N Ox) resulting from this process. 38 TABL E 3 VM T – OZONE EM ISSIONS – SIP BU DGETS Series 31C Year Oz one Area Series 31 C Bu dg ets Differen ce VOC NOX VOC NOX VOC NOX 2018 CT Portion of NY-NJ-LI Area 16.56 22.39 27 .40 54 .60 -10.84 -32.21 Gre ater CT Portion 15 .07 19. 74 26.3 0 49 .20 -11.2 3 -29.46 2025 CT Portion of NY-NJ-LI Area 12.33 13 .26 27 .40 54 .60 -15.07 -41.34 Gre ater CT Portion 11 .38 11 .86 26.3 0 49 .20 -14.92 -37 .34 2035 CT Portion of NY-NJ-LI Area 7.26 7.86 27 .40 54 .60 -20.14 -46.74 Gre ater CT Portion 6.65 6.91 26.3 0 49 .20 -19.65 -42 .29 2040 CT Portion of NY-NJ-LI Area 6.68 7.35 27 .40 54 .60 -20.7 2 -47.25 Gre ater CT Portion 6.15 6.48 26.3 0 49 .20 -20 .15 -42 .72 No te: 1 A small redu ction in the Gr ea ter Connecticut area will occur from the EC O program in the Connecticut portion of the NY-NJ-LI due to travel betwe en the areas. 2 VOC & N OX em issions are in tons per summer day and are calculated using Connecticut’s veh icle mix. 3 HPM S 14 Functional Class system used. 4 Na tional Low Em iss ion Ve hicl e (N LEV) program included in 2008 and all future years. 5 Eight Hou r Oz one emissi on budgets effective June 27, 2008 6 Series 31 C with 20 iteration equi librium assignmen t. 39 In the NY -NJ -LI portion, the tran sportation program an d plan meet the required con form ity test:  Action yea r em issions are less than approved 200 9 budge ts for VO X/NOx In the Greater Connecticut area, the transportation program and plan meet the required conformity test:  Action year emissions are less than approved 2017 budgets for VOX/NOx This analysis in no way re flects the full bene fit on air quality from the tran spo rtation plan an d progra m . The ne twork-ba sed m ode ling pr ocess is capable of assess ing the impa ct of m ajor ne w highway or tran sit service. It does no t reflect the im pact from the m an y projects which are categorically exclud ed from the requiremen t of conformity. These projects include num ero us impr oveme nts to intersection s, which will allow tra ffic to flow m ore effici en tly, thu s red ucing de lay, fuel usage an d em iss ions. The prog ram also includes a significant numb er of miles of resurfacing. Stud ies have shown that smoo th pa vemen t reduces fuel con sump tion and the attendan t CO an d VO C em issions. Includ ed in the TIP bu t no t reflected in this analysis are m any projects to m aintain existing rail and bus systems. W ithou t the se projects, those system s could no t offe r a high level of service. W ith the m, the mass transit system s function more efficiently, with imp roved safet y, and provide a more depe ndab le an d aesthetically appe aling service. These advantages will retain existing patro ns an d att ract ad ditional riders to the system . The technology to quantify the air qua lity be ne fits fro m these program s is no t currently availab le. As shown in this ana lys is, transpo rtation em issi ons are decli ning dram atically an d will continue to do so. This is primarily du e to prog ram s such as reform ulated fue ls, enh an ced inspe ction an d m ainten ance (I/M) program s, stage two vapor recover y (area sou rce), and th e low em iss ions veh icles (LEV ) progra m . MOVES 2014 a inc lude s three new em ission con trol program s ass ociate d with regulat ion p rom ulgate d since the re lease of MOV ES2010 b: 40  Tier 3 em ission standards tha t ph ase in beg inning in 201 7 for cars, light-du ty t ruc ks, m edium -du ty passenger vehicles, and som e he avy-duty trucks, and Tier 3 f uel sta ndards that require lower sulfur gasoline beginning in 201 7.  Heavy -duty engine an d vehic le greenho use has (GH G) re gulations that ph ase in dur ing m od el years 201 4-2018 .  The secon d ph ase of light-du ty ve hic le GHG regu lations tha t ph ase in for m odel yea rs 20 17-202 5 cars and light trucks. Changes in the tran spo rtation syst em will no t produce significant emiss ion red uctions because of the m ass ive existing rail, bus, highway system s, and land de velopmen t alre ad y in place. Change in these aspects is usually marg inal, pro ducing ver y sm all impa cts . PM 10 EP A previously design ated the City of New Haven as Nona ttainm en t with res pect to the Natio nal Am bie nt Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for par ticulate m atter with a nom inal diamet er of ten m icron s or less (P M10). The PM10 No nattainment status in New Ha ven was a local probl em stemm ing from activities of several bus inesses loc ated in the Stiles Stre et section of the City. Num erous violations in the late 198 0’s and early 199 0’s of Section 22a-17 4-18 (Fugitive Dust) of CTDEEP re gulation s in that section of the city led to a nona ttainm ent de signa tion (CTDEEP, 19 94: Na rrative Conne cticut Departm ent of E ner gy and Environ mental Protection , Stat e Imp lem entation Plan Re vision For PM10, Mar ch 19 94 ). Cor recti ve acti ons were subsequently identified in the Stat e Im plem ent at ion Plan an d im plemente d, with no violations of the PM10 NAAQS since the m id-19 90’s. All construction acti vities un dertaken in the City of New Ha ve n are required to be p erform ed in com pliance with Secti on 22 a-17 4-18 (Control of Particulate “Em issions”) of the CTDEE P re gulations. All reasonable availab le con trol m easures 41 m ust be implem ented during constructi on to m itigate particulate matter em iss ions, including wind-blown fugitive du st, m ud an d dirt carry out, and re-entrain ed fugitive em iss ion from m obi le equipm en t. The projects con taine d in the STIP and Plans, de signa ted within the Ci ty of New Haven, are expected to ha ve little effe ct on the overall projected veh icle m iles of travel for the area an d are no t expe cted to cause significan t additional airbo rne pa rticulate matter to be gene rated. The tran spo rtation projects initiated in New Haven are no t designe d to en han ce de velopme nt in the are a. There fore, the projects unde rtaken in this are a will no t have a det rime ntal effect on PM10 in New Haven. On Octob er 13 , 20 05, EPA pub lished in the Federal Register (Vo l. 70, No. 19 7), ap proval of a request by CTDEEP for a Lim ited Maintenan ce Plan and rede signation of the New Haven Non attainm en t Are a to Att ainmen t for the Nationa l Amb ien t Air Qua lity Standards f or PM10. This dire ct final rule be cam e effective on Decemb er 12, 20 05. As with lim ited m aintena nce plans for other pollutan ts, em iss ions bu dge ts are considered to sat isfy transpor tation con form ity’s “bu dge t test”. However, future “proje ct level” conformity determ ination may re quire “hot spot” PM10 analys es for new transpo rtation projects with significant diesel traf fic in acco rda nce with EPA’s Final Ru le for “P M2.5 and PM10 Hot-Sp ot An alys es in Projec t-level Transportation Con form ity Rule P M2.5 an d PM10 Am end m ents; Final Rule (75 FR 4260 , March 24, 20 10) which became effective on Apr il 23 , 20 10. PM 2.5 In Decem ber of 20 04, EPA sign ed the final rulema king not ice to de signa te atta inme nt and Nonattainm ent are as with respect to the Fine Pa rticles (PM2.5) National Amb ien t Air Quality Stan da rds, becom ing effective Ap ril 5, 200 5. In Conn ecticut, Fairfield and New Haven counties are include d in the New York-Northern New Jersey-Lon g Island, NY-NJ – CT PM2.5 Nona ttainmen t area. Tran sportation plans an d transportation imp rovemen t program s (TIPS ) for the tri-state nona ttainmen t are a 42 were foun d to be collectively con form ing as of Novembe r 2006 . On Jun e 20 , 200 7, PM2.5 bud gets were foun d to be adequ ate for the ea rly progr ess SIP. As EPA New England has determine d the MOVES 201 0b 201 7 an d 202 5 m otor vehicle em iss ions bu dge ts sub m itted on June 22, 2012 to be ade quate for transportation con form ity purposes and effective as of February 20, 20 13. On Se ptem ber 24 , 20 13, EPA publishe d its approval of the PM2.5 redesigna tion req uest, est ablishing October 24, 20 13 as the effective da te of redesi gnat ion to attainment/maintena nce for Con necticut’s portion of the NY-NJ-T Area for bot h the 199 7 annu al and 24 -hours PM2.5 NAAQ S. The PM2.5 Conform ity Sub m ittal is a sepa rate do cum ent which currently include s da ta specific to Conne cticut’s five MPO ’s containe d in tha t attainmen t/ma intenan ce area. O the r Pl an ning Documen ts The ena ction of Se ction 81 of Con ne cticut Public Act 13-27 7 repea led Section 13b- 15 of the Connecticut General Statutes, no longer mandating a bien nial Master Tra nspo rtation Plan effective July 1, 2013. The Dep artment’s Capital Plan has be en expand ed to includ e much of the project inform ation that was formerly include d in the MTP. In ad dition, the Existing Systems docum ent and the Statewide Lon g Ran ge Tra nsportation Plan contain othe r information that was includedin various MTPs. Tran sportation Pl anning W ork Pr og ram CTDOT’s FY 20 17 -201 8 Tran sportation Plan ning W ork Pro gram contains a description of all planning efforts (inc luding those related to air qua lity) to be spo nsored or undertaken with federal assistance during FY 2017 and 2018. Inclu ded with this p rogram are several tasks directly related to CTD OT’s responsibilities un der C on necticut’s SI P for Air Quality. Additional functions, such as those sup po rting the p repa ration of pro ject level co nform ity an alysis, are fund ed un der project related tasks . This work program is available at CTDOT for review. 43 Con clusions CTDOT ha s assessed its com pliance with the applic able conform ity criteria requiremen ts of the 199 0 CAAA. Based up on this analysis , it is con clud ed tha t all elem ents of CTDOT’s tra nspo rtation program an d the Regional Long -Range Tra nspo rtation Plan s conform to applicab le SIP and 199 0 CAAA Con formity Gu idance criteria an d the ap proved tra nspo rtation conform ity bud gets. In add ition to the informa tion required for a confor m ity de termina tion , the following is attached:  Appendix A: Interagency Consultation Meeting Minutes  Appendix B: The MOVES2014a tabulations for each analysis year  Appendix C: The MOVES2014a Input Ozone Emission Runs  Appendix D: ACRONYMS Please direct an y que stions you m ay ha ve on the air qu ality emiss ion analysis to: Conn ecticut Depa rtmen t of Tran spo rtation Bu reau of Po licy an d Planning Di visi on of Coo rdina tion, Modeling an d Crash Data – Unit 5753 1 Travel Demand / Air Quality Modeling Unit 280 0 Be rlin Turn pike Newington, CT. 061 11 (860) 594 -203 2 Email: Jud y.Raymon d@ ct. gov 44 APP EN DIX A Interagen cy Consultation Mee ting Minu tes 45 IN TERAGEN CY CONSU LTATION MEETI NG Stat ewide T ransport ation Impro vement Program Co nne cticut Departm ent of Transportat ion Ro om 2307 – February 7 , 20 17 Go To Meeting Atten dees : Eloise Powell – FHW A Ken Shooshan-Stoller, FHW A Leah Sirmin – FTA Ariel Garcia – EPA Je nnifer Carrier – CRCO G C a r a R a d z i n s – CRCOG R o b A l o i s e – CRC OG Mark Nielson – CN VMPO Christian Meyer – CN VMP O Ben Muller – CNVMPO Meghan Sloan – CT Metro COG Robert Haramut – LCRV CO G Stephen Dudley –SCRCOG Chris Rappa – SCRC OG Ri cha rd Guggenheim – SECC OG Kate Rattan – SECCOG Rob Sachnin – W es tern COG Mari beth W ojenski – CTDOT Ju dy Raymond – CTDO T Robbin Cabelus – CTDOT Roxane Fromson – CTDOT Grayson W right – CTDO T Sa ra Radacsi – CTDO T Matthew Cegielski- CTDOT Rya n Dolan – CTDOT Greg Pacelli – CTDOT Kara Chandler – CTDOT 46 Th e Interagency Consu ltation Meeting was held to review projec ts su bmitted for the 2018 – 2021 STIP. Both the Ozo ne and PM 2.5 reports will be elect ronica lly distributed to the MPOs in the appropriate Nonattainment/Maintenance areas, FTA, FHW A, DEE P an d EP A. The MP Os will nee d to hold a 30 da y public comm ent and review period. At the end of this review period , the MP O will h old a Policy Board meeting to endorse the Air Quality Con formity determination. There was also a brief discuss ion on the trav el mo del an d emissions software planning assumptions emp loyed in the conform ity analysis. Th e sch edule for the 201 8-2021 Regional Transp ortation Impro vem ent Plans Conform ity Determina tion Analysis is as follow:  MPOs transmit signed and dated Concurrence Form to judy.raymond@ ct.gov by F e b r u a r y 1 0 , 201 7.  CTDOT Travel Demand Model Unit perform s the air quality analysis an d se nds the Air Qu ality Conformity Determina tion Reports electronica lly to all MPOs in e a r ly s umme r 20 17  MPOs adve rtise and hold a 30 -da y public rev iew an d co mm ent pe riod for the Air Qu ality Conformity.  MPOs hold a Policy Board meeting approving an d endo rsing the Air Quality Conformity and transmit resolutions to judy.raymond@ct.gov after Policy Board meeting . It is importan t tha t all MPOs follow this schedule to ensu re that the TIP/STIP Con formity Determ inations can go forward on schedule. 47 PLANNING ASSUMPTIONS Ozone and PM2.5 2018 -2021 Statewide Transportation Improvement Program February 7, 2017 Planning Assumptions for Review Frequency of Review * Responsible Agency Year of Data Socioeconomic Data At least every 5 years CTDOT 2010 Census Data available 2012 DMV Vehicle Registration Data At least every 5 years CTDE EP 2011 Data available 2012 State Vehicle Inspection and Maintenance Program Each con formity round CTDE EP Same as currently approved I&M SIP State Low Emission Vehicle Program Each conformity round following approval into the SIP CTDE EP Same as SIP VMT Mix Data At least every 5 years CTDE EP 20 10** Analysis Years – PM 2.5 Each conformity round CTDOT/CTDE EP 2018 , 2025, 2035, 2040 Analysis Years – Ozone Each conformity round CTDOT/CTDE EP 2018 , 2025, 2035, 2040 Emission Budget – PM2.5 As SIP revised/updated CTDE EP 2017 / 2025 PM 2.5 Emission Budget – Ozone As SIP revised/updated CTDEEP 20 09 SW 2017 Gr.CT Temperatures and Humidity As SIP revised/updated CTDE EP X Control Strategies Each conformity round CTDE EP X HPMS VMT Each conformity round CTDOT 20 13 * Review of Planning Assumptions does not necessarily prelude an update or calibrati on of the travel demand model. ** Data not available until 2011 . 48 APP EN DIX B MOVES 2014 a tabulations 49 2018 MOVES 2014a Cou nty Summ ary: Pollutants 2017 Emission Quantities (Tons/Day) NY/NJ/CT Non-Attainment Area Greater CT Non-Attainment Area Statewide ID Name Fairfield Middlesex New Haven Subtotal Har tford Litchfield New London Tolland Windham Subtotal 1 Hydrocarbons 7.6274 1.6437 7.1406 16.4117 7.8156 1.8309 2.6416 1.4939 1.1044 14.8865 31.2981 3 Nox 9.9661 2.4093 10.0105 22.3859 10.5144 1.8126 3.8446 2.1539 1.4138 19.7393 42.1252 79 NM Hydrocarbons 7.2531 1.5533 6.7620 15.5684 7.4237 1.7720 2.4988 1.4078 1.0508 14.1531 29.7215 87 VOC 7.7097 1.6517 7.1948 16.5562 7.9072 1.8841 2.6612 1.5020 1.1199 15.0744 31.6306 2025 MOVES 2014a Cou nty Summ ary: Pollutants 2025 Emission Quantities (Tons/Day) NY/NJ/CT Non-Attainment Area Greater CT Non-Attainment Area Statewide ID Name Fairfield Middlesex New Haven Subtotal Har tford Litchfield New Londo n Tolland Windham Subtotal 1 Hydrocarbons 5.7190 1.2515 5.4076 12.3781 5.9992 1.3967 1.9892 1.1474 0.8431 11.3756 23.7538 3 Nox 5.8467 1.4415 5.9709 13.2592 6.3827 1.0401 2.2826 1.3132 0.8443 11.8629 25.1221 79 NM Hydrocarbons 5.3595 1.1620 5.0 332 11.5547 5.6067 1.3457 1.8484 1.0597 0.7907 10.6512 22.2059 87 VOC 5.7175 1.2404 5.3766 12.3345 5.9939 1.4340 1.9759 1.1353 0.8457 11.3848 23.7193 2035 MOVES 2014a Cou nty Summ ary: Pollutants 2035 Emission Quantities (Tons/Day) NY/NJ/CT Non-Attainment Area Greater CT Non-Attainment Area Statewide ID Name Fairfield Middlesex New Haven Subtotal Har tford Litchfield New London Tolland Windham Subtotal 1 Hydrocarbons 3.3318 0.7501 3.3393 7.4212 3.5313 0.8082 1.1954 0.7082 0.5127 6.7559 14.1771 3 Nox 3.3550 0.8533 3.6562 7.8644 3.7133 0.5187 1.3589 0.8207 0.5005 6.9120 14.7765 79 NM Hydrocarbons 3.0337 0.6739 3.0076 6.7152 3.2015 0.7726 1.0743 0.6305 0.4683 6.1472 12.8624 87 VOC 3.2779 0.7294 3.2559 7.2633 3.4657 0.8309 1.1638 0.6850 0.5072 6.6526 13.9159 2040 MOVES 2014a Cou nty Summ ary: Pollutants 2040 Emission Quantities (Tons/Day) NY/NJ/CT Non-Attainment Area Greater CT Non-Attainment Area Statewide ID Name Fairfield Middlesex New Haven Subtotal Har tford Litchfield New London Tolland Windham Subtotal 1 Hydrocarbons 3.0376 0.6925 3.0718 6.8019 3.2469 0.7390 1.1028 0.6601 0.4774 6.2262 13.0281 3 Nox 3.1171 0.8020 3.4334 7.3524 3.4812 0.4695 1.2780 0.7816 0.4722 6.4824 13.8348 79 NM Hydrocarbons 2.7468 0.61 74 2.7452 6.1094 2.9223 0.7050 0.9834 0.5828 0.4335 5.6271 11.7365 87 VOC 2.9989 0.6754 3.0034 6.6777 3.1970 0.7657 1.0767 0.6399 0.4743 6.1537 12.8313 50 APPE NDIX C MOV ES 20 14a Input Oz on e Em iss ion Runs 51 2018 Fairfiel d 53 54 55 56 57 201 8 Hartford 58 59 60 61 62 63 201 8 Litchfield 64 66 68 69 201 8 Middlesex 71 73 74 75 201 8 New Haven 77 79 80 81 201 8 New London 83 85 86 87 201 8 Tolland 89 91 92 93 201 8 Windham 95 97 98 99 2025 Fairfield 101 103 104 105 2025 Hartford 107 109 110 111 2025 Litchfield 113 115 116 117 2025 Middlesex 119 121 122 123 2025 New Haven 125 127 128 129 2025 New London 131 133 134 135 2025 Tolland 137 139 140 141 2025 Windham 143 145 146 147 2035 Fairfield 149 151 152 153 2035 Hartford 154 155 159 160 2035 Litchfield 161 162 166 167 2035 Middlesex 168 169 173 174 2035 New Haven 175 176 180 181 2035 New London 182 183 187 188 2035 Tolland 189 190 19 4 195 2035 Windham 196 197 201 202 2040 Fairfield 203 204 208 209 2040 Hartford 210 211 215 216 2040 Litchfield 217 218 222 223 2040 Middlesex 224 225 229 230 2040 New Haven 231 232 236 237 2040 New London 238 239 243 244 2040 Tolland 245 246 250 251 2040 Windham 252 253 257 258 APP EN DIX D AC RON YMS 259 Acr onym s Acronym Me aning CA AA Cle an Air Act Am endments (1990) CO Carbon Mon oxide COG Coun cil of Gov ernm ent CTD OT Conn ecticut Departm ent of Trans portation CT DEEP Connecticut Departm ent of Env ironme ntal Prot ection EPA U.S. En viron me ntal Protec tion A gency FSD Final S cope Developm ent (Now PD) ISTEA Inte rmodal Surface Trans po rtation E fficien cy Act MA P-21 Moving Ah ead for Pro gress in the 21 st Centu ry Act MO VES Mobile Vehicle Emission Simulator MPO Met ropolitan Pl anning Organization NAAQS Nation al Ambient Air Quality Sta ndards NH 3 Ammonia NOx Ni tro gen Oxides PD Pr eliminary Design (Forme rly FSD) PDWP Pr oject D evelopm ent W ork Pro gram PM 2.5 Fine Particulate Matt er PMT Person M iles T raveled RA Regional Admi nist er ROP Rate of Pro gress RTP Regional Transp ortation Plan (generally refers to Regional Transp ortation Plan Upd ate) SA FETEA-LU Safe, Accoun table, Flexible, Effici ent T ransport ation Equi ty Act: A Legacy for U sers SD Stu dy and D evelopme nt SIP State Impl eme ntation Plan SOx Sulfur Oxides STIP St atewide Transpo rtation Improv eme nt Pro gram TCM Transpo rtation Co ntrol Me asure TIP Transpo rtation Improv ement Pro gram USDOT U.S. D epartm ent of Transport ation USEPA U.S. En viron me ntal Protec tion A gency VMT Vehicle M iles T raveled VOC Vol atile Organic Comp ound

CNV MPO TIP FTA

Federal Transit Administration Thursday, June 15, 2017 Central Naugatuck Valley Region MPO 2018-2021 Transportation Improvement Program DRAFT Project #: 0170-XXXX Municipal Grant Program Region: Route/System: Advanced Construction Phase: Year: Tot$(000): Fed$(000): Sta$(000): Loc$(000): FACode: Air Quality Code: Statewide Various 70 OTH 2018 $5,000 $0 $5,000 $0 9-N/A OTH 2019 $5,000 $0 $5,000 $0 9-N/A OTH 2020 $5,000 $0 $5,000 $0 9-N/A OTH 2021 $5,000 $0 $5,000 $0 9-N/A Project #: 0170-XXXX Section 5310 Program-Enhanced Mobility of Seniors/Individuals with Disabilities-Other Urban Region: Route/System: Advanced Construction Phase: Year: Tot$(000): Fed$(000): Sta$(000): Loc$(000): FACode: Air Quality Code: Other Urban Area Various Bus X6 70 OTH 2018 $540 $432 $0 $108 5310E OTH 2019 $556 $445 $0 $111 5310E OTH 2020 $573 $458 $0 $115 5310E OTH 2021 $590 $472 $0 $118 5310E Project #: 0170-XXXX Section 5310 Program-Enhanced Mobility of Seniors/Individuals with Disabilities-Rural Region: Route/System: Advanced Construction Phase: Year: Tot$(000): Fed$(000): Sta$(000): Loc$(000): FACode: Air Quality Code: Rural Various Bus X6 70 OTH 2018 $250 $200 $0 $50 5310E OTH 2019 $257 $206 $0 $51 5310E OTH 2020 $265 $212 $0 $53 5310E OTH 2021 $273 $218 $0 $55 5310E Page 1 of 5 Central Naugatuck Valley Region MPO 2018-2021 Transportation Improvement Program DRAFT Project #: 0170-XXXX Transit Capital Planning Region: Route/System: Advanced Construction Phase: Year: Tot$(000): Fed$(000): Sta$(000): Loc$(000): FACode: Air Quality Code: Statewide Various X6 70 OTH 2018 $450 $360 $90 $0 5307C OTH 2019 $500 $400 $100 $0 5307C OTH 2020 $550 $440 $110 $0 5307C OTH 2021 $600 $480 $120 $0 5307C Project #: 0171-XXXX CTfastrak Infrastructure/Station/Facility improvements Region: Route/System: Advanced Construction Phase: Year: Tot$(000): Fed$(000): Sta$(000): Loc$(000): FACode: Air Quality Code: Various CTfastrak X6 71 CON 2018 $1,642 $1,313 $328 $0 5337H CON 2019 $1,683 $1,346 $337 $0 5337H CON 2020 $1,725 $1,380 $345 $0 5337H CON 2021 $1,768 $1,414 $354 $0 5337H Project #: 0400-XXXX CTtransit Facility improvements Region: Route/System: Advanced Construction Phase: Year: Tot$(000): Fed$(000): Sta$(000): Loc$(000): FACode: Air Quality Code: Various CTtransit X6 79 CON 2018 $4,440 $3,552 $888 $0 5339 CON 2019 $4,551 $3,641 $910 $0 5339 CON 2020 $4,665 $3,732 $933 $0 5339 CON 2021 $4,781 $3,825 $956 $0 5339 Page 2 of 5 Central Naugatuck Valley Region MPO 2018-2021 Transportation Improvement Program DRAFT Project #: 0400-XXXX CTtransit Facility improvements/Misc Admin Capital Region: Route/System: Advanced Construction Phase: Year: Tot$(000): Fed$(000): Sta$(000): Loc$(000): FACode: Air Quality Code: Various CTtransit X6 79 OTH 2018 $12,000 $9,600 $2,400 $0 5307C OTH 2019 $8,250 $6,600 $1,650 $0 5307C OTH 2020 $6,625 $5,300 $1,325 $0 5307C OTH 2021 $25,000 $20,000 $5,000 $0 5307C Project #: 0400-XXXX CTtransit Systemwide Bus Replacements Region: Route/System: Advanced Construction Phase: Year: Tot$(000): Fed$(000): Sta$(000): Loc$(000): FACode: Air Quality Code: Various CTtransit X6 79 ACQ 2018 $4,440 $3,552 $888 $0 5339 ACQ 2019 $18,750 $15,000 $3,750 $0 5307C ACQ 2019 $4,551 $3,641 $910 $0 5339 ACQ 2020 $4,665 $3,732 $933 $0 5339 ACQ 2020 $25,375 $20,300 $5,075 $0 5307C ACQ 2021 $15,000 $12,000 $3,000 $0 5307C ACQ 2021 $4,781 $3,825 $956 $0 5339 Project #: 0431-XXXX Waterbury – ADA Operating Region: Route/System: Advanced Construction Phase: Year: Tot$(000): Fed$(000): Sta$(000): Loc$(000): FACode: Air Quality Code: Waterbury Waterbury X6 05 OTH 2018 $1,943 $0 $1,943 $0 9-N/A OTH 2019 $1,943 $0 $1,943 $0 9-N/A OTH 2020 $1,943 $0 $1,943 $0 9-N/A OTH 2021 $1,943 $0 $1,943 $0 9-N/A Page 3 of 5 Central Naugatuck Valley Region MPO 2018-2021 Transportation Improvement Program DRAFT Project #: 0431-XXXX Waterbury – Fixed Route Region: Route/System: Advanced Construction Phase: Year: Tot$(000): Fed$(000): Sta$(000): Loc$(000): FACode: Air Quality Code: Waterbury Waterbury X6 05 OTH 2018 $4,504 $0 $4,504 $0 9-N/A OTH 2019 $4,504 $0 $4,504 $0 9-N/A OTH 2020 $4,504 $0 $4,504 $0 9-N/A OTH 2021 $4,504 $0 $4,504 $0 9-N/A Project #: 0431-XXXX Waterbury Dial-A-Ride Region: Route/System: Advanced Construction Phase: Year: Tot$(000): Fed$(000): Sta$(000): Loc$(000): FACode: Air Quality Code: Waterbury Waterbury X6 05 OTH 2018 $732 $0 $732 $0 9-N/A OTH 2019 $732 $0 $732 $0 9-N/A OTH 2020 $732 $0 $732 $0 9-N/A OTH 2021 $732 $0 $732 $0 9-N/A Project #: 0442-XXXX Bristol Local Region: Route/System: Advanced Construction Phase: Year: Tot$(000): Fed$(000): Sta$(000): Loc$(000): FACode: Air Quality Code: Bristol Bristol X6 05 OTH 2018 $319 $0 $319 $0 9-N/A OTH 2019 $319 $0 $319 $0 9-N/A OTH 2020 $319 $0 $319 $0 9-N/A OTH 2021 $319 $0 $319 $0 9-N/A Page 4 of 5 Central Naugatuck Valley Region MPO 2018-2021 Transportation Improvement Program DRAFT Project #: 0450-XXXX Bristol Commuter Region: Route/System: Advanced Construction Phase: Year: Tot$(000): Fed$(000): Sta$(000): Loc$(000): FACode: Air Quality Code: Bristol Bristol X6 05 OTH 2018 $233 $0 $233 $0 9-N/A OTH 2019 $233 $0 $233 $0 9-N/A OTH 2020 $233 $0 $233 $0 9-N/A OTH 2021 $233 $0 $233 $0 9-N/A Page 5 of 5

CNV MPO TIP FHWA

Thursday, June 15, 2017 Federal Highway Administration Central Naugatuck Valley Region MPO 2018-2021 Transportation Improvement Program DRAFT Project #: 0017-0187 Route 72, Route 69 and Divinity Street: Construct intersection improvements at Route 72 and Route 69. Includes realignment of the intersection. Region: Route/System: Advanced Construction Phase: Year: Tot$(000): Fed$(000): Sta$(000): Loc$(000): FACode: Air Quality Code: Bristol CT 72 X7 05 FD 2018 $750 $600 $150 $0 STPH ROW 2018 $4,150 $3,320 $830 $0 STPH CON 2019 $4,050 $3,240 $810 $0 NHPP CON 2019 $4,050 $3,240 $810 $0 STPH Project #: 0080-0128 Improvements on Routes 63, 64 and I-84 WB Interchange 17 Region: Route/System: Advanced Construction Phase: Year: Tot$(000): Fed$(000): Sta$(000): Loc$(000): FACode: Air Quality Code: Middlebury I-84/CT 63 & 64 CC 05 FD 2018 $1,625 $1,300 $325 $0 STPO ROW 2018 $1,900 $1,520 $380 $0 STPO AC Entry CON 2020 $0 $0 $0 $0 NHPP AC Conversion CON 2020 $12,500 $10,000 $2,500 $0 NHPP AC Conversion CON 2021 $8,250 $6,600 $1,650 $0 NHPP AC Conversion CON FYI $8,250 $6,600 $1,650 $0 NHPP Project #: 0087-0145 Reconstruction of Cross Street Region: Route/System: Advanced Construction Phase: Year: Tot$(000): Fed$(000): Sta$(000): Loc$(000): FACode: Air Quality Code: Naugatuck Cross Street X7 05 CON 2018 $4,430 $3,544 $443 $443 STPO Page 1 of 10 Central Naugatuck Valley Region MPO 2018-2021 Transportation Improvement Program DRAFT Project #: 0110-0136 Realign North Main Street to intersect US 6 opposite Agney Avenue. Widen US 6 to provide left-turn lanes at North Main Street/Agney Avenue and South Main Street. Region: Route/System: Advanced Construction Phase: Year: Tot$(000): Fed$(000): Sta$(000): Loc$(000): FACode: Air Quality Code: Plymouth US 6 X7 05 FD 2020 $500 $400 $100 $0 NHPP ROW 2020 $700 $560 $140 $0 NHPP CON FYI $3,770 $3,016 $754 $0 NHPP Project #: 0151-0273 Upgrade Expressway – Phase 3: Reconstruction of I-84 to provide a third lane in each direction from Washington Street to the vicinity of Pierpont Road in the City of Waterbury. Region: Route/System: Advanced Construction Phase: Year: Tot$(000): Fed$(000): Sta$(000): Loc$(000): FACode: Air Quality Code: Waterbury I-84 CC 05 AC Entry CON 2018 $0 $0 $0 $0 NFRP AC Conversion CON 2018 $17,875 $14,300 $3,575 $0 NFRP AC Entry CON 2018 $0 $0 $0 $0 NHPP AC Conversion CON 2018 $29,900 $23,920 $5,980 $0 NHPP AC Conversion CON 2019 $16,600 $13,280 $3,320 $0 NFRP AC Conversion CON 2019 $10,000 $8,000 $2,000 $0 NHPP Project #: 0151-0312 NHS – Rehab Bridge 03191A over I-84 westbound, Route 8 and the Naugatuck River Region: Route/System: Advanced Construction Phase: Year: Tot$(000): Fed$(000): Sta$(000): Loc$(000): FACode: Air Quality Code: Waterbury I-84 EB X6 05 AC Entry CON 2018 $0 $0 $0 $0 NHPP-BRX AC Conversion CON 2018 $13,333 $12,000 $1,333 $0 NHPP-BRX AC Conversion CON 2019 $16,667 $15,000 $1,667 $0 NHPP-BRX AC Conversion CON 2020 $5,556 $5,000 $556 $0 NHPP-BRX AC Conversion CON 2021 $3,644 $3,280 $364 $0 NHPP-BRX Page 2 of 10 Central Naugatuck Valley Region MPO 2018-2021 Transportation Improvement Program DRAFT Project #: 0151-0313 NHS – Rehab Bridge 03191A over I-84 westbound, Route 8 and the Naugatuck River Region: Route/System: Advanced Construction Phase: Year: Tot$(000): Fed$(000): Sta$(000): Loc$(000): FACode: Air Quality Code: Waterbury I-84 WB X6 05 AC Entry CON 2018 $0 $0 $0 $0 NHPP-BRX AC Conversion CON 2018 $4,444 $4,000 $444 $0 NHPP-BRX AC Conversion CON 2019 $7,778 $7,000 $778 $0 NHPP-BRX AC Conversion CON 2020 $12,222 $11,000 $1,222 $0 NHPP-BRX AC Conversion CON 2021 $2,556 $2,300 $256 $0 NHPP-BRX Project #: 0151-0321 Design and construct a section of the Naugatuck River Greenway in Waterbury along South Main Street from the Naugatuck town line at Platts Mill Road — Phase 1 Region: Route/System: Advanced Construction Phase: Year: Tot$(000): Fed$(000): Sta$(000): Loc$(000): FACode: Air Quality Code: Waterbury NRG X6 05 CON 2019 $4,147 $3,512 $0 $635 HPPS CON 2019 $3,082 $2,564 $0 $519 REP CON 2019 $631 $505 $0 $126 TAPO Project #: 0151-0324 Implement and construct various pedestrian safety improvements in the vicinity of Gilmartin School in the City of Waterbury Region: Route/System: Advanced Construction Phase: Year: Tot$(000): Fed$(000): Sta$(000): Loc$(000): FACode: Air Quality Code: Waterbury Various X6 05 CON 2018 $500 $500 $0 $0 SRSI Project #: 0151-0325 Traffic signal upgrade at 15 location in downtown Waterbury Region: Route/System: Advanced Construction Phase: Year: Tot$(000): Fed$(000): Sta$(000): Loc$(000): FACode: Air Quality Code: Waterbury Various X8 05 FD 2018 $88 $88 $0 $0 CMAQ CON 2018 $2,780 $2,780 $0 $0 CMAQ Page 3 of 10 Central Naugatuck Valley Region MPO 2018-2021 Transportation Improvement Program DRAFT Project #: 0151-0326 I-84 & Rte. 8: Rehabilitate eight bridges on Route 8 at the interchange with I-84 – Bridge No. 03190 A, B, C, D, E & F; and Bridge No. 03191 D & E Region: Route/System: Advanced Construction Phase: Year: Tot$(000): Fed$(000): Sta$(000): Loc$(000): FACode: Air Quality Code: Waterbury I-84/CT 8 X6 05 AC Entry CON 2018 $0 $0 $0 $0 NHPP-BRX AC Conversion CON 2018 $25,000 $20,000 $5,000 $0 NHPP-BRX AC Conversion CON 2019 $31,250 $25,000 $6,250 $0 NHPP-BRX AC Conversion CON 2020 $31,250 $25,000 $6,250 $0 NHPP-BRX AC Conversion CON 2021 $34,450 $27,560 $6,890 $0 NHPP-BRX Project #: 0151-0332 NHS – Rehab Bridge # 03191F Ramp 197 over Ramp 202 Meadow Street Region: Route/System: Advanced Construction Phase: Year: Tot$(000): Fed$(000): Sta$(000): Loc$(000): FACode: Air Quality Code: Waterbury I-84 X6 05 CON 2019 $5,000 $4,500 $500 $0 NHPP-BRX Project #: 0151-0333 Rehab of bridge 03176 over the Naugatuck River and adjacent local roads. Located 1/4 mile north of town line. Region: Route/System: Advanced Construction Phase: Year: Tot$(000): Fed$(000): Sta$(000): Loc$(000): FACode: Air Quality Code: Waterbury CT 8 X6 05 FD 2018 $500 $400 $100 $0 NHPP-BRX ROW 2018 $50 $40 $10 $0 NHPP-BRX CON FYI $7,100 $5,680 $1,420 $0 NHPP-BRX Project #: 0151-0334 National Highway System – Rehabilitate Bridge numbers 03178 (Route 8 Southbound) and 03179 (Route 8 northbound) over Waterbury Branch Line Region: Route/System: Advanced Construction Phase: Year: Tot$(000): Fed$(000): Sta$(000): Loc$(000): FACode: Air Quality Code: Waterbury CT 8 X6 05 ROW 2018 $50 $40 $10 $0 NHPP-BRX FD 2018 $510 $408 $102 $0 NHPP-BRX CON FYI $10,200 $8,160 $2,040 $0 NHPP-BRX Page 4 of 10 Central Naugatuck Valley Region MPO 2018-2021 Transportation Improvement Program DRAFT Project #: 0170-0BRX On/Off-Systems bridge improvements, BRX and BRZ (Bridge Report) Region: Route/System: Advanced Construction Phase: Year: Tot$(000): Fed$(000): Sta$(000): Loc$(000): FACode: Air Quality Code: Statewide Various X6 70 ALL 2018 $50,000 $40,000 $10,000 $0 NHPP-BRX ALL 2019 $50,000 $40,000 $10,000 $0 NHPP-BRX ALL 2020 $50,000 $40,000 $10,000 $0 NHPP-BRX ALL 2021 $50,000 $40,000 $10,000 $0 NHPP-BRX ALL FYI $50,000 $40,000 $10,000 $0 NHPP-BRX Project #: 0170-3382 Provide funds to conduct load ratings for bridges on National Highway System roads (1/1/16-12/31/20) Region: Route/System: Advanced Construction Phase: Year: Tot$(000): Fed$(000): Sta$(000): Loc$(000): FACode: Air Quality Code: Statewide Various X6 70 AC Entry OTH 2018 $0 $0 $0 $0 NHPP-BRX AC Conversion OTH 2018 $2,000 $1,600 $400 $0 NHPP-BRX AC Conversion OTH 2019 $2,000 $1,600 $400 $0 NHPP-BRX AC Conversion OTH 2020 $2,000 $1,600 $400 $0 NHPP-BRX Project #: 0170-3383 Provide funds to conduct load ratings for bridges on non-National Highway System roads (1/1/16-12/31/20) Region: Route/System: Advanced Construction Phase: Year: Tot$(000): Fed$(000): Sta$(000): Loc$(000): FACode: Air Quality Code: Statewide Various X6 70 AC Entry OTH 2018 $0 $0 $0 $0 STPA-BRX AC Conversion OTH 2018 $1,000 $800 $200 $0 STPA-BRX AC Conversion OTH 2019 $1,000 $800 $200 $0 STPA-BRX AC Conversion OTH 2020 $1,000 $800 $200 $0 STPA-BRX Page 5 of 10 Central Naugatuck Valley Region MPO 2018-2021 Transportation Improvement Program DRAFT Project #: 0170-3411 Provide funds for state forces to conduct inspections on bridges that are located on the National Highway System (9/1/2016 to 8/31/2021) Region: Route/System: Advanced Construction Phase: Year: Tot$(000): Fed$(000): Sta$(000): Loc$(000): FACode: Air Quality Code: Statewide Various X6 70 AC Entry OTH 2018 $0 $0 $0 $0 NHPP-BRX AC Conversion OTH 2018 $3,703 $2,962 $741 $0 NHPP-BRX AC Conversion OTH 2019 $3,926 $3,141 $785 $0 NHPP-BRX AC Conversion OTH 2020 $4,162 $3,330 $832 $0 NHPP-BRX Project #: 0170-3412 Provide funds for state forces to conduct bridge inspections on non-National Highway System roads (9/1/16 – 8/31/21) Region: Route/System: Advanced Construction Phase: Year: Tot$(000): Fed$(000): Sta$(000): Loc$(000): FACode: Air Quality Code: Statewide Various X6 70 AC Entry OTH 2018 $0 $0 $0 $0 STPA-BRX AC Conversion OTH 2018 $2,860 $2,288 $572 $0 STPA-BRX AC Conversion OTH 2019 $3,032 $2,426 $606 $0 STPA-BRX AC Conversion OTH 2020 $3,214 $2,571 $643 $0 STPA-BRX Project #: 0170-3413 Provide funds for consulting engineering services to conduct inspections on bridges that are located on the National Highway System (9/1/2016 to 8/31/2021) Region: Route/System: Advanced Construction Phase: Year: Tot$(000): Fed$(000): Sta$(000): Loc$(000): FACode: Air Quality Code: Statewide Various X6 70 AC Entry OTH 2018 $0 $0 $0 $0 NHPP-BRX AC Conversion OTH 2018 $19,010 $15,208 $3,802 $0 NHPP-BRX AC Conversion OTH 2019 $20,150 $16,120 $4,030 $0 NHPP-BRX AC Conversion OTH 2020 $21,360 $17,088 $4,272 $0 NHPP-BRX Page 6 of 10 Central Naugatuck Valley Region MPO 2018-2021 Transportation Improvement Program DRAFT Project #: 0170-3414 Provide funds for bridge inspections using consulting engineering services on non-National Highway System roads (9/1/16 – 8/31/21) Region: Route/System: Advanced Construction Phase: Year: Tot$(000): Fed$(000): Sta$(000): Loc$(000): FACode: Air Quality Code: Statewide Various X6 70 AC Entry OTH 2018 $0 $0 $0 $0 STPA-BRX AC Conversion OTH 2018 $8,340 $6,672 $1,668 $0 STPA-BRX AC Conversion OTH 2019 $8,840 $7,072 $1,768 $0 STPA-BRX AC Conversion OTH 2020 $9,370 $7,496 $1,874 $0 STPA-BRX Project #: 0170-3415 Provide funds for sign support inspections using consulting engineering services on National Highway System roads (9/1/16 – 8/31/21) Region: Route/System: Advanced Construction Phase: Year: Tot$(000): Fed$(000): Sta$(000): Loc$(000): FACode: Air Quality Code: Statewide Various X6 70 AC Entry OTH 2018 $0 $0 $0 $0 NHPP AC Conversion OTH 2018 $1,168 $934 $234 $0 NHPP AC Conversion OTH 2019 $1,168 $934 $234 $0 NHPP AC Conversion OTH 2020 $2,920 $2,336 $584 $0 NHPP Project #: 0170-3416 Provide funds for sign support inspections using consulting engineering services on non-National Highway System roads (9/1/16 – 8/31/21) Region: Route/System: Advanced Construction Phase: Year: Tot$(000): Fed$(000): Sta$(000): Loc$(000): FACode: Air Quality Code: Statewide Various X6 70 AC Entry OTH 2018 $0 $0 $0 $0 STPA AC Conversion OTH 2018 $250 $200 $50 $0 STPA AC Conversion OTH 2019 $250 $200 $50 $0 STPA AC Conversion OTH 2020 $750 $600 $150 $0 STPA Page 7 of 10 Central Naugatuck Valley Region MPO 2018-2021 Transportation Improvement Program DRAFT Project #: 0170-3417 Provide funds to conduct mast arm and span pole inspections statewide (9/1/17- 8/31/21) Region: Route/System: Advanced Construction Phase: Year: Tot$(000): Fed$(000): Sta$(000): Loc$(000): FACode: Air Quality Code: Statewide Various X6 70 AC Entry OTH 2018 $0 $0 $0 $0 STPA AC Conversion OTH 2018 $1,000 $800 $200 $0 STPA AC Conversion OTH 2019 $500 $400 $100 $0 STPA AC Conversion OTH 2020 $500 $400 $100 $0 STPA Project #: 0170-3439 Federal eligible preliminary engineeringfor the Transportation Alternatives set-aside program Region: Route/System: Advanced Construction Phase: Year: Tot$(000): Fed$(000): Sta$(000): Loc$(000): FACode: Air Quality Code: Statewide 70 AC Entry PE 2018 $0 $0 $0 $0 STPA AC Conversion PE 2018 $660 $528 $132 $0 STPA AC Conversion PE 2019 $660 $528 $132 $0 STPA AC Conversion PE 2020 $660 $528 $132 $0 STPA AC Conversion PE 2021 $660 $528 $132 $0 STPA Project #: 0170-3444 Pavement management analysis and data collection (4/1/17 – 3/31/20) Region: Route/System: Advanced Construction Phase: Year: Tot$(000): Fed$(000): Sta$(000): Loc$(000): FACode: Air Quality Code: Statewide X6 70 AC Entry PL 2018 $0 $0 $0 $0 STPA AC Conversion PL 2018 $668 $534 $134 $0 STPA AC Conversion PL 2019 $443 $354 $89 $0 STPA Page 8 of 10 Central Naugatuck Valley Region MPO 2018-2021 Transportation Improvement Program DRAFT Project #: 0170-3455 Connecticut Highway Assistance Motorist Patrol (CHAMP) safety service patrol (7/1/17-6/30/20) Region: Route/System: Advanced Construction Phase: Year: Tot$(000): Fed$(000): Sta$(000): Loc$(000): FACode: Air Quality Code: Statewide Various 70 AC Entry OTH 2018 $0 $0 $0 $0 SIPH AC Conversion OTH 2018 $4,537 $4,083 $0 $454 SIPH AC Conversion OTH 2019 $4,537 $4,083 $0 $454 SIPH Project #: 0170-SFTY Safety Program, HSIP – Rural and Other(Safety Report) Region: Route/System: Advanced Construction Phase: Year: Tot$(000): Fed$(000): Sta$(000): Loc$(000): FACode: Air Quality Code: Statewide Various X6 70 ALL 2018 $26,608 $23,948 $2,661 $0 HSIP(SIPH) ALL 2019 $26,608 $23,948 $2,661 $0 HSIP(SIPH) ALL 2020 $26,608 $23,948 $2,661 $0 HSIP(SIPH) ALL 2021 $26,608 $23,948 $2,661 $0 HSIP(SIPH) ALL FYI $26,608 $23,948 $2,661 $0 HSIP(SIPH) Project #: 0171-0402 Traffic Control Signals in District 1 Region: Route/System: Advanced Construction Phase: Year: Tot$(000): Fed$(000): Sta$(000): Loc$(000): FACode: Air Quality Code: District 1 Various X7 71 CON 2018 $3,570 $3,570 $0 $0 STPA Project #: 0171-0417 Add funding to install/replace Office of State Traffic Administration (OSTA) approved signals in District 1 Region: Route/System: Advanced Construction Phase: Year: Tot$(000): Fed$(000): Sta$(000): Loc$(000): FACode: Air Quality Code: District 1 Various X7 71 ROW 2018 $110 $110 $0 $0 STPA FD 2018 $187 $187 $0 $0 STPA CON 2019 $3,350 $3,350 $0 $0 STPA Page 9 of 10 Central Naugatuck Valley Region MPO 2018-2021 Transportation Improvement Program DRAFT Project #: 0174-0400 Traffic Control Signals in District 4 Region: Route/System: Advanced Construction Phase: Year: Tot$(000): Fed$(000): Sta$(000): Loc$(000): FACode: Air Quality Code: District 4 Various X7 74 CON 2018 $3,000 $3,000 $0 $0 STPA Project #: 0174-0418 Replace traffic control signals at 12 locations Region: Route/System: Advanced Construction Phase: Year: Tot$(000): Fed$(000): Sta$(000): Loc$(000): FACode: Air Quality Code: District 4 Various X7 74 ROW 2019 $120 $120 $0 $0 STPA FD 2019 $282 $282 $0 $0 STPA CON 2020 $3,859 $3,859 $0 $0 STPA Page 10 of 10

Pathway to Revitalization: Economic Impacts of Phased Completion of the Naugatuck River Greenway

Pathway to Revitalization: Economic Impacts of Phased Completion of the Naugatuck River Greenway

