Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout08/15/2005 Historic Preservation Commission IOWA CITY HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION Monday, August 15, 2005 City Hall, 410 E. Washington Street Lobby Conference Room 7:00 p.m. 1. Call to Order 2. Public discussion of anything not on the agenda 3. Items of Consideration A. Certificate of Appropriateness: 1. 922 East College Street 2. 800 North Van Buren Street 3. 533 South Summit Street 4. 422 Brown Street 5. 404 South Summit Street B. Minutes for July 14, 2005 and August 2,2005 4. Other 5. Adjourn MINUTES HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AUGUST 2, 2005 CIVIC CENTER LOBBY CONFERENCE ROOM DRAFT MEMBERS PRESENT: Richard Carlson, Michael Maharry, Mark McCallum, Jim Ponto, Tim Weitzel MEMBERS ABSENT: Michael Brennan, James Enloe, Michael Gunn, Justin Pardekooper, Jan Weissmiller STAFF PRESENT: Karen Howard, Bob Miklo, Sunil Terdalkar OTHERS PRESENT: Helen Burford, Terry Stumpf, Richard Wayne Because not enough members were in attendance to constitute a quorum, Chairperson Weitzel stated that the Commission would hold a work session. DISCUSSION OF CERTIFICATES OF APPROPRIATENESS: 800 North Van Buren Street. Stumpf said he is the contractor for this project. He said the barn on this property is going down, and the owner would like to save it. Stumpf said the foundation on the front south side that faces Brown Street is pushing in severely. He said the stone foundation failed years ago and is slowly going down, letting all the timbers come down, and the roof is coming down as well. Stumpf said he proposes to excavate the front perimeter and around both the west and east ends back to the service doors, where the foundation stops and goes to ground level. He said he would like to put in a poured concrete foundation to take the pressure in the front. Stumpf said the grade is pretty high out front, so he would like to put a reinforced poured concrete wall in. He stated that the back wall has pushed a little bit; it is a stone wall that he will repair back there. Stumpf said that inside he would replace footings where the vertical timbers that carry the floor are located. He said that once the foundation is in, he would have to replace the front timber that runs east- west. Stumpf said he would then jack the barn timbers vertically back up where the dormer is settling. Stumpf said that the barn is also spreading. He said he would like to use the eight by eight timbers that run through there at about the dormer level and plate them on each end and hold them right into the vertical timbers in the front wall. Stumpf said that when everything is straightened up, he plans to put a new, simulated architectural shake roof on the barn. He said he would strip the roof down to the space sheeting and put Yz-inch roof sheeting on it and then the 30-year architectural shake shingles, probably of a slate color. Stumpf said that he would repair the wood shingles that are missing on the dormer. He stated that the existing barn doors will be rehung. Stumpf said he would want to put gutter on the front. He said that when he does the foundation, he will put in vertical tiles to grade that will all go down to a footing tile. Stumpf said he would not guarantee a stone foundation here and did not think anyone could. He said his goal is to save the barn. Weitzel said that this is a landmark property. He said the barn has a nice, original stone foundation wall, but that is no longer recommended as structurally sound construction. Weitzel said there is also a massive hill and drainage problems. Weitzel said the barn in the front and back is kicked off the existing foundation. He said there is no front footing around the base of the barn. Weitzel said the Commission generally recommends the least invasive method of preservation possible, but at the same time, the Commission doesn't want to see something done that will fall down in ten years and have to be redone, possibly ruining the entire structure. Historic Preservation Commission Minutes August2,2005 Page 2 Weitzel said the Design Review Subcommittee (DRS) looked at different possibilities for the barn. He said the DRS talked about trying to repair the foundation, cutting out parts of the wall and putting in piers, and a reinforced concrete wall. Strumpf said he would be afraid of anything other than what his proposal is, even concrete block. Weitzel said the DRS did not really consider the concrete block to be a good substitute for limestone anyway. He said in that case, if it can't be made to look proper, the Commission might fall back to not creating a false historic appearance and just accept the concrete. Stumpf said that it has been all faced with masonry, and the stone has been covered to try to hold it in over the years. He added that this is not a house either, so if this cannot be done, the owner will probably let it go down. Maharry asked how much of the foundation would be visible. Stumpf said that on the front, very little would