Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1982-12-21 Bd Comm minutesr L MINUTES RIVERFRONT COMMISSION NOVEMBER 17, 1982 7:30 PM CITY MANAGER'S CONFERENCE ROOM MEMBERS PRESENT: Sokol, Knight, Rausch, Fountain, Johnson, Willis, Oehmke, Lewis MEMBERS ABSENT: Cleland, Boutelle STAFF PRESENT: Franklin, Moen GUESTS PRESENT: Gillies RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL 1. Riverfront Commission recommends that the City Council adopt conservation easements as a tool to implement the vegetative buffer portion of the buffer and trail proposed in the Stanley Plan. 2. The Riverfront Commission recommends that the City Council accept the Engineering Department's proposal for a structure which would house the salt pile at the Iowa City maintenance yards and that the Council allocate the requisite funds for construction of this building. SUMMARY OF DISCUSSION The meeting was called to order by Chairperson Knight at 7:30 PM. New Commission members Rausch and Willis and the new staff person, Monica Moen, were introduced. The minutes of October 13, 1982, were approved as submitted by a unanimous vote (Johnson moved and Lewis seconded). DISCUSSION OF CONSERVATION EASEMENTS AND RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL Sokol explained the contents and the history of the conservation easement model. He referred to the Iowa Natural Heritage Foundation booklet for the benefit of new members of the Commission. He pointed out that the purpose of the easements was to preserve an area along the river for perpetuity but the easement model did not provide for public access. It was pointed out that the model easement had been reviewed by the City's legal staff. A question arose as to why someone would want to contribute a conservation easement; minimal tax advantages and a larger public interest of preserving riverfront property were given as reasons for contributing. Fountain questioned whether the mowing of property would be considered routine maintenance under N3 of the convenants. Franklin pointed out that it could be considered as such, but cautioned the Commission that ,:he easement before them was only a model and that specific documents would have to be negotiated with individual property owners. 111CRD(Iu4ED BY JOAM MIC AG,7L AP I CEDAR RAPIDS DES 'dD1YE5 a ,301T ti J \I Riverfront Commission November 17, 1982 Page 2 Willis questioned whether the use of zoning would not be more appropriate. Franklin explained the river corridor overlay zone to him, pointing out that this zone was currently being reviewed but was not guaranteed passage; the easements were designed to achieve the same goals as the zone proposed and would serve the same function if the zone did not pass. Fountain suggested that a revision be made in the language concerning the "right of view" mentioned in N1 of paragraph 4. She suggested inserting the phrase "from the river" after the word "property". Oehmke moved and Johnson seconded that the model conservation easement be revised as suggested and referred to the City Council for their approval and to the Parks and Recreation Commission for their review. Discussion followed of the problems which might arise in determining a legal description for riverbank property and discussion also followed relating to the presentation of the document to the City Council. The motion to refer the easement to the City Council and the Parks and Recreation Commission passed unanimously. PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION LIAISON Craig Willis was reintroduced as the Parks and Recreation Commission member who would be serving on the Riverfront Commission also. Willis stated that it was his intent to keep the channels of communications open between the two commissions. NAPOLEON PARK -RIVERBANK TRAIL Commission members who had completed a field survey of the Napoleon Park riverbank area related their impressions of the feasibility of a nature trail in the area. Lewis and Johnson stated that they felt a nature trail would be appropriate and would be a good addition to the buffer and trail system. Fountain pointed, out that it would be advisable -to place a sign at the south end of the riverbank area indicating that the park ended and private property began; the sign would avoid any occurrence of trespass beyond the end of the park. Franklin stated that she had discussed the idea of nature trail in the area with Dennis Showalter, the Director of the Parks and Recreation Department. She stated that Showalter.'s main concern involved the problem of mosquitos in the area during the summer months; he had indicated that he would be relucant to encourage people to use the area given this problem. A number of commissioners responded that the mosquito problem in Iowa City was not isolated to Napoleon Park or the riverbank area but was pervasive and could be found in a number of parks and vegetated areas within the county. It was suggested that a recommendation be made to the Parks and Recreation Commission to look at the possibility of a low -maintenance trail along the riverbank in Napoleon Park. Lewis moved and Oehmke seconded that a memo be sent to the Parks and Recreation Commissionprior to their December meeting with the Riverfront Commission's recommendation; the motion was approved unanimously. ELECTION OF OFFICERS 30 l �l II CROC I Lt ICD B1' JCRM MICROLAB I CEDAR N4{'105 DCS '401AE5 r L Riverfront Commission November 17, 1982 Page 3 Lewis was elected Chairperson for 1983 and Sokol was re-elected as Vice -Chair. OTHER BUSINESS AND PUBLIC DISCUSSION Certificates of Appreciation were presented to Bernadine Knight, the outgoing Chairperson and Sally Johnson, a County representative who was moving out of state. Johnson and Knight expressed their appreciation. Johnson suggested that the commission continue to pursue their goal of informing the public about the Iowa River. She encouraged Knight to complete the slide show presentation which had been discussed. Moen reported on the location of the salt pile at the Iowa City maintenance yard. She presented Engineering Department plans showing that the salt pile would be moved to the south of the proposed transit facility and would be placed within 60 feet of the river. She pointed out that the Engineering Department had proposed for inclusion in the Capital Improvements Program $40,000 for the construction of a building to house the salt pile. The plans presented also showed a number of storage sheds which would be placed in close proximity to the salt pile, also south of the transit facility. Several commissioners expressed deep concern that the problem of the salt pile leaching into the river, which they felt had been addressed to some extent in the past, would be worsened by the move. The commissioners requested that a memo be sent to the City Council on their behalf expressing their concern about the placement of the salt pile and the storage sheds and pointing out the fact that this location for the salt pile would be contrary to the commission's goal of achieving a 100 foot buffer between the river and any development. The commission felt that the pile would be placed too close to the river, that the gravel surface proposed would be inappropriate, and that visibility from the river would be aesthetically impaired. The commission stated that the memo should also include a statement of their. opposition to the open storage of salt; it was suggested that at the appropriate time an additional memo be sent to -the Council supporting the Engineering Department's request For funds to build an enclosed structure. It was decided that the next meeting of the Riverfront Commission should take place in January, unless urgent events arose. Meeting adjourned 8:55 P.M. Minutes submitted by Karin Franklin. 