Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1979-09-11 Bd Comm minutes■. August 16, 1979 Civic Center Conference Room MINUTES OF RE;ULAR AUGUST MEETING OF THE IOWA CITY MUNICIPAL AIRPORT COMMISSION The meeting was called to order by Chairman Phipps at 7:30 P.M. Present: Phipps, Saeugling, Embree Absent: Redick, BLeckwenn Others attending: Leo Brachtenbach, E.K. Jones, Charles Neuzil, Kevin Gleaves, Cue Young, Curt Seifert. Approval of Minutes Saeugling, moved that the Commission approve the minutes of June 28, 1979, as corrected by Embree. Embree seconded. Motion carried. Saeuglino moved that the Commission approve the minutes of July 23, 1979, as corrected by Saeunlinc, Embree, Phipps, and Jones. Embree seconded. Motion carried. Saoui-linq moved that the Commission approve the minutes of July 25, 1979. Embree seconded. Motion carried. Consideration of gills r;mbree moved that the August bills be approved as presented. Saeugling seconded. Motion carried. Report of Chairman/Interim Manager 1) Consultants on the Master Plan are preparing for next Commission meeting and are planning, to attend. They want to set up the next required public information meetings. Most of the engineering part of the noise study is completed. They have appraised the airport at $5,840,000: h02 acres at $12,000 ®, and the balance in buildings. 2) The McCrabb lease question has been turned over to Atty. Tucker for action: compliance with the lease by lessee or termination of the lease. 3) The advertisement for a new manager has been published in the proper manner. I,) Receipt of a registered letter (July 24) from E.K. Jones tendering his resig- nation as airport manager was noted. Embree moved that the Commission adenowledge receipt of the letter and accept Jones' resignation. Saeugling seconded. Motion carried. The job description for a new manager was discussed by Jones and Phipps. K) The Riverfront. Commission is requesting approval of a request for permission to construct a boat ramp in the Sturgis Park area. Phipps read a July 15 letter askinf, consideration of the proposal. No definite desiEtn was available (included in the reaa:rst). Embree raised the question of the DOT and its proposed drain ditch across the airport property and through the Sturgis Park area. heaves said t'�at. he is the bi-mest user of Sturgis Park in the City; he agreed that a boa'. ramp is needed and said it would •rive a handle to the Commission for the v improvement of the property ---that the City is using the park area as a junk yard and old equipment dump/salvage yard: atrocious -eyesore, infested with rats and beavers. It. was the consensus of the Commission that Embree should (1) inspect Sturgis and (2) tell the City that the Commission will not move on the ramp until details of construction and location are provided. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES ■', ■ , 6) r Rmbree asked that copiesbefdistributedgwithltheal Ser e had been received. Minutes, 7) Phipps noted the receipt of a reporton the airport insurance coverage .from Mel i :.. Jnnes and rend it to the. Commission. Embree asked that copies be distributed with the Minutes. Jones will be advised of the appraisal figures just received I from the Master Plan consultants. Cleaves said that the question of duplicate insurance had not adequately been addressed. Phipps sAd he would check, on it. (;.K. Jones said that he has also been checking with the City Finance Director. Commissioners' Reports Rmbree made a report on the airport farm operation. Discussion. Resolution Accepting Work• 1979 Tie -Down and Surfacint; Progam The final cost of the improvements wasene lessDietthan estimated; a letter of explanation was received from City Embree moved that the Commission receive the Certificate of Completion from City Engineer Dietz for the 1979 Tie -Down and Surfacing Program and approve a Resolution byctheiL.L. Pe111noCo. the work for the SaeualingAirport seconded.Tie-Down Motion carried. Proram as performed Old Business Ilona . Mrw nusiness `. Phipps said thr applications for the airport manager's job will be held until the deadline date is reached. Phipps will check with the City on the correct procedure for processing the applications. Public Discussion Brachtenbach asked about the status of the noise abatement actions passed by the Commission in the July regular meeting. Phipps said he has discussed them with the Master Plan consultants; the