Pathway to Revitalization Economic Impacts of Phased Completion of the Naugatuck River Greenway March 2017 ii iii Research Team ► Fred V. Carstensen, Director, Connecticut Center for Economic Analysis ► Peter E. Gunther, Senior Research Fellow, Connecticut Center for Economic Analysis ► Aaron Budris, Senior Regional Planner, Naugatuck Valley Council of Governments ► Mark Nielsen, Director of Planning & Assistant Director, Naugatuck Valley Council of Governments ► Laura E. Brown, Community & Economic Development Educator, UConn-Extension ► Danielle Jensen, Research Assistant, Connecticut Center for Economic Analysis ► Jessica Powell, Research Intern, UConn-Extension Acknowledgments The research team would like to extend special thanks to members of the Naugatuck River Greenway Steering Committee and the Connecticut Greenways Council for ongoing feedback and support. Thank you to the following organizations who contributed to the funding and development of this project: Grants from the U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, and the Federal Transit Administration, and by contributions from member municipalities of the Naugatuck Valley Council of Governments (NVCOG) financed this analysis by NVCOG in partnership with the University of Connecticut College of Agriculture, Health and Natural Resources Department of Extension and The Connecticut Center of Economic Analysis. The study has been graciously further funded through grants by the Connecticut Community Foundation, Valley Community Foundation, Katharine Matthies Foundation, and the Community Foundation of Northwest Connecticut with support from the Northwest Hills Councils of Governments. k a t h a r i n e m a t t h i e s f o u n d a t i o n ii iii Executive Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 Key recommendations/findings from impact study ……………………………………… 1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 Project Overview ……………………………………………………………..ffl……. 5 Research Team and Study Approach …………………………………………………… 6 The Naugatuck River Greenway ………………………………………………………. 8 Other Trails Referenced in this Study …………………………………………………… 9 Literature Review . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 Alternative Trail Studies with REMI ……………………………………………………. 18 Research Methods & Preliminary Findings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 Trail Count Data ………………………………………………………………ffl……. 21 Trail User Intercept Survey …………………………………………………………… 24 Stakeholder Focus Groups …………………………………………………………… 26 Economic Impacts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 Direct Economic Impacts ……………………………………………………………. 33 Benefits & Strategies for Businesses along Trails . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .ffl . . . . . . . . . . . . 53 Indirect and Induced Economic Impacts ………………………………………………. 54 Brownfields Opportunities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71 Background ……………………………………………………………..ffl……….. 71 Environmental Regulation Governing Brownfields ……………………………………… 71 Reimagining Brownfields through the RBP …………………………………………….. 73 Data into Action ……………………………………………………………..ffl……. 74 Recommendations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 77 Promotion ………………………………………………………………ffl………… 77 Amenities ……………………………………………………………..ffl…………. 78 Demonstrating Value ……………………………………………………………..ffl.. 78 Trail Maintenance ………………………………………………………………ffl….. 78 Community & Business Engagement …………………………………………………. 79 Trail Planning and Routing …………………………………………………………. 80 Funding Opportunities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83 State Programs ……………………………………………………………..ffl…….. 83 Federal Programs ……………………………………………………………..ffl…… 86 Innovative Financing ………………………………………………………………ffl.. 87 Funding Open Trail Sections …………………………………………………………. 88 A Path to Revitalization Table of Contents Table of Contents iv 1 Naugatuck River, Beacon Falls iv 1 This study assesses the potential economic impacts of the development of the Naugatuck River Greenway ( NRG ) Trail, a proposed 44-mile multi-use trail that will run through 11 Connecticut communities historically linked by the Naugatuck River from Torrington in the north down river to Harwinton, Litchfield, Thomaston, Watertown, Waterbury, Naugatuck, Beacon Falls, Seymour, Ansonia, and Derby. As of this writing, five unconnected sections of the Greenway have been completed: the Derby Greenway (about 2.2 miles), the Ansonia Riverwalk (about a half mile), Beacon Falls, (half mile), and Naugatuck (1.1 miles). The study addresses the primary question: “How will communities and residents along the Naugatuck River benefit from their investment in building the proposed trail?” The study involved a literature review, collection of new quantitative and qualitative primary data through trail counts, a trail user intercept survey, three focus groups, and deployment of the Regional Economic Impact Model ( REMI ) to estimate total economic impacts of the proposed trail. Considerations included in the impact analysis are construction costs, operating expenditures, user amenity benefits, user expenditures, as well as potential impacts on population, employment, income, and fiscal impacts. Key recommendations/findings from impact study Currently, unconnected trail segments of the NRG are already yielding benefits to citizens within the Naugatuck River valley region. Residents within closest proximity to trailheads and those nearby realize a combined annual consumer surplus (the value they derive from being near the trail but for which they may not be paying) of about $13.8 million. It is important to note that, based on the findings presented here, residents of the region derive significant consumer surplus from the NRG, even if they do not reside in an area that has a nearby trail head or easy trail access point. In addition, many trail users visit the trails often enough to realize health benefits and to reduce risks of obesity, diabetes, cardiovascular diseases and many types of cancer, specifically breast cancer. Such benefits will grow with expansion and completion of the NRG. Recent studies underline the significance and array of health benefits that flow from green spaces and trails; for example, just walking in a pocket park measurably reduces blood pressure. Such studies reinforce the analysis offered here of the health benefits the NRG will deliver. 1 Expeditiously completing the NRG will yield additional and growing benefits to the residents of the Naugatuck Valley region. This document reports three potential growth scenarios. The first, a “slow growth” scenario, is based on the current usage of the open sections of the NRG, that is, the sections in Derby, Beacon Falls and Naugatuck and their current average expenditure levels. These rates are applied to new sections of the trail as the mileage is completed. This forms the Baseline scenario. Under the second "moderate growth" or Current Trend scenario, usage and spending rates are based on all completed sections in the region and includes trail counts from the Middlebury Greenway and the Sue Grossman Trail in Torrington. Both sections are not a component of the 1 Ellard, C. Places of the Heart: the pscyhogeography of everyday life . Bellevue Liberty Press, New York, 2015. Ellard summarizes a broad array of sophisticated studies that analyzed how the environment within which we move impacts our basic physiology and psychology, from levels of stress and anxiety to blood pleasure. The beneficial impact of green space is striking. A Path to Revitalization Executive Summary Executive Summary 2 3 NRG, but were included in the current trend scenario to assess the economic impacts from a more complete trail network. This second case was augmented by the potential impacts of bicyclists by including bicyclists' utilizing trails at national ratios of walkers to bicyclists. These first two scenarios are somewhat conservative as they do not take into account the potential increase in trail usage that may occur from creating linkages among trail segments. The final completion of the trail will increase its appeal to both walkers and bicyclists and accelerate the growth rates. For that reason the “high growth” case includes constant growth rates that will double trail use per mile by 2031. This is identified as the Accelerated Growth scenario. The normal direct impacts of constructing and operating the trail, annual expenditures to expand and maintain it, as well as increased consumer spending by users were the primary drivers of economic impacts of the NRG. ► The cumulative direct construction spending to complete the NRG is expected to reach $77.2 million by the year 2030. ► By 2031, annual direct consumer spending will rise to about $42.6 million under the Baseline scenario, up from the approximate $5.6 million spent today by trail users. These amenities are extremely beneficial to inhabitants and strong attractors to the Naugatuck Valley region. However, as the Surgeon General argues 2, improving consumer surpluses and health amenities also drives economic benefits. To some extent, the consumer surplus and health benefits may eventually be absorbed into property values and therefore distributed between landlords, tenants and recipients of property taxes. ► Using federally-determined values, the net present monetized value of health-related benefits will increase from about $5.2 million currently to $37.9 million in 2031 after the completion of the entire trail (baseline scenario) . ► For residents living close to the trail, the derived amenities benefits rise from a current value of $5.1 million to about $34.6 million (baseline scenario ). By 2031, as a result of increased attractiveness, accessibility, and health benefits, the completion of NRG will generate significant economic benefits. The CCEA’s impact analysis used the REMI to estimate anticipated changes in population, employment, real gross domestic product (RGDP ), personal income, disposable income and other generated public revenues, as measured by income taxes. These impacts were calculated for New Haven and Litchfield counties (the county is the smallest geography that REMI can analyze) . The results indicate that, on completion of the NRG in 2031, and based on the Baseline scenario, the two counties, as an aggregate, will experience: ► Population growth reaching over 9,000; ► Employment expanding by 1,400 jobs; ► RGDP would expand by $128 million (in 2009 dollars); and, ► Personal Income would grow by $206 million with disposable income increasing by $166 million in current dollars. In short, the construction of the NRG–despite its $77 million price tag–has the capacity and potential to improve the quality of life and economic well-being of the residents of the Naugatuck Valley region by increasing property values, reducing risks to various diseases, and stimulating economic growth. The investment in the trail will result in a substantial return on that investment 2 U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Set It Up! The Surgeon General’s Call to Action To Promote Walking and Walkable Communities , Washington, DC: U.S. Dept. of Health and Human Services, Office of the Surgeon General; 2015. Executive Summary A Path to Revitalization 2 3 and more than pay for itself over the time frame assumed for completing the NRG. Between now and 2031 when the trail is assumed to be fully operational, total cumulative economic benefits, in terms of user spending, consumer surplus, and monetized health benefits, are estimated at over $7.3 billion (mostly due to health benefits) , amounting to over 95 times the cost to construct the trail. As was emphasized through the focus group discussions, however, these impacts are not inevitable even if sections of trail are built. The assumptions made throughout this document emphasize the importance of trail use to realize its full economic potential. The effective implementation of a fully functional multi-use trail will involve significant investments in capacity building and community organization. In addition to the recommendations cited in this report in the areas of trail promotion, safety, amenities, demonstrating value, trail maintenance, community and business engagement, and trail planning and routing, data collection and documentation will be essential in promoting use of the trail. This study revealed that the current state of data collection regarding trail use in Connecticut is limited. The data collected for this study may serve as a baseline for which communities along the NRG can continue to gauge progress, involvement and impact. A Path to Revitalization Executive Summary 4 5 Derby-Shelton Bridge, Derby 4 5 Project Overview In 2014 the Naugatuck River Greenway Steering Committee realized the need for a comprehensive economic analysis that would estimate the potential impact of completion of the Naugatuck River Greenway ( NRG ) Trail, a proposed 44-mile multi-use trail, motorized vehicles aside, that will link eleven Connecticut communities from Torrington in the north to Harwinton, Litchfield, Thomaston, Watertown, Waterbury, Naugatuck, Beacon Falls, Seymour, Ansonia, and Derby, the southern extreme. Representatives of these communities comprise the Naugatuck River Greenway Steering Committee, and the Naugatuck Valley Council of Governments ( NVCOG ) provides the staff support and administers the on-going efforts of the NRG Steering Committee. NRG Steering Committee members expressed interest in better understanding how the Greenway would change trail usage and visitor spending, impact property value, create development and redevelopment possibilities, deliver health and quality of life enhancements, and generate possible connections to brownfield remediation projects. The NVCOG approached the University of Connecticut-Extension and University of Connecticut Center for Economic Analysis ( CCEA ) regarding the collaborating on the economic analysis. An agreement was executed between the NVCOG and CCEA for the CCEA to produce this analysis and determine the potential economic benefits that would accrue to region and municipalities from the construction of the entire planned NRG. This report covers the topics above, with the exception of brownfield remediation potential, which was outside the scope of work. In June 2015 UConn-Extension began this project by undertaking a literature review to better understand existing studies that estimated economic impacts of similar (and potential) greenways, the types of impacts captured through these studies, and the methods and data used. The literature review revealed that no existing studies of this kind had been performed on multi-use trails in Connecticut (though CCEA had performed a similar analysis of state parks). Further, there was little primary data from trails in the state of Connecticut that could be used to inform an appropriate economic model. While the literature uncovered a wide range of existing trail studies from across the country, comparisons between trails are difficult due to variations in methodologies used and nature of trail studied. The Literature Review section of this report 3 provides additional results. Given the relative absence of primary trail user data in Connecticut on which to base the economic impact analysis, the research team designed several methods for collecting this information from built sections of the NRG. This process presented an important challenge: only a few sections of the NRG have been built (at this time sections are open in Derby, Ansonia, Beacon Falls, and Naugatuck), and those that are built are relatively short in length, Derby Greenway is the longest at about two miles in length. Because it will not be constructed along an existing road or a former rail corridor and the proposed route includes property in federal, state, municipal, and private ownership, the process of constructing the 44-mile NRG is likely to occur over a period of many years. The status of the trail, as well as likely changes in users as the trail segments become 3 Full report may be accessed online at http://communities.extension.uconn.edu/trails . A Path to Revitalization Introduction Introduction 6 7 more integrated and longer, were weighed carefully in the economic analysis. After discussion of these limitations and conducting pilots using infrared counters to determine highest use points, the research team selected primary points of study on three sections of built trail in the communities of Beacon Falls, Derby, and Naugatuck, as well as two additional sections of similar, nearby trails, in Torrington (the Sue Grossman Still River Greenway) and Middlebury (the Middlebury Greenway). Data collection methods included trail counts (through the use of infrared counters calibrated through manual counts) and a trail user intercept survey. This study includes a short summary of results of these analyses which provided a basis for the economic impact model. 4 To best capture appropriate recommendations for communities to capitalize on the construction of the NRG, the research team turned to other similar existing trails in Connecticut. The Farmington Canal Heritage Greenway is a multi-use trail that runs along the route of a former canal for approximately 84 miles, from New Haven, Connecticut to Northampton, Massachusetts. About half of this trail has been developed as a paved trail for non-motorized transportation and recreation. The research team convened three focus groups of stakeholders along the Farmington Canal Heritage Greenway: business owners, public health professionals, and trail administrators. Again, this report summarizes the comments and opinions provided by focus group participants. A complete report of survey findings is attached as an Appendix of this document. Research Team and Study Approach The NVCOG, on behalf of the NRG Steering Committee, partnered with the CCEA at the University of Connecticut to develop a dynamic economic impact analysis of the benefits that would flow from the construction of the NRG. In addition, the research team would develop data from an intercept survey, convene focus groups to ascertain best practices, and conduct a nationwide literature review of similar studies of other greenways. The economic analysis investigated direct impacts from trail construction, maintenance and consumer spending by those using the trail, amenity benefits in terms of consumer surplus and accrued health savings, and indirect and induce economic benefits. For the indirect and induced impacts to the region’s economy, the team deployed a general dynamic, equilibrium model ( REMI ). Since its founding in 1988, the CCEA has participated in the development of the REMI model and utilized it to complete over 150 impact studies. The approach for this analysis involved the unique approach of using the derived amenity benefits as inputs to the model. At the October, 2016 REMI meetings on the advanced use of the model, CCEA researchers presented this study’s methodologies for estimating amenity values to advanced REMI users. The response to the approach was very favorable, with 10-to-15 percent of attendees mentioning that they had been contemplating making similar estimates, but were unaware of many of the inputs used (specifically the data and methodologies presented in the US Surgeon General’s report to monetize improved health outcomes) . Many indicated that they would follow the same approach in similar studies. The products delivered by the research team during the course of this study include: ► Literature Review: The review involved a thorough search for relevant literature through standard academic search engines. It resulted in a summary report: The Economic Impact 4 Full report may be accessed in the Appendix . Introduction A Path to Revitalization 6 7 of Greenways and Multi-Use Trails: A review of literature prepared as part of the Naugatuck River Greenway Economic Impact Study , August, 2015. The report was prepared by the University of Connecticut-Extension. ► Multiuse Trail Counts: During the summer and fall of 2015, the NVCOG conducted trail use counts on five sections of multiuse trail assess the popularity and use patterns of trail facilities in and near the region. The trail counts were conducted using passive infrared counters. The report was prepared by the NVCOG. ► Intercept Survey: To obtain insights into trail users’ characteristics, including spending habits, a survey tool was developed and administered along open sections of the multiuse trail system in the region. The results and analysis of the intercept surveys were collated into a technical report: Analysis of User Survey Data on Extant Sections of the Naugatuck River Greenway Trail , February 2016. The report was prepared by the University of Connecticut-Extension. ► Focus Groups: The University of Connecticut-Extension convened three focus groups involving health professionals, trail administrators and business owners. The intent was to obtain statements from persons with experience and knowledge of the potential impacts of a mature trail, in this case the Farmington Canal Heritage Trail. A report, Naugatuck River Greenway Economic Impact Study Focus Group Report , May 2016, was prepared by the University of Connecicut-Extension. ► Economic Impact Analysis: A full narrative report was prepared by the research team that describes the methodology on which the analysis is based, the data on which the analysis is developed, and the range of potential economic benefits that will the proposed greenway will generate (this document) . The primary research was conducted by the CCEA. The CCEA is a semi-independent center located within the School of Business at the University of Connecticut. It specializes in economic impact and policy analysis studies, as well as advising clients regarding business strategy, market analysis, and related topics. CCEA focuses particular attention on the economic and business dynamics of Connecticut. CCEA’s studies of state issues are founded on data sets maintained by Amherst, Massachusetts-based REMI, which licenses dynamic models of the state’s economy. The CCEA was created at the request of Governor Weicker in 1992 to serve the state’s citizens by providing timely and reliable information regarding Connecticut’s economy and to evaluate the potential impacts of proposed policies and strategic investments. By mobilizing and directing the expertise available at the University of Connecticut, state agencies, and the private sector, CCEA aims to equip the public, decision makers, and stakeholders with transparent analyses to facilitate systematic, thoughtful debate of public policy issues. Additional information regarding CCEA, as well as copies of its studies and reports available to the general public, can be found at http://ccea.uconn.edu . Key personnel who worked on this study are: ► Peter Gunther: As Senior Fellow at CCEA, Peter Gunther has successfully applied normal economic criteria for development–Real Gross Domestic Product, increased employment– as well as amenity concepts in support of strategic economic development of the State. He has a long history of conducting studies, dynamic analyses, and evaluations of investment projects and other similar economic development initiatives. As a former Director of Economic Research for Canada’s Department of Regional Economic A Path to Revitalization Introduction 8 9 Expansion, Mr. Gunther is fully aware of importance of economic development to regions and municipalities as well as successful approaches to achieve development without destroying attractive features and assets. Mr. Gunther is an expert in using REMI to model different scenarios involving infrastructure development investments and capital project expenditures at the state and local government levels. ► Fred Carstensen: Dr. Carstensen is currently Professor of Finance and Economics at the University of Connecticut and is Executive Director of the CCEA, a post he has held since 1998. Professor Carstensen has directed more than 100 studies at CCEA, frequently testified in legislative hearings, handled media relations relating to CCEA studies, and made numerous presentations to stakeholders and interested organizations. ► Danielle Jensen: Ms. Jensen was a Research Assistant at CCEA during the conduct of the study and has recently graduated. ► Laura Brown: Laura Brown is an Associate Professor, Community & Economic Development Specialist at the University of Connecticut, Department of Extension and a Certified Economic Developer ( CEcD ). Ms. Brown conducts applied research and educational programs that address asset based community and economic development, regionalism, place-making and economic development readiness. Over the past fifteen years she has coordinated economic development, food systems and community development education programs throughout New England and the Mid-West. The Naugatuck River Greenway The NRG is a planned 44-mile multipurpose trail following the Naugatuck River from Torrington to Derby. When complete, the Greenway will link 11 municipalities, help reclaim the Naugatuck River for recreation, provide an alternate mode of transportation, support tourism and economic development in the region, and improve residents ’ quality of life. In 2010 the then Council of Governments of the Central Naugatuck Valley ( COGCNV , now NVCOG) commissioned a routing study to explore the potential and routing possibilities for a multi- use trail that would run adjacent to the Naugatuck River in Western Connecticut. The stated goals of the proposed NRG at that time were to: 1) develop a non-motorized transportation facility for walkers and cyclists and 2) provide public access to the Naugatuck River 5. This effort resulted in five studies for five municipalities along the proposed trail and included recommendations for the trail and related improvements such as trailheads, parking areas, canoe/kayak landings, river access for fishing, bike improvements, spur connections, cost estimates and phasing recommendations. The effort included significant community participation through workshops, site walks, and stakeholder meetings. The Regional Naugatuck River Greenway Committee ( RNRGC ) oversaw this initiative, which included municipal officials, representatives from state and federal agencies, and COGCNV staff to keep the public informed about the study and to solicit public comment. This study committee created the foundation for the current Naugatuck River Greenway Steering Committee (NRGSC ), which continues to oversee trail development. 5 Naugatuck River Regional Routing Study Overview . (2010) Accessed at http://www.nvcogct.org/sites/default/files/COGCNV-Naugatuck-River- Greenway-Routing-Study-Overview.pdf Introduction A Path to Revitalization 8 9 Other Trails Referenced in this Study The Middlebury Greenway The Middlebury Greenway follows the historic route of a Connecticut Company trolley line that once connected the residential towns of Woodbury and Middlebury and the Lake Quassapaug Amusement Park to the City of Waterbury. The Sue Grossman Still River Greenway The Sue Grossman Still River Greenway runs for nearly three miles through a wooded corridor between Lanson Drive in Winchester and Harris Drive in Torrington. The paved multi-use trail occupies the old right-of-way for the New York, New Haven, and Hartford Railroad’s Naugatuck division and parallels Winsted Road. There are plans to extend the trail south into downtown Torrington to connect to the NRG, and north to the Winsted section of Winchester. Farmington Canal Heritage Trail The Farmington Canal Heritage Trail runs approximately 84 miles, extending from New Haven into the neighboring state of Massachusetts to Northampton. In Connecticut, the trail is about 56 miles in length. The Farmington Canal was constructed in the 1820s and 30s as a means of bypassing Hartford, where the navigable portion of the Connecticut River ends, to transport goods from the harbor at New Haven into central Massachusetts. The canal ceased operations 12 years after its completion in 1835, but a railway was built within its right-of-way, portions of which remained active until the late 1990s (Central Connecticut Regional Planning Agency, Farmington Valley Greenway , 2009). In the 1990s, work began on the Farmington Canal Linear Trail in Cheshire and Hamden and on the Farmington River Trail in Burlington. The idea of creating the Farmington Canal Heritage Trail from New Haven to Massachusetts was borne of the nationwide greenway movement of the 2000s. The Connecticut portion of the East Coast Greenway will follow much of the Farmington Canal trail. 6 A 2013 Farmington River Trail user study extrapolated data gathered in Farmington, Canton, and Suffield from May to October of 2013 and arrived at an estimate of roughly 250,000 trail uses per year. This data was collected using infrared motion sensors. 7 In 2013, the Burlington portion of the trail was studied; that study predicted nearly 100,000 annual users. 8 Both studies used National Bicycle and Pedestrian Documentation Center methodology to arrive at these figures. The Farmington Canal Trail sees even heavier usage, with over 400,000 annual users estimated for its Southington section. The Burlington study determined that most trail users were locals, although some came from Massachusetts, and that the majority of people used the trail for walking. 9 These utilization and demographic characteristics are likely to be common for most Connecticut greenways; the study anticipates that this is the pattern along existing sections of the Naugatuck River Greenway. 6 East Coast Greenway. (2015). Farmington Canal Heritage Trail . Retrieved from http://www.greenway.org/ http://www.greenway.org/ 7 Farmington Valley Trails Council. (2013). Farmington Valley Trail usage study . Retrieved from http://fvgreenway.org/pdfs/FVTCTrail UsageStudyComplete.pdf http://fvgreenway.org/pdfs/FVTCTrailUsageStudyComplete.pdf http://fvgreenway.org/ pdfs/FVTC Trail Usage Study Complete.pdf 8 Central Connecticut Regional Planning Agency. (2013). User survey of the Farmington River Trail . Retrieved from http://www.ccrpa.org/projects/ trails/BurlingtonTrailUserSurvey2013Report.pdf 9 Central Connecticut Regional Planning Agency. (2009). Southington-Plainville Farmington Canal Greenway Study . Retrieved from http://www. fvgreenway.org/pdfs/Southington-Plainville-Farm-Canal-Greenway-Study.pdf A Path to Revitalization Introduction 10 11 Union City Gateway, Naugatuck 10 11 A literature review of existing trail studies that estimate economic impacts of similar (and potential) greenways was conducted to better understand and appreciate the types of impacts captured through these studies including the methods and data used. The literature review involved a thorough search for relevant literature through standard academic search engines including SCOPUS and Google Scholar. Additional documents reviewed included meeting minutes from the Naugatuck Greenway Steering Committee, reports, and studies related to the completion of the existing sections of the NRG. The trails literature pointed to the following types of impacts: impacts related to trail user spending, tourism impacts, amenity benefits (which include consumer surplus and increases in property values, tax revenue, public cost reductions, and quality of life and health impacts) , expenditures by agencies, and expenditures due to construction and development. Some trails or greenways also included impacts related to commercial uses such as rentals for events, impacts related to agency oversight, or fees charged for trail use, most of which are not anticipated for the NRG. Trail User Spending One of the most basic ways of considering economic impact is in the value of dollars spent by trail users. Spending by local residents typically refers to residents who reside within a given radius of a trail or greenway. While this spending generally doesn't include spending by tourists who live out of the area and tend to stay overnight, some studies do not explicitly differentiate between local and non-local visitors. Local resident spending may include clothing or footwear, equipment, gear or related outdoor recreational services, travel to and from the trail, food or concessions, as well as fees paid to use the trail. Data collected directly from users or from local businesses in communities along a trail provides a basis for projecting these impacts. The actual amount of local spending on a trail or greenway may vary significantly by state or region, demographic of trail users, proximity to a major metro area, or proximity to or availability of amenities. There is also significant variation in how “local visitors” or spending categories are defined when, and if, primary data is collected from a trail. These factors complicate the task of determining average or generalized spending figures from trail to trail. Collecting primary data on a trail over a period of time is probably the most effective way to estimate spending. A Path to Revitalization Literature Review Literature Review 12 13 ► A 2013 study of 3,133 national participants (distributed across regions) in non-motorized recreational activities found that participants spent an average of $60.26 per trip on trail- based recreational day trips and $43.81 on bicycle related recreational day trips. Overnight trips resulted in more than double the daily expenditures: $148.89 for trail based trips and $150.93 for bicycle related trips. (This study used “in state” or “out of state” to define local travelers.) 10 ► Participants in trail based recreation spent an average of $119.30 annually on equipment and accessories including, but excluding transportation costs. ► The same report estimates that Connecticut residents spend a total of $353,489 annually on trail-based recreation and $704,067 on bicycle based recreation. 10 Outdoor Industry Association. (2013). The Economic Contributions of Outdoor Recreation: Technical Report on Methods and Findings by Southwick Associates . Retrieved from https://outdoorindustry.org/images/ore_reports/oia-state-recreation-economy-technical-report-2013.pdf Table 2: Annual Average Expenditures for Equipment and Accessories Item Trail Based Bicycle Based Apparel $33.21 $31.25 Equipment $26.12 $55.78 Accessories $20.54 $19.98 Services $16.25 $11.27 For Children $23.18 $13.10 Total $119 .30 $131 .38 Source: Outdoor Industry Association, 2013 Table 1: Average Expenditures per Trip for Non-Motorized Recreation Day Trips Trail Based Bicycle Based Food and Drink $18.73 $14.91 Transportation $20.97 $15.05 Recreation & Miscellaneous $12.93 $8.61 Souvenirs $7.62 $5.24 Total $60 .26 $43 .81 Overnight Trips Trail Based Bicycle Based Food and Drink $32.66 $33.54 Transportation $37.17 $31.65 Recreation & Miscellaneous $20.47 $20.85 Souvenirs $5.40 $17.04 Lodging $43.91 $47.86 Total $148 .89 $150 .93 Source: Outdoor Industry Association, 2013 Literature Review A Path to Revitalization 12 13 ► Many impact studies have been conducted on greenways and trails around the United States using methods similar to those used for this study. The following selected studies were reviewed as comparable recent examples of east coast trails. ► A 2010 study of the 12.5-mile Burlington Waterfront Path in Vermont estimated that in-state day users spent an average of $60.20 per trip and out-of-state domestic day users spent $67.16. In-state overnight users spent $124.78 while overnight out of state domestic users spent $156.84. Out-of-state users had the highest expenditures per trip at $80.63 for day users and $193.31 for overnight users. 11 ► A 2004 survey of the 20-mile Northern Central Railroad Trail in Maryland found that users spent an average of $333.12 on “Hard goods” such as bikes, gear, shoes and supplies, $9.14 on “Soft goods” such as snacks, food, and rentals, and $61.09 on Accommodations. 12 ► The Georgia Silver Comet Trail Economic Impact Analysis conducted in 2013 found that most trail users spend about $50 on trail use (additional spending data was not collected and all other figures are extrapolated). 13 Tourism Impacts While tourism and travel represent an economic engine for many areas of the United States, tourism does not encompass one particular industry sector, product, or service making its impact difficult to quantify. 14,9 Industrial sector areas from the Census Bureau’s SIC or the NAICS often include hotel and other forms of lodging, restaurant or other eating establishments, travel, retail, and some services. In addition, “local” visitor spending is sometimes difficult to separate from “tourist” spending, unless there are overnight stays or the origin of the visitor or the purpose and intention of the visit is known. Natural amenities, trails, parks, greenways, open space and wildlife habitat play an important role in tourism, particularly for leisure travelers. Amenities with significant tourist drawing power might include national parks or established bike trails or walks. Not all of these amenities have significant tourist drawing power and the extent of the draw may help to determine what proportion of travel expenditures can be attributed to the amenity itself. 15 The Connecticut Department of Community & Economic Development ( DECD ) has contracted with Witan Intelligence to conduct Vision Intercept tourism intercept surveys throughout the state, including at casinos, beaches, parks, shopping destinations, arts venues, farms and markets, vineyards, and other tourist venues every year since 2001. These surveys include questions about spending, demographics, and satisfaction. ► According to the 2014 Vision Intercept Survey report, 35% of all parties included someone from out of state; visitors from New York and New Jersey accounted for 46% of all out of state visitors. 16 11 University of Vermont Transportation Research Center. (2010). Estimating Tourism Expenditures for the Burlington Waterfront Path and the Island Line Trail . Retrieved from http://www.uvm.edu/tourismresearch/ 12 Trail Facts. (2005). NCR Trail 2004 User Study and Economic Impact Analysis . Retrieved from http://www.railstotrails.org/resource-library/ resources/ncr-trail-2004-user-survey-and-economic-impact-analysis/?state=Maryland 13 Alta Econsult Solutions. (2013). http://nvcogct.org/sites/default/files/COGCNV-Naugatuck-River-Greenway-Routing-Study-Watertown.pdf Silver Comet Trail Economic Impact Analysis and Planning Study . Retrieved from http://www.bwnwga.org/wpcontent/uploads/Silver_Comet_ Combined.pdf 14 Smith, V. K. (1997). Pricing What is Priceless: A Status Report on Non-Market Valuation of Environmental Resources . Retrieved from http://doi. org/10.2139/ssrn.31974 15 Nadel, R. (2005). Economic impacts of parks, rivers, trails and greenways . University of Michigan. Retrieved from http://erb.umich.edu/Research/ Student-Research/Nadel.pdf 16 Witan Intelligence. (2015). 2014 Year Connecticut Visitor Intercept Study . Documents provided by Witan Intelligence. A Path to Revitalization Literature Review 14 15 ► Connecticut residents represent two-thirds of the state’s overall tourism market. Over the past four years the number of tourism trips by Connecticut residents has grown from 6.7 to 10 trips annually. 10 ► Visitor parties spent an average of $623 during each trip, a total of $4,859 each year. Local residents spent $369 per trip (mainly on shopping, meals and recreation), while out of state visitors spent $1,114 per trip (mainly on lodging, wagers and shopping). Two out of three parties stayed overnight. 10 ► The median household income of visitors was $76,300; 16% earned more than $150,000. Thirty-eight percent (38%) of parties included children and 33% included someone 55 or older. 10 ► While the percentage of parties with out of state residents declined slowly from 2002 (48%) to 2014 (37%), the average percent of all trips which were made to Connecticut increased from 47% in 2002 to 61% in 2014.10 The peak of 82% in 2006 (prior to the recession) followed by a significant drop to 42% in 2007 suggests that the recession had a significant impact on Connecticut tourism. The 2013 Traveler Research Profile compared Connecticut travelers to a set of travelers in other New England states. This study suggests that at the time of this study travelers to Connecticut (including business and leisure travelers) were not typically participating in activities related to trails and greenways compared to travelers to eight other New England area states. These were largely out of state travelers (81.5%) from the New York metro area with overnight stays (73.9%). ► Fewer travelers to Connecticut participate in hiking or other adventure sports (1.1%) than travelers to other New England States (3.0%). Fewer travelers to Connecticut participate in fishing (1.3%) compared to other states (2.0%), biking (0.8%) compared to other states (1.9%), or bird-watching (2.0%) compared to other states (2.5%). Primary activities included visiting relatives and friends, dining, gambling, and going to the beach. 17 Studies have shown that trails and greenways support local business development as a result of increased visitation to the area or to “gateway communities.” Following trail openings, communities have documented increases in businesses such as lodging and restaurant facilities, bike rental establishments, and bed and breakfasts. 18 Business output, or sales volume, includes the gross level of business revenue and net business income and is probably the most common measure of business activity. It is important to note, that the presence of a trail itself does not imply that business will naturally increase. Communities might facilitate business development efforts by providing adequate signage and access to the trail, supporting local businesses by helping them understand trail user demographics and spending preferences, and coordinating efforts for local businesses to reach trail users. Trail Construction and Maintenance For the purposes of this analysis, the study estimated annual construction and maintenance costs for each section of trail for timely integration into the dynamic REMI model. The task of estimating annual construction costs for sections of the NRG is complicated by the piecemeal 17 H2R Market Research. (2013). Connecticut 2013 Traveler Profile & Benchmark Comparison Study . Retrieved from http://www.cultureandtourism. org/cct/lib/cct/tourism/outreach2015/connecticut_-_tns_traveler_profile_2013-final_022615.pdf 18 Nadel, R. (2005). Economic impacts of parks, rivers, trails and greenways . University of Michigan. Retrieved from http://erb.umich.edu/Research/ Student-Research/Nadel.pdf Literature Review A Path to Revitalization 14 15 approach to construction, as each community undertakes development of its own section of trail separately and independently, and by fiscal constraints that limits how many sections can be funded in any given year. Despite federal transportation appropriations that set aside funds for transportation alternative projects, such as multi-use trails, only about $3.8 million in federal funds are likely to be available for trail construction in the Naugatuck Valley region over the next five years, an amount that is substantially less than the funds needed to construct priority sections of the NRG. Trail construction is further complicated by the unique conditions faced by each community in creating the trail around existing transportation, rail, and industrial infrastructure. For each trail segment, annual maintenance costs are incurred only upon completion of construction. Health- and Fitness-Related User Amenity Benefits Amenity benefits are non-pecuniary benefits arising from positive assets of the NGR, including health benefits derived from its use. This section generates a base for understanding and assessing future amenity benefits by estimating those derived from the present very limited number of trail segments. This knowledge enlightens researchers and readers on approaches to establishing amenity benefits and their current magnitudes. Clearly, extending and integrating disparate trail segments until the trail’s eventual completion has potential to expand benefits. As in the Field of Dreams , proponents argue, “Build it and they will come.” Why they may come requires not only an understanding of trail users’ amenity benefits but also empirical documentation. Because many trail and greenway walkers primarily use these facilities for exercise, 19 it is logical to consider how these amenities may improve physical and mental health and reduce the costs of healthcare. In the face of prevalent obesity and other chronic illnesses, planners, public health and medical professionals have begun to consider how changes in the built environment, such as parks and trails, might contribute to a solution. The literature search conducted for this study links walking, and walking communities, to health. The Surgeon General minces no words in describing the health of Americans. The following is a summary of his findings at the end of 2015 (original sources provided in the footnotes) : ► In 2012, almost 50% of U.S. adults (117 million people) were living with a chronic disease. 20 ► More than 15 million U.S. adults aged 20 years or older (6.4% of the population) had coronary heart disease in 2007–2010. 21 ► In 2010, more than 6 million adults aged 18 years or older (2.6% of the population) reported having had a stroke. 22 ► In 2012, more than 29 million people (9.3% of the population) had diabetes, a disease that can lead to other serious health complications, including heart disease, blindness, kidney failure, and lower extremity amputations. 23,24 ► More than 1.5 million people were diagnosed with cancer in 2011, and more than 13 million 19 U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Set It Up! The Surgeon General’s Call to Action To Promote Walking and Walkable Communities , Washington, DC: U.S. Dept. of Health and Human Services, Office of the Surgeon General; 2015. p 1. Further supported by UConn’s and NVCOG’s Trail Intercept Survey. 20 Ibid.21 Go AS, Mozaffarian D, Roger VL, et al. Heart disease and stroke statistics—2014 update: a report from the American Heart Association . Circulation. 2014;129(3):e28-e292. 22 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Prevalence of stroke — United States, 2006-2010 . MMWR Morbid Mortal Wkly. Rep. 2012;61(20):379- 382. 23 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. National Diabetes Statistics Report: Estimates of Diabetes and its Burden in the United States, 2014 . Atlanta, GA: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, U.S. Dept. of Health and Human Services; 2014. 24 CDC WONDER Database. United States Cancer Statistics: 1999-2011 Incidence Request . Atlanta, GA: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, U.S. Dept. of Health and Human Services; 2014. http://wonder.cdc.gov/cancer-v2011.html . Accessed April 7, 2015. A Path to Revitalization Literature Review 16 17 are living with the disease. 25 ► During 2011–2012, more than one-third of adults aged 20 years or older and one out of every six children and adolescents aged 2–19 years were obese. 26 ► Children with obesity have an increased risk of Type 2 diabetes, 27,28 high blood pressure, 29 and being obese as an adult. 30,31,32 ► Adults with obesity have an increased risk of: coronary heart disease, Type 2 diabetes, cancers – postmenopausal, breast, and colorectal – osteoarthritis, and stroke. 33 ► About 16 million adults aged 18 years or older and more than two million adolescents aged 12–17 years had a major depressive episode in 2012 34 that negatively affected their ability to work, sleep, study, eat, and enjoy life. 35 The Surgeon General views walking and having appealing places to walk, not as a panacea to all the above, but as a step to curbing such afflictions. In his words, walking will: “…significantly reduce their risk of chronic diseases and premature death and support positive mental health and healthy aging.” 