111CROFILMED 61' JORM MICR6LAB CEDAR RAPIDS • AES MOM[$ 3618 J r MINUTES PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION ROOM B, RECREATION CENTER NOVEMBER 10, 1982 MEMBERS PRESENT: Crum, Dean, Jennings, Martin, Mitchell, Riddle, Willis MEMBERS ABSENT: Wooldrik STAFF PRESENT: Showalter, Lee, Howell, Christner, Crutchfield GUESTS PRESENT: Anne Glenister, Project GREEN; Mike Cilek RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE CITY COUNCIL * Moved by Dean, seconded by Crum that we enthusiastically endorse the naming of the little league fields Bobby Oldis Fields, but would express the desire that any future action of this sort involving the Department of Parks and Recreation be channeled first through the Parks and Recreation Commission for their recom- mendation. Unanimous. * Moved by Jennings, seconded by Dean to recommend that we support and approve of the Bobby Oldis Memorial plan to build a restroom/concession/storage building at City Park. Unanimous. RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE STAFF None. SUMMARY OF DISCUSSION AND FORMAL ACTION TAKEN Moved by Dean, seconded by Crum that the October minutes be approved as written. Unanimous. Craig Willis has been appointed by the City Council to serve the remaining two months of Humbert's term, as well as a four year term. Riddle also appointed Willis to serve as the Parks and Recreation Commission representative to the Riverfront Commission. Mitchell has been appointed to a four year term after serving 18 months of an unexpired term. Mike Cilek appeared on behalf of the Bobby Oldis Memorial, asking for approval of the construction by next spring of a restroom/concession/storage facility by the little league diamonds in City Park. The concrete block building would be nearly identical to the Mercer Park building, with a few minor changes as — recommended by Showalter, Lee, and Howell. There will be a fund drive to get donated materials, labor, and money (need estimated at $10,000). It will probably be necessary to put in a larger water line. The building is designed * for handicapped access. Moved by Jennings, seconded by Dean to recommend that we support and approve of the Bobby Oldis Memorial plan to build a restroom/ concess4on/storage building at City'Park. Unanimous. Riddle commented that the City Council had passed a resolution naming the eight little league fields in City Park the Bobby Oldis Fields, but that they had failed to get a recommen- dation from the Parks and Recreation Commission before doing so. Moved by Dean, seconded by Crum that the Parks and Recreation Commission enthusiastically 3.017 1 MICRUILMED BY JORM MICROLAB ' J CfmAm RAPIDS GCS Id014C5 i v November 10, 1982 Minutes, Page 2 endorses the naming of the little league fields in City'Park Bobby Oldis Fields, but would express the desire that any future action of this sort involving the Department of Parks and Recreation be channeled first through the Parks and Recreation Commission for their recommendation. Unanimous. Showalter reported that Mr. Caruth, who owns the only access to the proposed Alpine Park, had presented legal documents regarding access control. Caruth would allow vehicular access five times per year if given a written request and 24 hours notice. Showalter felt that emergency access was also necessary, and that 24 hour written notice was not practical. The documents have been taken to Larry Lynch who represents the owners of the property, Trees Inc. We would need to remove any dead and dangerous trees, then leave the area in its natural state. We would want the area made exempt from the weed ordinance, and can do so by declaring it a natural area. BUDGETS Lee presented the Recreation Division budget for FY84, which begins July 1, 1983. For this fiscal year everyone was asked to keep to their FY83 budget; a 5% increase was allowed in areas where it was felt an increase was needed. 7280 miscellaneous supplies was cut back for FY84 because it had been budgeted higher than needed. 9210 building improvements includes $1,000 for ceiling fans in the non -air conditioned craft room and $1,500 to replace a hot water storage tank at City Park pool. The old tank, which provides hot water storage for showers, broke down last summer and was not repairable. State law requires that a shower be taken before entering a pool. After a short discussion the Commission reluctantly agreed that although it was a lot of money to put into an old facility, it must be done to comply with state law. Howell reported that the recent combining of the forester and horticulturist positions will affect several changes in the FY84.Parks budget. 6130 temporary employees - $4,000 transferred to forestry. 7210 agriculture supplies - $2,000 transferred to forestry. 9500 transfers - $10,000 has been set aside by the City Council to acquire parkland. Showalter's budget for Administration is nearly all for salaries. All three budgets have gone through Finance, but have not yet been to the City Manager's_ office. Capital improvement project information will be discussed at the next meeting. CHAIR REPORT None. DIRECTOR'S REPORT The City Council will begin collection of the hotel/motel tax April 1, 1983. We are to get 25% of these fees, probably for a pool. OTI4ER BUSINESS Mitchell asked about possible soccer fields on Scott Boulevard. Showalter reported that there is room for a field which would be better than some they are now playing on, but the best areas are farther off the road where parking 3017 rncmonuaen sr JORM MIC R0LAE I i I CEDAR RAPIDS •DCS '•1O1NCS L it November 10, 1982 Minutes, Page 3 is a problem. Crum asked about using a flat area at Regina High School near the football field for a soccer field. Showalter will look into this suggestion. The regular Commission