be visible. Maharry said that it would be simple for someone who really doesn't like that look to cover it up with vegetation. Weitzel said the Commission would recommend correction of any water and drainage problems. Stumpf said he would suggest to the owner to also gutter the back of the barn, since she is already spending money to save it. Terdalkar asked if regrading were done if the foundation could be built back. Stumpf said the stone and mortar is all so deteriorated, it would have to be completely taken apart. He said he did not think there was any mason who would guarantee the work. McCallum said that he would support this project. He said that salvaging the building as well as possible is important. He said the foundation is not visible from the street, but the profile of the barn is visible from the street, and that is what is important to maintain. Weitzel said he could also vote for this. He said that because there is not a quorum, the Commission cannot vote, but the Commission would vote as soon as it has a quorum. 533 South Summit Street. Stumpf said the windows on this house are in poor shape. He said the owners asked him to prepare a quote for vinyl windows and Pella clad windows. Weitzel said the Commission disallows vinyl for a number of reasons. Stumpf said the house has aluminum siding on it, and he believed that the original siding was under the aluminum. He said that the windows seem to be original to the house. He said the sashes are dry rotted, and some of the sills are rotted. Stumpf said, however, that the rot was not a result of the aluminum siding. Weitzel said the DRS had hoped the sashes would be in good shape. Stumpf said the sashes cannot be restored. Weitzel said the Commission's view is that the windows have lasted a long time, and if there is any way to save them, the Commission asks people to look at that. He said, however, if the windows are rotten, the Commission has an obligation to work with the owner to remove them. Stumpf said that almost every window is rotten. He said that the only thing to be left is the picture unit on the south side and possibly the two windows in the stairway that faces Summit Street, although they are not in good shape either. Maharry said that the shutters would be another issue, but the Commission doesn't have any control over the design of the shutters. He said that because a building permit is not needed to remove or replace shutters, the Commission does not review them. Stumpf said that the shutters don't look right on the house. Weitzel said the Commission could give its strongest recommendation that the shutters not be replaced with vinyl, whether they are removed or not. Maharry said that having no shutters would be more historically accurate. Maharry said that if there is no alternative to repairing the windows, then replacement is the next option, in something that is approvable. Historic Preservation Commission Minutes August 2, 2005 Page 3 Stumpf said that the front door on the Summit Street side is in pretty bad shape, but he will be restoring the door. 422 Brown Street. Wayne, the owner of the property, said that he wanted to follow staff's recommendation with respect to installing two egress windows on the front porch. He said he would like to take one of each pair of the non-opening windows on the front and transform them from non-opening windows to egress windows. Wayne said he would like to use the existing casing. Weitzel said the openings that are presently on the house are not windows but are actually set sashes. Wayne said he wanted to preserve the trim that is already there. Weitzel said the DRS was concerned that the windows will not look the same width-wise, next to each other. Wayne agreed but said there would be some symmetry around the center. He said he would like to use the least invasive method. Weitzel said the DRS would like to see four egress windows to match across the front so that they would all look the same. He said that would maintain the appearance and sense of proportion. Wayne said he would like to be governed by staff's suggestions of a few weeks ago. He said he is overwhelmed right now with the project, and he would like to stick to Terdalkar's original recommendation, which was to convert one of each of the front openings to an egress window. Terdalkar said his recommendation originally was to open up the enclosed porch to make it look like an enclosed porch, which it does not now. Weitzel said the original approved certificate was consistent with staff's recommendation. Regarding the side opening, Weitzel said it could be used for an air conditioner, could be left as it is, or could be enlarged for an egress window. Wayne said he misunderstood staff's recommendation. Miklo stated that this is kind of an oddity in that a porch was so severely enclosed that it doesn't look like a porch any more. He said the direction the Commission seems to be going is that the ideal solution would be openings in the two end walls to give this the appearance of