36 Still cited in the Surgeon General’s Report, physically active people "…have about a 30% lower risk of early death than people who are inactive.” 37 “Conversely, physical inactivity accounts for about 11% of premature deaths in the United States” 38,39 25 Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) Cancer Statistics Review 1975-2011 . Bethesda, MD: SEER Program, National Cancer Institute; 2014. http://seer.cancer.gov/csr/1975_2011 . Based on November 2013 SEER data submission. Accessed May 1, 2015. 26 Ogden CL, Carroll MD, Kit BK, Flegal KM. Prevalence of childhood and adult obesity in the United States, 2011-2012 . JAMA. 2014;311 (8):806-814. 27 Franks PW, Hanson RL, Knowler WC, et al. Childhood predictors of young-onset type 2 diabetes . Diabetes. 2007;56 (12):2964-2972. 28 May AL, Kuklina EV, Yoon PW. Prevalence of cardiovascular disease risk factors among US adolescents, 1999−2008 . Pediatrics. 2012;129(6):1035- 1041. 29 Freedman DS, Dietz WH, Srinivasan SR, Berenson GS. The relation of overweight to cardiovascular risk factors among children and adolescents: The Bogalusa Heart Study . Pediatrics. 1999;103(6):1175-1182. 30 Serdula MK, Ivery D, Coates RJ, Freedman DS, Williamson DF, Byers T. Do obese children become obese adults? A review of the literature . Prev. Med. 1993;22(2):167-177. 31 Biro FM, Wien M. Childhood obesity and adult morbidities . American Journal of Clinical Nutrition. 2010;91(5):1499S-1505S. 32 Whitaker RC, Wright JA, Pepe MS, Seidel KD, Dietz WH. Predicting obesity in young adulthood from childhood and parental obesity . N Engl J Med. 1997;337(13):869-873. 33 National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute. Managing Overweight and Obesity in Adults: Systematic Evidence Review from the Obesity Expert Panel, 2013 . Bethesda, MD: National Institutes of Health, U.S. Dept. of Health and Human Services; 2013. 34 Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration. Results from the 2012 National Survey on Drug Use and Health: Mental Health Findings . Rockville, MD: Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration; 2013. 35 National Institute of Mental Health. Depression website. http://www.nimh.nih.gov/health/topics/depression/index.shtml . Accessed October 29, 2014. 36 U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Set It Up! The Surgeon General’s Call to Action To Promote Walking and Walkable Communities , Washington, DC: U.S. Dept. of Health and Human Services, Office of the Surgeon General; 2015. p 1. 37 Physical Activity Guidelines Advisory Committee. Physical Activity Guidelines Advisory Committee Report, 2008 . Washington, DC: U.S. Dept of Health and Human Services; 2008. 38 Lee IM, Shiroma EJ, Lobelo F, et al. Effect of physical inactivity on major non-communicable diseases worldwide: an analysis of burden of disease and life expectancy . Lancet. 2012;380(9838):219-229 39 Yang Q, Cogswell ME, Flanders WD, et al. Trends in cardiovascular health metrics and associations with all-cause and CVD mortality among US adults . JAMA. 2012;307(12):1273-1283. Literature Review A Path to Revitalization 16 17 “Regular physical activity helps prevent risk factors for disease (such as high blood pressure) and protects against multiple chronic diseases (such as heart disease, stroke, some cancers, Type 2 diabetes, and depression).” 40,41 For additional data, see the section on Amenity Benefits . Other Amenity Benefits and Property Valuation Resources such as trails and greenways may have value even to those who do not use them. These may be considered passive-use values. One form of passive-use value is preservation. 42 Preservation values include option value, the knowledge of guaranteed future access to the greenway; existence value, the knowledge that the greenway will be preserved in perpetuity; and bequest value, the knowledge that future generations will have access to the greenway. Another form of passive-use value is property valuation. This process describes changes in property values as a result of proximity to trails or green spaces. Property values may increase due to proximity to open space; this seems to be most pronounced when the greenways highlight open space, prohibit vehicular access, and have regular maintenance and security. 43 It is important to note that while the effect of greenways on property values remains unclear, no negative effects have yet been determined. 44 ► A 2011 study by the Connecticut Center for Economic Analysis analyzed the value of properties overlooking state parks and/or forests and state trails. While the results varied by region, this study identified a green space bonus of $41,961 to $50,124 for properties overlooking Connecticut Department of Energy and Environmental Protection ( CTDEEP ) managed green spaces compared to those that did not. 45 40 U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. 2008 Physical Activity Guidelines for Americans . Washington, DC; 2008. 41 Physical Activity Guidelines Advisory Committee. Physical Activity Guidelines Advisory Committee Report, 2008 . Washington, DC: U.S. Dept of Health and Human Services; 2008. 42 Walsh, R., Sanders L., & Loomis, J. (1984). Measuring the economic benefits of proposed wild and scenic rivers . [as cited in Nadel, R. (2005). Economic impacts of parks, rivers, trails and greenways.] 43 United States Department of Interior, National Park Service (1995). Economic impacts of protecting rivers, trails, and greenway corridors . Rails, Trails, and Conservation = Assistance Program. Retrieved from https://www.nps.gov/pwro/rtca/econ_all.pdf 44 Nicholls, S., Crompton, J. L., & others. (2005). The impact of greenways on property values: Evidence from Austin, Texas . Journal of Leisure Research, 37(3), 321. 45 Gunther, P., Parr, K. E., Graziano, M., & Carstensen, F. V. (2011). The Economic Impact of State Parks, Forests and Natural Resources under the Management of (Connecticut) Department of Environmental Protection . Connecticut Center for Economic Analysis (CCEA) University of Connecticut. Retrieved from http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2195058 . A Path to Revitalization Literature Review 18 19 Alternative Trail Studies with REMI There are two other studies of the impacts of trails using REMI modeling: ► East Central Florida Regional Planning Council’s Economic Impact Analysis of Orange Lake County Trails ;46 and ► Vermont Agency of Transport, Economic Impact of Bicycling and Walking in Vermont , 07/12/2012. 47 (Prepared by Resource Systems Group, Inc., Economic and Policy Resources, Inc., and Local Motion.) Orange County Florida Economic Impact Analysis of Orange Lake County Trails mentions health benefits and amenities in passing but takes no account of them. It is a 2010–2011 study based strictly on expenditures by trail users on three relatively short multi-use trails–Cady Way (6.5 mi.), Little Econ (7.4 mi.) and West Orange (22 mi.). They are all heavily utilized by local residents with 57% of users being within a mile, 84% within five miles and 89% within 10 miles. 48 Noteworthy has been Orange Lake County’s role in upgrading Winter Garden’s downtown. The report claims: “By embracing the Trail as the spark to ignite redevelopment, the City has redefined their Downtown by investing in the area and downtown businesses. Five million dollars was spent by the City to extend the Trail through their Downtown and enhance infrastructure and streetscape to create a one of a kind destination. Improvements included brick streets, the clock tower and other enhancements. The dedication of the City to the quality of the Downtown is evident through the high standards of maintenance throughout, including City facilities. With 90%+ downtown occupancy rate, the City’s strategy to attract business development within its downtown area has succeeded.” 49 This claim may slightly exaggerate the current attribution following the complementary massive expansion of the Morse Museum, which should share credit for upgrading the Downtown core, but that has occurred subsequent to the evaluation based on 2010-2011 data. Community Redevelopment Area ( CRA ) was established, to 2010. The total 2010 CRA value was estimated at $69.39 million versus $22 million in 1993, a cumulative increase of 215% from base year, with an average annual increase of 11.32% for 19 years. While the Trail improvements were completed in 2002/2003, 2001 to 2008 marked the highest and fastest growth of the assessed value in the downtown area. Even with the CRA value reduced by 12.6%, due to the overall economic conditions of 2009 and 2010, the CRA area lost less value than the overall city reduction of 15%. 50 This report has the advantage of being retrospective and being based on extensive expenditure surveys sufficient to justify the expenditures on the trail and its association with rising downtown property values. The report falls short of the mark for not taking more account of the health amenity benefits it has generates among its frequent users. 46 https://www.dep.state.fl.us/gwt/economic/PDF/Orange_County_Trail_Report_final_May2011.pdf (April 28, 2016) 47 http://vtransengineering.vermont.gov/sites/aot_program_development/files/documents/ltf/BikePedFinalReportEconImpactWalkingandBiking2012.pdf (April 28, 2016) 48 Op. cit. East Central Regional Planning Council, p. 20.49 Ibid. p. 7.50 Ibid. p. 11. Literature Review A Path to Revitalization 18 19 Ve r m o n t This study also focused on 2009 expenditures directly on Vermont trails and by bicyclists and hikers. Direct expenditures on construction and repair amounted to $9.6 million. Sixteen thousand (16,000) people attending 40 major bicycling or hiking events spent another $6 million and bicyclist-pedestrian-oriented businesses in Vermont sold another $30.7 million during the year of which 40% was marketed outside the state for a total direct expenditure of $37.8 million. The resulting total economic impacts were $82.7 million in output, and over 1,400 jobs with $40.9 million in labor earnings (wages, salaries plus proprietors’ income). 51 Again the shortfall in this study is that it contains none of the amenity health values albeit it found transportation costs amounted to $42-$43 million for each of the public and private sectors. 52 Further, being located within walking distance of a trail adds $6,500 to the value of a home relative to a carfdependent home. This approach was based on relative values of home sales, not as in the CCEA’s study, justified by health amenities and consumer surplus estimates. 51 Op. Cit. Vermont Agency of Transport, p. 4.52 Ibid. p. 5. A Path to Revitalization Literature Review 20 21 Map 1 . Locations of Infrared Trail Counts & Intercept Survey 20 21 In addition to the data noted above from previous studies, data regarding trail usage is germane to the assessment of both health and economic impacts. Data collection for this study began with a survey of the literature but those results were found to lack specificity regarding likely use of the currently fragmented sections of the NRG. To address this point, the research team undertook trail counts on five trail segments three along the NRG and two on nearby or feeder sections of the NRG. A total of eight separate locations were counted. Counts involved manual calibration and installation of two TRAFx passive infrared (pyroelectric) trail counters. UConn and NVCOG also conducted intercept surveys of trail users on the same five trail segments at five separate locations. Additional data collection included three stakeholder focus groups involving stakeholders along the Farmington Canal Trail. These instruments yielded expenditure data including travel costs of residences of origin, estimates of consumer surplus (value consumers attach to trail activities over and above the costs they actually pay). CCEA has added health amenities accruing to trail users, based on national and local health indicators and estimated a dynamic economic model to the year 2031. Methods and preliminary findings are discussed below. Trail Count Data During the summer and fall of 2015, staff from the NVCOG conducted trail use counts on five sections of multi-use trail to assess the popularity and use patterns of trail facilities in and near the region. Two passive infrared counters were temporarily installed with the intent of collecting four weeks of un-interrupted counts at predetermined locations along open sections of NRG in Derby, Beacon Falls, and Naugatuck, as well as on the Middlebury Greenway in Middlebury and on the Sue Grossman Still River Trail in Torrington. Locations were chosen based on pretests to determine which would be most suitable for the infrared counters (to avoid circular paths, for instance) as well as areas that would be appropriate for the intercept survey as well. Map 1 shows survey locations. Count Data Collection Methods Equipment Two TRAFx passive infrared (pyroelectric) trail counters were used to conduct the trail user counts. The counters work by detecting the heat difference between passing trail users and the ambient air or background temperature. The counters were affixed to signs or fence posts on one side of the trail facing trail traffic. The counters record warm objects passing by the count site 24 hours per day, compiling data into one-hour time blocks. Text files were downloaded from the counters and imported into Microsoft Excel where the hourly count information was converted into more illustrative tables and graphs. Limitations There are some limitations to passive infrared counter technology. For instance, the counters are not capable of determining the type of use: pedestrians, bicyclists, and any other user are indistinguishable in the count data. From limited in person manual counts, mode share was A Path to Revitalization Research Methods & Preliminary Findings Research Methods & Preliminary Findings 22 23 observed to be mainly pedestrian (84%), with approximately 11% bicyclists and 5% other (stroller, wheelchair, roller-blade, etc.). Further study would be necessary to compare mode share between trail sections, but given the relatively short lengths of the open trails, it is reasonable to expect that currently the majority of users are walkers. Undercounts The TRAFx trail counters used are considered “screenline” counters: they detect trail users passing the line of “sight” of the sensor. Two individuals walking or riding side by side would be counted only once because the counter would only “see” one heat signature. This type of undercount is typical and is referred to as occlusion. The same problem occurs when users pass the counter at the same time in opposite directions, and the undercount can be even greater for larger groups. High ambient air or background temperatures can also cause undercounts. As the temperature approaches human body temperature, the differences between the two may become difficult for the counter to distinguish and may result in undercounting. In a similar fashion, during very cold weather, highly insulated clothing may prevent counters from registering the difference between the background and clothing surface temperature resulting in undercounts. Whenever possible, counters were placed in shaded areas as per the manufacturer’s recommendation to reduce the likelihood of overheating. Over counts There are also conditions that may cause passive infrared ( IR ) counters to over-count users. For instance, if trail users stop or congregate in front of a counter they may be counted several times. Pets or wildlife may be inadvertently counted. Heated background vegetation moving in the wind may cause false counts. Understanding these possibilities, the counters were placed in a manner to minimize the risk of over counts. The counters were placed away from areas where trail users typically congregate, at a height so that most pets or wildlife would not be counted, and to avoid background vegetation in the counter’s field of vision. The counter records trail users every time they pass, meaning that a trail user who takes an “out and back” route will be counted twice. Because the NRG is not yet a through trail, all of the trail sections counted likely have a high percentage of these types of users, but it is difficult to calculate the percentage to be used in corrections. Therefore, the figures presented in this report do not correct for out and back users. The number of trail trips or uses are presented in this report, not trail users. Tampering and Malfunction Because trail counters are often in remote areas, and thus cannot be constantly monitored, there is risk of tampering or the possibility that a counter malfunction might not be caught for an extended period of time. Both scenarios played out during this study. A regular check of counters in Naugatuck determined that a sunflower seed had been placed in a manner to block the sensor, resulting in just under a week of no data collected for that counter. Because the goal was to obtain four weeks of uninterrupted data, counts were extended to remedy the situation. A counter malfunction occurred in Torrington, when, upon downloading the data at the end of the four weeks, it was found that a battery had come loose and the counter had stopped working after nine days. A check of the counter in the first week found it to be working, and limited staff availability prevented additional checks. Because Torrington was the last site to be counted, and winter conditions were starting, it was not feasible to extend the count survey and data in this report reflects only nine days. Research Methods & Preliminary Findings A Path to Revitalization 22 23 Adjustments To account for potential differences between the actual number of trail uses and what the IR counters registered, an adjustment factor was used to extrapolate the raw counts to better reflect total number of uses. The adjustment factor was determined by conducting manual counts several times at each location. At each count location, NVCOG staff manually counted the number of people walking or riding a bicycle past the counter while it was recording. In all, manual counts from 28 one-hour time periods were compared with the IR counts from the same time period to determine that there was an overall 24% undercount. This factor falls within the typical range of IR counter error. A correction factor of 1.24 was applied to account for these inherent discrepancies. Extrapolation Staff used the National Bicycle Pedestrian Documentation ( NBPD ) Project extrapolation methods to estimate annual uses based on limited duration collection periods. The NBPD Project is a joint effort of Alta Planning & Design and the Institute of Transportation Engineers ( ITE ) Pedestrian and Bicycle Council. Using previous counts from across the country, the NBPD provides extrapolation factors to estimate daily, monthly, and annual figures based on counts done during any period of a day, month or year. The NBPD provides different monthly-to-annual extrapolation factors based on regional variation due to climate. This report uses the factors for “Long Winter Short Summer”. This assumes that more trail users will be using multiuse trails in the warm months (April through September) than in colder winter months. In Middlebury, for instance, for purposes of estimating annual uses, the analysis assumes that 6% of total annual uses would occur in October, the month that users were counted. In Naugatuck, the count was completed in July; therefore, it is assumed that the recorded data represent 13% of the total annual uses. Count Data Findings The Derby North count location was by far the most popular trail section analyzed in this study with over 30,000 adjusted uses recorded over the four-week count period, and an annual extrapolated total of over 300,000 uses. Beacon Falls South was the least used trail studied, likely due to the fact that it is minimally developed as a trail. A summary of findings follow for each trail count location; the full report for each location can be found in the Appendix of this document. The table below shows the adjusted average uses and total extrapolated uses per year. As discussed above, the count data from the IR counters were extrapolated to provide an estimate of annual uses. These results need to be used with caution as a certain amount of double or multiple counting is likely. This is possible because one person may be recorded at multiple points along the trail or multiple times by the same counter, that is, someone who started walking along the Derby Greenway from Bridge Street and ended at Division Street would have been recorded by each IR counter installed at both locations and by the same counter multiple times if the same person reverse their trip. Since it is not practical to determine the extent of overlapping counts, it is important to reiterate that these counts estimate uses , and not users. Based on the infrared trail counts and the NBPD methods, the current total number of uses on the surveyed trails is estimated at 747,886. The number is reduced to 385,791 uses when the second count point in Derby, Beacon Falls and Naugatuck is subtracted and the counts attributable to the Middlebury Greenway and Sue Grossman Trail are not included. This is the baseline total for just the sections of the Naugatuck River Greenway. A Path to Revitalization Research Methods & Preliminary Findings 24 25 Trail User Intercept Survey An Intercept Survey was completed in October 2015. The data offer insights into trail use on the short, completed sections of the NRG. Intercept data was collected at trailheads in the communities of Naugatuck, Middlebury, Derby, Beacon Falls and Torrington, at five of the eight locations as shown in Map 1 . It was decided not to conduct intercept surveys at all locations due to the likelihood for repeat users at the beginning and end of these trail sections. While the trail sections in Middlebury and Torrington are currently not proposed sections of the Naugatuck Greenway, they represent nearby trails with similar characteristics and there are proposals to make these sections contiguous with the NRG. Intercept Survey Methods UConn and NVCOG staff developed the survey protocols. The survey tool is attached in the Appendix and included questions completed by the interceptor, including time of day, apparent gender, group size, and activity, and questions completed by trail users. These questions included trail use times and seasons, trail related expenditures, transportation methods, age, income, and suggested trail improvements. Users were intercepted in 2-hour windows on 12 separate days throughout the month of October. These times included both weekday and weekend dates in the morning and afternoon to best represent accurate trail usage. Days and times for data collected were selected based on best practices developed by the National Bicycle and Pedestrian Documentation Project as well as preliminary infrared counts at points on the trail conducted in August 2015. The surveys were conducted by NVCOG staff and by active volunteers recruited from local trail organizations. To ensure consistency in survey protocols, training occurred when NVCOG staff and volunteers were on the trail. One question regarding group gender was not included in this analysis due to unexpected inconsistencies in data collection. A total of 383 intercept surveys were completed. Response rates varied by question and complete reports of the data can be found in the survey report in the Appendix . Table 3: Multi-use Trail Counts Count Location 4–Week Adjusted Total 1–Week Adjusted Average 1–Month Adjusted Extrapolated Month Collected Annual Extrapolation Factor Annual Trips* Adjusted Extrapolated Beacon Falls North 2,572 643 2,784 September 0.11 25,311 Beacon Falls South 702 176 762 September 0.11 6,928 Derby North 30,730 7,682 33,263 May 0.11 302,391 Derby South 15,281 3,820 16,541 May 0.11 150,369 Middlebury [1] 5,276 1,319 5,711 October 0.06 95,188 Naugatuck North 6,977 1,744 7,552 July 0.13 58,089 Naugatuck South 5,477 1,369 5,928 July 0.13 45,598 Torrington [2] NA 887 3,841 October 0.06 64,012 Source: Naugatuck Valley Council of Governments, Multiuse Trail Counts, Summer/Fall 2015 [1] Middlebury Greenway; [2] Sue Grossman Trail Research Methods & Preliminary Findings A Path to Revitalization 24 25 Intercept Survey Findings Below is a summary of highlights from the Trail User Intercept Survey. Full results can be found in the Appendix . ► Trails are used on a very regular basis. Across all communities, 74% of all users stated they used the trail at least one or more times per week. ► Trail users reflect the general age and income demographics of the region. Of the 374 individuals who responded to the survey question regarding age, the majority were over the age of 45 years old and 66% indicated their household income was $50,000 or more. Over half of the users were female. ► The majority of trail users (53%) traveled by car or motorcycle alone to access the trail followed by walking to the trail (21%). Naugatuck and Beacon Falls were the only two survey sites where the majority of users walked to the trail, while only of 4% of the users walked to access the trail in Torrington. ► Overall respondents made use of these trail sections fairly consistently through the spring, fall, and summer. Fifty-three percent of users indicated they used the trail in the fall, 44% in the spring, and 48% in summer. Only 1.3 % of users indicated use in winter. ► Exercise was by far the primary activity for the majority of trail users (88%), followed by recreational uses (25%). The Naugatuck and Derby sections were the only areas where any users indicated use for travel to school or work. ► The average amount spent by users annually on trail-related items is $155, with the lowest amount reported in Derby with expenses of $124, the highest from Torrington reporting $268. ► Thirty-eight percent of users reported spending any money during their visit. The average spending per visit was $14.03, adjusted to account for travel-related expenses. This expenditure is consistent with other trails in the region with a high number of local users. About 56% of users who reported spending money spent it on beverages. ► Ninety-seven percent (97%) of respondents considered the trail an asset to their community. Seventy four percent (74%) felt the trail had increased property values, 5% said it had not, and 21% were not sure. ► Suggested improvements to the trail included lengthening, reviewing dog use policies on the trail, lighting, and restroom facilities improvements. ► The manual count of users conducted at the same times as the intercept surveys resulted in a higher annual estimate than determined based on the IR counters. This is likely because the surveys were conducted during peak times and when the weather was pleasant. The higher usage rate resulted in an annual total of about 968,647 uses. Estimate of Annual Users based on Intercept Survey Findings In an attempt to estimate the number of individual persons that use the trail each year and differentiate “uses” from “users,” the extrapolated number of Annual Uses was discounted based on the responses from the intercept survey. The intercept survey asked respondents how often they used the trail. The results indicate the following breakdowns: ► 18.1% use the trail every day; ► 35.3% use the trail 3-to-5 times per week; A Path to Revitalization Research Methods & Preliminary Findings 26 27 ► 20.7% use the trail 1-to-2 times per week; ► 16.0% use the trail 2-to-4 times per month; and ► 9.9% use the trail 1-to-2 times per year. The percentage breakdowns were then multiplied by total uses and then divided by the frequency of use over the course of a year, that is, by 365 for those who use the trail every day, 208 for those who use it 3-to-5 times a week, 52 for those using it once or twice a week, 24 for those using it 2-to-4 times per month, and two for those who use it once or twice per year. This method results in baseline number of users of about 24,375 and abfflout 47,261 users based on all IR counts. If the higher count from the intercept survey is applied, about 60,386 persons use the trail each year. Stakeholder Focus Groups Focus Group Methods In addition to the count and intercept survey data collection, UConn-Extension convened three focus groups as part of the Study. The primary purpose of the focus groups was to learn best practices for trail development and maintenance from stakeholders’ experience along a similar existing trail. The trail chosen for this purpose was The Farmington Canal Heritage Greenway. As described above, it is a multi-use trail that runs along the historic canal route for approximately 84 miles between New Haven, Connecticut and Northampton, Massachusetts. Similar to the planned NRG, about half of this trail has been developed as a paved trail for non-motorized recreation. The three focus groups represented: business owners, public health professionals, and trail administrators. Participants were asked about their opinions regarding the use and the impacts of this trail. The focus groups were conducted on: ► March 30, 2016 for public health professionals; ► March 31, 2016 for trail administrators; and ► April 5, 2016 for nearby business owners. In total, fifteen stakeholders participated in the focus groups. They were recruited through local trail organization networks, chambers of commerce, and a “snowball” type referral process. Participants received information about the purpose of the study, the agenda for the focus group, and consent forms (permitting UConn’s use of the information) in advance of the meetings. Questions for each stakeholder group were developed in advance with feedback from the research team and NVCOG staff, and based on best practices developed by Richard A. Krueger. 53 The focus groups were conducted in adherence to UConn protocols and procedures, and were recorded and transcribed to ensure the discussions were accurately and properly coded. All focus group statements were coded into four main areas: ► Statements about uses and users of the trails; ► Statements about the impacts of trails; ► Statements about challenges; and 53 Krueger, Richard A. (1994). Focus Groups: A Practical Guide for Applied Research . SAGE Publications, Inc. 2nd edition Research Methods & Preliminary Findings A Path to Revitalization 26 27 ► Statements about recommendations. Coding was reviewed and verified by two coders. Where statements may have reflected multiple meanings they are duplicated in the data reported below. Two additional sections were created, one to specifically address comments related to data collection and impact assessment on the trails, and the other on successes and case studies that were mentioned throughout the discussions. Focus Group Findings A summary of key findings from the focus groups after coding is provided below; the complete report is attached in the Appendix of this report and is also available online at www.nvcogct.org . A limited number of quotes are provided here as examples. Trail Uses and Users Statements about trail use during the focus groups reflected the wide range of uses, and potential uses, for multi-use trails as well as a diverse range of existing users. Discussions emphasized the potential for increasing use by overcoming winter maintenance challenges and promoting and supporting trail use among millennials, young families, and those who use it for shopping, transit, to access local amenities, and for commuting. Summary of perceptions of current trail uses: ► Organizations use trails as a venue for providing public health education “Chamber of Commerce Health and Wellness committee had been working on and partnering with relevant local agencies to take a part of the trail and doing different things along the trail. My nurse will be sitting doing blood pressures, we’re having a staff member set up public information sessions on Lyme disease. All of the issues that we see creeping up in the health department. But also the Y will be doing exercising along the trail. It’s a day dedicated to educating, using the trail as an educational tool. Maybe people using the trails are great at rollerblading, but not informed about Lyme disease, an easily avoided risk.” ► Schools use trails as part of curricular activities and for fundraisers ► Communities use trails for family events and fundraisers ► Trails are used in winter, whether they are maintained or not “People are riding their bikes to work in snowstorms and in the pouring rain. You can’t believe how people are out riding bikes. Conditions in which the hardest core of my friends would not ride bikes. It’s just the reality of the situation. “ “We have a lot of lower income people using it as a commuting resource, not just a recreational resource. And that’s why I’m always arguing with the parks and rec department about whether we should plow or not, the snow in the winter. People use this resource to go to work and to go shopping, and when it doesn’t get plowed until April that’s a transportation, justice, social justice issue.” ► Women and young people use trails when they are perceived as safe ► While there is a vocal contingent of bicyclists, pedestrian users likely comprise a significant percentage of total users A Path to Revitalization Research Methods & Preliminary Findings 28 29 ► Due to present remote access points and difficult terrain, some extant trails may not be easily accessed by or promoted to people with disabilities ► Perception that users are primarily suburbanites and out of residential towns ► Perception that most users are families and light recreational users who value safety ► Employers use trails to promote employee wellness ► Trails serve an important role as transportation routes, connecting communities, and connecting local residents to amenities “… these trails are transportation…for a segment of the population that is easily overlooked. And those are people who can’t afford cars. And they can only get to work by bike. They need a way to get down …to the food service establishments. So they close at 9 (pm), maybe they get done at 11 and they’re on their way back home. There is a whole class of people will use these and its against all of the rules of the trail… because the trail says were open from dawn to dusk. We close at dusk. You can’t use it after that. People will use it. It’s a fact of life. And I’m glad it’s going to be there for them because otherwise they’re getting further underprivileged than they already are.” Impacts of Trail Use Statements about the impacts of trail use included the trails function as an educational tool (for health and environmental education) , community development and planning purposes (to increase community ownership, as an amenity to promote for economic development, and to slow traffic) as well as fiscal impacts such as spending at local businesses and potential for increasing property values. The statements here are perceived benefits and should be viewed in light of the discussions regarding challenges associated with collecting trail impact data reported above. Summary of statements about the impacts of trail use ► Trails promote general health, well-being, and public health education “I think the major impact is to get the people out and walking….” “I don’t think the parks and recs people understand. They know exercise, but they might not understand that the trails are important public health assets. It was a teachable moment.” ► Trails create community ownership and spark other community development initiatives “Once you have a trail, there’s more opportunities for other parts of town to become walk-able and also for developing youth programs to get kids on bikes. We have two such programs now. We have children in fourth grade that now have bicycling as part of their PE. So once you become more of a bicycle friendly community.” ► Trails may serve as tools to educate and promote coordination among trail stakeholders ► Trails help to increase environmental awareness ► Trails add value to and encourage maintenance of nearby properties “There was a big concern that my property values were going to go down or crime would increase, and I’m sure we have stats that show that that isn’t the case. And property values have increased as a result. As it turns around, the trail has added value to your property as opposed to be a derelict rail. But after seeing the value of the trail, a new neighborhood nearby is clamoring for the trail to come to provide that vital link. Research Methods & Preliminary Findings A Path to Revitalization 28 29 ► Direct impacts of trails on businesses can be both positive and negative ► By facilitating bicycle commuting, trails may reduce congestion and greenhouse gases (GHGs) and speed traffic but slow it at trail crossings. ► Trails generate amenities that can be marketed to attract young families and millennials both for fitness and commuting “But there’s a growing number of young people who want to get their fitness in in the morning and at night, they want to be able to commute to work, they want to be able to commute without having to go over the mountain and to compete with cars. So that link to … again, it’s a huge draw for business for recruiting young talent.” Challenges Statements about challenges focused primarily on development issues, routing and construction, maintenance, and safety issues. Specific challenges are listed below. ► Actual or perceived safety and security issues ► ADA Compliance/ access for people who are differently abled “A couple of weeks ago we had a mom and a son in a wheelchair who couldn’t use our…trail because it’s a soft trail and not paved…this poor kid in a wheelchair didn’t have a place to go outside and enjoy the river, since it was not paved. You know it has to be considered that it’s for them too. These trails are for people of all ability levels.” ► Lack of public awareness ► Routing issues “There is a long term goal of connecting the NRG to the FCT [Farmington Canal Trail] through Cheshire and Waterbury but we’re not finding a real good path for it but that’s why it’s a long term.” ► Liability concerns “Liability is really a touchy issue with a lot of communities. But the real key to reducing liability is maintenance and good planning prevents liability issues best. Fencing design, proper standards followed then that reduces liability. It’s a big budget issue.” ► Lack of organizational capacity “Some trails have very active community groups that will be willing to take this up, but when community groups are not strong they aren’t able to maintain very well. Then it’s up to city and towns and that becomes problematic.” ► Competition or lack of cooperation with neighboring towns ► Poor planning or lack of budget for maintenance ► Lack of support from community leaders/businesses “We tell our town leaders we need to keep pushing the envelope because we want to make [the community] a destination for cyclists…some businesses will say I’m in the jewelry business I don’t get anything out of this. Well you do. All boats rise when money comes into town, and that’s part of the story we’ve been trying to communicate to people.” A Path to Revitalization Research Methods & Preliminary Findings 30 31 ► Unsafe connections from neighborhoods to the trail “The problem is getting there safely if you are a family with kids. And I think if we were to have done something differently we would’ve done a lot more forward thinking on good safe arterial connections down from neighborhoods down to the trail to get people to those businesses safely. I hear students… when they are coming down- the first thing parents want to know is there a safe route? Do I have to worry about my kids on bikes really congested road?” ► Lack of consistency/state policy or standardization of regulations “Our state has not created any policies to dictate what municipalities have to do. So you’ll see differences as you go from one town to another. So it’s important that you get started with some sort of standardization.” ► Difficulty working with state agencies “It was an immense hassle to get, for instance pedestrian activated flashers up. It would take years. Literally years of studies and people saying oh I lost the study. No really!” ► Too much signage ► Costs of aging trail infrastructure and funding issues in general ► Trees, foliage maintenance issues- poor site planning “We cannot maintain all of the plantings we put in, and we put in fences that the mower wouldn’t fit under so they have to use a weed whacker…which takes more time and costs.” ► Too much fencing ► Water safety in areas near a river ► Poor mile marking ► Graffiti ► Few existing businesses along the trail ► Conflicting uses “We learned of new uses, like fishing…something that we didn’t think about or plan for. And the fishing people for example used the trail in different directions to cross into the river to fish.” “…we also had a problem with snowmobiles and motorcycles which really tear the stone dust trails up. And bollards are useless against them because they’re coming in from the farms.” Recommendations The focus groups provided suggestions, based on their experiences, that they felt would be of most interest to other trail developers to effectuate greater public use and awareness of multiuse trails. The recommendations were organized into the following general categories: promotion , safety , amenities , demonstrating value , trail maintenance , community and business engagement , and trail planning and routing . Detailed recommendations are on page 25 . Research Methods & Preliminary Findings A Path to Revitalization 30 31 Promotion ► Use environmental education to increase appreciation for the outdoors ► Develop events to promote trail use ► Consider using social media ► Create a consistent brand Safety ► Get more people using the trail to increase safety ► Develop citizen/volunteer patrol programs ► Engage public safety officials in using trails ► Be attentive to traffic safety issues ► Provide a way for users to locate themselves in case of emergency ► Consider emergency access points Amenities ► The three B’s: bike racks, benches and bathrooms ► Develop good traffic signage and cross walks ► Maps and consistent way finding signage are essential Demonstrating Value ► Collect data about trail use ► Educate leaders, planners, economic developers and citizens about how the trail impacts your community ► Look for low-cost, high visibility projects Trail Maintenance ► Use technology like SeeClickFix to get the right information to the right people ► Create a plan and budget for maintenance from the start ► Know who your users are and plan for winter maintenance ► Engage volunteers in maintaining the trail ► Choose materials that are graffiti resistant Community and Business Engagement ► Find champions, involve community groups and get them to take ownership ► Engage a diverse range of businesses and create ways to connect them to the trail ► Involve schools and young people ► Integrate the trail into other community planning efforts from the beginning ► Collaborate with neighbor communities on cost sharing and to create consistency in signage ► Build a culture of support for the trail in your community ► Be patient and go slow ► Look to other communities and trails as examples ► Build a culture of support for the trail in your community ► Use the trail to stimulate innovative ideas Trail Planning and Routing ► Create a destination and an enjoyable experience for users ► Create safe routes for local users from the trail to neighborhoods, transit points and community amenities ► Make accommodations for trees ► Mitigate user conflicts ► Consider costs and benefits of paved or stone dust trails and consistency of surface A Path to Revitalization Research Methods & Preliminary Findings 32 33 Fish Bypass & Park, Seymour 32 33 Direct Economic Impacts Introduction The direct dynamic economic impacts of completing the NRG flow from the timing of completion of construction of its major elements and future uses. Direct inputs include remaining trail construction costs net of any land acquisitions, expenditures by current and future users of the greenway and its component parts, health or amenity benefits enjoyed by users, inclusive of any consumer surplus that users and onlookers enjoy. By definition, these direct elements are dynamic because they increase as portions of the trail are completed. Because trails take time to plan, design and secure funding, construction of the entire trail is not expected to be completed until 2030, at the earliest. Given a year’s lag in expected usage, the number of people utilizing the greenway related to completion of trail segments can be expected to continue to grow through 2031. Combined, these direct expenditures generate direct impacts that form the basis for estimating additional indirect 54 and induced 55 economic impacts. Collectively, these expenditures constitute economic impacts measured by population augmentation, employment, personal income, personal disposable income, and various fiscal impacts. This report first estimates direct economic impacts by utilizing currently available data. The Connecticut Center for Economic Analysis ( CCEA ) then deployed the Regional Economic Model Inc.’s ( REMI ) model to estimate annual impacts to 2050. The particular model on which the CCEA relied in this analysis is REMI IP+ v1.7 at the Connecticut county level for impacts on New Haven County and Litchfield County. In doing so it identifies opportunities for expansion by industry for the Naugatuck River Valley. This section concentrates on establishing all direct impacts. Included are likely annual construction costs and associated timing, amenity benefits including consumer surplus, and operating costs borne by users and governments. Construction Costs The NVCOG, based on its earlier engineering studies, provided estimates of the cost to construct the remaining sections of the NRG and the anticipated timing for that construction. The construction estimates are in 2016 dollars and represent annual capital costs between 2016 and 2020, and in five-year increments from 2021 to 2025 and 2026 to 2030. The trail is expected to be completed in 2030, again in annual average expenditures. Table 4 illustrates annual construction costs based on NVCOG data. Cost estimates were extracted from a previous route alignment study and are illustrative and considered preliminary. 