meeting for December falls on a home basketball game. All members agreed that the December meeting would be held on the 15th at 7:00 p.m. Moved by Crum, seconded by Dean to adjourn, 6:20 p.m. Karen Christner MICROFILMED BY I JORM MICRWLA9 � CEDAR RAPIDS • BES'MOINES I I i I ge/9 ! J� r MINUTES SENIOR CENTER COPHISSION NOVEMBER 4, 1982 1 P.M. SENIOR CENTER CONFERENCE ROOM MEMBERS PRESENT: G. Scott, M. Kattchee, A. Arneson, J. Williams, B. Coen, M. Clover MEMBERS ABSENT: L. Carlton GUESTS PRESENT: Conrad Browne, applicant -for Commission position; Ruth Wagner, Council of Elders; STAFF PRESENT: B. Meisel, L. Benz, B. Murray MINUTES: G. Scott declared the minutes of the October meeting accepted with two minor corrections. COUNCIL OF ELDERS REPORT: Ruth Wagner shared positive comments from the Cuuncil of Elders about the volunteer appreciation dinner. The Council of Elders hopes the celebration will continue for next year. Council of Elders Hostin Coffee Service: There may have been miscommunication as the ounce of lders understood from Lee Poynter that AARP was starting the service. CoE understood that AARP was to take care of providing and serving the coffee in the Senior Cen'er lobby and that the Senior Center Commission would underwrite any deficit; this would be for a trial period of three months. Ruth will talk again to Lee Poynter to see if AARP can take care of this service. i The AARP nominating committee will act as greeters at the door to encourage AARP members to sign in; and explain to people why the signing in of numbers is important. Rural Outreach: Three Council of Elders members met with older people in the Cosgrove area. The people were eager to know more about the Center. The Outreach Committee is in the process of arranging a meeting with Tiffin and Oxford groups. Christmas Ornaments: Each person is encouraged to bring a handmade non- returnab o article to decorate the Christmas tree. BY-LAWS: The secretary will mail a correction of page four, Term of Office section of the By-laws, to the Commission members. •The new language is: the Johnson County Board of Supervisors shall appoint two members. The City Council of Iowa City shall appoint five members. All appointments shall be for a period of three years. M. Kattchee moved to authorize submission of revised By-laws to the Commission for their December meeting for,adoption. J. Williams seconded the 3490 MICROF ILMED B1' �L JORM MIC R A6 L1 CEDAR RAPIDS • DES MOINES j J v k■ L SENIOR CENTER COMMIS! I NOVEMBER 4, 1982 PAGE 2 motion. Motion declared carried (6 yes, 1 absent). After the Commission approval, the By-laws will be sent to the Board of Supervisors and the Iowa City Council for their approval in order for the By-laws to become effective. REVIEW OF VOLUNTEER•APPRECIATION DINNER: B. Meisel distributed letters of gratitude from participants of the appreciation dinner. G. Scott noticed that people were delighted at being able to go out in the evening and go somewhere and have a good time. Letters will be available at the Coordinator's office for people to read. Appreciation was expressed to the committee, the staff, and for the plaque. Information on the cost of the program, including the graphic artist's time for designing the invitations, program and plaque was presented by B. Meisel. L. Benz told of the misunderstanding of some people who volunteer for congregate meals and expected to be recognized at the volunteer appreciation dinner for the Senior Center volunteers. Lori explained that other groups such as Congregate Meals have their own volunteer recognition parties. The two Commission members who are members of the Congregate Meals Nutrition Board were asked to explain this misunderstanding to the Congregate Meals staff who in turn could clarify the situation to their volunteers. REVIEW OF THE GOALS AND PROPOSED BUDGET FOR THE SENIOR CENTER: B. Meisel reported that the goals are the same as those of the previous year. J. Williams suggested that under Division Objectives 2, the words "effectively administer" should be changed to "effectively facilitate the coordination of other agencies," to get away from any inference that the staff may be running other agencies. B. Meisel, in the report submitted to the City Manager, requested a volunteer coordinator staff position. Six hundred dollars is requested to be added to the budget for next year's volunteer appreciation festivities. M. Kattchee moved to approve the budget draft for submission to the City Manager. J. Williams seconded the motion. Motion declared carried (6 yes, 1 absent). SENIOR CENTER UPDATE: a. Meisel reported that Mary Slaymaker checked on figures in the Congregate Meals and Senior Center and found 175 people in October did not sign in at the Senior Center register. With the additional 175, the total for October Senior Center usage is 5145. Saturday and Sunday usage of the Center from 2 to 3 p.m. (after the meal) is minimal. J. Williams suggested the Commission should consider if it was important for the Center to be open Saturdays and Sundays and how long the Center should be open. The morning secretary hours were changed to 9-1 to serve the public better over the noon hour. The maintenance person is now responsible for issuing parking tickets at the Senior Center parking lot. There has been only 1 application filed to fill the City vacancy on the Senior Center Commission. Interested people should be encouraged to apply. L. Carlton's term expires in January. MICROf ILMED BY DORM MICR6LAB CEDAR RAPIDS DCS 'd01'IES 360740 J 9A, SENIOR CENTER COMMIS! NOVEMBER 4, 1982 PAGE 3 THE ELDERCRAFT SHOP REPORT: L. Benz reported the year's end total of 131 consignors, $8,807.67 sold in merchandise - the consignors received 80% of this amount, 20% is for overhead cost; the balance remaining, $1,600. CONTRACT OBLIGATIONS: The agencies located in the Center are not fulfilling all aspects of their contracts in terms of volunteer hours staffed and submission of yearly evaluation. M. Kattchee moved to write a letter to the chairperson of the boards of the agencies, referring to paragraph M in the contract " agrees to submit a yearly self-evaluation of services and activities" asking for a reply from the boards. The Commission wants to be prepared to act on renewal of contracts. M. Clover seconded the motion. J. Williams recommended re -sending the previous letter asking for this report, with a cover letter of information. The motion declared carried (6 yes, 1 absent). ELDERLY SERVICES AGENCY REPORT TO UNITED WAY Section E of ESA report states: "Another major problem is the attitude of the Senior Center staff towards the elderly community and agencies who occupy space in the Center. We are working on a solution." The Commission members suggested a letter should be sent Monday