a porch or sunroom. Maharry said the staff report says that here is the plan, and he recommends approval of that plan, which was the change to the front openings. Miklo said another solution is to take the existing openings and make them look like double hung windows, but if just one is changed, it will just make it even more odd, which will further detract from the historic fabric. Wayne said that this is a huge, chaotic building. Miklo pointed out that the part to be altered is the most visible to the public in terms of the street façade. Wayne said that the brick façade is the upper part of a kind of faux fireplace built into an enormous window well for a basement apartment. He said that if the egress window is put on the west side, there will have to be a ladder or a platform or a fire escape that will have to be close enough to the window to be usable. Maharry said that situation eliminates the option of putting the egress windows on the sides. Weitzel said that Wayne needs to have egress windows here, and the Commission wants them to look proper. Wayne said that what he is requesting would still look symmetrical around the center and would look as if some planning was done. Terdalkar stated that there would be three different kinds of openings on one façade. McCallum said that would be consistent for Gaslight Village. Weitzel asked if the three windows under the gable are fixed panes. Wayne said they are fixed panes. Weitzel asked if they were the same size and shape as those on the front of the house. Wayne responded that they sort of are, but they are very high. Weitzel said they provide some unity to the rest of the building. Maharry asked Carlson if he had any suggestions for how this could be turned into an egress window with a thick horizontal bar, since the side opening won't work. Carlson said his recommendation would be to replace all four openings with four double hung windows to make it look more unified. Historic Preservation Commission Minutes August2,2005 Page 4 Wayne said he believes that the asymmetry on one side will be duplicated by an identical asymmetry on the other side. He said that taking the whole façade into consideration will show that there is some planning. Terdalkar said that when he visited the site earlier in the day, he noticed that the soffits are being replaced with aluminum soffits all over. Wayne said that the painter is doing any repair work required, such as siding, soffits, fascia, etc. He said he did not inquire about a permit for replacing soffit. Terdalkar stated that, for a multi-family structure, a permit is required to replace soffit. He said that when he was at the site, half of the work had already been done. Wayne said he was not making alterations but was repairing the soffit. Weitzel said it is a replacement, not a repair. Wayne said he knew that there was a problem with vinyl. Weitzel said the guidelines disallow replacement of soffit with a synthetic material. Maharry said that the definition of a repair is to use the same material to repair, not to replace it with a different material. He said that aluminum is a non-historic material for that structure. Miklo suggested that Wayne contact the Building Department regarding the soffit replacement. Wayne replied that he would contact them in the morning. Weitzel said that anything done on the exterior of a multi-family dwelling will probably need a permit. He suggested contacting the Building Department, Housing Inspection Services, before any work is started. Weitzel said he would recommend replacement of all four openings. Carlson said that of all the options, he believed that was the least bad one. Ponto said that by putting in four double hungs, there would be the same sense of symmetry that is there now with the individual panes, rather than creating a new, different symmetry. Maharry said that sometime in the future, this room might be transformed back to a porch. He said that, in that case, either option would be fine. He said that as it is, with either four double hungs or two double hungs, this porch is not what it originally was, because the center window destroys any semblance of a porch anyway. McCallum said that he appreciated the work done on the house by Wayne. He said that if tenants cannot have air conditioning, the additional ventilation would be an added benefit for the tenants, in addition to the egress. McCallum said he would prefer to see four similar windows on the façade. Ponto agreed that this could potentially be a porch in the future but said he did not see it happening any time soon. He said that because this façade faces Brown Street, he would rather have it look a little nicer. Weitzel thanked Wayne for his input. DISCUSSION OF PROPOSED NEW ZONING CODE (CITY TITLE 14): Miklo said he and Howard read the Commission's last few sets of minutes and wanted to respond to the questions and confusion raised by those minutes regarding the drafting of the Zoning Code, the Commission's role, and the outcome in terms of the Historic