54 Indirect impacts include those in the counties back up the supply chain for each direct purchase. For example, if a locally produced Power Bar is purchased for sustenance while walking, the direct employment would cover its selling and production costs whereas the indirect employment would capture all local employment in inputs into the Power Bar, such as honey and grains plus the production of all the parts going into those raw materials. 55 Induced impacts are above and beyond the direct and indirect impacts because they take account of consumption arising from the wages and salaries generated in both the assembly and throughout all the rest of the supply lines as well as expenditures from wages and salaries earned in the production of induced impacts themselves. A Path to Revitalization Economic Impacts Economic Impacts 34 35 The timeframe reflects current status of the trail projects and whether or not advanced planning has been completed. These data exclude coincident downtown improvements in Derby, a major road widening project that includes the installation of a bi-directional cycle-track with direct connections to the Derby Greenway. For trail sections to be built after 2020, the average construction cost was assumed to be $1.5 million per mile, as an order of magnitude cost estimate. The table contains the resulting annual construction expenditures completed in 2030 and fully operational in 2031. (Note: the costs listed in the 2021-to-2025 and 2026-to-2030 columns represent annual average costs for the five-year time frame.) In total, the NRG is estimated to require an additional investment of about $77.2 million to fully implement. Over half of this total, about $53.2 million, would be allocated to sections to be constructed in New Haven County. Trail construction in Litchfield County communities would need about $24.0 million to complete. Table 4: Annual Estimated Construction Cost by Community and Trail Section (in $1,000s Constant 2016) Community 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Annually (2021– 2025) Annually (2026– 2030) Total Litchfield County Total $0 $0 $2,347 $0 $6,029 $900 $2,190 $24,021 Torrington $0 $0 $500 $0 $0 $900 $0 $5,000 Litchfield/ Harwinton $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $2,190 $10,950 Thomaston $195 $0 $0 $0 $5,529 $0 $0 $5,724 Watertown $0 $0 $1,847 $0 $500 $0 $0 $2,347 New Haven County Total $2,220 $7,457 $6,210 $3,200 $14,580 $420 $3,490 $53,197 Waterbury $0 $5,500 $0 $0 $8,600 $0 $2,380 $26,000 Naugatuck $0 $0 $3,000 $0 $3,236 $420 $0 $8,336 Beacon Falls Trail $0 $1,357 $0 $3,200 $2,744 $0 $0 $7,301 Seymour $700 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $750 $4,450 Ansonia $1,500 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $360 $3,300 Derby [1] $0 $600 $3,210 $0 $0 $0 $0 $3,810 Total Construction Costs $2,395 $7,457 $8,557 $3,200 $20,609 $1,320 $5,680 $77,218 [1] Construction costs include a bi-directional cycle-track to be built as part of the reconstruction and major widening of Route 34/Main Street (2017), but exclude the cost to construct the major road widening. It should be noted that Winter Garden, Florida has found it very useful to remake its downtown core as an integral part of the Orange Lake County Trails system yielding appreciating land values in the downtown core of 11.3% over 19 years. (See Appendix 1 ) Economic Impacts A Path to Revitalization 34 35 Operating Expenditures Based on data from Derby, maintenance and repair costs by town are set at $4,000 annually per mile, with annual publicity and promotion costs assumed to match this level from 2018 onward. Both of these outlays are financed by local governments and modeled as reductions in other expenditures so that budgets balance at each level of government. In addition, amenity benefits are expected to increase with use of completed trail segments, contributing particularly to improved health of users. Projected Annual Trail Uses As sections of the NRG are built and it is actively promoted by the host communities, the amount of usage is expected to increase beyond current trends. The CCEA developed three growth scenarios: (1) a baseline case that uses the annual number of uses from just the open sections of the NRG (390,996 uses) as the basis; (2) a current trend case based on the total extrapolated number of uses from the IR counters; and (3) an accelerated growth scenario that assumes use will increase exponentially with trail development and at a rate that will double usage by full completion of the NRG. For the baseline and current cases, the assumed growth rate is related to current trail usage per mile and construction of trail sections. The growth in the number of annual uses shows variability because trail construction occurs at different rates over time, with completion expected in 2030. The accelerated growth scenario includes expansion factors that take into account the enhanced attractiveness of longer, more completed trails and assumes that, as the trail becomes more complete, usage will occur at a higher pace than the current rate calculated for the existing short, fragmented trail. Chart 1: Estimated Total Annual Trail Uses 0 2,500,000 5,000,000 7,500,000 10,000,000 12,500,000 15,000,000 17,500,000 20,000,000 22,500,000 25,000,000 2016201720182019202020212022202320242025202620272028202920302031 Estimated Number of Annual Uses Accelerated Growth Scenario Current Trend Scenario Baseline Scenario A Path to Revitalization Economic Impacts 36 37 Under these scenarios, the amount of usage on a fully completed NRG has the potential to be substantial. Under the baseline case, annual uses would increase to over 5 million in 2031, while the growth based on current per mile miles usage rates would result in annual uses to exceed 10 million. The trend lines are depicted in Chart 1 (previous page) . As discussed above, these projections represent uses and are a summation of the use on trail sections in each community; these number do not indicate the number of users. The use of these numbers to calculate economic benefits, however, has the potential of over- stating the effects because they represent the number of times the trail counter is actuated, as opposed to an estimate of individual visits. Because of where the counters were installed and the nature of a typical visit, it is very likely that each person on the trail was counted twice: once entering the trail and a second leaving. For this reason, subsequent analyses presented in this report were based on the annual number of uses divided by two, reflecting a ratio of two uses equal to one visit. User Amenity Benefits Associated with Current Trails Consumer Surplus Methodology and Benefits This report documents two types of amenity benefits: consumer surpluses and health benefits . Both of these types of benefits over time will increase property values and to that extent be transferred from participants to landowners and property taxing authorities, albeit the timing and share of those adjustments are far from certain. This section outlines and measures benefits initially accruing to residents through consumer surplus. Consumer surplus is the value that consumers are willing to pay over and above what they actually pay for consumption of a good or to participate in an activity. It is the monetary measure of net consumer benefit and is calculated by subtracting the amount spent on a good or service from the amount a person is willing to pay for that good or service. Because greenways usually do not have explicit fees for their use, it is often necessary to use surrogate measures to estimate. Two possibilities are the comparison of property values near and away from the greenway and estimating travel costs to the greenway. For the former method, after accounting for all pricing variables, the estimated willingness-to-pay more for properties located next to the greenway is determined. 56 The travel cost method works by estimating greenway users’ willingness-to-pay based on amount they spend traveling to and using the greenway. 57 The assessment of property values near and away from the greenway was beyond the scope of this study. As an alternative, the study team estimated net consumer surplus by using the travel cost method. 58 For example, under the currently segmented trails a resident of Waterbury might drive to Naugatuck to utilize that trail. In doing so that Waterbury user incurs return driving costs, recognized by the IRS at $0.55 per mile for roughly 11.6 miles 59 per round trip or $6.38. However, in the future that Waterbury resident could effectively save $6.38 by living close to a new section of the NRG that runs through the City and being able to access the trail directly by walking or riding a bicycle. In addition, the $6.38 savings would accrue each time the resident uses the trail. In essence, the Waterbury resident’s price for using the trail falls, and as is typically the case whenever prices decrease on any other good or service, consumption will increase. In this case, it is likely that the 56 Bunting & Briand, 200357 ibid.58 Refer to the companion report: The Economic Impact of Greenways and Multi-Use Trails: A review of literature prepared as part of the Naugatuck River Greenway Economic Impact Study , August, 2015 59 https://www.google.ca/?gws_rd=ssl#q=Waterburyct+to+Naugatuck+ct Economic Impacts A Path to Revitalization 36 37 frequency of using the new trail will increase; and as the frequency increases the odds of getting sufficient exercise to be beneficial to his or her health will improve. While $6.38 in this example does not sound like a large amount, the savings would accumulate every time the trail is used. Over the course of a year total savings could reach nearly $1,000 based on using the trail three times a week, walking sufficiently often to gain health benefits. In economic terms, this is referred to as consumer surpluses: that is, the Waterbury resident would no longer be incurring costs to use the trail, but instead would be realizing savings. Economists estimate such avoided transportation costs for all users of the expanded trail as the measure of consumer surplus. Consumer benefits can then be estimated as the costs which some people are willing to incur but no longer have to because of free or lower access cost access brought about from extensions to the NRG. The value of consumer surpluses can rise substantially as more residents are afforded direct access to the NRG. For every 1,000 residents that realize savings as in the above example, the expanded trail system would generate a million dollars in consumer surplus. Of course, not all current trail users will live in walking distance to the extended trail, but most will reside closer to the trail thereby attaining benefits of lower costs and the corresponding likelihood of increasing both consumer and consequential health impacts. Further, due to lower costs and closer proximity, other current non-walkers will increase their participation. The intercept survey asked respondents to provide their home ZIP Code. Travel distances and costs were then estimated between respondents' home ZIP Codes and the trailhead ZIP Codes. This calculation is based on the responses of those who were captured by the intercept survey. Consumer surpluses rise as the spreads between distances of driving to trailhead under the current disparate trail system and the expanded one shrink. In practice, the data required to make the above estimates are not readily available. Nevertheless, the CCEA approximated distances travelled to each current trailhead for users that responded to the survey based on individual ZIP Code information provided by respondents. Because most trailheads are very specific points and ZIP Codes cover larger areas, trail users who live in the same ZIP Code as the trailhead or live in an adjacent ZIP Code area will still incur a small transportation cost. For example, the trailhead for the Naugatuck NRG section is in ZIP Code 06770. Based on an assumed average travel distance from the centroid of the ZIP Code area to the trailhead, an average transportation cost for residents to and from the trail is estimated at $1.89. 60 Persons who live outside of the area but still use the Naugatuck trail section demonstrate a willingness to pay a higher cost because of the longer travel distance to the trail. This willingness is indicative that parties with sufficiently similar choices will pay the higher cost. The value they pay over and above the $1.89 paid by those who live closest to the trail generates an estimate of consumer surplus. The intercept survey results indicated that 86 users of the Naugatuck trail section lived in ZIP Code 06770 and 18 users were from more distant ZIP Code. These latter trail users were willing to incur higher transportation costs. The difference between the transportation cost incurred by these users and the users who live in ZIP Code 06770 is the measure of consumer surplus accrued to the 60 An approximation for the distances travelled within these home ZIP Codes was made by assuming that each of the home ZIP Code land masses were approximately square and the population evenly distributed within the square, travelling to a central point (trailhead) within the square, that is half the distance inside each. From known areas within each home ZIP Code several points exist within the square in which a circle containing half the area would capture half the residences. So as the crow flies the perimeter of the circle having half the area of the square is as far as the average resident needs to travel. In addition, as long as roads are designed in rectangular blocks, the shortest travel distance within any of these circles will approximate the radius of the circle and the longest the two sides of an equilateral triangle whose hypotenuse is at 45% to the foregoing radius. The average distances travelled within each home ZIP Code is taken as the average of those two extreme measures. Where trailheads are located within any circle described as above, these are reasonable measures to capture average users because participants from most approximate origins are apt to be higher than those more distant and outside the circle. A Path to Revitalization Economic Impacts 38 39 residents of ZIP Code 06770. Chart 2 illustrates how consumer surplus was calculated based on users who were interviewed on at the Naugatuck trailhead. While most of the respondents live in Naugatuck (ZIP Code 06770), there were 18 persons who were from outside of the immediate area of the trailhead. These users are shown in Chart 2 by those with the highest transportation costs (that is, farthest from the Naugatuck trailhead) to those with lowest cost. The chart depicts what participants from other ZIP Codes are willing to pay over and above the lower costs incurred by residents of ZIP Code 06770. The blue line depicts the assumed transportation costs for those living the closest to the trailhead, estimated at $1.89. The resulting consumer surplus estimates are illustrated by the solid orange line as the difference between travel costs from out-of-the-area ZIP Codes and the average transportation cost paid by residents of ZIP Code 06770. The consumer surplus derived by each trail user living close to the trailhead from those outside the trailhead ZIP Code was summed and an average value was calculated. This method results in an average per person consumer surplus per visit of about $12.66. Based on the number of respondents to the intercept survey, the consumer surplus for an average day amounts to $1,089 and over the course of the year it would total $65,304. The same method was used to calculate the consumer surplus realized by trail users from any ZIP Code. 61 For this example, trail users living within fifteen miles of the Naugatuck trail section trailhead accrue an annualized consumer surplus amounting to $184,272. Trail users from farther ZIP Codes realize an additional $21,243, increasing the total consumer surplus to $205,516. The estimates of consumer surplus by ZIP Code are listed in Table 5 . 61 For example, to establish consumer surplus for the 19th individual, rather than subtracting $1.89 subtract his or her costs of $4.45 from each of the remaining total travel costs and repeat the process. Chart 2: Consumer Surplus for Residents of Zip Code 06770 (Naugatuck) $0 $5 $10 $15 $20 $25 $30 $35 $40 $45 1 2345678910 111213141516171819 Average Consumer Surplus Trail Users Living Outside Zip Code of Trailhead Cost for most proximate Zip Codes Consumer surplus Economic Impacts A Path to Revitalization 38 39 Table 5: Estimated Annual Consumer Surplus Accruing from Extant Naugatuck Trail, by ZIP Code Trail-ZIP Codes 06770 06403 06708 06779 Within 15 Miles Total All ZIP Codes Naugatuck $65,304 $50,051 $40,074 $28,843 $184,272 $205,516 Based on respondents to the intercept survey and estimated travel costs from home ZIP Code to ZIP Code 06770. Table 6: Estimated Annual Consumer Surplus Accruing from Extant NRG Trails By ZIP Code ZIP Codes/ Trailhead Naugatuck Middlebury Derby To r r i n g to n Total 06770 Naugatuck $65,304 $52,804 $1,796,620 $1,914,728 06403 $50,051 $50,051 06708 $40,074 $64,024 $104,098 06779 $28,843 $30,826 $59,669 06762 Middlebury $2,468,749 $2,468,749 06706 $56,879 $56,879 06488 $42,938 $42,938 06478 $41,322 $41,322 06798 $42,704 $42,704 06795 $35,170 $35,170 06705 $31,022 $31,022 06704 $34,962 $34,962 06712 $6,529 $6,529 06418 Derby $2,466,232 $2,466,232 06401 $2,043,273 $2,043,273 06525 $2,002,117 $2,002,117 06484 $1,993,069 $1,993,069 06481 $1,973,225 $1,973,225 06463 $1,894,745 $1,894,745 06460 $1,863,875 $1,863,875 06614 $1,857,815 $1,857,815 06478 $1,844,532 $1,844,532 06611 $1,837,049 $1,837,049 06513 $1,825,446 $1,825,446 06606 $1,813,408 $1,813,408 06790 Torrington $61,687 $61,687 06791 $41,485 $41,485 06057 $13,961 $13,961 06778 $10,272 $10,272 06098 $13,554 $13,554 Total $184,272 $2,907,929 $25,211,406 $140,959 $28,444,566 Trailhead ZIP Codes $65,304 $2,468,749 $2,466,232 $61,687 $5,061,972 A Path to Revitalization Economic Impacts 40 41 This process was repeated for the other four trailheads at which intercept surveys were conducted and for which there were sufficient data. The results of the consumer benefits by ZIP Code within 15 miles driving one-way from residences to the trailheads are listed in Table 5 . Estimates of consumer surplus in Middlebury and Derby are influenced by the higher number of respondents that traveled farther to access the trails than occurred in Naugatuck or Torrington. Note: Consumer Surplus attributable to several respondents who indicated an out-of-state ZIP Code were excluded from the calculations. Data in Table 6 are unadjusted for non-responses and for trails not covered by the four towns. Summing the estimated consumer surpluses for the ZIP Codes containing trailheads yields a modest $5.1 million for the year. Extrapolating to cover both non-responses and other ZIP Codes containing trailheads, yields annual consumer surplus of $6.5 million for residents in ZIP Codes containing trailheads alone. When all ZIP Codes of visitors to the open sections of the NRG are summed, the consumer surplus totals about $28.5 million. The CCEA has taken this very conservative approach to utilizing benefit accruing only in the trailhead ZIP Codes as the starting point for consumer surpluses generated by the trail system. CCEA’s lower case assumes that trail usage will increase proportionately with the miles of trail completed, calculated using the number of annual uses exrapolated from one count location per open section and only for those sections on the NRG. As noted earlier, trail expansions and construction of additional trail sections will make the trail more accessible at lower costs to both current and new users. For that reason, trail usage is expected to increase and average usage rates per mile are expected to grow as the NRG becomes more accessible and attractive to use. For its upper case, the CCEA assumed that trail use will double at completion of the full trail. A constant growth rate rather than a linear extrapolation was also used in the calculation of future consumer surplus. This results in a more conservative process to avoid front loading impacts. Trail construction is likely to fluctuate annually with some years experiencing the opening of several miles of trail while other years may not see any new trail construction. Because of this, annual consumer surplus values also fluctuate year-to-year. Chart 3 illustrates the growth in consumer surplus as the entire NRG is constructed and opened. It is assumed that the consumer surplus associated with a new section of trail will accrue in the year following its construction. This dynamic explains why the contour of the lines in Chart 3 show substantial jumps in consumer surplus in some years and periods of slow growth in other years. Chart 3 represents the amount of consumer surplus accruing in each year. Because the portions of the trail driving consumer surplus from each previous year remain in place the following year, the points along the consumer surplus curves are cumulative. The annual increments along the curves represent the annual gains in consumer surplus derived from completion of trail segments in the previous year only. With consumer surplus expanding from NRG expansion at current usage rates only and under the baseline scenario, the estimated economic values would grow from $5.1 million in 2016 to $34.6 million by 2031. Based on the higher use counts for the current trend scenario, consumer surplus totals $6.4 million today and would increase to $43.6 million in 2031. With trail usage rates doubling, the rise would be to $87.1 million. The CCEA analysis calculated consumer surplus at the county level with the results showing that roughly 78% of the consumer surplus would accrue to New Haven County residents. Chart 3 also establishes that different assumptions about use clearly matter. The estimated consumer surplus is enhanced with increased access to the trail as well as higher usage rates. Economic Impacts A Path to Revitalization 40 41 Assessed Land Values The change in assessed property values as a result of proximity to a trail or greenway is difficult to quantify because of the number of factors that influence land values, such as age and condition of the home. Previous studies that have attempted to monetize increases in property values have found that proximity to trails and greenways either increase property values or have no negative impact. These studies have also concluded that increases are most pronounced near greenways that highlight open space, limit vehicular traffic and effectively maintain and provide security on the trails. Another key factor is minimizing trail-home owner conflicts. 62 Past studies have concluded that proximity to a trail increases the selling price of a home and typically reduces the time in which a house sells. A 2011 study by the CCEA analyzed the value of properties overlooking state parks and or forests and state trails. While the results varied by region, this study identified a green space bonus of $41,961 to $50,124 for properties overlooking managed green spaces compared that those that did not. 63 Relative to the latest assessed land values within walking distance of current and future trails, consumer benefits as a percent of the assessed values accruing within walking distance of currently available trails range from 0.14% in Derby to 0.08% in Naugatuck. 64 Both these results could be elevated by increased use of trails by more people for three days or more. Both estimates are conservative because they do not account for persons exercise on several trails contributing to frequency of use. For example, a person walking three different trails each of three days a week would slip through the cracks in the data. Nor do the numbers account for the increased access of the completed trail increasing frequency of use with which the NRG would be utilized. The 62 Economic Impacts of Protecting Rivers, Trails and Greenway Corridor , US Department of the Interior, National Park Service, 1995 63 Gunther, Parr, Graziano, Carstensen, 201164 The impacts on land values were assessed over 10 years discounted at 15% indicative of high risks associated with expected completions of the trail segments. Data were insufficient to make similar estimates for the other communities. Chart 3: Annual Cumulative Consumer Surplus $0 $10 $20 $30 $40 $50 $60 $70 $80 $90 $100 2016 201720182019202020212022202320242025202620272028202920302031 Consumer Surplus ($1,000,000s) Accelerated Growth Scenario Current Trend Scenario Baseline Scenario A Path to Revitalization Economic Impacts 42 43 estimates are also constrained by the databases to only benefits derived from walking and exclude those accruing to bicyclists. When amenity values are considered as part of the economic model, they generate incentives to live and reside in an area proximate to a trail section. The National Association of Home Builders and the National Association of Realtors conducted a survey on the importance of community amenities to homebuyers. Walking and biking trails came in second only to highway access. 65 Furthermore, trails are some of the cheapest amenities to build with the highest value. 66 These factors clearly demonstrate that proximity to trails as a positive impact on and increases property values. Health Benefits Methodology and Benefits Health benefits are expressed in terms of lives saved, that is, extended life years, and improvements in the quality of patients’ and caregivers’ health, and, in this instance, trail users’ quality of life improvements and consequentially lives saved. The CCEA explores these concepts based on surveys of current trail users and on counts obtained along extant sections of the NRG, as well as, documents on various health concerns that are partially redressed by increased participation. Trails in Naugatuck, Middlebury, Derby, Beacon Falls and Torrington are all envisioned as becoming part of the NRG, integrating those and adjacent communities with multiple entry points, including trailheads and other less structured points of access and egress, to encourage local participation. While persons can exercise in a wide variety of places, trails provide excellent venues for people to exercise in a comfortable and non-threatening environment and achieve sufficient health benefits from frequent physical activity. By frequently using trails and greenways, users can curb and reduce obesity, diabetes, cardiovascular diseases ( CVD ) and various cancers, particularly breast cancer. 67 Trails have also been shown to provide excellent places for people to walk in groups and socialize, and thereby, reap psychological benefits derived from group activities. Based on a report from the Surgeon General: ► Physically-active people have about 30% lower risk of early death than the inactive. ► Physically-inactive people account for about 11% of premature deaths in the United States. ► Physical activity helps prevent risk factors and protects against multiple chronic diseases. While the CCEA does not have medical information for trail users, 68 it does have incidences for these afflictions by type of Connecticut community 69. Based largely on relative incomes and their impacts on incidence rates, Table 7 shows likely incidences of the three major diseases within each type of community. The CCEA used these incidences to estimate how many people could potentially benefit from health improvements related to trail use. The trail user intercept survey identified how frequently users utilized these trails more than three times per week. Inclusive of walking to and from trailheads for those residing within a half a mile, the CCEA assumed that these uses extended for 30 minutes or more, which is enough effort and duration to improve health and extend longevity 65 Trails Are Important to Homebuyers, Survey Shows http://www.americantrails.org/resources/benefits/homebuyers02.html 66 Trails Add Values to New Homes http://www.americantrails.org/resources/devel/Trail-system-community-developer-investment-return- Martin.html 67 Harvard Health Publications Harvard Medical School, Walking your way to Health , http://www.health.harvard.edu/newsletter_article/Walking- Your-steps-to-health . 68 Doing so would clearly be invasive and is beyond CCEA’s expertise.69 2015 DataHaven Community Wellbeing Survey , DataHaven and Siena College Research, February 2, 2016. Economic Impacts A Path to Revitalization 42 43 (based on a recent Surgeon General’s report and other general health recommendation) . The expected incidences of different diseases ( Table 7 ) were applied to the current trail usage along open sections. This calculation results in the number of people who could potentially realize health improvements from using the trail ( Table 8 ). Because the health literature pertains to walking, this assessment relates only to walkers. Bicyclists were treated separately. Obesity is a precursor to other inflictions, though not all obese persons become diabetic or experience CVDs. In redressing diabetes alone, the current trail system is expected to facilitate the saving of 2.5 lives per year, based on the information in the Surgeon General’s Report. Throughout their lifetime this value is modestly set at $7.3 million for each life 70 saved or $18.2 million. 71 Had these patients been walking all their lives, 27 would have avoided having the first incident with diabetes. 72 Walking regularly reduces the risk of Type 2 diabetes by 60% and even reduces the risks of other types of diseases, such as colon cancer. 73 A case study involving male graduates at Harvard University walking at least nine miles a week showed a 22% lower death rate. Not only does walking have many of the same benefits as more vigorous exercise, like running, but it also has fewer negative impacts on a body; running is a high impact activity and therefore has more risk of injury–20% to 70%–while the risk of injury to walkers is only 1% to 5%. 74 Two major studies provide indications of the extent that walking reduces CVD: ► Among 44,452 male health professionals, walking at least 30 minutes a day led to an 18% lower risk of coronary artery disease; ► Among 72,488 female nurses, walking at least three hours a week led to a 35% lower risk of heart attack and cardiac death and 34% lower risk of stroke; 70 Lisa A. Robinson, How US Agencies Value Mortality Risk Reductions , Policy Monitor 2009 p. 283. http://opim.wharton.upenn.edu/risk/downloads/ RiskSeminar_2008-09-23_Robinson.pdf (June28, 2916) Review of agency practices suggests … the central tendency of the range of twenty-six estimates used in many EPA analyses is $7.2 million (2005 dollars), while the mean EPA estimate based on recent meta-analyses is $5.5 million (1999 dollars) 71 These calculations are based on the values of Statistical life (VOSL) for each life saved. 72 An alternative approach, based on the American Heart Association, Walking can lower risks of heart related conditions as much as running . http:// newsroom.heart.org/news/walking-can-lower-risk-of-heart-related-conditions-as-much-as-running . 73 8 Reasons why walking is great for your health. https://www.tescoliving.com/articles/8-reasons-why-walking-is-great-for-your-health . 74 Harvard Health Publications Harvard Medical School, Walking your Way to Health , http://www.health.harvard.edu/newsletter_article/Walking- Your-steps-to-health . Table 7: Expected Adult Incidences of Disease by Community Disease Naugatuck Middlebury Derby Beacon Falls To r r i n g to n Obesity 25% 12% 25% 21% 25% Diabetes 9% 4% 9% 7% 9% CVD 6% 5% 6% 7% 6% Source: CCEA application of the 2015 DataHaven Wellbeing Survey Table 8: Potential Number of People Avoiding Health Issues by Using Existing Trail Sections Disease Naugatuck Middlebury Derby Beacon Falls To r r i n g to n Total Obesity 100 21 426 26 27 600 Diabetes 36 7 153 9 10 215 CVD 24 9 102 9 7 150 Calculated by multiplying percentages in Table 7 by the number of trail users. A Path to Revitalization Economic Impacts 44 45 ► A 10-year study of 229 post-menopausal women randomly assigned the volunteers to walk at least one mile a day or to continue normal activities. At the end of the trial, the walkers enjoyed an 82% lower risk of heart disease. 75 In contrast with Harvard’s meta-data article, the National Heart Foundation relies on a major study by Paul T. Williams at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, Life Science Division. It concluded that walking reduced heart disease by 9.2%. 76 These data suggest that had the people with cardiovascular disease been walking prior to their problems, 14%-to-50% would have avoided the disease, resulting in considerable savings in medical costs and lost employment for both patients and their professional and home caregivers. In its 38-year longitudinal study starting with 18,863 male British civil servants, Whitehall found that those with cardiovascular disease at age 50 died 10 years earlier than those with no baseline risk factors at age 50. 77 In short, every group of eight was expected to avoid an entire life of 80 years of premature death. Walking has also been connected to a decreased risk of cancer. More specifically, exercise has been linked to decreasing the risk of breast cancer. Physical activity decreases the level of estrogen in women’s bodies, which in turn reduces the risk of contracting breast cancer, as well as boosting the body’s immune system. 78 Walking as little as 75 minutes-to-2 hours per week reduces a woman’s risk of breast cancer by 18%. 79 Breast Cancer Risk in American Women estimate that 12.4% of women will develop breast cancer at some point during their lives; therefore 2.2 of every 100 women could avoid breast cancer by increasing exercise. 80 During the intercept survey conducted as a part of this study, 185 women were interviewed. This level of participation rate combined with the avoidance rate for breast cancer infers that 4.2 women among those surveyed are expected to avoid breast cancer as a result of trail related exercise (assuming this was their only form of exercise). The incidence of breast cancer currently in Connecticut is relatively high at 137/100,000. In the short-term expansion of the trail by 2020, there are expected to be 427,000 trail uses. To gain sufficient exercise by using the trail without any other exercise, an individual would need to exercise about 160 times a year, meaning that a maximum of 2,500 people and 1,250 females could be getting enough exercise to reduce their risk of breast cancer. With 12.4% of the female population likely to contract breast cancer at some juncture over their lifetime that would reduce breast cancer incidence by 155 cases over 80 years or about two per year. By age 68, half the women who have or will get breast cancer have died. 81 That is at least 10 years prematurely relative to U.S. female life expectancy. Avoiding those premature deaths amounts to at least another half a life a year saved carrying with it an amenity value of at least another $3.6 million annually at a VOSL of $7.3 million. Based on the limited sample from the four trails included in the intercept survey and the health benefit factors described above, about 7.25 premature deaths could be avoided: 1.25 deaths from obesity, 3 deaths from diabetes, 2.5 deaths from CVD, and 0.5 deaths from breast cancer. These 75 Ibid.76 American Heart Association, Walking can lower risks of heart related conditions as much as running . http://newsroom.heart.org/news/walking- can-lower-risk-of-heart-related-conditions-as-much-as-running . 77 http://www.bmj.com/content/339/bmj.b3513 . 78 How Can Physical Activity Affect Breast Cancer Risk http://ww5.komen.org/Breastcancer/Lackofexercise.html . 79 Get Moving to Help Reduce Your Risk of Breast Cancer http://www.cancer.org/cancer/news/features/get-moving-to-help-reduce-your-risk-of- breast-cancer . 80 Breast Cancer Risk In American Women http://www.cancer.gov/types/breast/risk-fact-sheet . 81 SEER, Cancer Statistics Review 1975-2912 Table 1.13. Without further medical progress in avoidance and treatments, only 31% of women who have or will contract breast cancer live beyond the normal life expectancy of American females. Economic Impacts A Path to Revitalization 44 45 numbers do not include possible avoidance of premature deaths from other cancers. Monetizing the lives saved at federal guidelines of $7.3 million yields a total annual value of $52.9 million in health benefits. Extrapolating that value to cover all of the currently open trails increases the monetized health benefit to an estimated $73.5 million. These values are based on the results from the intercept survey and include sections not on the NRG. An adjustment for the baseline scenario reduces current health benefits to about $37.9 million, lower value but still substantial. As sections of the trail are built and opened, the health benefits from active and frequent use will increase proportionally under the baseline and current trend scenarios and exponentially for the accelerated growth scenario. The relationship between moderate exercise and reduced incidence of various diseases is well established. The expansion of the NRG will greatly increase access to an attractive and convenient venue for exercise, resulting in health benefits accruing to frequent users. The estimated monetized value of health benefits over time is staggering. By the project completion year of the trail of 2031, the accumulated value of deaths avoided amounts to $259.6 million under the baseline scenario and just over a half-billion dollars under the current trends case, with about 138 people enjoying healthier lives because they lived close enough to the trail to reduce their risk of experiencing diabetes, cardiovascular disease and various forms of cancer. Based on current use and length of open trail, 14 people will avoid a premature death. With the completion of the trail, an additional 70 lives may be saved. These results are based on the current trend scenario and a constant increase in trail usage. If usage increases at a higher rate, the expected health benefits will also increase. Under the accelerated growth scenario, the cumulated monetized health benefits would reach just over $1 billion with a total of 138 premature deaths avoided. Other medical research has noted that physical activity can reduce the risk of colon, Chart 4: Cumulative Monetized Health Benefits Accruing from Expanded Trail $0 $125 $250 $375 $500 $625 $750 $875 $1,000 $1,125 2016 201720182019202020212022202320242025202620272028202920302031 Monetized Health Benefits ($1,000s) Accelerated Growth Scenario Current Trend Scenario Baseline Scenario A Path to Revitalization Economic Impacts 46 47 endometrial and advanced prostate cancer. 82 Women who are active have a 20% to 40% decreased risk of endometrial cancer, with risk decreasing as physical activity increases. Studies have also been done to examine the effect an increase of physical activity has on lung cancer; however, these studies found it difficult to control for the effects of smoking and other respiratory diseases. The CCEA’s health benefit estimates described above are conservative in that the use of future trail section is based on the users of currently open and relatively short trail segments. Where individuals get additional exercise by using a variety of trails the extent of the workouts are being underestimated. This approach underestimates health benefits. The NRG will also assist in avoidance of many cancers in addition to breast cancer and the economic values from reducing other forms of cancer have not been estimated. Further, no account has been taken of the social costs of actually being ill. In addition, the analysis of health benefits did not estimate the effects trail usage by walkers and bicyclists may have on reducing greenhouse gas ( GHG ) emissions. These reductions could further enhance the health benefits over and above those included in the study. It is useful to note the impact that advertising could have on the use of trails. A telephone survey conducted in a southeastern county of the United States found that awareness of trails was low, and advertising should be directed at older and irregularly active adults for best results. 