from Gladys Scott, Chairperson of the Senior Center Commission, to the Chairperson of the Elderly Services Board and ask their board to meet with the Senior Center Commission to discuss the statement and the facts that provoked that statement on Thursday, November 11 or Friday, November 12. The Commission will. suggest to the Board of ESA that staff from the Senior Center and ESA not attend this meeting. All Commissioners eicpressed their concern that a staff person would make such an accusation without any apparent basis. Meeting adjourned 4 p.m. �- Michael Kattchee, ecretary Minutes prepared by Barbara Murray MICROFILMED DY ' JORM MICROLAB � CEDAR RAPIDS DDS F101N15 3oaa 1 J L MINUTES SENIOR CENTER COMMISSION NOVEMBER 19, 1982 1:30 P.M. SENIOR CENTER CONFERENCE ROOM MEMBERS PRESENT: G. Scott, E M. Kattchee MEMBERS ABSENT: J. Williams Coen, L. Carlton, A. Arneson, M. Clover, GUESTS PRESENT: Martha Eimen, Council of Elders; Neal Berlin, Iowa City City Manager; Betty Ockenfels, Board of Supervisors STAFF PRESENT: B. Meisel, B. Murray Chairperson G. Scott convened the meeting at 1:35 p.m. As introductions were made, Betty Ockenfels made it clear that she was here representing herself, not as an individual Supervisor and as a representative of the Board of Supervisors. G. Scott proceeded to detail events that led up to this special meeting. At the regular Senior Center Commission meeting on November 4, the Commission instructed the Chairperson to send a letter to the Elderly Services Agency Board chairperson for a meeting with the ESA Board. The purpose of this meeting was to clarify a statement in ESA's written application to United Way. "Another major problem is the attitude of the Senior Center staff towards the elderly community and agencies who occupy space in the Center." The letter was to Marian VanFossen. Two times for a meeting were offered: November 11 at 4 p.m. or November 12 at 4 p.m. There was delay in getting a reply as there was a new chairperson of ESA. Gladys talked with chairperson Roberta Patrick who said the ESA Board could not meet on either day. At that point, Gladys found another date agreeable to members of the Commission which was Wednesday, November 17. After receiving no answer from Ms. Patrick regarding the possibility of a November 17th meeting at 4 p.m., Gladys pursued an answer by telephone and was told that the ESA Board had mat twice, on November 10th and November 11, and that ESA did not consider a joint meeting with the Commission necessary. A letter from Ms. Patrick was later received which confirmed the phone conversation. Gladys then met with Mayor Mary Neuhauser which Gladys summarized as being very reassuring as to the follow-up of this matter with the City Council. M. Clover stated that very severe accusations had been made and it is our duty as Commissioners to "seek out the truth." G. Scott said that it has been verified that the statement in question was on the original report. It is also verified that that statement is not the point of view of people familiar with the staff's attitude. Furthermore, the SC Commission unanimously and strongly disagrees with any implication that there are attitude problems. 111CROrILMED P I 1 DORM MICR61 13 J CEDAR RANIDS • DES MOVIES 340,20 L SENIOR CENTER Cl ISSION NOVEMBER 19, 198c PAGE 2 ry Neal Berlin reported that Marythadthe askedUnited LucyWay Luxenberg aforwhich specifics Nuhauser was present, regarding that statement. Lucy presented information which Mary considered to be, inconsequential. People at the meeting did not go away with a negative view of the Senior Center. G. Scott stated that Mary Neuhauser expressed her satisfaction with the Senior Center operation and supports the staff. Mary would prefer to have is the Council be endangered h actions atalate of to when the United Way campaign could Neal Berlin pointed out that the City Council looks to the Senior Center Commission for advice related to agencies which are located in the Center. If the Commission feels there are problems with the agencies, this information should be presented to the Council which in turn would become part of the basis for decisions on dispersal of funds from the Council to these agencies. The City Council is interested in the Commission's view as to how these agencies are serving the city. M. Clover stated that it is difficult for the Commissioners to evaluate the agencies sincethe agencies have not fulfilled their contract by presenting an annual report to the Commission. Neal answered that you to cannot force 9Cou1 the fact thatethe agencies nbring es arenotcooperatto ingttention of the M. Kattchee pointed out that when official comment comes from the Commission, there will be an accusation that the Commission is trying to run the agencies. The Commission is making extensive efforts not to be put in that position. Betty Ockenfels stated there is an increasing Concern by some elderly regarding the ESA. M. Kattchee said that if the statement on the United Way form was made under the auspices of the ESA director, then the director is not deserving of serving the elderly community simply because this is clearly an attempt to Senior Facility.undrine the Senior Center operation and therefore undermine a Sen G. Scott suggested the Commission should make a statement to Mary Neuhauser and honor her request for extra time. M. Clover stated the Commission can live with a wait but should insist on some action. M. Kattchee stated the Commission has to draft a statement that is clear cut and expresses our opinion. M. Clover moved that a letter be sent to Mayor Mary Neuhauser asking her to inform the City Council of the Senior Center Commission's frustration caused by the clear cut efforts by some people at ESA to undermine the men operation of the Center. Specifically the etisdefina regarding lyha attitude of our staff (made on the U.W. application) totally unprofessional cotvnent and quite an illconceived action by the ESA director. The Commission's frustrations stem from the ESA board's unwillingness to meet and resolve this matter. The Commission is available to discuss this matter and to furnish further information. MICROFILMED BY JOfiM MIC Rd)LA9 CEDAR RAPIDSDCS MOVIES 30x0 SENIOR CENTER �, `.SSION NOVEMBER 19, 1982 PAGE 3 M. Clover moved that the Commission will give permission to Chairman Gladys Scott and Secretary Mike Kattchea to edit the above motion to correctly state the sense of the Commission and include this in a letter to Mayor Mary Neuhauser. Motion seconded by A. Arneson. Motion declared carried (6 yes; 1 absent). The Commission agreed that an appearance to present this information at informal meetings of the City Council and the' Board of Supervisors be cancelled. On other business, there has been a letter sent to the Board