Preservation Overlay Zone. Miklo stated that the Commission's role in this began in 2001, when Gunn worked with Shelley McCafferty to ensure that changes in the overlay zone were in concert with the handbook that was being developed at the same time. Miklo said Gunn and whoever else on the Commission was involved were guided by the Historic Preservation Plan, which includes an analysis done in 1992 of the overlay zone. Miklo said that pointed out some things the Commission wanted in terms of a wish list, such as an economic hardship clause, a demolition by neglect clause, etc. Miklo said that over the years that was being worked on. He said that a draft was prepared, and it was reviewed by legal and other staff. Miklo said the draft was sent back to the Commission in August 2004 for the Commission's review. Miklo said the public review draft of the entire Zoning Code, including the preservation overlay zone, was released in March of 2005. He said there was then a series of meetings, public workshops to which citizens were invited to meet with staff and the Planning and Zoning Commission to identify concerns and Historic Preservation Commission Minutes August2,2005 Page 5 make suggestions. Miklo said there was also a special public meeting requested by Friends of Historic Preservation regarding the sections of the Code that would address preservation. He stated that the Planning and Zoning Commission then held two public hearings to gather public input on the Zoning Code. Miklo said this has been a six-month long process. He said that staff is a little concerned that there are issues coming up at this point. Miklo said that, if possible, staff would like to address those. He said if there are items that the Commission feels need to be changed in the overlay zone or preservation-related items in the other parts of the Code that can be done in a relatively quick manner, staff would like to do that. Miklo said that if there are bigger, broader issues, staff would suggest that they be revisited after adoption of the Code. Miklo said that staff feels there are a lot of pro-preservation elements to the Code, not only in the overlay zone but in how zoning is approached City-wide. He said that some of the things proposed for the Code were requested by the Neighborhood Council, and there was a task force that addressed housing, zoning, occupancy, etc. Miklo said that reducing the number of allowed roomers in specific zones could go a long way towards, not necessarily preserving individual houses, but preserving neighborhoods. Miklo said the special exceptions have been broadened to allow historic properties to apply for relief from the dimensional requirements of the Zoning Code. He said this means that if one has a property in a historic district and one of the dimensional requirements, such as setbacks or height requirements, hinders the reuse of that property, the owner could bring a case to the Board of Adjustment to ask for relief from the zoning ordinance. Howard said another example would be the carriage houses that exceed the current height limit for accessory buildings. She said that if someone wanted to improve those or expand them for an accessory apartment or home occupation, he would be allowed to do that to keep that structure. McCallum agreed that all those things did occur. He said that he is now pushing forward some ideas, a different vision, than what the planning staff has, although he believes the goals are the same. Regarding the Commission's role, McCallum said that in prior meetings, the Commission was looking for different ideas and opportunities, and when the proposals were presented, he always had the impression that there would be more of a formal presentation. He said he appreciated staff coming to the meeting for interaction. McCallum said he is probably the only person on the Commission advocating incentive zoning changes. He said he presented his ideas in writing to the Commission to get attention and feedback. McCallum said he is comfortable in knowing that the Commission has digested his ideas and rejected them. He said he is working in other venues at this point. McCallum said his only argument is that he thinks the Commission should be more aggressive. Regarding the Des Moines example submitted by McCallum, Miklo said that Des Moines has two historic districts. He said that the Sherman Hill District is right downtown and has always been a mixed use, higher density, residential/commercial area. Miklo said it is an area that for years was pretty blighted, and the City was encouraging any investment in that neighborhood that it could get, which may explain the reason that the City allows many of the uses it allows. Miklo said that Des Moines has a second historic district that is a single-family neighborhood. He said those same types of incentives are not included in that district. Miklo said that the Planning and Zoning Commission did explore the ideas of allowing more commercial type uses in the RM-12 and RM-20 zones in the late 1990s. He