83 A number of campaigns have been undertaken across the United States to increase physical activity among inactive adults. In Wheeling, West Virginia, a program was developed which encouraged insufficiently active adults to walk for 30 minutes a day. The Wheeling Walks program resulted in a 14% net increase in self-reported walking among the target group, showing that encouragement through print, media, and television advertisement can lead to increased physical activity. 84 Advertising dollars were not considered in the REMI analysis of potential impacts. User Spending Spending by users on the day they visit the trail is a form of direct economic impact. Direct effects are impacts as a result of direct spending by consumers on goods and services related to activities utilizing the trails or amenities accruing from the trails, e.g. consumer surplus and health benefits identified above. In the case of the NRG or any other multi-use trail, direct effects can be defined as purchases made by users including spending on food, beverages, gasoline, gear, clothing and equipment (such as bicycles), or services. This also includes tourism expenditures such as lodging for trail-based recreational activities, although at its current composition, it is not likely that the NRG generates any overnight stays. The construction of the trail also has a direct economic effect, in labor hired and material used by construction firms to build the trail. The CCEA estimated direct user spending based on the answers to the intercept surveys conducted along open sections of the trail. Transportation expenses to and from the trail access points, however, were calculated based on approximate travel distances from the center of the home ZIP Code to the trailhead and federal mileage rates. Survey data collected user spending for snacks, food, beverages and meals on the day walkers and bicyclists were interviewed, as well as, the amounts spent over the past year on specific items, such as equipment, gear, active wear, and any other retail expenditures in general that the user made specifically because of the trail. It is difficult to attribute all of these latter expenditures to the trail, as consumers can use these items anywhere. For example, the person who purchases a new bicycle can ride it on the trail or may use it mostly on a road. Despite this, the survey attempted to gauge whether or not users were making 82 Physical Activity and Cancer. http://www.cancer.gov/about-cancer/causes-prevention/risk/obesity/physical-activity-fact-sheet#q7 . 83 Awareness and Use of Community Walking Trails http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0091743504001707 84 The CDC Guide to Strategies to Increase Physical Activity in the Community http://www.cdc.gov/obesity/downloads/PA_2011_WEB.pdf Economic Impacts A Path to Revitalization 46 47 new purchases because they frequently visited an open section of the trail. Average single visit spending patterns among respondents to the survey are listed in Table 9 . It also contains CCEA’s extrapolations from spending on gasoline to mileage charges on vehicles. Respondents were asked about their spending on gasoline because they are not apt to think in terms of total costs of driving. To establish what impact consumer spending would have in 2016, the above average single visit spending was multiplied by the annual number of trail uses based on data collected from the infrared trail counters. The estimated total annual uses is 747,886. (As discussed above, the trail count data were extrapolated based on factors from the National Bicycle and Pedestrian Documentation Project and reflect counts collected at all points, including two not on the NRG.) This results in a total direct spending of about $5.6 million over the course of an entire year. If the second NRG data points and the counts along the trails in Middlebury and Torrington are subtracted from the total, the annual uses drop to 385,791, reducing direct user spending to about $2.9 million. These costs cover those going to and returning from the trail, food consumed on and off the trail, incidental other retail and activities associated with trail usage. During the intercept survey, only 13 respondents were bicyclists with 8 respondents fully completing the survey. This represents only 3.4% of the total number of people that stopped and were willing to complete the survey. The low percentage of bicyclists is likely due in part by the short lengths of the open sections and a preference of bicyclists to remain on a parallel road. The currently open trails are more conducive to walking than riding a bicycle. Because of the small sample size, it is difficult to extrapolate bicyclist expenditure data with any confidence to represent Table 9: Single Visit Spending per Intercept Survey Responses by User Category – Walker or Bicyclist Single Visit Spending | Average Costs Walkers Bicyclists Beverages $2.07 $0.31 Snacks $0.58 $0.23 Meals $2.37 $0.77 Gas $1.54 $4.23 Retail $2.81 $17.69 Equipment $0.05 $30.77 Lodging $0.03 $0.00 Activities $0.05 $7.69 Other $0.58 $0.00 Total (Unadjusted) $10.08 $61.69 Total Vehicle Costs [1] $5.49 $15.07 Total Adjusted Costs $14 .03 $72 .53 [1] Total vehicle costs are based on vehicle mileage rate allowed by the IRS (at the time of the survey, it was 57.5¢ per mile and an approximate average travel distance. Gasoline expenditures indicated by respondents were subtracted from the vehicle costs to avoid double counting. A Path to Revitalization Economic Impacts 48 49 the entire trail. However, the data suggest that the spending pattern of bicyclists is somewhat different than walkers. Based on the survey data, bicyclists spend more annually than other users of the trail. The average annual spending by bicyclists is about $351, compared to the average annual expenditure of about $114 made by walkers. The difference is likely attributable to the more specialized equipment and gear used by bicyclists, and may include big ticket items, such as new bike purchases. In addition, these estimates are likely high because they assume that all the bicycle equipment expenditures were made for use of the NRG. The average amount spent by bicyclists on the day using the trail was also substantially higher, amounting to $61.69 as compared to $10.08 for all users. The difference is primarily attributable to the amount spent on meals. Bicyclists spent, on average, $22.73 on meals while the average for all other users was only $1.60. Transportation costs were also higher. Bicyclists travel costs averaged $15.07 based on distance times the standard mileage rate, suggesting bicyclists were willing to drive longer distances to use the trail. This cost increases the daily average direct expenditure by bicyclists to about $72.53, about five times as much as spent by walkers and other users. It is also interesting to note that more than half of the bicyclist-respondents indicated that they rode their bike to access the trail and therefore spent no money on gas. The total number of bicyclists that use the open trail sections each was estimated using the same aggregation methods described above for all other users. This method indicates that total annual bicycle use is in the range of 2,600–6,500 uses. Based on this, direct expenditures of bicyclists amounted to between $191,000 and $473,000 in 2 016. While this comes from a smaller sample than those on walkers, the results are illustrative of the potential spending of bicyclists that use the trail and can be used to inform future expenditures. To estimate future direct spending, current total uses of the open trail sections was converted to a per mile rate. This rate was then held constant over time with new trails considered to only come into use the year after their construction, no matter the month when construction is actually completed. Per walker expenditures per mile was also assumed to remain constant in real terms, rising only by inflation. The counts of trail users conducted on the days of the intercept surveys suggest a higher annual number of uses than calculated based on the infrared counts. Direct expenditures were determined based on this higher count as a way of representing a high use scenario. This scenario also includes an accelerated capture growth rate that expects trail use per mile to double by 2031 relative to the result without the accelerator. The doubling is reflective of both expectations that the trail usage will increase in-line with activities on longer trail segments and success from Table 10: Bicycling Spending Shares Type of Spending Shares Ground transportation 14.1% Full service restaurants 2.6% Limited service restaurants 2.6% Accommodations 0.1% New bicycles 48.4% Bicycle Accessories 22.2% Repair & Maintenance 10.1% Source: The Economic Impact of Bicycling in Colorado and CCEA Economic Impacts A Path to Revitalization 48 49 augmented publicity for the NRG. As evidenced by the survey, the present short segments do not attract many bicyclists relative to walkers. Those relatives will change, particularly as the NGR nears completion. For that reason and in-line with national averages for longer trails, CCEA expects the number usages by bicyclists to rise to 18.2% of the number of walker usages by 2031. These increases start from the current low bicyclist user rate and rise at a constant rate through time. This methodology delays the major impacts of bicyclists to the late 2020s and early 2030s. See Chart 5 . The points of inflection, where the slope of the spending curves change, are caused by differing rates of trail completion out to and including 2030. By 2031, total estimated direct spending by walkers, bicyclists and all other trail users are expected to reach about $42.6 million under the baseline scenario to about $201.7 million based on an accelerated growth rate. The actual spending that occur will depend on the quality and safety of the trail and the capacity of NRG merchants to service an increasing community of users. Chart 5 shows the projected trends in direct spending over time. The data suggests that the Naugatuck River Greenway has the potential to generate substantial direct user spending each year. However, because of the very limited number of bicyclists included in the survey, the actual economic impact of bicycling is likely understated. Therefore, the CCEA also looked at other sources to determine contributions to the region’s economy by bicyclists. A 2006 study by the Outdoor Industry Foundation found that bicycling accounted for $133 billion of outdoors’ $730 billion total contribution to the U.S. economy. 85 This yields a ratio of about 18.2%. It should be noted that not all bicyclists will use or want to use multiuse trails, as many experienced ridings prefer riding on road. Included in this estimate are 85 Outdoor Industry Foundation, The Active Outdoor Recreation Economy: A $730 Billion Annual Contribution to the U.S. Economy , 2006 Chart 5: Total Annual Direct Spending by Trail Users $0 $25 $50 $75 $100 $125 $150 $175 $200 $225 2016 201720182019202020212022202320242025202620272028202920302031 Total Annual Spending ($1,000,000) Accelerated Growth Scenario Current Trend Scenario Baseline Scenario A Path to Revitalization Economic Impacts 50 51 the direct spending by bicyclists during a ride, ground transportations costs to travel to and from the starting and ending points of the trip, and purchases of new equipment and maintenance of existing equipment. Due to the paucity of responses by bicyclists to the intercept survey, bicyclists’ aggregate spending is broken out according to consumption shares noted in The Economic Impact of Bicycling in Colorado 86 with general spending being further disaggregated by shares within the survey of NRG users. CCEA broke out bicyclists' spending shares as noted in Table 10 . Due to the fragmented nature of the trail development, the CCEA assumed constant growth rates for bicycling of 36.0% and 45.2%, rather than a simple linear extrapolation. That methodology takes until 2029 to reach half the impacts with the completed trail finally being fully operational in 2031. The NRG, when completed, will have several advantages that will likely increase the attractiveness to bicyclists and generate use: ► The NRG will be short enough for bicyclists to undertake round trips in a single day, but long enough to offer a challenging experience; ► The NRG will provide access to the small, compact downtowns along the Naugatuck River and generate inter-city travel to and from work; ► The NRG will provide a very diverse and interesting riding experience with multiple urban, suburban and rural sections; ► The NRG will provide access to the Naugatuck River that is not currently available. While local resident bicyclists are likely to access the trail at the closest entrance to their home, riders from outside the region are more likely to start at an end point to take full advantage of a longer trip. This would encourage the establishment of bicycle shops and convenience stores, as well as significant parking in Torrington and Derby. It would also encourage other intermediate services at which bicyclists could take a break. Those staying overnight before and/or after riding will also bolster demand for accommodations and food services. Based on this alternate method for estimating future direct spending, total direct spending by 2031 amount to $51.3 million in the current rate case and $102.6 million for the high rate scenario. The year in which this spending commences will be determined by the actual completion of trail segments. If segments linking towns which encourage commuting by bicycle rather than car are completed earlier, bicycling impacts could be brought forward. Alternatively if those commuter- segments are delayed the reverse would be true. Key Direct Expenditures and Influences Based on the foregoing discussions, the completion of the entire length of the NRG has the potential to generate substantial direct economic benefits, from the investments in construction, the value accrued by those living close to the trail (consumer surplus), health benefits derived by those who take advantage of the trail for exercise, and expenditures made by users for goods and services. Chart 6 summarizes the results from the previous discussions and compares the monetized direct effects of building the NRG by growths scenario and county. Under the three trail use scenarios, the increased growth scenario that assumes an accelerated growth in users as the trail is built, the chart itemizes the key direct effects from spending by bicyclists and all other users, the amenities of consumer surpluses and health benefits for Litchfield and New Haven counties under each scenario. The total costs to construct and maintain the NRG are depicted as a trend line 86 http://atfiles.org/files/pdf/CObikeEcon.pdf . Accessed June 09, 2016. Economic Impacts A Path to Revitalization 50 51 Chart 7: Breakdown of Cumulative Economic Benefits in 2031 by County under the Baseline Scenario Direct User Spending: Litchfield County $9.5 Direct User Spending: New Haven County $33.1 Consumer Surplus: Litchfield County $7.70 Consumer Surplus: New Haven County $26.89 Cumulative Health Benefits: Litchfield County$57.77 Cumulative Health Benefits: New Haven County $201.78 Total Construction Cost: $77.2 million (2016 -2030) Total Economic Benefits: $336.8 million (2031) Note: Values in $1,000,000s Chart 6: Estimated Cumulative Economic Benefits in 2031 by Growth Scenario and County $0.0 $100.0 $200.0 $300.0 $400.0 $500.0 $600.0 $700.0 $800.0 Litchfield CountyCurrent Trend Litchfield County Accelerated Growth New Haven County Baseline New Haven County Current Trend New Haven County Accelerated Growth Cumulative Economic Benefits ($1,000,000s) Direct User Spending Consumer Surplus Monetized Health Benefits Direct Construction A Path to Revitalization Economic Impacts 52 53 and shows that the investment to construct the trail is significantly returned and exceeded by the monetized benefits. These are the drivers of the subsequent impact analysis. Direct spending is the combined amount for all users, but as noted above the spending by bicyclists is expected to be particularly strong in later years. However, because no account is taken of the health benefits and consumer surpluses attributable to bicyclists, their economic contributions augment direct spending only. In 2031, the total economic benefits are estimated at between $336.8 million under the Baseline scenario and about $629 million under the current trend scenario. The majority of the benefits would be attributable to monetized improvements to health. The value of improved health for those who frequently use the trail is estimated at $259.6 million, with residents of New Haven County realizing about $201.8 million in health benefits and abfflout $57.8 million attained by Litchfield County residents. These values would be attained under the more conservative Baseline scenario. For the Current Trend scenario, monetized health benefits are expected to reach $503.3 million in 2031. However, direct spending by trail users on consumables on the day of their visit also yields substantial economic benefits. In 2031 alone direct spending by users is estimated at $42.6 million in the Baseline scenario and $82.6 million under the Current Trend case. Over the time frame (2016–2031) used in the study, trail users will spend a total of about $626.1 million. The total cost to construct the entirety of the NRG as plannd is estimated at just $77.2 million. Comparing this investment to just direct spending yields a benefit-cost ( B:C ) ratio of 4.18 for the very conservative Baseline scenario. If trail usage approaches the numbers estimated under the Current Trend scenario, direct spending would rise to $1.2 billion over the 2016–2031 time period, resulting in a B:C ratio of 8.11. These B:C ratios suggest a highly cost effective project and an extremely valuable investment. And these ratios do not account for the cumulative health benefits that would accrue to trail users nor the economic benefits (consumer surplus) realized by those living in proximity to the trails. When these monetized benefits are considered, the economic returns on that investment far exceed the cost to build and maintain the NRG. Under the Accelerated Growth scenario, usage of the NRG is expected rise exponentially based on the assumption that a longer and more connected trail will attract higher usage and generate significantly high economic benefits. In 2031, based on the projection that trail usage will double over current trends, the total economic benefits are estimated to exceed $1.2 billion, again the primary contributor to this amount is monetized health benefits (estimated at slightly more than $1 billion in 2031) . Clearly, from these data the key contributors to the economic value of the NRG are health benefits, consumer surplus, and direct expenditures by users for goods and services. Health benefits and consumer surplus are amenity values augmenting life and its quality. Even though the health benefits are monetized, the full value of avoiding death also encompasses avoided costs from becoming prematurely ill and hospitalization. Lost time at work and burdens borne by family and other caregivers are also health benefits not directly included in the calculations. Attaining and maximizing the economic benefits described above will depend greatly on fully investing in trail construction. Increasing the population’s awareness of access points to the NRG is also critical to encouraging participation in its safe use and upkeep. The actual distribution of the direct effects among the host communities will differ with the extent to which people utilize the trail with sufficient frequency to avoid health issues and in generating new business to serve those utilizing the NRG. Once it is built citizens will have those opportunities, and as part of this assessment, the CCEA added 10% of the value of annual construction costs for publicity and Economic Impacts A Path to Revitalization 52 53 promotion of the NRG to facilitate and encourage use of the trail. Benefits & Strategies for Businesses along Trails The construction of multiuse trails can provide economic benefits to local businesses through an increased customer base resulting from improving pedestrian and bicycle access, and by drawing customers from outside the immediate area. Trails can also offer new business opportunities by catering to the needs and desires of trail users, for example, the sale of bicycles and accessories, repair services, and refreshments. These benefits have been reported along trails across the country. A 2015 study by the Indiana University Public Policy Institute stated that more than half of businesses near the Indianapolis Cultural Trail saw an increase in customers and 48% reported increased revenues since the trail was built. 87 The report also reported numerous new businesses locating near the trail and increased hiring due to increased business attributed to the trail. In Greenville, South Carolina, most businesses along the Swamp Rabbit Trail reported a 30- to-50 percent increase in sales after the trail opened in 2011, and five businesses that relocated to be closer to the trail reported 30-to-90 percent increases in sales. 88 Similar benefits were noted in a 2015 report about the Great Allegheny Passage Trail, where businesses saw a 41% increase in trail user traffic, and attributed 67% of business expansion to positive impacts from the trail. 89 These benefits, while conceivable, are not guaranteed. It will not always be the case that “if you build it, they will come”. Current and potential business owners along trails need to think strategically about how they can best benefit from trail traffic. The Rails to Trails Conservancy (RTC )90 offers tips taken from discussions with business owners regarding trail user impacts on business. Most recommendations are related to business visibility and accessibility, as well as catering to trail users’ needs. Proper signage is crucial to notify those on the trail that businesses are nearby, requiring coordination with trail managers to provide proper wayfinding signage and maps along the trail. RTC also suggests that businesses cater to trail users by offering refreshments, healthy food, bike racks and relevant information available for visitors. They also recommended coordinating with trails groups on special events and advertising, and generally being involved with the trail user community. 91 Communities that embrace trails and provide amenities and safe connections for trail users can maximize the benefit that local businesses can realize. In order to accentuate business benefits along the Great Allegheny Passage ( GAP ) Trail in Pennsylvania, the Allegheny Trail Alliance authored Trail Towns: Capturing Trail-Based Tourism, a Guide for Communities in Pennsylvania in 2005. The guide provides a roadmap for trail communities and businesses to benefit from trail traffic by organizing efforts, developing partnerships, identifying deficiencies and provides tools to help towns evaluate and improve existing amenities and facilities. To date, 13 communities along the 87 Indiana University Public Policy Institute. (2015). Assessment of the Impact of the Indianapolis Cultural Trail: A Legacy of Gene and Marilyn Glick . Indianapolis: Indiana University. Retrieved from http://policyinstitute.iu.edu/Uploads/PublicationFiles/15-C02CulturalTrailAssessment. pdf 88 Reed, J. (2014). Greenville Health System Swamp Rabbit Trail Year 3 Findings . Greenville, NC: Furman University. Retrieved from http:// greenvillerec.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/SRT-Impact-Study-Year-3-Final.pdf 89 Trail Town Program. (2015). Trail User Survey and Business Survey Report: Great Allegheny Passage March 2015 . Greensburg, PA: Trail Town Program. Retrieved from https://gaptrail.org/system/resources/…/2015-GAP-Report.pdf 90 www.railstotrails.org 91 Lynch, J. (2012, September 27). How To: Attract Trail Traffic to Your Business. Building Trails . Retrieved January 25, 2017, from http://www. railstotrails.org/trailblog/2012/september/27/how-to-attract-trail-traffic-to-your-business/ A Path to Revitalization Economic Impacts 54 55 GAP trail have been identified as Trail Towns .92 Focus groups conducted with stakeholders along the Farmington Canal Heritage Trail as part of this study supported the idea that the trail has had economic benefit, but also reported that there could be drawbacks as well. A focus group that centered on business owners near the FCHT was held on April 5, 2016 in Simsbury, CT. The benefits reported include increased business for bike shops and some businesses that cater to trail users. Participants also reported that realtors were using the trail as a selling point and some businesses might be using the trail to help recruit talent from outside the area. Some drawbacks include drawing business away from other parts of town, especially when there are special events, and the potential for increased taxes to build and maintain the trail. Overall, the focus groups recommended similar approaches to draw trail users that have been suggested for other trails. Several main themes included proper signage, promotion, and connectivity. Participants also recommended improving downtown streetscapes to accommodate trail users, providing public restrooms and other trail user amenities, and engaging with a diverse range of businesses near the trail. More details can be found in the Appendix . Indirect and Induced Economic Impacts Direct economic impacts require inputs to identify the supply chain in the production of any good or service being consumed or used as an input. As an example, money spent by walkers and bicyclists on meals form part of the direct economic impact. The restaurant preparing those meals must purchase food, consume energy, hire and pay personnel, and expend time, etc. to prepare and serve it, and pay for the facility in which it is served. Additionally, the food may require processing or preservation before it gets to the restaurant. Production of all those goods and services forms the indirect economic impacts. In addition, those producing goods and services for trail use, such as restaurant owners and servers, spend their own incomes. All that additional spending represents the induced impacts. 93 Sequential iterations of those impacts also capture consumption from earnings from previous iterations of induced incomes. Each direct impact has its own supply chain within the economy. The total economic impact is the sum of the direct, indirect, and induced impact. 94 The CCEA utilizes the REMI model to aggregate the direct, indirect, and induced impacts in order to estimate total economic impacts of the NRG. The analysis determines total impacts for Litchfield and New Haven Counties and for the entire state. (Note: The smallest geographical unit that REMI can model is the county; therefore, town-level impacts cannot be calculated by REMI.) State impact estimates generally exceed those for the counties because some economic activity will occur in other parts of the state. Alternatively, locating the NRG with all is amenity values in New Haven and Litchfield Counties may retain some population there that otherwise might have left as well attracted others from elsewhere in the state. These changes to migratory patterns can erode population impacts elsewhere in the state thereby reducing total state impacts relative to the sum of those in New Haven and Litchfield. 92 Allegheny Trail Alliance. (2005). Trail Towns: Capturing Trail-Based Tourism – A guide for communities in Pennsylvania . Pittsburgh, PA: Schiff Printing. Retrieved 2 1, 2017, from https://gaptrail.org/assets/TrailTownManual-c7ef7d3de9ff523f6118e3f0868cf946.pdf 93 To avoid double counting, only the value added by each stage of production is additive in the sense of generating economic activity at that point in the production process of inputs into any final good or service. 94 On a technical note, because amenity values are accumulated within the REMI model through lagged variables only the annual increments to amenities enter the model. Economic Impacts A Path to Revitalization 54 55 The REMI model measures economic activity via the following economic indicators: ► Population; ► Employment; ► Personal income; ► Disposable Personal income; ► Personal income taxes; and, ► Fiscal impacts. Over the years, annual direct impacts rise in both counties to meet these heights as noted for the low case by way of example. The values are shown in 2015 dollars after converting expenditures to REMI categories. For all but amenities in the last line for each county, Table 11 describes the amounts by which various direct impacts are incremental to the base case annually, albeit each of the last two five-year periods are stated as annual averages for each quinquennial. The amenities are increment to the year in which they begin to avoid double counting because they are accumulated within the model. These amenities are used as inputs to REMI. REMI REMI is a general dynamic equilibrium economic model developed by Regional Economic Models Inc. in Amherst, Massachusetts. It estimates and calculates economic activity at the county level; it is not designed to model economic activity at the local level. Working in tandem with the national economic model from the Regional Seminar of Quantitative Economics and the University of Michigan 95, REMI simulates the county and state economies out to 2050. In doing so it establishes differential rates of growth in income and employment among counties and utilizes them to establish population shifts in response to economic opportunities. Capturing the migratory impacts allows the model to take further account of the changing demands that migrants generate over time for housing and private and public goods and services as part of establishing total economic impacts. (A more detail description of the REMI model is included in the Appendix .) Outputs generated by REMI are all incremental to a base case of what would happen without the additional stimulus. Only in flat base cases are incremental impacts additional to the previous year. Thus, if an economy is shrinking or growing, annual incremental impacts are only incremental to the base in the given year. They may exceed or wholly or partially offset year-over-year declines in the base case. In this sense readers need to be clear on the meaning and context of incremental as not being from the previous year but from the base case of what would have been the state of the economy without the construction and use of the NRG. Therefore, the economic impacts described and depicted in the following sections and accompanying charts do not represent additive or cumulative effects, but rather the incremental changes in the state and county economies due to the construction of the NRG. To simplify the assessment, the report focuses on the impacts predicted for 2031–the year after the target year for the complete construction of the NRG–and when the corridor would be fully operational and open to the public. Again, the results denote the incremental change over the base case without any investments in and use of the NRG. 95 CCEA remains an active participant in RSQE’s annual deliberations. See RSQE, The Economic Outlook for 2015 , University of Michigan at Ann Arbor, 2016. A Path to Revitalization Economic Impacts 56 57 Table 11: Annual and Five-Year Average Direct Impacts by County, 2016 through 2031 ($1,000s) Litchfield County 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Average 2022-26 Average 2027-31 Snack food manufacturing 256 292 292 955 955 2,163 2,163 2,163 Food manufacturing 4,358 4,976 4,976 16,263 16,263 36,839 36,839 36,839 Beverage and tobacco product manufacturing 4,358 4,976 4,976 16,263 16,263 36,839 36,839 36,839 Retail trade 813 928 928 3,034 3,034 6,874 6,874 6,874 Transit and ground passenger transportation 2,905 3,322 3,335 10,809 10,832 24,458 24,670 24,953 Full-service restaurants 527 602 605 1,960 1,964 4,435 4,473 4,525 Limited-service restaurants 527 602 605 1,960 1,964 4,435 4,473 4,525 Motorcycle, bicycle, and parts manufacturing 119 155 199 337 418 672 1,398 2,367 Sporting and athletic goods manufacturing 915 1,053 1,073 3,365 3,401 7,580 7,913 8,357 Civic, social, professional, and similar organizations 18 20 20 67 67 152 152 152 Recreational items 15 17 17 55 55 124 124 124 Highways and streets 195 – 2,347 – 6,029 900 1,158 1,674 Accommodation 15 18 18 57 57 129 130 131 Advertising, public relations, and related services 20 – 235 – 603 90 116 167 Nonresidential maintenance and repair 23 30 39 62 79 121 272 474 Amenities* 31,313 4,440 – 81,103 – 147,854 – – Economic Impacts A Path to Revitalization 56 57 New Haven County 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Average 2022-26 Average 2027-31 Snack food manufacturing 1,164 1,495 2,293 3,218 3,848 5,473 5,634 5,926 Food manufacturing 19,826 25,460 39,052 54,821 65,544 93,223 95,964 100,948 Beverage and tobacco product manufacturing 19,826 25,460 39,052 54,821 65,544 93,223 95,964 100,948 Retail trade 3,699 4,750 7,287 10,229 12,230 17,394 17,906 18,835 Transit and ground passenger transportation 13,216 16,980 26,017 36,513 43,704 62,134 64,912 69,494 Full-service restaurants 2,396 3,079 4,718 6,621 7,925 11,267 11,770 12,601 Limited-service restaurants 2,396 3,079 4,718 6,621 7,925 11,267 11,770 12,601 Motorcycle, bicycle, and parts manufacturing 542 727 1,020 1,400 1,840 2,532 5,858 10,302 Sporting and athletic goods manufacturing 3,978 5,122 7,813 10,952 13,171 18,694 20,734 23,708 Civic, social, professional, and similar organizations 82 105 161 226 270 384 395 415 Recreational items 67 86 131 185 221 314 323 340 Highways and streets 2,200 7,457 6,210 3,200 14,580 420 1,034 2,262 Accommodation 70 89 137 192 230 327 342 366 Advertising, public relations, and related services 220 746 621 320 1,458 42 103 226 Nonresidential maintenance and repair 103 138 192 263 349 479 1,171 2,094 Amenities* 142,464 40,482 97,666 113,306 77,055 198,886 6,567 21,685 * All variables but amenities are incremental to the base year. Amenities are for the year in which they initially occur because they are additive within the model. The closest industry to paved trail construction was highway construction so it is used in the simulation. Similarly for “Motorcycle, bicycle and parts manufacturers," albeit the NRG is for strictly non- motorized traffic. A Path to Revitalization Economic Impacts 58 59 The following sections are based on three scenarios: 1 . Baseline Scenario: Current use of the trail is based on trail counts collected by the IR counters installed at the north end of the Derby Greenway at Division Street, the north end of the Beacon Falls trail at South Main Street, and the north end of the Naugatuck trail at Bridge Street; future use of the NRG is assumed to be proportional to miles of trail completed at the outset of each year. Trail use count data was adjusted to better represent the number of individual trips. Because trail counters likely record one person twice: once entering the trail and a second time leaving; the annual use estimates were discounted by 0.5, resulting in two uses equaling one trip. To reach national shares of activities on trails, bicyclists’ participation grows exponentially to 2031, at which time both groups usage flattens out. This scenario is conservative because rates of use are expected to expand as sections of the trail are linked. Further, the health and environmental benefits from walking those derived from bicycling are excluded because of lack of sufficient data. 2 . Current Trend Scenario: This scenario projects future use based on the proportional use per miles of trail completed at the outset of each year, as described for the Baseline Scenario. The difference is the number of trail uses for 2016. In this scenario, annual trail uses are derived by summing the counts from all IR counter installations, including the counts collected by the counters in Torrington and Middlebury. This is considered a moderate approach because use rates are expected to increase as the NRG becomes more complete and interconnected but the use of the trail is based on a less constrained starting point. 3 . Accelerated Growth Scenario: Building on economic theory, this scenario is more in keeping with experience with other trails. Per mile use rates for walking and jogging activities are expanded exponentially and double by completion of the NRG in 2031. Bicycling would rise even higher as the NRG nears completion in 2031 because the interconnected trail would be more attractive to bicyclists and provide better connections to downtown areas along the trail. This scenario is considered a much more hypothetical and uncertain approach, but it is informative in providing an understanding of what is possible if the entire NRG were built. Economic Impacts A Path to Revitalization 58 59 Population The construction of the NRG is expected to retain and attract new residents to Litchfield and New Haven counties and to Connecticut as a whole because of the extent of the amenities accruing to users and increased incomes from usage of the Greenway. Chart 8 illustrates the net migration attracted by the construction of the NRG out to 2031. The model relies on the rate of trail construction as the determinant of net population changes. Under the Baseline and Current Trend scenarios, the construction of trail segments and the subsequent use of those segments reflects the anticipated construction schedule and current usage rates. This results in lines depicting net population increases being more variable. The Accelerated Growth scenario assumes increasing usage rates in response to a more connect and longer trail and explains the peaks in the shape of those trend lines. Based on current use of the NRG and constant rates of use, Connecticut population impacts peak twice at about 4,800 people in 2021 and a second time in 2031. The first reflects the earlier construction and completion of segments of the NRG in Litchfield County, while the second occurs because of trail construction in New Haven County. At these peaks, the Connecticut impacts are less than the sum of the two counties because of migration within Connecticut. Under the Accelerated Growth scenario that assumes usage rates double by 2031, 9,500 people would be retained or attracted to Connecticut. New Haven County population impacts peak at 7,700 people in 2031, while in Litchfield County the peak impact is 2,000 people. Without any further trail construction but with increasing productivity, the initiative’s impacts drop off to about two-thirds of their peak population impacts by 2050. Chart 8: Net Population Impacts in New Haven and Litchfield Counties from NRG Completion by Scenario 0 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 5,000 6,000 7,000 8,000 9,000 2016 201720182019202020212022202320242025202620272028202920302031 Net Increase in Population New Haven Accelerated Growth Litchfield Accelerated Growth New Haven Current Trend Scenario Litchfield Current Trend Scenario New Haven Baseline Scenario Litchfield Baseline Scenario A Path to Revitalization Economic Impacts 60 61 Employment The expected employment impacts follow the same basic patterns as the population trends shown above. Employment growth peaks in 2031 for the Baseline scenario with the creation of 1,157 jobs in New Haven County and 258 jobs in Litchfield County. Under the Accelerated Growth assumptions, job growth due to the construction of the NRG is projected at 4,586 jobs and 972 jobs in New Haven and Litchfield counties, respectively. The vast majority of the employment impacts are in the private sector. Job growth in the private sector accounts for about 92.5% of the total estimate of new employment. Minor public sector employment increases occur to maintain the trail and deliver public services to the increased population. The REMI model ensures that public sector revenues rise sufficiently to meet these expenditures with balanced budgets. Real Gross Domestic Product Additional employment generates increased incomes in both real and current dollars. Real Gross Domestic Product ( RGDP ) is measured in real or constant 2009 dollars net of any impacts from price changes, in order to eliminate any inflationary influences. Its pattern is similar to that of the previous two charts; however, the trend becomes less regressive after 2031 due to rising productivity through time. The impacts under the Baseline and Current Trend cases peak in 2031 at $106.2 million and $206 million in New Haven County and $21.7 million and $42 million in Litchfield County. The Accelerated Growth scenario increases the RGDP to $421.1 million in New Haven County and $85.8 million in Litchfield County. These results are illustrated in Chart 10 . To put these high growth rate scenario figures in perspective, at their peak in 2031, increases in RGDP amount to 0.7% of base levels for New Haven County, 0.9% for Litchfield County, and 0.17% for the state. Economic Impacts A Path to Revitalization 60 61 Chart 9: Net Employment Impacts in New Haven and Litchfield Counties from NRG Completion by Scenario 0 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 2,500 3,000 3,500 4,000 4,500 5,000 2016 201720182019202020212022202320242025202620272028202920302031 Net Increase in Employment New Haven Accelerated Growth Litchfield Accelerated Growth New Haven Current Trend Scenario Litchfield Current Trend Scenario New Haven Baseline Scenario Litchfield Baseline Scenario Chart 10: Net Real Gross Domestic Product Impacts in New Haven and Litchfield Counties from Construction of the NRG by Scenario $0 $50 $100 $150 $200 $250 $300 $350 $400 $450 2016 201720182019202020212022202320242025202620272028202920302031 Millions of Dollars –2009 Constant New Haven Accelerated Growth Litchfield Accelerated Growth New Haven Current Trend Scenario Litchfield Current Trend Scenario New Haven Baseline Scenario Litchfield Baseline Scenario A Path to Revitalization Economic Impacts 62 63 Personal Income Personal income is measured in current dollars inclusive of inflation. For that reason, personal income impacts continue to increase after 2031. In 2031, personal income impacts hit $160.4 million in New Haven County and $45.4 million in Litchfield County under the Baseline scenario. Under the Accelerated Growth scenario, the impacts on personal income for the individual counties reach almost $633.9 million for New Haven County and $168.2 million for Litchfield County. For the Current Trend scenario, the county results are more modest at $311 million and $88 million, respectively. In percentage terms, these gains are small. Even under the Accelerated Growth rate scenario, personal income impacts in 2031 add only 0.6% to total New Haven County personal income and 0.7% million for Litchfield County. For the Baseline and Current Trend scenarios, the county results are more modest at between 0.15% and 0.3% of personal income in New Haven County and between 0.2% and 0.35% for Litchfield County. Disposable Personal Income Disposable personal income is calculated by deducting personal income taxes and other minor adjustments from personal income. It is an important performance measure because it captures the additional