of Supervisors asking them to instruct their agencies to issue an annual report to the Senior Center Commission as agreed to in their contracts. B. Meisel reported that regarding the smoking issue, the advisory board of the Congregate. Meals unanimously supported the policy of no smoking in the dining assembly room as stated in the Operational Handbook. Meeting adjourned at 2:45 p.m. Mike Kattchee, Secretary Minutes reported by Barbara Murray. I MICROFILMED BY JORM MIC ROLAti ] ,� 1 I CEDAR RAPIDS DES MINES L—i I MINUTES HOUSING APPEALS BOARD NOVEMBER 9, 1982 MEMBERS PRESENT: Carol Karstens, Beth Ringgenberg, Goldene Haendel and Al Logan MEMBERS ABSENT: Mike Farran STAFF PRESENT: Judy Hoard, David Malone, Kelley Vezina, David Brown and Larry Kinney SUMMARY OF DISCUSSION AND ACTION TAKEN: Chairperson Haendel called the meeting to order. Logan made a motion to approve the minutes from the previous meeting; this motion was seconded by Ringgenberg. The motion carried. APPEAL OF MR. CALVIN KNIGHT Others present: William Meardon Inspector Heard reported that she conducted a licensing inspection at 715 North Linn on August 12, 1922. The violation being appealed was Chapter 17-6.A. Lack of required access. Apartments N2 and N3, only access to bathroom is through second bedroom. The Board deferred making a decision four weeks ago at the October 12, 1982, appeals hearing until pictures could be taken of the apartments. Attorney William Meardon made a request to be able to give evidence on the other violations that were appealed four weeks ago. Karstens made a motion to reconsider the decisions on 715 North Linn. Ringgenberg seconded the motion. The motion carried. Mr. Meardon pointed out that this property had been inspected in previous years and met the codes and the present owner made special efforts to make sure that this property was inspected before he made the purchase. At that time the property passed inspection. Hoard said that apartment 1 was not owner -occupied at this time, but was a rental unit. The Board had granted a variznce at the October 12, 1982 hearing so long as owner -occupied. Karstens made a motion to grant a variance on Chapter 17-6.A. Lack of required access for apartments 1, 2 and 3. Ringgenberg seconded the motion. The motion carried. Al Logan left before the vote on the motion. Karstens made a motion to uphold all original decisions. Ringgenberg seconded the motion. The motion carried. 3oal 141CRO NICD BY I �F JORM MIC R1i1L AB CEDAR RAPIDS •DCS MOINES. J r L Mousing Appeals board November 9, 1982 Page 2 APPEAL OF HELENE SCRIABINE Others present: Mark Moen Inspector Malone reported that he conducted a licensing inspection at 28 West Park Road on October 4, 1982. The violation being appealed was Chapter 17- 5.N.(4) Lack of required 7' minimum ceiling height. The second floor dwelling unit has approximately 6'11" ceiling height. The other two appealed violations were withdrawn. Mr. Moen stated that he had lived in the apartment at one time and had no problems, and the property is now being rented by another couple and they have no problems with ceiling height either. Ringgenberg made a motion to grant a variance to Chapter 17-5.N.(4) Lack of required 7' minimum ceiling height. Karstens seconded the motion. The motion carried: APPEAL OF IVA M. HILLEMAN Others present: Iva M. Hilleman inspector Hoard reported that she conducted a licensing inspection at 624 North Linn on August 31, 1982. The two violations being appealed were Chapter 17- S.N.(4) Lack of required 7' minimum ceiling height. Apartment 2, bedroom, kitchen, and dining room have ceiling heights of 6'10" and apartment 4, bedroom has ceiling height of 6'84". Mrs. Hilleman stated that she had put a lot of money into this apartment and fixed the roof this past year. Ringgenberg made a motion to grant a variance to Chapter 17-5.N.(4) Lack of required 7 minimum ceiling height in the bedroom, kitchen and dining room of apartment 2. Karstens seconded the motion. The motion carried. Karstens made a motion to grant a variance to Chapter 17-5.N.(4) Lack of required 7' minimum ceiling height in the bedroom of apartment 4. Ring%-ienberg seconded the motion. The motion carried. APPEAL OF MIRIAM YUUNG Others present: Miriam Young and Susan Young Inspector Hoard reported that she conducted a licensing inspection at 1606 Muscatine Avenue on September 28, 1982. The first violation being appealed was Chapter 17-5.B. Lack of required kitchen or kitchenette, first floor, west dwelling unit, kitchenette has 23.63 square feet, lacking the 40 square feet requirement. Mrs. Young stated that the apartment does have a kitchenette alcove that is known as a Dwyer unit. She showed the Board a picture of what it looked like. Karstens made a motion to grant a variance to Chapter 17-5.B. Lack of required kitchen or kitchenette. Ringgenberg seconded the motion. The motion carried. The next violation being appealed was Chapter 17-5.M.(1) Lack of required electrical outlet, first floor, west dwelling unit, kitchenette, convenience outlets are 3'4" distance apart, lacking the required minimum distance of 4'8" apart. Mrs. Young stated that she felt that there was no other place to put an outlet and felt that the outlets there were sufficient. Karstens made a motion touphold Chapter 17-5.M.(1) Lack of required electrical outlet. Ringgenberg seconded the motion. The mt.tion carried. 30.11 1 111CROEILMED B1' JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RA PIDS • DES ',IDINES I � J r L Housing Appeals Board November 9, 1982 Page 3 APPEAL OF MIRIAM YOUNG Others present: Miriam Young and Susan Young Inspector Hoard reported that she conducted a licensing inspection at 340 Ellis Avenue on October 27, 1982. The violation being appealed was Chapter 17-5.N.(4) Lack of required 7' minimum ceiling height, apartment M5 has ceiling height of 6'1111. Al Logan returned at this time. Mrs. Young stated that there was duct work for the boiler over the ceiling and that the ceiling could not be raised. Karstens made a motion to grant a variance to Chapter 17-5.N.(4) Lack of required 7' minimum ceiling height. Logan seconded the motion. The motion carried. APPEAL OF MAYNARD E. SCHNEIDER Others present: Mary Schneider Inspector Vezina reported that to conducted a licensing inspection at 413-415 Ronalds, on September 8, 1982. The first violation being appealed was Chapter 17-7.B. Accessory structure not maintained in good state of repair, southwest garage is lacking protective coating. Mrs. Schneider reported that she wanted time to have the building removed or repaired. Logan made a motion to uphold Chapter 17-7.B. Accessory structure not maintained in -good state of repair, extending the time to correct violation until July 1, 1983. Karstens seconded the motion. The motion carried. The next violation being appealed was Chapter 17-5.F. Lack of privacy in toilet room/bathroom; 413 Fonalds., basement toilet not contained in a room by itself. Mrs. Schneider stated she didn't think it mattered because it was in her own home. Karstens made a motion to grant a variance to Chapter 17-5.F. Lack of. privacy in toilet room/bathroom, as long as the property is owner -occupied. Logan seconded the motion. The motion carried. Another violation being appealed was Chapter 17-5.I.