said the Planning and Zoning Commission decided against that because: 1) commercial traffic tends to cause issues in a residential area and 2) the City has a downtown core and also some smaller commercial areas with some vitality. Miklo said the Planning and Zoning Commission felt that if the City started allowing these commercial uses all over the City, it would detract from the commercial areas. McCallum said his only argument was that those types of people would not be attracted to the downtown area in the first place. He said his argument to that is that it would just be displacing rooming houses and Historic Preservation Commission Minutes August2,2005 Page 6 high-density, multi-family. McCallum said he is not against that but would like to see a balance to the neighborhoods. McCallum said he looked to the Peninsula Model and looked to the east side of downtown as sort of a little village zone. Miklo said that commercial is not allowed everywhere in the Peninsula but is restricted to live/work units and the main square. McCallum asked if staff had considered "retrozoning," which would allow buildings with a prior use to go back to that use. Howard responded that there is something in the new Zoning Code for that. She said that the non-conforming provisions were loosened up to allow the re-use of buildings that no longer fit with the uses. McCallum asked if lateral moves in multi-family housing are allowed under the current zoning. Howard said there is a provision added to the non-conforming section that would allow a property to go from one use to another use that is less intense. She said there are provisions that are intended to help older buildings to be able to adapt over time. McCallum said he didn't know if the Code communicates to incoming citizens what can or cannot be done. He said his idea was to create incentives. McCallum said that most of the people opposing the new historic districts were landlords, who stated that the designation would hurt the value of their properties. He said he wanted to change that perception. Howard said that Iowa City allows home occupations everywhere in the City. She said that as far as creating an incentive to preserve a building, the Des Moines ordinance doesn't seem to be much different than what Iowa City has now. Howard said that in Iowa City, one doesn't even have to own the building with the home business, as long as the person lives in the building. Maharry said it might be beneficial to have the specific language in the Code that says that these types of activities are allowed. Howard said that there is an entire section on home occupations that lists all of them in the Zoning Code. McCallum said the number of employees is limited. Howard said that limit is one way to signify that the business is getting beyond a home occupation. Miklo said one of the goals of the rewrite was to make the Code less open to interpretation, to make it clearer. Howard said there is a balance between having a Code that is flexible enough for interpretation to allow people to do things in a way that seems reasonable and having things clear enough to show what is allowed and what is not allowed. Maharry said that two years ago on Iowa Avenue, a small bungalow was demolished to be replaced by a two-unit, ten-bedroom structure. He asked if the Code rewrite would have addressed that type of situation. Miklo said indirectly. He said the proposal is to allow a maximum of four unrelated persons in a housing unit. He said there are also provisions regarding how the building sits on the lot that would make it difficult to do what was done on Iowa Avenue. Miklo added that there are also changes to when the moratorium status goes into effect. He said that under the new Zoning Code, the moratorium would have applied. Howard said that occupancy is a big issue. She said that people are coming out against the reduction in the number of unrelated renters. Howard stated that the Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council also need to hear from pro-neighborhood and pro-preservation people about the things, such as the reduction in unrelated renters, that they support. Miklo said that the last Planning and Zoning Commission hearing would be held August 18th. Maharry said that one of the reasons the Commission didn't recall discussion on the specific changes was that it occurred last August. He said that at that time, the Commission was working on the Gilbert-Linn and Jefferson Street Districts and was holding its own public hearings. Miklo said it is important at this point that the Commission has had time to digest and consider the proposal and that the Commission believes it is going in the right direction, most specifically with regard to the overlay zone. Weitzel said he thinks it looks good. He said it may take a certain amount of time to watch it work and to see how things go. Historic Preservation Commission Minutes August 2, 2005 Page 7 Weitzel said that some of the things the Commission is interested in for the future