freedom of choice that consumers gain and the essence of economic growth accruing to citizens. Other than the personal tax rate, which is assumed not to change, growth in disposable personal income is driven by the same forces underpinning personal income covered above. By 2031, annual personal disposable income impacts, depending on growth scenario, range between $128.9 million and $509.4 million in Nfflew Haven County. For Litchfield County, the incremental increases in disposable personal income would amount to $36.9 million in the Baseline case, $71.5 million under the Current Trend scenario and $134.8 for the Accelerated Growth scenario. For Connecticut, the incremental increase climbs to $570.2 million in the Accelerated Growth scenario suggesting that the NRG will draw some population from other Connecticut counties into New Haven and Litchfield. These results also demonstrate that the construction and operation of the NRG will substantially increase and empower consumers’ choice. Economic Impacts A Path to Revitalization 62 63 Chart 12: Disposable Personal Income Impacts in New Haven and Litchfield Counties from Construction of the NRG by Scenario $0 $100 $200 $300 $400 $500 $600 2016 201720182019202020212022202320242025202620272028202920302031 Millions of Dollars –Nominal New Haven Accelerated Growth Litchfield Accelerated Growth New Haven Current Trend Scenario Litchfield Current Trend Scenario New Haven Baseline Scenario Litchfield Baseline Scenario Chart 11: Personal Income Impacts in New Haven and Litchfield Counties from Construction of the NRG by Scenario $0 $100 $200 $300 $400 $500 $600 $700 2016 201720182019202020212022202320242025202620272028202920302031 Millions of Dollars –Nominal New Haven Accelerated Growth Litchfield Accelerated Growth New Haven Current Trend Scenario Litchfield Current Trend Scenario New Haven Baseline Scenario Litchfield Baseline Scenario A Path to Revitalization Economic Impacts 64 65 Fiscal Impacts The REMI model measures aspects of fiscal impacts on all three government levels: local, state, and federal. The projected increases in population, employment and income from constructing the NRG will generate additional personal income tax revenues, as depicted in Chart 13 . These taxes are shared between the federal and state governments, with the latter receiving about 23% of the total. The REMI model calculates the personal taxes paid by residents from their home jurisdiction: New Haven County, Litchfield County and Connecticut. The tax data are for the jurisdiction for which they were paid, and do not reflect additional public revenues accrued by the counties. Instead, New Haven and Litchfield counties receive additional revenues from personal income taxes only via transfer payments from the state or the federal governments, not directly. For New Haven County, the incremental personal taxes that flow out of the county in 2031 would be worth about $31.5 million under the Baseline scenario and increase to a value of $61 million in the Current Trend case. Based on the Accelerated Growth rate scenario, the additional tax generation would amount to $124.5 million. The tax values from Litchfield County would total about $8.5 million, $16.5 million and $33.4 mfflillion under the three scenarios. Due to migration within the state, personal income taxes paid throughout the state rise less. The bottom line is that the federal government, without even accounting for its avoided health care costs of Medicare and Medicaid, is sufficiently remunerated through increases in personal income taxes to cover its contribution to construction of the NRG. Chart 13: Fiscal Impacts in New Haven and Litchfield Counties from Construction of the NRG by Scenario $0 $20 $40 $60 $80 $100 $120 $140 2016 201720182019202020212022202320242025202620272028202920302031 Millions of Dollars -Nominal New Haven Accelerated Growth New Haven Current Trend Scenario New Haven Baseline Scenario Litchfield Accelerated Growth Litchfield Current Trend Scenario Litchfield Baseline Scenario Economic Impacts A Path to Revitalization 64 65 Community Impacts A limitation of the REMI model is that it simulates the economy only at the county level. The communities along the NRG are located in either New Haven County or Litchfield County, with the southern portion of the trail south of Watertown in New Haven County and those north of Waterbury located in Litchfield County. The REMI model was run simultaneously for both counties with each of the counties containing the NRG being impacted. While the model estimates fiscal expenditure it also balances budgets of both local and state governments so that local governments have sufficient funds to meet any incremental expenditures arising from the larger population base attracted by construction and completion of the NRG. The actual local impacts realized in each community will depend critically on the extent to which residents and outsiders use the host community’s trail and whether local businesses cater to the needs of trail users. Approaching and after NRG completion, the share of trail users, particularly bicyclists, many of whom will be tourists, 96 is likely to rise so that accommodations will expand in importance. The extent to which communities will support their sections of the NRG is unknown. However, it is likely the largest local impacts will accrue to the population residing within a half a mile of the trail Currently, about 40,950 people reside within a half mile of the open and planned route of the NRG. This is a distance that is easily accessible to both walkers and bicyclists. The farther residents 96 The UNWTO deploys three criteria simultaneously in order to characterize a trip as belonging to tourism: "The displacement must be such that it involves a displacement outside the usual environment; Type of purpose: the travel must occur for any purpose different from being remunerated from within the place visited: the previous limits, where tourism was restricted to recreation and visiting family and friends are now expanded to include a vast array of purposes; Duration: only a maximal duration is mentioned, not a minimal. Tourism displacement can be with or without an overnight stay." http://www.tugberkugurlu.com/archive/definintion-of-tourism-unwto-definition-of-tourism-what-is- tourism Chart 14: Breakdown of Total Indirect or Induced Benefits in 2031 by County under the Baseline Scenario Real Gross Domestic Product: Litchfield County $21.7 Real Gross Domestic Product: New Haven County $106.2 Personal Income: Litchfield County $45.39 Personal Income: New Haven County$160.40 Disposable Personal Income: Litchfield County$36.88 Disposable Personal Income: New Haven County $128.94 Total Construction Cost: $77.2million (2016- 2030) Total Indirect/Induced Benefits*: $333.7 million (2031) Note: Values in $1,000,000s *Includes RGDP & Personal Income A Path to Revitalization Economic Impacts 66 67 live from the trail, the less likely they would be to use the trail as frequently as those who live closer to the trail. And, usage rates would further decline if users need to drive to access the trail. As the trail is completed, settlement patterns may adjust and the number of people in close proximity of the trail can be expected to rise. Therefore, the beneficial impacts are likely to be broadly and increasingly distributed. Beneficiaries will include those who frequently use the trail, and, therefore, derive direct health benefits, and residents with easy access to the trail, who are more likely to realize consumer surpluses. The value of consumer surplus will be reflected in rising land and home values. Increases in residential land values may be fairly broadly spread among those owning land within about a half a mile of the NRG. Beyond the impacts modelled by REMI, the increase land values will add to the local property tax base and generate incremental increases in municipal revenues. Commercial land values will also be positively impacted due to the increased appeal of locales in the immediate vicinity of the NRG for health clubs, restaurants and accommodations with active scenic vistas. Due to the omission of these improved tax bases from REMI, the results will be more favorable to community financing than covered by REMI. Currently, the population of the eleven communities through which the NRG passes is about 278,102 people (2010 Census) . However, the number of people living within 10 miles of the planned route of the trail increases to about 831,149 people, nearly a quarter of the state’s population. About 57% of participants live within one mile of the trail, 27% from between one and five miles, and 5% from between five and ten miles. Since it is reasonable to assume that the closer someone lives to the trail, the more likely they would be to use it and the more often they will use it. The percentage breakdown of persons living within five miles of an open and planned trailhead by municipality is shown in Chart 15 . Waterbury has the highest proportion of people living within five miles of a trailhead at 22.7%. This is reasonable because it is the largest community along the NRG and, once completed, will be the home to 8.2 miles of the entire trail or roughly 18.6%. Chart 15: Percent of Population Living within 5 Miles of Open and Future Trailheads Litchfield/Harwinton Derby Beacon Falls Ansonia Watertown Waterbury Torrington Thomaston Seymour Naugatuck 9.7% 8.3% 10.2% 6.1% 16.0% 9.1% 3.5% 5.2% 22.7% 9.1% Economic Impacts A Path to Revitalization 66 67 While using the population percentages shown above would provide a rough approximation of the benefits accruing to host communities, the study team assessed which factors were the better predictors of trail use. The method applied multiple regression techniques to develop a trend line to predict trail uses. Interestingly, trail length within a municipality was determined not to be a good predictor of trail use. Instead, the best fit line was based on the population density of the host community and the number of people living within five miles of current trailheads. Because this method used a non-liner approach, population density was raised to a power of two (that is, squared) . Although this approach is based on participation by the present residents it does not take into account different mixes of industries among the towns. It does, however, rest on the very important amenity benefits identified earlier in this report. As noted throughout, the distribution of the magnitude of the benefits will depend critically on each town’s ability to serve participants–initially primarily walkers–but with growing numbers of bicyclists as the NRG nears completion. The disaggregation of the county-level data into town-based estimates involved a two- step approach. First the trail use by town was estimated using the regression equation; then a proportional distribution was calculated. These percentages were applied the county-level results to estimate town-by-town estimates. A second step was added to adjust the disaggregated estimates to the county total. That is, the county totals were assumed to be the control value. The percentage breakdowns are shown in Chart 16 . The disaggregated economic benefits by town are included in the Appendix . Chart 16: Percentage Breakdowns of Trail Use Based on Regression Analysis Waterbury Naugatuck Beacon Falls Seymour Ansonia Derby Torrington Litchfield/Harwinton Thomaston Watertown 29.9% 9.5% 3.4% 4.7% 21.0% 15.1% 5.0% 3.3% 4.5% 3.6% A Path to Revitalization Economic Impacts 68 69 Conclusions The economic impacts from the completion of the Naugatuck River Greenway, as derived from REMI, surveys, personal accounts and health documents are substantial and far exceed the investment in constructing and maintaining the NRG. The results illustrate how the economies of both Litchfield County and New Haven County would be affected between now (2016) when only a few sections are open, and in 2031, when the trail is projected to be completed. Through the use of REMI, the CCEA derived annual economic impacts the completion of the NRG will have on local, state, and federal economies. These are listed and summarized in Table 12 . The CCEA found that the initial construction costs and annual operating costs would be offset by the positive economic impacts the completed NRG will deliver. The NRG will offer numerous amenities and health benefits, including an increase of home values, and decrease the risk of obesity, diabetes, cardiovascular disease, and some cancers. Furthermore, visiting users will support local businesses and increase revenues for goods and services including: food, snacks, meals, equipment, gear, and possibly in the future accommodations. These direct expenditures will lead to a number of indirect economic impacts. The construction of the NRG will retain and attract people to the area and create new jobs. This dynamic will in turn positively affect numerous economic factors, such as real GDP. With an increase in employment and personal income, there will be a corresponding increase in personal income taxes paid to the state and federal governments. The federal government will realize a substantial return on its contributions to building the trail, even without accounting for avoided Medicare and Medicaid costs from improved health outcomes. In addition, the completion of the NRG will have an overall positive economic impact on the local, state, and federal economies. Table 12: Summary Total Economic Impacts in 2031 by County and Growth Scenario Baseline Scenario Current Trend Scenario Accelerated Growth Scenario Economic Indicator Litchfield New Haven Litchfield New Haven Litchfield New Haven Population 590 1,933 1,143 3,747 2,017 7,668 Percent Increase 0.30% 0.20% 0.60% 0.40% 1.05% 0.85% Employment 258 1,157 500 2,244 972 4,568 Percent Increase 0.25% 0.20% 0.50% 0.45% 0.95% 0.85% RGDP ($1,000,000 2009 Constant) $21.66 $106.24 $42.00 $311.00 $85.77 $633.88 Percent Increase 0.25% 0.20% 0.45% 0.35% 0.90% 0.70% Personal Income ($1,000,000 Nominal) $45.39 $160.40 $88.00 $311.00 $168.20 $633.88 Percent Increase 0.20% 0.15% 0.35% 0.30% 0.70% 0.65% DPI ($1,000,000 Nominal) $36.88 $128.94 $71.50 $250.00 $134.81 $509.42 Percent Increase 0.20% 0.15% 0.35% 0.30% 0.70% 0.65% Economic Impacts A Path to Revitalization 68 69 This page intentionally left balnk. 70 71 South End Buildings, Waterbury 70 71 Background Brownfields are properties with known or suspected environmental contamination, the presence of which has hindered investment on site. Some brownfield sites require remediation activities that far exceed the value of the property. In accordance with historic development patterns, many brownfields are located in areas with robust existing infrastructure in close proximity to train stations and densely settled residential neighborhoods. Although more difficult to develop than clean sites, brownfields offer abundant opportunities for infill development and neighborhood revitalization. Throughout the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, land adjacent to the Naugatuck River was fertile for industry due to its relatively flat topography, opportunities for hydroelectric power and, later, access to freight train service. These same characteristics have left a legacy of environmental contamination in and around the river. Due to the legal and financial obstacles that brownfields present to any type of development, constructing a greenway from Torrington to Derby will require proactive collaboration between brownfields officials and the Naugatuck River Greenway Steering Committee. Reimagining these sites by integrating the Naugatuck River Greenway into future developments along the river will continue to improve water quality and will encourage economic vibrancy in our communities. Environmental Regulation Governing Brownfields Environmental regulation that affects brownfield properties in Connecticut is shaped by legislation at both the state and federal levels. Most federal environmental statutes are monitored by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency ( E PA ) and its compliance monitoring programs. These programs were enabled by many pieces of legislation, including those listed below: ► Clean Air Act ( CAA ) ► Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act ( CERCLA ). ► Clean Water Act ( C WA ) ► Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act ( FIFRA ) ► Resource Conservation and Recovery Act ( RCRA ) ► Safe Drinking Water Act ( S DWA ) ► Toxic Substances Control Act ( TSCA ) In brownfields, TSCA and RCRA are familiar acronyms. The 1976 RCRA is the primary law governing the disposal of solid and hazardous wastes in the United States. According to the EPA, RCRA established programs for managing solid waste, hazardous waste, and underground storage tanks. These programs set criteria for waste disposal, prohibited open dumping of solid waste, established a system of controlling hazardous waste through EPA, and regulated underground storage tanks containing hazardous substances and petroleum. The contemporaneous TSCA A Path to Revitalization Brownfields Opportunities Brownfields Opportunities 72 73 provided EPA authority to regulate chemical substances and mixtures from production through use and disposal (with the exception of pesticides addressed under FIFRA) . Common contaminants like PCBs, asbestos, and lead based paint are regulated under TSCA and are subject to the act’s compliant remediation practices. These landmark federal acts completely changed the role the federal government plays in the health of the environment. Through decades of iterating, these acts have been shaped into what is known today to be one of the most important bodies of legislation implemented in the twentieth century. While many good outcomes were witnessed at the national level, the processes and procedures that these laws created did not solve all issues at the local level. Recognizing the financial and legal burden that contaminated sites present to all levels of government and the private sector alike, the EPA began piloting a brownfields funding program in the mid-1990s. The pilot programs were intended to direct funding to high priority sites identified by municipalities. With community support and input, the funding began a now-twenty-year history of federal investment executed by local governments on sites challenged by known or suspected contamination. In contrast to the superfund site programs conducted under CERCLA, largely led by EPA staff on vast sites with extensive contamination, these programs encouraged ground up collaboration to realize good outcomes on more manageable properties. One such pilot was the Naugatuck Valley Pilot program established in 1996. While the EPA has the primary role of regulating hazardous substances and chemical contaminants in soils, structures, and water resources, states have enacted their own legislation to fulfill requirements of federal environmental laws and to address environmental concerns specific to their respective regions. As in all U.S. states and territories, Connecticut in 1971 established the Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection ( CT DEP ) to oversee and aid in the implementation of environmental law. The CT DEP was consolidated with the Department of Public Utility Control in 2011 to create the current Connecticut Department of Energy and Environmental Protection ( CT DEEP ). In addition to federal environmental laws, Connecticut has its own set of regulations governing brownfields. The Remediation Standards Regulations ( RSRs ) set guidelines and standards that may be used at any site to determine if remediation is necessary. While the RSRs alone do not trigger any required actions, Connecticut has enacted legislation surrounding the sale and transfer of contaminated sites that does set mandatory assessment and remediation milestones. Connecticut’s property transfer law, commonly known as the Transfer Act , applies to sites that qualify as an establishment. An establishment is defined as any site meeting the following criteria stipulated by Connecticut General Statute 22a-134 Section 3): "Establishment" means any real property at which or any business operation from which (A) on or after November 19, 1980, there was generated, except as the result of (i) remediation of polluted soil, groundwater or sediment, or (ii) the removal or abatement of building materials, more than one hundred kilograms of hazardous waste in any one month, (B) hazardous waste generated at a different location was recycled, reclaimed, reused, stored, handled, treated, transported or disposed of, (C) the process of dry cleaning was conducted on or after May 1, 1967, (D) furniture stripping was conducted on or after May 1, 1967, or (E) a vehicle body repair facility was located on or after May 1, 1967; More than any other state level brownfield regulation, the Transfer Act has had perhaps the most profound effect on brownfield redevelopment in Connecticut. Since it was signed into law in 1985, the Transfer Act has been modified to address the ground level needs of developers Brownfields Opportunities A Path to Revitalization 72 73 and municipalities to realize successful remediation and redevelopment projects. CT DEEP and the Connecticut Department of Economic and Community Development ( CT DECD ) work collaboratively to oversee and implement brownfields grants and loans, voluntary remediation programs, and liability relief programs enabled by the legislature. The Abandoned Brownfield Cleanup ( ABC ) program, for example, provides liability relief and allows Transfer Act sites with limited existing environmental conditions to enter into an expedited environmental closure process. This program ensures environmental remedial management and safety while providing banks and developers more certainty and fewer administrative requirements stipulated in the original Transfer Act. In the past, many brownfield sites subject to the Transfer Act required massive investments in time and resources from the public and private sectors. Programs like the ABC make brownfields more feasible sites for all types of redevelopment projects, small and large. Despite these programs, contaminated properties often remain expensive to remediate. Many sites cost more to remediate than their worth, presenting very real financial obstacles to development. Currently, funding for brownfield sites is limited and highly competitive both at the state and federal level. Additionally, the legal complications related to ownership of these sites and the liability that ownership precipitates has led to continued abandonment and negligence. Reimagining Brownfields through the RBP In order to meet the challenges present on brownfield sites, the NVCOG hosts the Regional Brownfields Partnership ( RBP ). The RBP grew out of the Naugatuck Valley Brownfields Pilot program established by the EPA pilot funding round in 1996. Since then, the RBP has expanded to encompass 27 eligible cities and towns in west central Connecticut. The RBP is geographically diverse, representing a collection of historic downtowns, neighborhood centers, and surrounding suburban and rural communities from Torrington to Shelton north to south and Newtown to Southington west to east. Technical Assistance Available through the RBP At the request of a dues paying municipal member of the RBP, the NVCOG brownfields team may conduct initial site investigations for any given property address at no additional cost. Such work may include researching past assessments conducted on the site, reviewing any files available through CT DEEP, and meeting with local chief elected officials and staff. The process is guided by a context specific approach to each site. There are a number of physical, legal, and historical characteristics that affect how a brownfield property might move through the assessment, cleanup, and redevelopment process. These include site ownership, location, historical use, current use, past assessment history, history of transfer, water resources on or adjacent to the site, and more. If a site appears to be a good candidate for further assistance, NVCOG staff will discuss a strategy for bringing the site through the brownfields process. Additional assistance may be completed through a negotiated maximum fee to the municipality attached to a scope of services, billed on an as needed basis. Services include but are not limited to preparation of grant applications, preparation of liability relief applications, project management, and strategy development. Over the last two decades, NVCOG staff have been involved in hundreds of brownfield site inquiries. A Path to Revitalization Brownfields Opportunities 74 75 Funding Opportunities Available through the RBP As a service to members of the RBP, NVCOG has secured federal funding to assess and cleanup brownfield sites in our region. Over the past decade, NVCOG has managed more than $2.6 million in federal brownfields funding awarded and administered by EPA. Through redevelopment projects led by chief elected officials and aided by state and federal partners, this funding has leveraged more than $76 million in additional federal, state, municipal, and private investment. There are three federal resources available through NVCOG and directly to municipalities: ► EPA Revolving Loan Fund : The EPA’s Revolving Loan Fund ( RLF ) program allows NVCOG to issue grants and loans to municipalities, economic development agencies, and developers. These funds may be used for cleanup activities on eligible sites. The NVCOG was awarded $427,000 in supplemental RLF Funding FY 2016. All funding is committed at this time, however, additional funding may be made available as previous private borrowers make loan payments. ► EPA Assessment Grants : This funding may be used to develop environmental information for a site in order to better understand existing conditions. Data is leveraged to develop cleanup strategies with the ultimate goal of remediation and reuse. Most recently (FY 2016) , NVCOG was awarded a highly competitive $400,000 assessment grant. An RFQ process will be conducted in October 2016 to select a shortlist of firms that will conduct environmental assessment activities. Municipalities will be solicited for additional assessment project proposals in the coming months. ► EPA Cleanup Grants : Municipalities may request up to $200,000 in cleanup funding per parcel. Funding rounds are highly competitive and generally released on an annual basis. Cleanup funding must target sites with well-defined and immediately actionable remediation and redevelopment goals. NVCOG may assist a municipal application to EPA cleanup funding. In addition to grants offered by EPA, Connecticut offers brownfield funding assistance through the DECD’s Office of Brownfield Remediation and Development, described below: ► CT DECD Office of Brownfield Remediation and Redevelopment Municipal Grant Program : DECD grants provide funding for a range of cleanup activities and associated costs, including but not limited to abatement, assessment, demolition, and remediation. NVCOG may apply to DECD grant funding rounds on behalf of a municipality or assist in the development of a grant. Data into Action In July 2015, NVCOG brownfields staff began assembling a comprehensive brownfields inventory. Announced and released as part of the 2016 NVCOG Annual Report, the NVCOG Brownfields Inventory is a collection of data on brownfield properties located within the 27 municipality region of the RBP. Properties included in the inventory are those with existing environmental information in the NVCOG brownfields library in addition to those that have received state and federal brownfields funding through CT DEEP, CT DECD, and EPA. As of October 2016, there are 157 parcels in the NVCOG Brownfields Inventory. Staff identified brownfield sites that may be considered for future development of the Naugatuck River Greenway. Twenty-two of the 157 total parcels in the inventory have boundaries within 250 feet Brownfields Opportunities A Path to Revitalization 74 75 of the Naugatuck River. In addition to these parcels, NVCOG may review sites listed within the CT DEEP List of Contaminated or Potentially Contaminated Sites. The criteria for this list is broader. Understanding the potential risks and opportunities for each of these parcels if not already listed within NVCOG’s Brownfields Inventory will require more research. The PDF provided by CT DEEP is easily searched for specific property addresses. 97 The NVCOG brownfields team may be of assistance to municipalities as Naugatuck River Greenway projects move forward. Routing studies should leverage the information available from the NVCOG to inform feasible routing alternatives. Knowing what it will take to remediate a site is critically important. NVCOG works with environmental professionals to identify appropriate remediation strategies and to estimate these costs. This information is critical to developing working plans for remediation and redevelopment for all projects. The NVCOG brownfields team understands greenway projects improve quality of life and catalyze development. Constructing remaining portions of the Naugatuck River Greenway will add value to current brownfield sites and spur further investment nearby. In the effort to reimagine and revitalize land along the Naugatuck River, redeveloping brownfields and constructing the greenway should be made a symbiotic process with each step reinforcing the other. The NVCOG brownfields team will work with the Naugatuck River Greenway Steering Committee to realize the Naugatuck River Greenway as a network of gathering places throughout the cities and towns of the Naugatuck River Valley. The economic benefits presented in this report depend critically on the assumed increase in trail uses by walkers and bicyclists, and are based on the trail being completed and well publicized. Under the current rate scenario, use of the NRG will be at a constant level based on the number of uses recorded today. The high growth rate scenario is based on the expectation that, as the trail expands and offers an enhanced experience, use of the trail will not remain at a constant rate, but will increase exponentially and double by the time the NRG is fully constructed. However, critical to capturing the amenity benefits will be enhancing and increasing participation and use on the NRG. Trail counts show that the longer the trail and the better the access, the more people use the trail. Therefore, the most important factor in increasing use is construction of the entire planned trail. While it is being built, increased participation can be achieved through expanded health awareness, signage, and advertising, including public-private hosting of community oriented events on it. Similar trail expansions nearby would normally reduce the relative attractiveness of the NRG and the Naugatuck Valley as a place reside thereby eroding some of the benefits captured above. That threat could be offset if the combined trails expansions were complementary in the sense being able to jointly attract more tourists than they could separately. The following recommendations are based on the comments and suggestions received from the focus group portion of this study which involved stakeholders from along a similar nearby trail, the Farmington Canal Heritage Trail. Recommendation statements derived from that study are organized into the following general categories: promotion, safety, amenities, demonstrating value, trail maintenance, community and business engagement, and trail planning and routing. A limited number of quotes are provided here as examples. Full data is available in the full report in the Appendix . 97 http://www.ct.gov/deep/cwp/view.asp?a=2715&q=325018&depNav_GID=1626 A Path to Revitalization Brownfields Opportunities 76 77 Naugatuck River Wildlife, Naugatuck 76 77 Promotion ► Use environmental education to increase appreciation for the outdoors ► Develop events to promote trail use “It’s about promoting [the trail] and doing events that would get people out there using it.” “I’m sure there are youth groups of some kinds in the neighborhoods, if you build youth events around use of the trail and environmental projects, those people will keep using the trails and make users feel safer. You get the youth involved early on I’m sure there’s a way we can make the whole trail feel good for people…” ► Consider using social media ► Create a consistent brand including frequent and standardized signage ► Get more people using the trail to increase safety “As you get more and more and more people on the trail it becomes self-policing. So not only do you have much less crime or no crime, in the case of the vast majority of the trail system that I know of, you get less graffiti, you get less kids kicking in fence rails, all of the stuff that traditionally we used to have in abundance 15 years ago is almost all gone because there’s so many people using the trail that it is in fact self-policing” “Again the best solution is getting more people on the trail and more eyes on the trail.” ► Develop citizen/volunteer patrol programs ► Engage public safety officials in using trails ► Be attentive to traffic safety issues ► Provide a way for users to locate themselves in case of emergency “We painted mile markers into the trail, so that if you’re reporting to the police department or maintenance you can locate it.” “The medallion either gives you the exact mileage from a specific point, or in some cases it’s a color, but whatever it is that’s important” ► Consider emergency access points ► Ensure cell phone access A Path to Revitalization Recommendations Recommendations 78 79 Amenities ► The three B’s: bike racks, benches and bathrooms ► Develop good traffic signage and crosswalks ► Maps and consistent way finding signage are essential “We have kiosks, information kiosks, along the trail that not only, we contribute particularly to the installation of those but we also keep them up. The advocacy groups keep those the information those up to date- maps notices and so forth. “ “We started with way finding signage. Eventually we’ll get municipal signage, library this way, town hall that way. Eventually we will move into commercial signage. But you have to be really careful doing that. We don’t want to make your trail to look like Las Vegas.” ► Ensure adequate parking at trail access points ► Adjust downtown streetscapes to accommodate Greenway participants Demonstrating Value ► Collect data about trail use (all statements related to this topic can be found separately in the section on collecting data and measuring impact). ► Educate leaders, planners, economic developers and citizens about how the trail impacts your community “And that’s a big part of becoming a bicycle-friendly community …not only attracting residents to town but attracting businesses. Quality of life is important to the younger generation coming in. They want places where they can walk and bike and maybe commute to work three or four miles. That’s an enormous part of that whole initiative- it isn’t just about kids in school now, its about the businesses.” ► Look for low-cost, high visibility projects Trail Maintenance ► Use technology like SeeClickFix to get the right information to the right people ► Create a plan and budget for maintenance from the start “Definitely have the maintenance people at the table while the design is going through, so you can fix these maintenance issues beforehand.” “Have the public safety at the table at the beginning for all of the natural resources or conditions involved, and then they can plan for their budgets.” “Involve the police early. They need sightlines so they can see into certain parts of the trail, and they need appropriate access to the trail. Most of that isn’t necessary during the day, but at night.” ► Know who your users are and plan for winter maintenance ► Engage volunteers in maintaining the trail ► Choose materials that are graffiti resistant Recommendations A Path to Revitalization 78 79 Community & Business Engagement ► Find champions, involve community groups and get them to take ownership “One is that you have mavens in the community that will stir the pot a lot and keep everything moving. You have to have those dedicated volunteers to make everything work. If you don’t it won’t.” “And if all of the communities that abut that trail start their bicycle-friendly community activity now, set up a committee, start learning what it really takes to become a bike friendly community, and start assembling a collection of people who have very diverse skill sets or instance. For instance, real estate, public works engineer, someone in marketing, someone that’s tied into the economic development commission so that you start getting all of these brains working in the same direction. The police, the board of education, businesses…” ► Engage a diverse range of businesses and create ways to connect them to the trail “The businesses have to be supportive and be supported. You can’t keep coming to the business and asking for donations if you’re not getting, like putting up a little sign that says “restaurants this way.” “But the trail wouldn’t be successful if the businesses weren’t supporting the people to get repeat customers. So the businesses have to rally around it and so forth. Because the repeat businesses …and over the past three years over the summer time a lot of it is repeat business.” “But getting business on board earlier, we didn’t do that, because we were just learning ourselves about how to build a bicycle friendly community. We were focusing on the low hanging fruit. And I think that in hindsight if we were to start all over again knowing what we know now, we would. I hate to use the word propaganda, but a lot of times people need to hear things two or three times before they connect the dots.” Involve schools and young people “… we now have bicycles in the PE programs in the school. We’ve also trained 100 high school kids last year and 85 the year before for programs in the summer. So it takes off …The growth has been phenomenal.” ► Integrate the trail into other community planning efforts from the beginning “Finally our public works people are they are so connected to complete streets no they have bought into the concept…every new project they are looking at through complete streets policy eyes. And we should have done that so much longer ago.” ► Collaborate with neighboring communities on cost sharing and to create consistency in signage ► Build a culture of support for the trail in your community “At the end of the day, it’s part of the network in this community that’s just critical. It’s not just the trail. And that’s I think what’s coming through here. I’m a big picture guy. It’s the river. It’s the quality of the community which is critical.” ► Be patient and go slow A Path to Revitalization Recommendations 80 81 ► Look to other communities and trails as examples ► Use the trail to stimulate innovative ideas Trail Planning and Routing ► Create a destination and an enjoyable experience for users ► Create safe routes for local users from the trail to neighborhoods, transit points and community amenities “Finding safe routes for people to the town center is the key.” “The connectivity between bike and transit is becoming more and more important.” “It isn’t just the old school concept of the linear park, but it’s an alternative transportation corridor. You can actually get from one place to another, to the store, on your bike or by walking. And that’s the other huge issue here is that if you’re talking about multimodal connectivity this would be part of it.” ► Make accommodations for trees ► Mitigate user conflicts ► Make accommodations for water and drainage issues ► Integrate the trail with parks and playgrounds to increase use “The other thing I’ve seen that helps with young families is the Rotary Park here. So as you think about the greenway …are there plans for parks and playscapes along the way as another family attraction? “ “It’s the integration of playgrounds, the integration of the town maintenance staff, …. It’s the integration of businesses…” ► Consider costs and benefits of paved or stone dust trails and consistency of surface ► Look to other communities and trails as example ► Use the trail to stimulate innovative ideas Recommendations A Path to Revitalization 80 81 Many of the recommendations provided in this section are reinforced by the Surgeon General’s Report which establishes five goals promoting health, of which three are related to generating positive publicity: ► Design communities that make it safe and easy to walk for people of all ages and abilities: ► Design and maintain streets and sidewalks so that walking is safe and easy; ► Design communities that support safe and easy places for people to walk; ► Promote programs and policies to support walking where people live, learn, work, and play: ► Promote programs and policies that make it easy for students to walk before, during, and after school; ► Promote worksite programs and policies that support walking and walkability; ► Promote community programs and policies that make it safe and easy for residents to walk; ► Provide information to encourage walking and improve walkability: ► Educate people about the benefits of safe walking and places to walk; ► Develop effective and consistent messages and engage the media to promote walking and walkability; and, ► Educate relevant professionals on how to promote walking and walkability through their profession. 