(2)(a) Lack of required handrail, 413 Ronalds, stairs to third floor lack a handrail. Mrs.Schneider stated it was in her own home and she does not want one. ingnterhandrail, made a motion to grant a variance to Chapter 17-7.5.I.(2)(a) _acerequired stairs to third floor, as long as home is owner -occupied. Karstens seconded the motion. The motion carried. The next violation being appealed was Chapter 17-5.I.(2)(a) Lack of required handrail, 413 Ronalds, handrail is lacking for steps to second floor. Mrs. Schneider again stated it was her own home and she does not want one. Karstens made a motion to grant a variance to Chapter 17-5.I.(2)(a) Lack of required handrail, as long as the property is owner -occupied. Ringgenberg seconded the motion. The motion carried. Another violation being appealed was Chapter 17-5.I.(1) Insufficient means of egess.toruphold4Chapter1ds 17-Salk(1) Inre sufficient cientfineansroffKarstens 13 egress.R nggenberg seconded the motion. The motion carried. MICROF ILIdED al' JORM MICROLAS CEDAR RAPIDS - DES IMOIDES 3oal 1 J L nuusing Appeals doaro November 9, 1982 Page 4 The next violation being appealed was Chapter 17-5.J.(1) Lack of required natural light, 413 Ronalds, third floor bedroom lacks sufficient window area for natural light. Mrs. Schneider stated she just insulated roof and ceiling of the house. She stated it would be too costly to have everything re -done. Logan made a motion to grant a variance to Chapter 17-5.J.(1) Lack of required natural light, 413 Ronalds, third floor bedroom, as long as the property is owner - occupied. Ringgenberg seconded the motion. The motion carried. Another violation being appealed was Chapter 17-5.J.(1) Lack of required natural light, 415 Ronalds, north room in basement being used as a sleeping room, lacks sufficient window area for natural light. Mrs. Schneider stated she didn't know that the basement was being used as a sleeping room and the tenant have been warned of the situation. Karstens made a motion to uphold Chapter 17-5.J.(1) Lack of required natural light, 415 Ronalds, north basement room being used as a sleeping room. Ringgenberg seconded the motion. The motion carried. The next violation being appealed was Chapter 17-5.K.(2)(b) Lack of required natural ventilation, third floor bedroom, 413, lacks sufficient window area for ventilation. Ringgenberg bade a motion to grant a variance to Chapter 17- 5.K.(2)(b) Lack of required natural ventilation, as long as the property is owner -occupied. Logan seconded the motion. The motion carried. Another violation being appealed was Chapter 17-5.K.(2)(b) Lack of required natural ventilation, 415 Ronalds, north basement room in basement being used as a sleeping room lacks sufficient window area for ventilation. Mrs. Schneider again stated she didn't know the basement was being used as a sleeping room. Ringgenberg made a motion to uphold Chapter 17-5.K.(2)(b) Lack of required natural ventilation, 415 Ronalds, north basement room. Logan seconded the motion. The motion carried. The next violation being appealed was Chapter 17-5.M.(2) Lack of required electric light fixture or switched outlet, 413 Ronald, second floor, north bedroom, lacks a switched outlet or electric light fixture. Logan made a motion to uphold Chapter 17-5.M.(2) Lack of required electric light fixture or switched outlet, 413 Ronalds, second floor, north bedroom. Karstens seconded the motion. The motion carried. APPEAL Of LEO E. MILLER Others present: Mrs. Miller Inspector Vezina reported that he conducted a licensing inspection at 616 North Dubuque on October 1, 1982. the first violation being appealed was Chapter 17- 7.A.(4) Window, storm window, window latch, window lock and/or other aperture covering not maintained in good and functional condition, southwest bedroom, second floor, west storm window is broken; south bedroom, second floor, south windows are broken and northwest room, second floor, northwest storm window is broken. Karstens made a motion to uphold Chapter 17-7.A.(4) Window, storm winder, window latch, window lock, and/or other ape-ture covering not maintained in good and functional condition, all three violations. Ringgenberg seconded the motion. The motion carried. MICROI ILMED 3s JORM MICR40LAO CEDAR RAPIDS • DCS '401:46 3oa 1 J FS L Housing Appeals Board November 9, 1982 Page 5 The next violation being appealed was Chapter 17-1. I. Electrical system not maintained in good and safe working condition, cover is missing off lis;ht above sink, second floor bath. Ringgenberg made a motion to uphold Chapter 3.7-7. I. Electrical system not maintained in good and safe working condition. Karstens seconded the motion. The motion carried. Another violation being appealed was Chapter 17-5.E. Lack of or improper location of required lavatory basin, toilet room in basement lacks a lavatory. Logan made a motion to grant a variance to Chapter 17-5.E. Lack of or improper location of required lavatory basin, as long as the property is owner -occupied. Karstens seconded the motion. The motion carried. The next violation being appealed was Chapter 17-5.I.(2)(a) Lack of required handrail, handrail is lacking for steps to attic. Mrs. Miller stated that she and her husband were the only people that went into the attic and the attic is padlocked. Karstens made a motion to grant a variance to Chapter 17-5.I.(2)(a) Lack of required handrail, as long as the property is owner -occupied, padlocked, and only the owner has access. Ringgenberg seconded the motion. The motion carried. Another violation being appealed was Chapter 17-5.I.(2)(a) Lack of required handrail, handrail is lacking for bottom four interior steps to basement. Karstens made a motion to grant a variance to Chapter 17-5.I.(2)(a) Lack of required handrail, as long as the property is owner -occupied. Logan seconded the motion. The motion carried. The next violation being appealed was Chapter 17-5.I.(2)(a) Lack of required handrail, handrail is lacking for exterior steps to basement. Logan made a motion to grant a variance to Chapter 17-5.I.(2)(a) Lack of required handrail, as long as the home is owner -occupied. Ringgenberg seconded the motion. The motion carried. Another violation being appealed was Chapter 17-5.I.