would require much more investigation and time spent on the part of staff and the Commission. He said the Commission wants to make certain that people aren't tearing down buildings as an incentive to grow the community. Weitzel said it appears that is being addressed in the new Code. Maharry thanked Miklo and Howard for coming to the meeting and said he appreciated the amount of work that went into the new Code. Miklo said he expects a vote from the Planning and Zoning Commission, possibly on the 18th. He said that then there will be a couple of work sessions at which the Planning and Zoning Commission presents the draft to the City Council. Miklo said that City Council would then set a public hearing, at the earliest in late September or October. He said he believed the City Council wanted to wrap this up before the end of the year. Weitzel said there are some other things the Commission is looking at, but they are very sketchy right now. Howard said it seems that there are a lot of incentives the Commission is considering that are not related to zoning. Weitzel said the Commission does want to look at financial incentives and tax abatements, which are not zoning issues. He thanked Miklo and Howard for coming to the meeting. OTHER: Maharry said that the Preservation Awards would be held Wednesday at 5:30 in the Library's meeting room. 922 East ColleQe Street. Weitzel said that this item was deferred. 404 South Summit Street. Weitzel said that he and Carlson are doing research on this pending application. Maharry proposed that the Commission allow the sleeping porches to be demolished if the owner would like to do so. Weitzel said that the Commission wouldn't want to approve demolition until a final plan is in place. Weitzel said that if the Commission can get the owner the funding by virtue of the fact that this would be a substantial renovation, the owner may be able to defer some of the expense through a State tax abatement program. Maharry said that evidently there is specific money set aside for the cultural district. Weitzel said that refers to the Old Capitol and the Gilbert-Linn Areas. Maharry said that all of the residential properties in the Gilbert-Linn National Historic District are eligible for cultural district State tax credits. Weitzel pointed out that the Jefferson Street Area is also a national historic district. Weitzel stated that the DRS needs another person to serve on it. He said that Pardekooper is frequently too busy to make it to the meetings. Maharry said that Carlson, Weitzel, and Gunn are also on the DRS. Weitzel suggested having a regular time for the meetings, perhaps before the regular Thursday night Commission meetings. He said another option is to change the by-laws to have only two members on the DRS. Carlson suggested having four people on the DRS, perhaps three people plus an alternate member. McCallum stated that he received an e-mail regarding a TV show producer who is looking for conversions of schoolhouses and that type of thing into residential homes. Weitzel suggested the Mennonite Church in the Longfellow Neighborhood. Maharry suggested the old schoolhouse on North Dodge. Burford said there is also one on Kirkwood Avenue and a house on Fairchild that was once an old church. Burford presented a slide show of the projects involved in the Preservation Awards. Minutes submitted by Anne Schulte. s:/pcd/minutes/H PC/2005/hpc08-02-05.doc = o .,.. [I} [I} .,.. e e~ o "'- u 8 Qj =~ o .,.. Qj I/) ......CJQ ~=Q >~N t~ [I} = Qj Qj "'-...... ~...... CJ< .,.. "'- o ...... [I} .,.. == N ~ ~ ~ 0 ~ ~ 0 :>< :>< :>< :>< 0 :>< co 0 0 0 0 Q 0 ..., ~ 0 ~ - 0 :>< :>< :>< :>< :>< :>< 0 :>< -- 0 0 t"- o Q ~ 0 0 ~ 0 0 :>< 0 :>< :>< :>< 0 :>< :>< 0 0 I ~ 0 I Q\ ~ ~ 0 0 :>< :>< 0 :>< 0 :>< 0 :>< :>< \C 0 0 0 0 0 0 N 0 ~ I -- :>< :>< 0 :>< I :>< 0 0 :>< :>< ~ I 0 0 0 ~ ~ 0 ~ 0 ~ N :>< 0 :>< 0 :>< 0 0 Ô :>< -- 0 0 0 0 'I) 0 0 N 0 0 ~ - :>< :>< 0 :>< 0 :>< 0 :>< 0 :>< -- 0 0 0 'I) 0 0 co 0 ~ N :>< :>< :>< :>< :>< 0 0 :>< 0 :>< -- 0 ..., 0 0 ..., ~ I ~ ~ - :>< :>< :>< :>< :>< :>< Ô :>< 0 -- -- 0 0 0 ..., 0 Q 0 ~ - I :>< 0 :>< :>< :>< 0 :>< :>< :>< -- 0 0 M I 'I) 0 ~ ~ - 0 :>< 0 Ô :>< :>< 0 :>< :>< Ô :>< -- I N I Q 0 ~ ~ - 0 :>< :>< :>< :>< :>< :>< :>< :>< -- 0 0 0 N 0 M I 0 ~ ~ ~ - 0 0 :>< :>< :>< :>< :>< :>< Ô -- 0 I 0 0 - 0 0 co I I ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ -- 0 I :>< :>< :>< Ô :>< Ô - 0 I 0 0 0 0 I Ê ,g 00 r- \D r- oo \D r- r- or. \D 00 0 0 0 t:2 t:2 t:2 0 0 t:2 0 t:2 -- -- -- -- -- -- <I) 0. 0'1 Q\ Q\ Q\ Q\ 0'1 0'1 0'1 0'1 Q\ Q\ ¡.... >< ~ ~ N ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ N N ~ -- -- -- ¡;¡¡ <'"> <'"> <'"> <'"> <'"> <'"> <'"> <'"> <'"> <'"> <'"> r- e II.> r- " Q. ~ =ª! = .: C> ~ = r- C> II.> 'ë - = C> = ~ ëë ..:.c: -= 0 = '" 0 -= U II.> C> i '" N ~ ï: .s = 'E ... '" ... ลก = ~ u = 'a:¡ "a:¡ ~ ::; ::; =:I U = íJ ~ C> ~ ~ ¡;..¡ ¡:., ¡:., rrJ ~ ~ z ~ ...; ::; ::; ::; ...; ...; < ...; ~ "'0 ( ) r.. '" ( ) ::s ot) ,.., ~ ·Ë 13 g; ( ) ( ) ~~5~~ "''''15o''' £~<zz II II II II II ;>.. ~~ ( ) -- ~:><oo