98 98 Op cit. Surgeon General pp. 33-42. A Path to Revitalization Recommendations 82 83 Naugatuck River Wildlife 82 83 To realize the economic benefits presented in this analysis, the host communities will have to make a substantial investment in the construction of planned sections. In total, the NRG is estimated to cost an additional $77.2 million to complete. Funding trails locally can work in some communities and local funding does offer some advantages: less stringent design standards and regulatory requirements of local funds, as compared to state or federal funds. Local control of the design and construction are usually reflected in lower costs and shorter project completion times. However, with high projected construction costs, municipalities may not be able to commit 100% local funds to building NRG sections; often communities are hard pressed to obtain the 20% match of federal funds for these projects. Therefore, funding is likely to come from a variety of sources. The following summarizes the current funding programs that may be used to implement multi-use trail projects. Funds need to be accumulated for all aspects of trail development, from concept planning, design, property acquisition (if needed) and construction. While the state and federal government have greatly increased the funding levels for non-traditional transportation projects, the amount of funds available to construct multi-use trails remains very limited, highly competitive and insufficient to meet all of the needs of communities wanting to build trail systems. However, as presented throughout this assessment, the investment in trails returns substantial benefits, in terms economic measures, improved health, and better quality of life, that far exceed the direct costs incurred by the communities. State Programs The state of Connecticut recognized the funding needs for bicycle and pedestrian programs and included bicycle and pedestrian trails as a priority in the CTDOT’s long term goals for transforming the transportation infrastructure in the state, including: ► Completion of gaps in the regional trail system; and ► Establishment of a program to support walkability and pedestrian urban centers. Specifically, the 25-year vision for transportation improvements calls for: ► A $30.0 million investment to maintain, in a state of good repair, the statewide regional trail network by funding $1.2 million per year for 25 years for trail maintenance. The program will leverage other funding sources for trail construction and help address a longstanding issue of deferred maintenance. ► Implementing a new program to implement pedestrian and bicycle improvements in urban centers. The program would be funded at $10.0 million per year for 25 years to help construct sidewalks and on and off-road bike improvements in the State’s urban centers making them more walkable, livable, and safe. The focus will be on creating networks of bicycle and pedestrian mobility and access. A Path to Revitalization Funding Opportunities Funding Opportunities 84 85 ► Completing gaps in the statewide regional trail network, including the spine of the East Coast Greenway and major regional trail systems. Completing gaps in the statewide and regional trail system enhances opportunities for recreation, as well as providing transportation options for non-motorists. The program would be funded at $10.0 million per year for 25 years. ► A $250 million investment to construct a multi-use, recreational trail along the Merritt Parkway (Route 15) from the New York state line to the Housatonic River. These goals and actions are highlighted in the CTDOT’s report: LET’S GO CT! Connecticut’s Bold Vision for a Transportation Future , February 2015. To realize this vision, the CTDOT must work with the state legislature and Bond Commission to authorize these programs. As part of the state’s 5-year ramp-up of transportation investments, two programs have been initiated and partially funded. The state also funds a recreational trails program that, in 2015, supplanted the National Recreational Trails Program administered by the Federal Highway Administration. Community Connectivity Program The program is administered through CTDOT and provides funds to municipalities for various projects and initiatives that enhance safety, mobility and access for bicyclists, pedestrians and persons with disabilities. The intent of the program is to make community centers more bicycle friendly, walkable, safe, livable, and prosperous. The program will help pay for various improvements such as the construction of sidewalks, pedestrian crossings, intersection improvements, ADA accommodations, bike lanes, sharrows, signage, and roadway safety audits, as well as, other measures. As part of the CTDOT’s ramp-up, $3.2 million was authorized in 2016. The CTDOT plans to expand the program to an annual program amount of about $10 million per year on average. Multipurpose Trails Program The program is administered through CTDOT and focused on closing gaps in the State’s major trail corridors, as well as, addressing a longstanding issue of deferred trail maintenance. The program will allow for the strategic infill of the state’s prioritized trail network, including the spine of the East Coast Greenway and other major regional trail systems. State funds will be used to leverage other funding sources for trail construction. As part of the CTDOT’s ramp-up, $7.7 million was authorized in 2016. The CTDOT plans to expand the program to total $56.0 over the next five years. Connecticut Recreational Trails Program The program is administered through the Connecticut Department of Energy and Environmental Protection ( CTDEEP ) and provides funds to private nonprofit organizations, municipalities, state departments and tribal governments. Program funds can be used for the following activities: ► Planning, design and construction of new trails (motorized and non-motorized); ► Maintenance and restoration of existing trails (motorized and non-motorized); ► Access to trails by persons with disabilities; ► Purchase and lease of trail construction and maintenance equipment; Funding Opportunities A Path to Revitalization 84 85 ► Acquisition of land or easements for a trail, or for trail corridors; and ► Operation of educational programs to promote safety and environmental protection as related to recreational trails. Project proposals and applications are solicited on an annual basis, and awards, pending the availability of funds, are made based on a competitive selection process. A 20% local match of the grant amount is required, but it can be in the form of in-kind services. Other State Funding Opportunities In addition to the above bicycle and pedestrian focused programs, there are several other state programs that, while not specifically bicycle and pedestrian programs, include transportation alternative projects as eligible for funding: Local Transportation Capital Improvement Program The Local Transportation Capital Improvement Program ( LOTCIP ) program was authorized under Section 74 of Public Act 13-239 and allocates State funds for capital improvements to local roads that would be eligible for funding under the federal-aid highway program. The program is administered through the Councils of Governments ( COGs ). The COGs are responsible for soliciting project proposals from their member municipalities, reviewing applications, and ranking and setting regional priorities. The program requires the municipal sponsor to fund the design phase, but the acquisition of any right-of-way and construction of the project are 100% state funded. Because of these funding arrangements, the LOTCIP program is expected to entail fewer constraints and requirements, thereby, streamlining project delivery and limiting costs. Because the LOTCIP program mirrors the federal aid program in terms of project eligibility, bicycle and pedestrian projects can be implemented under the program. The one caveat is that the total LOTCIP funds allocated to all multi-use trail projects in a region are expected to be limited to a reasonable level. In other words, while there is no explicit cap on the use of LOTCIP funds for transportation alternative projects, the COGs are expected to allocate most of the LOTCIP funds to road projects and restrict the expenditure of LOTCIP funds to a few high priority transportation alternative projects. Urban Action Bonds The State Bond Commission has the power, under Section 4-66c of Connecticut General Statutes, to authorize the issuance of bonds for economic development, community conservation and quality-of-life capital projects for localities that are determined to be eligible. For the purposes of this statute, eligible municipality means a municipality which is economically distressed, classified as an urban center, classified as a public investment community or in which the State Bond Commission determines that the project in question will help revitalize the community. Small Town Economic Assistance Program The Small Town Economic Assistance Program ( STEAP ) is authorized under Section 4-66g of Connecticut General Statutes and funds economic development, community conservation and quality-of-life capital projects for localities that are ineligible to receive Urban Action (CGS Section 4-66c) bonds. This program is managed by the Office of Policy and Management, and the grants are administered by various state agencies. A Path to Revitalization Funding Opportunities 86 87 Federal Programs The US Department of Transportation ( USDOT ) promotes safe, comfortable and convenient walking and bicycle for people of all ages and abilities. Federal transportation acts provide funding assistance under various program to states to implement a wide range of improvements to the surface transportation network. Bicycle facilities, including bike lanes on roads, paved shoulders on roads for bicycle use, recreational trails, road diets, signed bicycle routes, multi-use trails, and trail bridges, are eligible for funding under all major federal aid programs. In December, 2015, the Fixing America’s Surface Transportation ( FAST ) Act was signed into law and replaced the previous federal transportation act ( MAP-21 ). The FAST Act authorizes federal spending for transportation improvements over the next five years through the end of Federal Fiscal Year 2020 (September 30, 2020). The FAST Act replaced the stand-alone Transportation Alternatives Program that was authorized in the MAP-21 Act with a set-aside of funds under the Surface Transportation Block Grant ( STBG ) program. The project eligibility and program requirements were unchanged. The FAST Act maintained bicycle and pedestrian project eligibility in the other federal aid transportation programs. Surface Transportation Block Grant Program The Surface Transportation Block Grant ( STBG ) program provides flexible funding that may be used by States and localities for projects to preserve and improve the conditions and performance on any Federal-aid highway, bridge and tunnel, including bridges on any public road, pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure, and transit capital projects, including intercity bus terminals. Program funds are allocated to states as a lump sum but divided by statutory percentages to apportioned programs. About half of STBG funds are sub-allocated to urbanized areas based on their relative population, referred to as the STBG: Urban program, and the other 50% of the STBG funds can be used anywhere in the state, referred to as the STBG: Anywhere program. Before these drawdowns are made, funds are set-aside for Transportation Alternatives (see below). The MAP-21 Act added “recreational trails projects” as eligible activities under the STP and TAP programs. This eligibility was continued in the FAST Act; therefore, it is not required to demonstrate a transportation purpose in order to be eligible for STBG funds. Transportation Alternatives Set-Aside Program The FAST Act eliminated the Transportation Alternatives Program ( TA P ), originally authorized in MAP-21, as a stand-alone program and replaced it as a set-aside of STBG program funding. These set-aside funds can be used to implement all projects and activities that were previously eligible under TAP. Eligible activities encompass a variety of smaller-scale transportation projects, such as pedestrian and bicycle facilities, recreational trails, safe routes to school projects, community improvements, such as historic preservation and vegetation management, and environmental mitigation related to stormwater and habitat connectivity. Fifty percent of the TAP set-aside funds are sub-allocated to urbanized areas, with larger UZAs (greater than 200,000 in population) authorized to select projects. For smaller urbanized areas, project selection rests with the state. The remaining set-aside funds can be allocated to anywhere in the state; however, the state has the ability to flex up to 50% of the set-aside funds to the STBG: Anywhere program. In all cases, a competitive selection process is required. Funding Opportunities A Path to Revitalization 86 87 Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Program The FAST Act continued the Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality ( CMAQ ) program to provide a flexible funding source to State and local governments for transportation projects and programs to help meet the requirements of the Clean Air Act. Funding is available to reduce congestion and improve air quality for areas that do not meet the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS ) for ozone, carbon monoxide, or particulate matter (nonattainment areas) and for former nonattainment areas that are now in compliance (maintenance areas) . CMAQ program funds may be used for bicycle and pedestrian activities, including constructing bicycle and pedestrian facilities (paths, bike racks, support facilities, etc.) that are not exclusively recreational and reduce vehicle trips. This requirement is different from the STBG program. Multi-use trail projects funded under CMAQ are required to demonstrate that they are primarily intended to provide a transportation function. In addition, these projects must also demonstrate that reductions in air pollutant emissions will result. National Highway Performance Program The National Highway Performance Program ( NHHP ) provides funds for improvements to highways included on the National Highway System ( NHS ). Under MAP-21 the NHS was enhanced to include: interstate highways, other expressways and all principal arterials. The NHPP was continued under the FAST Act. Bicycle projects funded under the NHPP must benefit an NHS corridor. FTA Section 5307 Capital Program The Federal Transit Administration apportions funds under the Section 5307 Capital Program to designated recipients for public transportation capital and planning projects. Bicycle and pedestrian projects funded under this program must provide access to transit and, for a bicycle project, must be within a three-mile radius of a transit stop or station. If the project is beyond a three-mile radius, it must be within a distance that people could be expected to safely and conveniently bike to use to the particular station. For pedestrian projects, the distance criterion is ½ mile. Examples of eligible bicycle activities, include creating defined or dedicated bicycle routes to transit, installing bike racks and shelters at stations, and providing equipment for public transportation vehicles. Transit-related bicycle projects require only a 10% non-federal share. Innovative Financing USDOT permits the use of innovative financing techniques supplement and leverage available federal aid dollars. Section 323 of the National Highway System Designation Act of 1995 included provisions for innovative financing techniques that allow donated funds, material and services, the value of land donated by private individuals and companies for the right-of-way, and the value of the construction of sections of the trail completed without federal participation to be used as the non-federal matching share. Typically, the local sponsor is required to provide a 20% match of federal aid funds. The Innovative Financing techniques can provide a credit for the non-traditional funding sources as the non-federal match to federal funds. An example of this approach to funding a multi-use trails is the Pequonnock River Trail ( PRT ) through the towns of Monroe and Trumbull and the city of Bridgeport. Implementation and construction of the PRT has been funded mainly by federal aid funds authorized under USDOT programs, supplemented by state grants. Because of the availability of local cash to match the A Path to Revitalization Funding Opportunities 88 89 federal assistance, a variety of non-traditional funding sources were obtained to leverage the federal funds and an Innovative Financing Plan (IFP ) was developed for the trail project. The IFP was based on establishing a single federal aid project for the entire Pequonnock River Trail. This approach allowed any non-federal expenditures on the various sections to be accounted and credited as part of an overall project instead of separate projects for individual sections. It also stipulated that any credits designated in the IFP can be allocated to match future federal allocations for the design and construction of remaining sections of the trail, as the funds become available, regardless of town-specific locations. The following non-traditional sources were used to leverage federal funds: ► The value of a donated, defined permanent easement through an office park in Monroe was credited to the non-federal match requirement. The private developer of the office park donated a defined, permanent 25-foot easement with the right to build and maintain a multi-use trail through development. ► In addition to the value of the donated easement, the private developer constructed the section through the office. The work was completed without federal participation and the value of the construction was credited to the non-federal match requirement. ► The Town of Trumbull constructed the section of the trail through Twin Brooks Park without federal participation, using primarily town forces. The value of this construction was credited to the non-feral match requirement. Work included excavating and grading, labor, material and equipment. The value of the work was credited at $492,000. Combined, the value of these non-traditional sources leveraged the federal funds to construct other sections of the trail, including an approximate one-mile section in lower Trumbull and 1.1 mile section in Bridgeport. The IFP authorized the value of the work completed in Monroe to be used as the non-federal match for the new project sections in Trumbull and Bridgeport. Funding Open Trail Sections Currently, four sections of the NRG have been constructed and are open to the public: Derby Greenway, Ansonia Riverwalk, Beacon Falls and Naugatuck Greenway. And, one section (the Seymour Linear Park and Greenway) will be constructed during the spring of 2017. All five sections were funded under a federal-aid transportation program, with 80% of the costs reimbursed by the federal program and 20% paid by the municipal sponsor. Derby Greenway The Derby Greenway, which was the first completed section of the Naugatuck River Greenway, had its beginnings in a proposed Housatonic Riverbelt Greenway by the Housatonic Valley Association ( H VA ) in 1992. The Olde Birmingham Business Association was a driving force in efforts to create the greenway and began to work with the HVA on the plan to align the Housatonic Riverbelt Greenway through Derby’s downtown. At the same time, another major grassroots community planning effort was underway that was looking at all aspects of quality of life in the Valley called Healthy Valley 2000 . Because of the flood control walls that line the Naugatuck River and the existence of O’Sullivan’s Island, the idea of developing a greenway at the juncture of the Housatonic and Naugatuck Rivers was suggested by several members of that group. The use of the flood control walls presented a unique opportunity to construct a greenway because the right-of-way was already under public ownership and the top of the walls was already Funding Opportunities A Path to Revitalization 88 89 being used by walkers and joggers and was wide enough to accommodate a 10-foot wide trail. To determine the feasibility of constructing a paved trail on the top of the flood walls, a study was commissioned. The findings of the study concluded that a trail could be built as long as the integrity of the walls was maintained. The City of Derby, under then Mayor Marc Garofalo, applied for funding under the federal Transportation Enhancement Program and initiated the project. A critical complication, however, was the presence the Waterbury branch rail line ( WBL ) and the Maybrook rail freight line and the need to cross the tracks. To cross the WBL, a short tunnel was created under the tracks at a site of an existing bridge. The tunnel was needed to protect trail users from the open rail bridge. The crossing of the Maybrook line required to construction of a large overpass of the tracks, with long approach ramps to maintain a shallow grade. A third constricting point was at the crossing under Route 34. The road is elevated over the WBL tracks, and, to avoid a steep grade to Route 34 and then a crossing of the highway, it was decided to align the trail next to the tracks. To separate the trail and tracks, a wall was built. In the second phase of its development, Derby also moved to develop the entrances to the Greenway as special landmarks. At the Division Street side, a 100-year-old fountain was restored and it was surrounded with a beautiful plaza that now includes the Derby Hall of Fame. Bricks were sold to the public to raise funds and build a relationship with those who bought the bricks as memorials to family members and special events. Benches were also added and again the public had the opportunity to purchase memorial plaques on the benches. At the Main Street entrance to the trail, two historic water wheels were salvaged from one of the old factories being demolished along Main Street and placed at the entrance as a reminder of the industrial heyday of the center of town. That area will be developed into a more formal plaza as part of the major widening and reconstruction of Main Street. A new project is being initiated to renovate and rehabilitate the Derby-Shelton Bridge to create a pedestrian plaza and cycle-track. The new facilities will be connected and integrated into the Derby Greenway. The project is being funded in part by a $2 million state bond, with the remainder of the construction costs being financed by federal transportation dollars. Middlebury Greenway Completed in 2000, the Middlebury Greenway extends 4.4 miles east to west parallel to Route 64 from near the Woodbury town line to Route 63 near the Waterbury city line. The trail follows the route of a trolley bed that was in use by The Connecticut Company trolley line between 1908 to the 1930s, carrying passengers between Waterbury and Woodbury, and stopping at the popular Lake Quassapaug amusement park and resort area. Planning the development of a recreational trail along the old trolley route first began in 1985 and advocated by First Selectman Edward St. John. A greenway committee was formed, working first on public outreach and education. Early on, there was some public apprehension about the idea, and public outreach was critical to gain support from residents. Since the trolley right of way had been inactive for over fifty years, ownership of much of the line had reverted back to adjacent property owners. Because of the number of parcels involved, there were some issues gaining permissions and easements to use the trolley bed for the greenway. While most easements were given willingly, eminent domain was used to acquire a few properties and the town purchased two properties to allow the construction of some critical trail features. Middlebury obtained funding through the federal Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act ( ISTEA ) under the Transportation Enhancements ( TE ) program. The federal aid funds were A Path to Revitalization Funding Opportunities 90 91 and used to purchase materials for the construction of the trail, with the town’s engineering department designing most of the trail and its public works department personnel building it. Some of the more sensitive or difficult sections were designed by a consultant with local funding, including areas where the trail was in close proximity to Route 64 and where a tunnel was used to carry the trail under Route 188. In these sensitive or complex areas, the CTDOT required additional engineering that the town was not able to provide. The trail was designated an official Connecticut Greenway by the CT Greenways Council in 2002. There has been interest in Woodbury to continue the trail along the trolley bed, through newly acquired open space to US Route 6 in the town’s center. Middlebury is currently investigating an extension of the greenway along Route 63, and a redesign of Exit 17 on I-84 by CTDOT will include a greenway extension along a new service road to Chase Parkway in Waterbury. First Selectman St. John maintains that the greenway has been one of the most popular projects he has worked on. Despite early opposition to the project, the heavily used trail has been almost universally embraced by residents since it was completed. 8 Funding Opportunities A Path to Revitalization 90 91 Grants from the U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, and the Federal Transit Administration, and by contributions from member municipalities of the Naugatuck Valley Council of Governments (NVCOG) financed this analysis by NVCOG in partnership with the University of Connecticut College of Agriculture, Health and Natural Resources Department of Extension and The Connecticut Center of Economic Analysis. The study has been graciously further funded through grants by the Connecticut Community Foundation, Valley Community Foundation, Katharine Matthies Foundation, and the Community Foundation of Northwest Connecticut with support from the Northwest Hills Councils of Governments. For a physical copy, contact the Naugatuck Valley Council of Governments: 49 Leavenworth Street, 3rd Floor Waterbury, CT 06702 nvcogct@nvcogct.org • (203) 757-0535 www.nvcogct.org EN Translations available by request. ES Traducciones disponibles bajo petición. IT Traduzioni disponibili su richiesta. PL Tłumaczenia dostępne na zamówienie. PT Traduções disponíveis mediante solicitação. SQ Përkthime në dispozicion me kërkesë. ZH 可根据要求提供翻译。

Regional Plan of Conservation and Development for the Central Connecticut Regional Planning Agency (CCRPA) 2013

1 P LA N 1 Contents Introduction ………………………….. ………………………….. ………………………….. ………………………….. ………………………….. ………………………….. …………………….. 2 General requirements ………………………….. ………………………….. ………………………….. ………………………….. ………………………….. ………………………….. …. 21 Levels of development intensity ………………………….. ………………………….. ………………………….. ………………………….. ………………………….. ……………. 27 Plan area maps ………………………….. ………………………….. ………………………….. ………………………….. ………………………….. ………………………….. …………….. 38 Appendixes ………………………….. ………………………….. ………………………….. ………………………….. ………………………….. ………………………….. …………………… 46 Disclaimer and a cknowledgements The Central Connecticut Regional Planning Agency prepared this Plan. For information about the Agency , see Appendix D: About CCRPA .This plan (and all related documents) are subject to chang e. This version was released on October 7 th, 2 013 and adopted by CCRPA’s Board on October 3 rd, 2 013 . The work that provided the basis for this publication was supported by funding under an award with the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. The substance and findings of the work are dedicated to the public. The author and publisher are solely responsible for the accu racy of the statements and interpretations contained in this publication. Such interpretations do not necessarily refle ct the views of the Government. I ntroduction For centuries, resources were treated as limitless . Years of growth, however, are resulting in extraordinary pressure on the environment that sustains all life. If the vitality of the environment and of the societies and economy that depend on it are to be guaranteed over the long term, natural resources must be used sustainably. This plan takes a step in that direction, by laying out a vision for the sustainable use of the most basic resource of all ,land over the next ten years i ncentral Connecticut. 3 About this p lan This plan is intended to fulfill in part CCRPA’s obligations under the Sustainable Knowledge Corridor and to meet the requirem ents of Section 8.35a of the Connecticut General Statutes, which states: “At least once every ten years, each regional planning agency shall make a plan of conservation and develop- ment for its area of operation, showing its recommenda- tions for the general use of the area including land use ….” This Plan represents the culmination of over 45 years of land use planning by CCRPA .CCRPA adopted the region’s first Plan of Conservation and Development (POCD) on May 1, 1969. This Plan supersedes all preceding plan s, including the to -now current plan (adopted May 3, 2007). CCRPA developed this plan in consultation with a variety of stakeholders intended to reflect the region’s diversity. Among others, these include its member municipalities , the cities of Bristol and New Britain ,and the towns of Berlin, Burlington, Plainv ille, Plymouth, and Southington. Founded in 1966, one of CCRPA’s core responsibilities is to draw up regional plans such as this one .In addition to a regional POCD, CCRPA also develops and mainta ins several other regional plans. These include:  Long -Range Transportation Plan (LRTP) , which charts a course for and enables funding for the future of the region’s transportation system  Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy (CEDS) ,which prioritizes and provides access to funding for economic development projects  Natural Hazard Mitigation Plan, which prepares the region for storm and disaster damage and provides access to funds for mitigation and reconstruction CCRPA also conducts an d coordinates a variety of studies and grants for its member municipalities. This Plan was not created in a vacuum. CCRPA received considerable assistance and support from local, regional, state, and federal partners .Funding for the Sustainable Knowledge Corridor, including development of this Plan, in part was provided by the Sustainable Communities In- itiative, a program jointly run by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Deve lopment, Department of Trans- portation, and Environmental Protection Agency .As part of the Sustainable Knowledge Corridor (SKC) project, CCRPA, the Capitol Region Council of Governments (of 4 Hartford), and the Pioneer Valley Planning Commission (of Springfield) are updating regional plans to integrate sustainability principles. Public engagement was key to the development of this plan. In addition to consultation with local governments , public input was sought to shape the content of this plan. Input gathered during other planning exercises was taken into consideration, and new input was sought through public meetings. The function of the p la n This is the regional land use plan for cent ral Connecticut . It is not a plan of transportation, economic development, or hazard mitigation; separate plans (developed by the same agency and using the same physical boundaries) cover those topics. This plan is designed to complement those existing doc uments, not to duplicate their content. It shares many of the same principles of sustainability , such as prioritizing maintenance of existing facilities over new development ,that those plans embrace , but applies them to land use . For the purposes of the S KC, this plan should be read in concert with those plans (namely the regional LRTP, CEDS, and related subject area plans). The primary purpose of the plan is to provide guidance to local decision makers when their land use actions may have regional impacts . Co nnecticut General Statutes (Sec . 8 -3b ) require municipalities to give 30 -day advance written notice to a regional planning organization (RPO) prior to adopting a zone change or change to zoning regulations that will affect property within five hundred feet (500’) of a municipality in that RPO’s area. The RPO is directed to study the proposal and submit comments before a public hearing on the proposal. For proposed subdivisions that abut or include another municipality, Mattatuck Trail and Buttermilk Falls in Plymouth 5 the statutes (Sec. 8 -26b) likewise require the municipality to inform and give the RPO the opportunity to comment. By law (Sec. 8 -23(f)4), municipalities must also submit proposed amendments or revisions to local POCDs, with a 65 -day advance, to the RPO for review and comment. In all three cases, RPO comments are purely advisory. Regional plans also serve as a bridge between local and State plans .Public Act 10 -138 requires the Connecticut Off ice of Policy and Management (OPM) to implement a “cross -acceptance” policy for the Connecticut POCD. This policy is defined as “a process by which planning policies of different levels of government are compared and dif- ferences between policies are reconc iled with the pur- pose of attaining compatibility between local, regional and state plans.” As part of this process, this plan and the state plan will be compared and differences reconciled. As such, this plan may be able to influence state policies. The me chanics of the plan Being regional in nature, a broader approach to land use is required in this plan than would be in a municipal plan. CCRPA’s mandate is to encourage regional cooperation and ensure that development in one municipality does not burden or disadvantage surrounding communities. This plan is not concerned with the precise location or looks of corner stores, industrial facilities, schools, parks, and homes in a neighborhood. Local concerns such as these are the affair of individual communities ; the re- quirement s contained in this plan are not intended to supplant local zoning or serve as design guidelines. However, when a n industrial facility threatens a water supply, a commercial center will cause traffic congestion, or housing development will fra gment natural habitats, Hogans Cider Mill in Burlington 6 the entire region is affected. It is these impacts that this plan is designed to mitigate. Referrals ( proposed changes to land use plans, maps, and/or regulations) and (re)development proposals that come before CCRPA will be evaluated for consistency with this plan. Referrals and proposals that are deter- mined to be in violation of one or more key (‘must’) com- ponents of this plan or that are inconsistent with prepon- derance of this plan’s requirement s,shall be found in conflict with this plan. Those that do not present such violations shall be found not in conflict. In addition to determining consistency or conflict with this plan (and the state plan, as needed) , CCRPA may also provide writ- ten comments on referrals and (re)development pro- posals. These comments may include recommendations to improve consistency with this plan, the State plan, or with other plans, projects, or concerns. Lastly, where a re- ferral or a proposal is found to be in conflict, but said conflict may be avoided through a reasonable modifica- tion , CCRPA may find the referral or proposal condition- ally not in conflict, contingent on acceptance of the mod- ification reco mmended by CCRPA. (Should the recom- mendation modification not be accepted, the referral or proposal will be deemed to be in conflict.) Like the State Plan of Conservation and Development, Central Connecticut’s POCD is divided into two parts. The first is t he “general requirement s.”This is a text list of “should” and “must” statements. To conform to this plan, a referral or proposal may not violate any “must” state- ments. The second part is a map that serves as a guide to where development should occur, and where it should not. While most POCDs mirror this structure, t his plan takes an approach unique to Connecticut . All land in the region is placed in one of five categories based on the intensity Skiing at Mount Southington in Southington 7 of development the land and surrounding infrastructure are ap propriate for and can reasonably accommodate. The five categories (‘plan areas ’) are: preservation/ con- servation, rural, low, medium, and high. Furthermore, in central places, such as downtowns, town centers, and vil lage s,an overlay applies. The overlay is designed to fo- cus development in tradi tional centers, encourage mix- ing of uses ,stimulate reuse/rehabilitation of existing buildings, and protect and enhance the character of cen- tral Connecticut’s central places. As with traditional zoning, the specifications and limits given by the plan areas are not intended to be area -wide averages. They apply to each proposal that comes before CCRPA on its own. For example, a subdivision in a me- dium intensity plan area must meet the requirements of that plan area , regardless of the actual intensity of devel- opment currently realized in the rest of the plan area .Just because a neighboring property is less developed does not give one the right t o develop a one’s own property at a higher intensity. (However, where limits on develop- ment on the neighboring property is part of the pro- posal, CCRPA will include the size of this property in its calculations to determine the intensity of the proposal and its consistency with the plan area .) Should incon- sistency exist between the map and the general require- ment s (for example, the map shows a critical habitat area as being in a high intensity plan area ), the general re- quirement s take precedence. The importa nce of intensity One starting point for many land use plan s, including the last version of this plan, is a build -out analysis . This type of analysis quantifies how much more development can be absorbed before a place literally runs out of land. Former Landers, Frary, & Clark Factory (demolished) in New Britain 8 While this technique may have served in the past, by yok- ing economic and population growth to land conversion, it not only promotes the fallacy that growth takes sprawl, but it explicitly promotes unsustainable development. As a sustainable land use plan, this plan does not ask “how much more can we build until we run out of land?” In- stead, it asks whether we are using land sustainably and, if not, how we can begin to do so. For central Connecticut, the answer is sobering. Between 19 85 and 20 10 , the amount of ‘developed’ land in cen tral Connecticut increased by 18.4 %; the amount of ‘turf and grass’ (usually associated with lawns) increased by 24.2 %. From 1985 to 2010, however, the population of the re- gion increased by just 6.3 %.In other words , in 1990 ther e was one acre of developed land per 8.07 residents; be- tween 19 85 and 2010 the region developed land at a rate of one acre per 2 .77 new residents. During this period, employment growth was basically stagnant. These data show an unsustainable rate of land d evelopment. The rate of land development is not only environmentally unsustainable, but economically unsustainable as well. Greater land development brings g reater costs. As new homes and businesses are built, sewer, road, water, and electric infrastructure must also be built. Greater land consumption on a per capita basis also increases runoff (from greater impervious surface coverage), increasing demands on storm water systems. The costs of land development As development consumed land with increasing speed , municipal expenditures in Connecticut also rose .Munic- ipal expenditures rose an inflation -adjusted 70 .9% from 1985 to 2010 (100.6 % if averaged among municipalities) , Figure 1. Growth in population versus in developed land (1985 -2010) 0% 2% 4% 6% 8% 10% 12% 14% 16% 18% 20% State Region Population change Developed land change 9 far exceeding grow th in population and developed land . This compares to an 11.8% increase in population and an 18.7% increase in developed land over the same period. While an analysis of the interactions between land use, expenditures, pop ulation growth, and employment are beyond the scope of this plan, strong evidence suggest s that the pattern of development influences expenditure s. Studies have found that, holding other factors constant, low -density, “sprawl” -type development results in h igher per capita municipal costs. One study found that, in a typical county, a 25% increase in density could result in annual savings of $1.18 million. In an era of declining federal and state support, local res- idents and businesses must assume a greater share of municipal expenditures .If costs grow faster than popu- lation, the result will be higher per capita expenditures and thus a higher financial burden on local taxpayers. Adjusted for inflation, expenditures per capita increased by 15% region -wide bet ween 1995 and 2010. Increases range from a low of 9% in New Britain to 21% in Plainville. (See Figure 2.) Expenditure growth is not necessarily a problem as long as th e ability to pay, i.e. per capita income, rise sin parallel over the long term. (M ore affluent residents may desire, and be willing to pay for, more services ).However, that has not been the case in central Connecticut. Region – wide, per capita income grew by 4% between 1990 and 2010 , from a low of -17% in New Britain to a high of 15% in Burlington. In every municipality , per capita income growth has lagged expe nditure growth . Even when ac- counting for income growth, the burden of municipal services has grown in central Connecticut. Regionwide, Figure 2. Growth in per capita expenditures and income (1995 -2010) -20% -15% -10% -5% 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% Percent growth in expenditures per capita Percent growth in per capita income 10 residential property taxes consumed 0.9% more of per- sonal income in 2010 than in 1995. The growth in this tax burden rang es from 0.2% in Berlin to 1.4% in Burlington. While development is often billed as a means to lighten the property tax burden on residents and businesses, this analysis does not support such a conclusion .Instead, it finds that , in all municipalities :  Land has been developed much faster than pop- ulation growth ,  Municipal expenditures have grown much faster than incomes, and the  Per capita burden of municipal expenditures on residents has grown substantially This indicates that revenues from new development have been insufficient to cover increases in the cost of provid- ing municipal service s.The development experience d by the region over the last 25 years has not succeeded in stabilizing the tax burden. Indir ect costs of development patterns Recent development has not only failed to stabilize taxes , it has also created new costs .While some of the latter stem from development -associated population changes (e.g., construction of family housing may attract famil ies with children, driving up teaching costs ), others re sul t from the form or pattern of development (e.g., construc- tion of subdivisions beyond walking distance from school, thus requiring additional busing). Housing costs in the region exhibit a strong co nnection to development patterns ; a s houses and lots have grown in size, so, too, have housing costs. Large homes on large lots cost more up front , requiring larger mortgages. Due to their size, they also cost more over time — there simply is more to heat, cool, mow, and maintain. (Some of these More sustainable development in New Britain 11 factors compound, e.g. the expansive lawns these homes often feature are devoid of mature trees, which can mod- erate cooling, heating, drainage, and lawn care needs.) The effect of the shift towards big houses on big lots — whether market -or zoning -driven — has been an increase in household indebtedness and corresponding decreases in disposable income and financial resilience. While the trend of ever -larger homes had been building for some time ,fueled and concealed by credit, its effects have become hard to ignore. The global financial crisis that began in 2007 and is still unwinding started as a housing bubble in the United States . People bought more house and land than they could pay for. When mortgage rates increased, and payments rose, stagnant (if not declining )incomes were unable to cover m onthly payments . A wave of foreclosures followed , imperiling in- dividual , corporate, and government finances. The economic i mpacts of this crisis have reached far and wide .People have less disposable income ;many homes are worth less than the mortgages that paid for them ; and many homeowners have simply lost their homes. Furthermore, the drive to build bigger, more expensive homes has shut many would -be homeowners out of the market and, in many cases, out of the state. Facing a short supply of starter homes, and incomes that have remained stagnant, young profe ssionals are