(2)(a) Lack of required handrail, exterior steps to southeast entrance lack a handrail. Ringgenberg made a motion to grant a variance to Chapter 17-5.I.(2)(a) Lack of required handrail, as long as the property is owner -occupied. Logan seconded the motion. The motion carried. Logan left hearing, he did not return. The next violation being appealed was Chapter 17-5.M.(1) Lack of required electrical outlets, kitchen, first floor unit, electrical outlets are not spaced at 25% perimeter of room. Karstens made a motion to grant a variance to Chapter 17-5.M.(1) Lack of required electrical outlets as long as the property is owner - occupied. Ringgenberg seconded the motion. The motion carried. Another violation being appealed was Chapter 17-5.M.(2) Lack of required electric light fixture or switched outlet, first floor, northwest bedroom lacks a switched outlet or ceiling light. Karstens made a motion to uphold Chapter 17-5.M.(2) Lack of required electric light fixture or switched outlet. Ringgenberg seconded the motion. The motion carried. The last violation being appealed was Chapter 17-5.8. Kitchen/kitchenette inadequately equipped, second floor lacks a kitchen that is accessible to all tenants on second floor. Karstens made a motion to grant a variance to Chapter I11CROi ILMED Bh JORM MICROLAS CEDAR RAPIDS • DCS TINES 3cal 1 J nuubuly mppedIb oudru November 9, 1982 Page 6 17-5.B. Kitchen/kitchenette inadequately equipped. Ringgenberg seconded the motion. The motion carried. APPEAL OF AMOS BORNTREGER Others present: Amos Borntreger Inspector Vezina reported that he conducted a licensing inspection appealed was Chapter95East Washington on September 14, 1982. The violation being app 5.N.(4) Lack of required 7' minimum ceiling height, q4, ceiling height is 6'11". Karstens made a motion to grant a variance to Chapter 17-5.N.(4) Lack of required 7' minimum ceiling height. Ringgenberg seconded the motion. The motion carried. APPEAL OF HAL WEBSTER Others present: none Inspector Vezina reported that he conducted a licensing inspection at 815-15h was rst olation being Lackre North Dodge on September9 of 982. The required minimumiodoor/doorway, third floor Chapter 17-5.I.(2)(g) q entryway has 4'5" height. Karstens made a motion uphold Chapter 17-5.1.(2)(9) Lack of required minimum door/doorway. Ringgenberg seconded the motion. The motion carried. Another violation being appealed was Chapter 17-5.N.(4) Lack of required 7' minimum ceiling height, third floor room, observed usage, living room, 81511, has a ceiling height of 616411 at its peak. Karstens made a motion to grant a variance to Chapter 17-5.N.(4) Lack of required 7 minimum ceiling height. Ringgenberg seconded the motion. The motion carried. APPEAL OF MARY M. MCDONALD Others present: none Inspection Venzia reported that he conducted a licensing inspection at 727-271f North Dodge on September 28, 1982. The violation being appealed was Chapter 17- 5.8. Kitchen/kitchenette inadequately equipped, kitchen, second floor unit, has 34 square feet, lacking 40 square feet minimum. Ringgenberg made a motion to grant a variance to Chapter 17-5.8. Kitchen/kitcho-nette inadequately equipped. Karstens seconded the motion. The motion carried. APPEAL OF JOHN D. YO(�ER Others present: none Inspector Vezina reported that he conducted a licensing inspection at 7-7h East Harrison on August 23, 1982. The entire letter of violations was appealed. Mr. Yoder was not questioning the violations, but requested an extension of time to correct them. 111CRW ILMED BY JORM MICR6LAB CEDAR RAPIDS • DES '-001?IES 3oal J l Housing Appeals Board November 9, 1982 Page 7 Vezina had presented this case at the October 26, 1982, appeals hearing. Mr. Yoder had indicated in a letter that several violations have been corrected. The Appeals Board had deferred.a decision until Vezina reinspected to verify the corrected violations. Vezina reported that he was unable to reach the tenants to conduct the reinspection. Karstens made a motion to uphold all violations, but to give an extension of time to make the corrections until July 1, 1483. Ringgenberg seconded the motion. The motion carried. Ringgenberg made a motion to adjourn the meeting. The motion carried. Meeting was adjourned. Goldene Haendel, Chairperson Housing Appeals Board Karstens seconded the motion. r IaICRDfnwED BY i JORM MICR6LAB ? CEDAR RAPIDS • DES MOMES 1 i 3oa I B r MINUTES ' :,.`-; :_ • ., .,_ DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE —J NOVEMBER 23, 1982 4 P.M. CITY MANAGER'S CONFERENCE ROOM MEMBERS PRESENT: Wegman, Amert, J. Summerwill, Lafore, Sinek, Eckholt MEMBERS ABSENT: Seiberling, Haupert, Alexander, Wockenfuss STAFF PRESENT: Hauer, Behrman GUESTS PRESENT: Richard Summerwill, William Nowysz, Ben Summerwill RECOMMENDATIONS TO CITY COUNCIL: The Design Review Committee recommends approval of the design plans for an addition to the Iowa State Bank (102 S. Clinton Street). Further, the Committee recommends the exterior siding material facing the Block 81 alley consist of a darker and more durable material than was presented, and that any additional floors on the addition reflect a continuation of design which recognizes the older building's design. SUMMARY: 1. The design plans for the addition to the Iowa State Bank (102 S. Clinton Street) were found to be adequate; however, misgivings were expressed concerning the use of the material in the alley portion of the building. The Committee recommended the use of a darker colored and more durable material than was presented. It was also suggested that any additional floors constructed in the future be designed as a continuation of the existing building with some recognition of the design of the older building and its horizontal lines. 2. The Committee discussed its goals and objectives. It expressed the eventual desire to include the Committee's input to review the designs of new construction in the downtown as part of the building permit process. The Committee also discussed the production of a pamphlet describing the Design Review Committee. DISCUSSION: Wegman called the meeting to order at 4:08 p.m. Wegman introduced William Nowysz who reviewed the design plans for the addition to the Iowa State Bank building. REVIEW OF DESIGN PLANS FOR AN ADDITION TO THE IOWA STATE BANK: Nowysz reviewed the plans for the addition to the present Iowa State Bank, stating that there would be an indentation between the old building and its new addition. This recess, located south of the present Clinton - Washington Street corner entrance, would allow access into the bank at its juncture. The new entrance would provide a "marriage" between the two buildings through the use of function. Nowysz reviewed the materials to I� MICRO[ILMED 8 JORM MIC ROLAB 1 CEDAR RAHDS •DES MOVIES r DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE NOVEMBER 23, 1982 PAGE 2 be used, providing samples of the insulating glass, liaestone, and masonry material with insulating membrane and a texture to simulate stone which would be used on the Block 81 alley side. building would be Nowysz stated that the Indiana limestone on the existing extended to the first floor facade of the newer building. The upper floors of the new building would consist of glass and spandrel in a matrix ansion pattern. Nowysz stated that the addition would also allow for exp in the future. act of a truck hitting it in the alley. side might not withstand the imp masonry materia Wegman expressed concern that the l to be used an the alley ossibility and had Ben Summerwill stated they had considered thatmore durable material* discussed the possible necessity of using a Richard than the llimestone.stated th�• Summemasonrrwilltasked if the lerial could bmestone of the new building would match that of the old building. Ben Summering, stated it would. bronze color for the alley siding material Richard Summerwill indicated a could be considered. Lafore suggested that a darker color than the scussed the proposed grayish color might be more suita leto matchwthe glass in color possibility of using a metal -colored plywood pattern and color. Lafore and the cost considerations of matching stated that, while not of great significance, the more consistent the color of the alley -side material to the rest of the building the better. Hauer suggested that the Committee wroteas nyetts recommendation that the exterior material on the alley j. Serwill asked when w addition uld take place Richard Summerwill stated construction stated thatthe projectedeo constructi ndate was spring 1983. He also stated the present structure on the site )(formerlbe y housing the Brown Bottle, the Consumer/Ag Loans Division, carefully demolished. Nowysz said the only significant portion of the to - be demolished building was the interior on the second floor which had touches of art deco. q question about signage on the building was asked. Richard Summering, indicated that a bronze plaque, much like the one on the Lafore corner bindicated would probably be the only signage on the building. approval ofsuh cs� Richard Seummerwilleexplainedethatmax�the footings ngs would addition wouldbe support six floors. to see a second floor Wegman expressed the concern that the old and new building fit together. Hauer expressed the concern that it might true ortions. with no response to the older building P P A, were not very Lafore stated he thought proportions of the older buil ng to good anyway and that this design integrated concessions le in the t downtown. the older building as well, representing Eckholt stated that he liked the touch of post -mode and�to six flaorsW bbuilding and suggested that, if the building did exp HICROr ILMED Or JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS • DES MOVIES 300a 1. J DESIGN REVIEW CumM1TTEE NOVEMBER 23, 1982 PAGE 3 that the upper decorations of limestone on the older building also be reflected in the new building. Summerwill expressed approval of the suggestion that the alley material be darker. Lafore agreed, but stated that the alley would probably disappear from view. The Committee discussed the flimsiness of the proposed material for the alley. Wegman recommended that a similar -type treatment with some recognition of design in the older building in its horizontal line be given to any additional floors. Wegman also expressed misgivings about the material that should be used in the alley, both visually and in considering its durability. Wegman suggested that the material used in the alley portion of the building be composed of a mcre durable material in a darker color. It was the consensus of the Design Review Committee to forward these recommendations with J. Summerwill abstaining. REVIEW OF COMMITTEE'S GOALS AND OBJECTIVES: Summerwill asked why the meeting with the City Council had been requested by the Design Review Committee. Hauer explained the meeting had been requested at the Committee's last meeting and that with renewal projects coming to an end, the basic purpose of the Committee would also be ending. Wegman stated he had mixed feelings about remaining as a committee, asking why the City itself does not work with the Design Review Committee. Wegman stated that the City was a flagrant offender of aesthetics concerns. Summerwill stated that the Design Review Committee should remain to provide a voice to the City Council. Summerwill said she realized the Committee was not liked by businesses and was avoided by the City itself. Eckholt asked if there was any chance of expanding the Design Review Committee's goals over a limited review of the downtown refurbishing. Summerwill suggested that the Committee define what they mean b "refurbishing a building" and what items need to be submitted for design review. Hauer stated that that was conceivable but that was dependent on the Council's approval. Hauer suggested that, in its meeting with the City Council, the Design Review Committee know exactly what it wished its duties were and how these duties would be handled. Wegman indicated that he would work with Seiberling to detail future possible actions by the Committee. Summerwill asked if signage plans were reviewed by a signage committee and Hauer stated that they were not. Summerwill stated that the entire sign ordinance had problems and suggested that good City planning included design review as part of planning and zoning. Lafore stated that the Committee was always faced with accomplished facts. Summerwill agreed, stating that design review input always came too late. Summerwill suggested that a brochure be written that could possibly be attached to the building permit, apprising applicants of the Design Review Committee's ability to assist in design. 302,1 111:ROFILnED By JORM MICROLAB : CEDAR RANDSPES Id0Li1[S DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE NOVEMBER 23, 1982 PAGE 4 Summerwill suggested that a new a mits would only be of the Design Review ssued upon review by include the fact that building p the Design Review Committee. Hauer indicated that the types of items the Committee was discussing would have to go before the City Council. The members discussed whether or not the present size of the Design Review Committee was optimal. Hauer asked for input into the staff report format for Industrial Revenue Bond design reviews. The consensus of the Committee was that the form was satisfactory. Wegman moved and Eckholt seconded that the minutes of July 21, 1982, be approved. The motion carried unanimously. The meeting adjourned at 5:10 P.M. Submitted by: Sara Behrman F11CRonu4ED BY I J j JORM MIC Rf�L AO 1 f CEDAR RAPIDS DES MOINES ' I ' I 340 Qa J