forced to turn to a tight rental market. Similarly, many empty nesters who wish to downsize cannot find high -quality, well -located housing .Evidence that this is happening is plentiful. Connecticut is already losing a greater percentage of its you ng adults than any other state; it also loses a large proportion of its retirees. If this trend is not reversed, the result will be a shrinking workforce , shrinking revenues, and weaker economic competitiveness. Less sustainable development in Berlin 12 The patte rn of recent land development , which has fa- vored large buildings on even larger tracts of land lo- cated far from urban and town centers , also drives up transportation costs . While this phenomenon is by no means confined to the region — it has occurred all ove r the country — it has resulted in neighborhoods in which no resident can walk to a store or a job, and shops and workplaces to which nobody can walk. Moreover, it has not only made driving mandatory for an increasing share of trips in the region , but has al so lengthened people’s commutes, costing them time and money .For example, in 2002, 61.2% of central Connecticut workers commuted less than 10 miles to work. That percentage fell to 57.8% in 2009. During the same period, an extra 1,000 workers began commut ing 50 miles or more (a 50% increase). At the same time, gas prices have been increasing, hitting 30 -year high sin 2008 and 2012 .The increasing number and length of trips made by car also exacerbates conges- tion, further increasing the duratio n and cost of travel. Long commutes such as these negatively impact society. The more time people spend in their cars, the less time they have for other activities, from spending time with family and friends and volunteering in civic organizations to exercising, working, and patronizing local businesses. Together, the dispersal of housing out of town centers and downtowns, and the transformation o f foot traffic into car traffic, has seriously undermined the commercial viabili ty and vibrancy of these areas. In many places, once -thriving town and city centers have been reduced to government offices, vacant storefronts, and housing for the socioeconom ically isolated (who, in many cases, are poor because they are too poor to afford a car and , consequently, have limited employment options ). By increasing the use of and exposure to automobiles , development patterns such as that experienced by the Interstate 84 in Hartford 13 region i n recent years also negatively affect public health. When cars replace active transportation such as walking or biking , or when commutes deprive people of time for exercise , the prevalence of lifestyle -linked diseases, such as obesity, diabetes, heart dise ase , and certain cancers, rises. The air pollution produced by cars can also elevate the rates of cancer and cardiopulmonary diseas e. Of course, the most direct health impacts — and perhaps the costliest — of all are car accidents, which can damage property, m aim, and kill, and whose frequency increases with miles driven. Significant environmental consequences also accompany sprawl -style development .While this plan cannot discuss these in depth or quantify them , they include:  Air pollution (emissions from vehicle, heating fuel combustion, and electricity generation)  Soil and water contamination ( accumulation of pollutants such as vehicle fluids, road chemicals, and lawn treatments)  Reduced ecosystem services, including cleaning of air and water (loss of trees and vegetation that help to maintain air and water quality)  Decreased recharge and potential depletion of rivers, surface reservoirs, and aquifers (reduced ground infiltration and higher use for watering)  Flooding and erosion from surface runoff (through increases in impervious surface)  Species extinction (through habitat disturbance and loss, chemical use, vehicle -caused mortality, and spread of invasive species)  Climate change (through increase d greenhouse gas emissions). Opportunity costs Finally, the direct and indirect costs associated with the types of development patterns experienced in central Amtrak and future high -speed/commuter rail line in Berlin 14 Connecticut (and much of the rest of the county) reduce the ability of individuals and businesses to pursue other opportunities. Land taken for large lots could be used for more environmentally or economically productive pur- poses, such as open space, agriculture, and industry. When houses are onl y built on large lots, not only is the total number of lots limited, but land is developed faster , reducing supply . These supply limitations drive up land values and make it difficult for other land uses to survive. The opportunity costs of sprawl -style de velopment are not inconsiderable. It is not unusual for an acre lot to cost $100,000. Splitting this lot among four homes could lessen the cost of land — and thus the sale price of each of four homes — by $75,000. Building at greater density within a short dis tance of jobs, schools, shops, and transit could reduce household costs by reducing the length of commutes or obviating the need for a car altogether. When households in the United States spend nearly 4% of their income on gasoline, and the cost of owning a car is approximately $10,000 per year in Connecticut, being able to get by without a second car can save a family $100,000 over ten years. Families are not the only ones who can benefit from more efficient land use. Singles, childless couples, and empty nesters , as well as the elderly, disabled, and those who work from home or mobile offices may gain even more. The large house on a large lot in a remote subdivision is often a suboptimal fit for these groups. As these groups grow (which they are doing rapi dly), the demand for other types of housing is expected to grow. These include high -quality smaller and starter homes, townhouses, apartments, and live -work and assisted living spaces, as well as homes in walkable neighborhoods and with good transit access .Yet w hile demand for other types of hous- ing has grown, the supply has not kept pace. In the face Transit -oriented development plan for New Britain 15 of this escalating demand, t he focus of residential devel- opment over the last several years of large houses on large lots ,has left many with few options to rent or buy. With regards to rentals, the lack of newer construction means as that, while the size may be good, in many cases the condition is not. In addition, the limited supply of many rental units, c ombined with the economic crisis, which has forced many households to turn to renting, has made high -quality rentals hard to find and expensive. Conversely, w hile the supply of homes for sale is better, prices, while lower than the peak of the housing bubb le, still are high by historical standards. As a consequence, homebuyers often find themselves forced to buy more house and land, and, provided they can get credit, carry more debt, than they need or want. In short, the result of this mismatch between hous ing supply and demand is twofold: homes that are a poor fit for many residents, and high costs for all residents. In the past, cost was not as large of a concern. Low -cost credit enabled households to live beyond their resources. This is no longer the case .Despite improvement, c redit remains hard to get ;household debt loads are still high . Having to own more home than one needs or to rent in an artificially tight market can cost households dearly by making funds unavailable for and making people choose am ong other uses with potentially far larger payoffs. These include such as saving for college, a rainy day fund, and retirement as well as investing in small business es. Inefficient land use can also force municipalities to make painful decisions .Large -lot development permanently takes land that could be used for other purposes — whether housing, commerce, industry, agriculture, or open space — off the market , limiting future options and potential .The higher transportation costs that residents Farmland and preserved open space in Berlin 16 of and visitors to such developments face are also shared by municipalities. Road maintenance, t rash pickup, school transportation, and emergency services all cost more to provide in sprawling areas . Whether municipali- ties choose to cover these costs through increased taxes, or through service cuts, they are forced to make sacrifices and forego other opportunities. The alternative These costs — direct, indirect, and opportunity — ca nnot be sustained ind efinitely and would not exist to the same extent with other development patterns. An alternative, that avoids many of these costs, is to integrate the con- cept of sustainable development into our land use plans . A more sustainable form of development would consider the total cost of development, to all parties, including so- ciety and the environment, during land -use decisions. It would seek to lessen impacts on the environment, con- serve resources, and preserve future opportunities for both residents and gover nments. Moving toward sustainability This plan is being funded as part of a Sustainable Com- munities Initiative project. As such, it is written to encour- age the region to pursue more sustainable form sof de- velopment. I n crafting the policies of this plan, CCRPA performed an extensive literature review on sustainabil- ity , in particular with regards to land use , to determine what sustainable development would mean at the re- gional level . Before delving into the details of the plan, it is important to discuss wh at sustainable development means .How one proceeds in creating a sustainability fo- cused plan depends on one’s definition of sustainability. The EPA provides this definition: “Sustainability is based on a simple principle: Everything that we need for our su rvival and well -being depends, ei- ther directly or indirect ly, on our natural environment. Sus- tainability creates and maintains the conditions under which humans and nature can exist in productive har- mony, that permit fulfilling the social, economic and other requirements of present and future generations. ” In simpler terms ,the World Commissio n on Environment and Development famously defined it thus : “ Sustainable development is development that meets the needs of the 17 present without compromising the ability of future gen- erations to meet their own needs." The common thread is that for developmen t to be sus- tainable, it must meet current needs without preventing future generations from meeting their needs .At a mini- mum, this means protection of the natural systems that support all life . However, for people to thrive as opposed to merely survive, su stainable development also must address social and economic needs. Since there may be tension or trade -offs among the environment, society, and the economy, for development to be truly sustaina- ble, all three must be considered in concert. Sustainable regio nal development Striking a balance among these domains can be difficult. All people make demands on the economy, society, and the environment. Resource limitations , whether land, time, or money, make it impossible to meet all demands . This often results in unequal sharing of benefits and costs (e.g. ,economic growth through social or environmental exploitation ), potentially undermining the conditions necessary for prosperity and producing conflict. The pur- pose of regional planning is to ensure that the benefits that accrue to one party do not unduly burden another, such as neighbors or posterity. As a starting point, regional plan ssuch as this recogniz e that development is essential. Even where population growth is nonexistent to slow, as in central Con necticut , development will happen. Facilities and infrastructure will deteriorate and need replacement. A plan cannot stop these forces, but it can help guide them. A regional plan must also acknowledge that develop- ment comes with costs. As new development comes into a community, services and infrastructure will be required. For instance, r oads must be paved , water and sewer must be connected , schools must be staffed , and services, e.g. trash pickup ,must be provided .All of these cost money , Figure 3. Three components of sustainable development Economy Society Environment 18 and regardless of whether a municipality, developer, or property owner initially foots the bill, in the end society (and the environment) ultimately bears the expense. These costs show up in a variety of forms, such as higher taxes, housing costs, and utility bills. How land is developed influences the infrastructure and service needs of a community. For instance, low -density rural development may call for fewer municipal services , but often spell longer commutes and higher housing and transportation costs. Suburban development , in contrast, may shorten commutes but increase infrastructure costs (e.g., substituting sewers for septic tanks) .Finally, while urban development generally entails the highest level of public investment ,the higher density of urban areas al- lows infrastructure and services to be shared among many more people, improving utilization and reducing per capita costs . Environmental impacts also vary with the form that de- velopment takes. For example, e xtensive road networks and large bu ilding and parking lot foot prints make for high levels of impervious surface cover. Water pooling on these surfaces can flood .While storm water systems can mitigate these impacts ,construction and maintenance of these can be costly .Moreover, the runoff created by im- pervious surfaces (and discharges from these systems) can cause erosion and transport contaminants into lakes, ponds, river s, and streams .Additional investment may be necessary to adequately compensate for these impacts. In contrast, pervious landscapes permit water to infiltrate into the soil, preventing runoff and erosion ,recharging ground water ,and allowing contaminants to be trapped and broken down . Plymouth Reservoir in Plymouth 19 Density limits can reduce the severity of environmental impacts such as these . However, limiting the density of development also has the effect sof dispersing the latter, i.e. creating ‘sprawl.’ Because sprawling developments are generally squat, far, and challenging to impossible to rea ch other than by car, more road mileage and building and parking lot square footage are necessary to provide the same amount of usable space. As a consequence, the total impervious surface and, hence, environmental foot- print of low -density areas can outstrip that of socioeco- nomically comparable high -density areas of similar pop- ulation , even if the impacts of the latter are locally acute r. The sprawl of low -density development over large areas also means that, in addition to producing diffus er and cumulatively larger impacts, it can also generate entirely new impacts. Habitat fragmentation, which results from the punctuation of the landscape by development, limits animals ’ mobility and reduces their supplies of food . Compact development, such as has historically defined cities, town centers, and villages , on the other hand, has relatively limited impact son habitat . Density restrictions may also leave little room for growth and lead to poor socioeconomic outcomes. For instance, large lots may deplete available land reserves, driving up the cost of land uses from farming to housing to industry. Conversely, a lack of adequate infrastructure may result in low costs for tax payers, but may turn away employers . Discussion of the interactions among th e environment, society, and the economy, could go on for hundreds of pages. The key point for a land use plan such as this, Questions to ask Before a conservation or development proposal is approved, questions such as those listed below should be asked. (This is not an exhaustive list.) What new services and infrastructure, if any, will new de- velopment demand in the present and the future? How much will new services and infrastructure cost, who will pay for them, how will they funded, and how will they be maintained? Will new services and infrastructure induce additional de- mand that will neces sitate additional expansions? Where will resources and raw materials come from? Will new development cause adverse environmental, so- cial, or economic impacts? Whom will they affect? How will these impacts be prevented or mitigated? 20 however, is that if a region is to develop sustainably, it must use consider the panoply of impacts that develop- ment will have . A su stainable land use plan must ensure that infrastructure required for new development can be provided without saddling future generations with debt. It must also ensure that adequate social opportunities can be created. Finally, it must ensure that developm ent does not burden the natural environment. A more sustainable Central Connecticut Central Connecticut’s modest population growth (3.6% over the past decade), and the financial pinch felt by gov- ernments at all levels, necessitates a thoughtful, me as- ured approach to development. Development over the past few decades has consumed an ever increasing share of resources while population and economic growth have stagnated . The environmental consequences can be seen in the diminished quality of the region’s wate r and air , as well as the loss of its open space . The budgetary impacts can be seen in higher tax rates and increased debt loads. This dynamic cannot be sustained indefinitely. The purpose of this plan is to provide guidance so that future development in central Connecticut incorporate s all three elements of sustainability. It does this through a series of general requirement s and a locational map that fit development to the capacity of the region’s environ- ment and manmade infrastructure .Both the require- ment sand the map have been designed to leave future generations with a positive legacy by protecting the re- gion’ s environment, building on its ric h social and cul- tural heritage, and allowing for sustainable growth. Main Street Diner in Plainville G eneral r equirements The plan re quirements are intended to serve as basic conditions for the conservation and development of the region . They complement and were informed by the livability principles of the Partnership for Sustainable Communities, Connecti- cut’s growth manage ment principles , and Connecticut’s responsible growth criteria ( see Appendix A: Principles ). The plan requirement s are also intended to integrate with regional plans for the Capitol Region Council of Governments and the Pioneer Valley Planning Commission to advance a shared vision of a healthy and vibrant central Connecticut and beyond . 22 The general requirements fall into eight categories :nat- ural resourc es, land use, transportation, infrastructure, agricu lture, community character, housing , and legal . The categories are interconnected, with requirement s within each category intended to support and promote each othe r. The requirements are to be used in the eval- uation of referrals ( proposed changes to land use plans, maps, and /or regulations )and in the review of (re)devel- opment proposals. Strict adherence is required for all “must” requirement s. Referrals and proposals that do not adhere to the “must” re quirements shall be considered in conflict with the Plan. Some of the requirements fur- thermore differentiate between development and re de- velopment. This plan defines d evelopment as any per- manent new building (including st ructures and surfaces) on previously conserved or unused land; redevelopment refers to construction, rehabilitation, or reuse of an al- ready developed facility .Land that has reverted or been restored to a state of or reasonably approximating wil- derness is considered to be undeveloped. The plan requirement s are accompanied by a map. The map provides a comprehensive view of the region, show- ing appropriate levels of intensity of development and conservation across its entirety .Due to the potentia l for incomp leteness or inaccuracy in the underlying data , the map is not intended to be used as the sole t ool to eval- uate the congruence of referrals and proposals with the plan .The map serves as a visual guide and an important first step in evaluating a referral or (re)development pro- posal .The General requirement sin this section take prec- edence over the map and shall serve as the basis for de- terminations on consistency with the plan for all referrals and proposals . Additional information on the determina- tion evalu ations can be found under The me chanics of the plan (p. 5).The general requirement s are as follows: Corner of Center Street and Queen Street in Southington 23 Natural resources 1. Development must not occur in the following areas: 1.1. Mountain and hilltops 1.2. Ridgelines 1.3. Perennial bodies of water and watercourses 1.4. Floodways 1.5. Slopes 25% and greater 1.6. Highly erodible soils 1.7. Critica l habitat 2. Development must not occur in the following areas, unless mitigation sufficient to compensate for the adverse impacts of the development is included: 2.1. Wetlands 2.2. Intermittent bodies of water and watercourses 3. Development should not occur in the following ar- eas: 3.1. Ephemeral bodies of water and watercourses 3.2. Prime or important farmland soils 3.3. Slopes 15% and greater 4. Development must not cover more than 10% of the land in watersheds with impervious surfaces; if im- pervious surfaces already cover more tha n 10%, conservation and (re)development should decrease effective impervious surface cover 5. Development must not occur in the floodway or in- crease the amount of impervious surface sin the 100 -year floodplain s 6. Development must provide a natural buffer of at least 100 feet surrounding wetlands, rivers, streams, and bodies of water 7. Development should avoid fragmentation of natural resources such as large tracts of relatively undevel- oped land 8. Conservation and (re)development should promote habitat connectivity 9. Industrial uses should be limited in aquifer protec- tion areas; (re)development in such areas must be of moderate or low to moderate intensity and must prohibit potential contaminant sources (e.g. under- ground fuel storage tanks, vehicle service facilities, and facilities that generate or handle hazardous waste) (Connecticut Department of Public Health 4). 10. (Re)development should not generate noise and light pollution 24 Land u se 1. Development should use land efficiently (e.g. be compact) to minimize environmental impacts and preserve sufficient land for other uses 2. In central places: 2.1. Mixed use development should be encourage d 2.2. Vacant lots should be developed as infill projects (or conserved as public space) 3. Development should avoid undeveloped land 4. Brownfields, grayfields, and barren sites should be redeveloped when environmentally appropriate 5. Rehabilitation, including adaptive reuse, should take precedence over new construction where applicable and appropriate 6. (Re)development expected to generate significant freight traffic should concentrate along rail lines 7. (Re)development expected to generate significant passenger traffic should concentrate around major transportation corridors and nodes, especially transit, and/or be design ed to prevent such traffic generation Agriculture 1. Existing agricultural lands and active farms should be preserved 2. Agricultural opportunities should be permitted in all areas, including livestock keeping; in areas of low or higher development intensity, a dverse impacts to neighboring properties must be no greater than those of other allowed uses Farmland in Burlington, CT 25 Transportation 1. (Re)development and conservation: 1.1. Must accommodate current trail corridors 1.2. Should allow for future trail corridors 1.3. Should preserve, and where applic able, enhance, regional greenways 2. Facilities (including roads, streets, intersections, side- walks, and cyclist infrastructure )must be appropri- ate to the surrounding context 3. Improvements must be safe for all users and pro- mote mode choice 4. (Re)development mu st accommodate all types of users, except as exempted under the State’s Com- plete Streets Law (Public Act 09 -154) 5. (Re)d evelopment must avoid or compensate for un- desirable traffic impacts 6. (Re)development that is expected to generate signif- icant traffic shoul d employ access and/or demand management strategies 7. (Re)development should concentrate around trans- portation corridors and nodes 8. Existing and former transportation corridors and sig- nificant rights -of -way should be preserved for future use 9. (Re)development should not impede the extension of rail service to appropriate locations 10. (Re)development on designated scenic roads should not detract from the quality of the scenic road Infrastructure 1. (Re)development should implement low impact de- velopment/green infrastructure strategies where ap- plicable 2. (Re)development should be prioritized in areas served by existing infrastructure 3. (Re)development should minimize future infrastruc- ture needs and maintenance costs 26 Community c haracter 1. (Re)development or conservation should be context – sensitive 2. (Re)development in historic districts should preserve the quality of the historic district 3. Historic structures and sites of cultural significance should be preserved Housing 1. A mix of housing types (including single family, two – family, and multi -family homes) and tenure options should be built where appropriate 2. Accessory units should be encouraged in under -or unused space (e.g., attics, basements, carriage houses, and garages) 3. Housing (particularly high intensity and mixed use) should concentrate around major transit nodes Legal 1. (Re)d evelopment must conform to all applicable state and federal laws 2. Definitions used in regulations must be based on state and federal law or the best available science 3. (Re)d evelopment must abide by valid and legally enforceable covenants, deed restrictions, easements, and the like Levels of development intensity As the map sin Plan area maps (p. 38 )show , all land in the region is classified into one of five intensity plan areas : preserva- tion/conservation, rural, low, medium, and high. Each plan area ,with the excepti on of preservation/conservation, also has an associated “central place overlay” to allow and foster mixed -use, closer -together development in neighborhood, village, town, and city centers. The following pages give d etails and sample illustrations for each of the plan areas , along with the associated central place overlays . 28 Definitions Height : Number of stories ab ove ground; excludes attics and basements . Land Coverage : all impervious surface (building and parking); exceptions allowed for development that in- clude s“green infrastructure .” Density : only affects residential construction; commer- cial and industrial are governed by land coverage re- quirements . Setbacks : the maximum distance a building can be placed from the road . Central Place : A central place is any area within a town where a mix of uses is found. They function as the center of a village, town, neighborho od, or city. Criterion Preservation Conservation General Development (by intensity) Rural Low Medium High Density (units per acre) n/a 0to ½ (1 unit per 2 acres) ½ to 6 6 to 12 At least 12 Land coverage n/a 0% to 5% 5% to 25% 25% to 50% 25% to 90% Building height (stories) n/a 1 to 2 1 to 3 2 to 4 At least 2 Central Place Overlay (by intensity) Density (units per acre) n/a 24 max 48 max No max No max Land coverage n/a 0% to 80% max 50% min to 100% 75% to 100% 75% to 100% Typical building height (stories) n/a 1 to 3 1 to 3 2 to 5 At least 3 Front s etback n/a 48’ Max 18' Max 18' Max 12' Max 29 Preser vation/ c onser vation Land categorized as preservation/conservation should not be developed. The only development appropriate for these areas is passive recreation such as hiking, mountain biking, hunting, and fishing. Insofar as possible, conservation ef- forts should concentrat e on these areas. Agriculture , silvi- culture, and low -impact uses (e.g. seasonal camping, fish and game reserves) are also a permissible form of devel- opment in these areas, so long as the general requirement s of this plan are followed. A bird’s -eye view of Sessions Woods in Burlington, CT. A nature trail in Sessions Woods, Burlington, CT. The Metacomet Trail in Plainville, CT. 30 Rural Land categorized as rural is suited for ver y low intensity development. Appropriate development include sfarming , passive and active recreation, and residences such as farm- houses and lodges on large lots in agricultural or natural surroundings, and commercial amenities serving a local market. In some cases, industrial or institutional develop- ment may be appropriate, such as processing plants or re- treats . Development should not detract from the character of or heavily modify the landscape , nor should it require urban services such as wa ter, sewer, or high -capacity roads. A bird’s -eye view of a rural section of South Windsor, CT. Horsebarn Hill in Storrs, CT. Monastery on Mount Equinox, VT. 31 Rural — Central Place Overlay Even rural areas need central places from which to obtain daily goods and services . While a rural central place should not resemble an urban one, it will share many of the same characteristics. In a central place, d evelopment should be compact ,and buildings should be in walking distance. Small amounts of mixed use and/or multi -family housing may be appropriate to provide residences for those who wish to remain in the community without having to drive . A bird’s -eye view of Vi chel, Germany. Bellows Falls, VT. The town center of New Hartford, CT. 32 Low Areas categorized as low intensity are intended for pre- dominantly resid ential neighborhoods. With densities of up to six units per acre , small clusters of multi -family hous- ing may be appropriate. Traffic generation should be min- imal due to the low unit per acre densities. Urban runoff is also kept low by land coverage maximum s. A residential neighborhood near Unionville, CT. A quiet residential neighborhood in Litchfield, CT. A residential neighborhood in Yonkers, NY. 33 Low — Central Place Overlay Central places in low intensity areas will be village or neighborhood centers. Multi -use structures are preferred as ways of combining residential and commercial activity. Multi -family residences may be more plentiful due to higher allowable densities. Buildings will be located close together and may cover their entire lot. A bird’s -eye view of Guilford, CT. The historic center of Collinsville, CT. Main Street in Concord, MA. 34 Medium Areas delineated for medium intensity development are found in the region’s larger municipalities. Allowable resi- dential densities double (over low intensity are as), as do land coverage maximums. These areas transition from sub- urban to more urban development. Road infrastructure re- quirements will be greater, to handle increased traffic, and urban services such as sewer and water will be necessary. Brattleboro, V T from above. Federal Hill in Bristol, CT. Residential neighborhoods in Halifax, NS. 35 Medium — Central Place Overlay Central places in medium intensity areas will be town cen- ters or urban neighborhoods. No limit is placed on allow- able densities ,and land coverage should fall between 75% and 100%. Setbacks are to be kept at a minimum to pre- serve the walkability of the area. These areas are intended to be pedestrian a nd cyclist friendly. Mixed -use buildings will dominate, though some dedicated multi -family resi- dential structures or dedicated office buildings will be pre- sent. Blue Back Square in West Hartford, CT. Frederick, Maryland Nassau Street in Princeton, NJ. 36 High Areas delineated for high intensity development are found in the region’s largest cities. These are places where signif- icant investments in urban infrastructure have already been made. They should have easy highway access, good sidewalks, and tr ansit service to permit easy transporta- tion. These areas contain the most valuable land (for de- velopment) and should be developed at a high density, at least 12 units per acre. Land coverage should be high as well to maximize efficiency. A bird’s -eye view of a neighborhood in New Haven, CT. Biotech research facility in Seattle, WA. Natural gas cogeneration and apartments in Berlin, Germany. 37 High — Central Place Overlay Central places in high intensity areas are the region’s major urban cores. They contain high concentrations of urban services, such as stores, civic institutions, housing, and transportation options. Sewer, water, and road infrastruc- ture should already be present and of sufficient capacity. The existing level of services allows for high value -added development. A bird’s -eye view of the New Haven green. A tree -lined mixed -use street in New Haven, CT. Königstraße in Stuttgart, Germany. 38 Plan area maps The following pages reproduce maps for every municipality in the region. Due to printing constraints, maps are size -reduced. Larger scale maps are available in PDF format as well as in GIS formats upon request. These maps are intended to provide an overview of sustainable development intensities; for the purposes of referrals, they are adjunct to and do not replace the General requirements (p. 21 ). 39 Sources: Esri, DeLorme, NAVTEQ, TomTom, Intermap, increment P Corp., GEBCO, USGS, FAO, NPS,NRCAN, GeoBase, IGN, Kadaster NL, Ordnance Survey, Esri Japan, METI, Esri China (Hong Kong), and theGIS User Community Plan area map Berlin 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 0.25 Miles V High Medium Low Rural Conservation C e n t r a l p l a c e o v e r l a y Intensity 40 Sources: Esri, DeLorme, NAVTEQ, TomTom, Intermap, increment P Corp., GEBCO, USGS, FAO, NPS,NRCAN, GeoBase, IGN, Kadaster NL, Ordnance Survey, Esri Japan, METI, Esri China (Hong Kong), and theGIS User Community Plan area map Bristol 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 0.25 Miles V High Medium Low Rural Conservation C e n t r a l p l a c e o v e r l a y Intensity 41 42 Sources: Esri, DeLorme, NAVTEQ, TomTom, Intermap, increment P Corp., GEBCO, USGS, FAO, NPS,NRCAN, GeoBase, IGN, Kadaster NL, Ordnance Survey, Esri Japan, METI, Esri China (Hong Kong), and theGIS User Community Plan area map New Britain 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 0.25 Miles V High Medium Low Rural Conservation C e n t r a l p l a c e o v e r l a y Intensity 43 Sources: Esri, DeLorme, NAVTEQ, TomTom, Intermap, increment P Corp., GEBCO, USGS, FAO, NPS,NRCAN, GeoBase, IGN, Kadaster NL, Ordnance Survey, Esri Japan, METI, Esri China (Hong Kong), and theGIS User Community Plan area map Plainville 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 0.25 Miles V High Medium Low Rural Conservation C e n t r a l p l a c e o v e r l a y Intensity 44 Sources: Esri, DeLorme, NAVTEQ, TomTom, Intermap, increment P Corp., GEBCO, USGS, FAO, NPS,NRCAN, GeoBase, IGN, Kadaster NL, Ordnance Survey, Esri Japan, METI, Esri China (Hong Kong), and theGIS User Community Plan area map Plymouth 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 0.25 Miles V High Medium Low Rural Conservation C e n t r a l p l a c e o v e r l a y Intensity 45 Sources: Esri, DeLorme, NAVTEQ, TomTom, Intermap, increment P Corp., GEBCO, USGS, FAO, NPS,NRCAN, GeoBase, IGN, Kadaster NL, Ordnance Survey, Esri Japan, METI, Esri China (Hong Kong), and theGIS User Community Plan area map Southington 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 0.25 Miles V High Medium Low Rural Conservation C e n t r a l p l a c e o v e r l a y Intensity 46 Appendix es Principles, sources, and credits . 47 Appendix A : Principles Livability Principles 1. Provide more transportation choices. 2. Develop safe, reliable, and economical transportation choices to decrease household transportation costs, reduce our nation’s dependence on foreign oil, im- prove air quality, reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and promote public health. 3. Promote equitable, affordable housing. 4. Expand location -and energy -efficient housing choices for all ages, incomes, races, and ethnicities to increase mobilit y and lower the combined cost of housing and transportation. 5. Enhance economic competitiveness. 6. Improve economic competitiveness through reliable and timely access to employment centers, education opportunities, service and other basic needs by work- ers, as well as expanded business access to markets. 7. Support existing communities. Target federal funding toward existing communities — through strategies like transit oriented, mixed -use development, and land re- cycling — to increase community revitalization and the efficiency of public works investments and safeguard rural landscapes. 8. Coordinate and leverage federal policies and invest- ment. 9. Align federal policies and funding to remove barriers to collaboration, leverage funding, and increase the accountability and e ffectiveness of all levels of gov- ernment to plan for future growth, including making smart energy choices such as locally generated renew- able energy. 10. Value communities and neighborhoods. 11. Enhance the unique characteristics of all communities by investing i n healthy, safe, and walkable neighbor- hoods — rural, urban, or suburban. Source: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Develop- ment. “Six Livability Principles.” Web. 27 November 2012. Growth Management Principles 1. Redevelop and revitalize regional centers and areas with existing or currently planned physical infrastruc- ture 2. Expand housing opportunities and design choices to accommodate a variety of household types and needs 48 3. Concentrate development around transportation nodes and along major transportation corrid ors to support the viability of transportation options. 4. Conserve and restore the natural environment, cul- tural and historical resources, and traditional rural lands 5. Protect and ensure the integrity of environmental as- sets critical to public health and safe ty 6. Promote integrated planning across all levels of gov- ernment to address issues on a state wide, regional, and local basis Source: Office of Policy and Management. “Draft: Conserva- tion and Development Policies, a Plan for Connecticut.” 2013 -2018. Web. 27 November 2012. Responsible Growth Guidelines 1. Project activities should be in conformance with the Conservation and Development Policies Plan for Con- necticut. 2. Locate Projects within existing developed areas and promote infill development. 3. Locate projects within existing public utilities service areas (water, sewer, etc.). 4. Projects outside of public utility services areas should be scaled to use on -site systems, where practicable, to manage unplanned development of adjacent land. 5. Promote transit -oriented development. 6. Promote energy/water conservation, energy efficiency and "green" building design. 7. Avoid impacts to natural and cultural resources and open space. 8. Promote mixed -use development and compatible land uses (pedestrian -friendly with access to multiple destinations within close proximity of each other). Source: Department of Economic and Community Develop- ment. “Responsible Growth Guidelines.” 2012. Web. 27 No- vember 2012. 49 Appendix B : Sources Code of F ederal Regulations. Title 44 — Emergency Man- agement and Assistance, Part 9 — Floodplain Management and Protection of Wetlands, Section 9.4 — Definitions. 2010. Web. 5 December 2012. Connecticut Environmental Conditions Online. “Connecti- cut Critical Habitats.” 20 11. Web. 30 October 2012. Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection. IS Data. Available from: http://www.ct.gov/dep/cwp/view.asp?a=2698& q=322898 &depNav_GID=1707&depNav=|#Soils Booth, Derek B. and C. Rhett Johnson. “Urbanization of Aquatic Systems: Degradation Thresholds, Stormwater De- tection, and the Limits of Mitigation.” Journal of the Amer- ican Water Resources Association 33.5 (October 1997): 1077 -1090. Web. 30 October 2012. Fuss & O’Neill. “Low Impact Development Appendix to Connecticut Guidelines for Soil Erosion and Sediment Con- trol .” Partners for the Connecticut Low Impact Develop- ment and Stormwater General Permit Evaluation. 2011. W eb. 30 October 2012. Murphy, Brian. “Position Statement, Utilization of 100 Foot Buffer Zones to Protect Riparian Areas in Connecticut.” In- land Fisheries Division. Web. 30 October 2012. Kotchen, Matthew J. and Schulte, Stacey L. “A Meta -Analy- sis of Cost o f Community Service Studies”. International Re- gional Science Review .32.3 (July 2009). Carruthers, John I. and Ulfarsson, Gudmundur F. “Does ‘Smart Growth’ Matter to Public Finance?” Urban Studies . (July 2007). 50 Appendix C : Photo c redits Unless otherwise indicated, all photos are presumed free for noncommercial use, or permission for their use has been given. Photos by page: Cover Downtown Bristol , Francis R. Pickering 1 Walnut Hill Park ,New Britain, Flickr use r bbcamericangirl 4 Francis R. Pickering 5 Town of Burlington 6 Flickr user brown_cardinal 7 newbritainstation.com 10, 11 Bing maps 12 Flickr user boboroshi 13 Flickr user jonlewis 14 City of New Britain 15 ,18 Francis R. Pickering 20 Flickr user muffet 21 Depot Square , Renaissance Downtowns 22 Flickr user brown_cardinal 24 Timothy Malone 27 Flickr user dougtone For pages 29 -37, credits are listed clockwise from top 29 Bing Maps, Timothy Malone, Timothy Malone 30 Bing Maps, Flickr user trinity, Flickr user johncudw 2399 31 Bernhard Langheinrich, Timothy Malone, Flickr user mema_nh 32 Bing Maps, Google Maps, Timothy Malone 33 Bing Maps, Flickr user imotov, Flickr user johncudw 2399 34 Bing Maps, Google Maps, Bing Maps 35 Flickr user ying_xiaoyur, Flickr use r Patrick_nouhailleur, Google Maps 36 Bing Maps, Bing Maps, Wikipedia 37 Bing Maps, Flickr user ian_yvr, Flickr user sean_marshall 38 Bicycle race in Plainville , Flickr user bikeride 45 New Britain, Flickr user joshmichtom 51 Appendix D : About CCRPA This plan is a product of the Central Connecticut Regional Planning Agency. CCRPA may be reached as follows. Contact information Online http://ccrpa.org Phone /fax 860 -589 -7820 Postal m ail 22 5North Main Street, Suite 304 Bristol, CT 06010 -4993. Agency staff Carl Stephani , Executive Director Francis R. Pickering, Deputy Director Cheri Bouchard -Duquette, Office and Financial Administrator Timothy Malone, Associate Planner Kristin Thoma s, Associate Planner Amanda Ryan, Assistant Planner Abigail St. Peter , Assistant Planner Jason Zheng, Assistant Planner Greg Martin, Paratransit Coordinator/Emergency Planner Ryan Ensling, Planning Aide Jessica Haerter, Planning Aide Kristin Hadjstylianos, Planning Aide Francis R. Pickering ser ved as Project Manager, with Timothy Malone as Lead Planner on this project. Agency Board Bart Bovee, Berlin Dennis Kern, Berlin (Chair) Rosie O’Brien Vojtek, Bristol Donald Padlo, Bristol John Pompei, Bristol Peter McBrien, Burlington Paul Rachielles, Burlington Marie Lausch, New Britain Donald Naples, New Britain (Treasurer) Steven P. Schiller, New Britain Jennifer Bartiss -Early, Plainville (Secretary) James Cassidy, Plainville Carl Johnson, Plymouth Stephen Mindera , Plymouth John Barry, Southington Rudy Cabata, Southington (Vice Chair) James Haigh, Southington