new regulations are being reviewed by the estFAA. The consultants have concurred with the actions taken. Brachtenbach suggested change in the turn/traffic pattern now in effect --- as detailed in a letter by ?..M.. Jones posed at the airport. Bractenbach stressed the need foYagood noise abatement program. Phipps advocated taking, no further action until after the recommendations of the Master Plan consultants are heard, and said that he hoped the study would be done in October. F.K. Jones told Brachtenbach not to harass his students, and said that next time he would call the police. Phipps said this item was not Commission business, and ruled Jones and Drachtenbach out of order. F.K. Jones presented a proposal to the Commission for the construction of 2 new hangars. Phipps said the proposal would be taken under consideration by the commission. '.•anbtenbarh said that he went to the airport on Sat., Aug. 11, counted 5n take -offs in tvo hours on runway 35, and 300 durinv entire day; he said he went back to nheck nn the vind dirrction at 7:00'P.M., as he couldn't understand the heavy traffic on 35 since thr vinds in his yard were calm. He asked that the new manager keep a log o f the take -offs and arrivals, as required by City Code. He said that the Code should he rescinded if not enforced. Embree moved that the meeting, adjourn. Saeugling seconded. Motion carried. The next meetina, will he September 20. Meeting adjourned at 8:0 P'rCommission Member� These Mindtes prepared by C. Embree, MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS.DES MOINES City of Iowa Citi fir--- MEMORANDUM Date: July 10, 1979 To: Airport Commission From: Melvin Jones, Budget Administrator Re: Airport Insurance 4 . As per my conversation with Gary Bleckwenn a few months back please find listed below the insurances on which the Airport Commission pays an annual premium. I. Fire insurance -- Policy M94-30-42 (a renewal of policy #83-33-65). Provides fire and extended coverage: 1• On the one story, approved roof, semi fire resistive building occupied as aircraft repair and school -- $41,000. 2• On the one story, approved roof, steel and brick veneer build- ing occupied as an aircraft hangar -- $41,000. 3• On the one story, approved roof, steel building occupied as a multiple T -hangar -- $77,000. 4. On the one story, approved roof, steel and iron clad building occupied as a multiple T -hangar -- $740000. 5. On the one story, approved roof, steel and iron clad building occupied as a multiple T -hangar - $74,000. This policy in addition to providing for the replacement costs of the above buildings if destroyed by fire will pay for wind storm, hail, smoke and explosion damages up to the amounts stated above. If the Airport Commission wishes these values increased I will need some authorization from them. 1 am fairly certain a corresponding rate increase will accompany any increase in the value -of those buildings. Iowa Kemper is the insurance company. The present annual premium is $2,788. The deductible is $100. The policy__-,_. period is from January 1, 1979 to January 1, 1980. 2• Liability insurance -- Policy PL -1383. This policy covers single limit bodily injury and property damage up to $1,000,000 for each occurrence or accident. Coverage includesbut is not limited to injury to or destruction of tangible property, including the loss of the use of such property and bodily injury associated with such loss or destruction. The Manhattan Fire and Marine Insurance Com - $1,10005 the Thereinsurance deductible and thesPolic per premium is April, 1978, to April, 1979. Policy period is from O;T7 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES IIOIREs 2 �. 3. Hangar keepers insurance -- This insurance coverage is paid for by the fixed base operator and is to be provided by the FBO as per his contract with the Airport Commission. M 4. Glass breakage insurance -- This insurance would replace any glass breakage at the municipal airport except glass in buildings occu- pied by McCrabb Brothers. Coverage would not extend to those buildings at the airport whe.e glass is presently broken until broken panes are replaced. The Airport Commission does not presently have this policy in force. The annual premium would be $1,300. I would not recommend this insurance unless the annual cost of re- placing glass at the airport exceeds this premium. 5. Fidelity bonds -- Chapter 330.20 of the Code of Iowa and Article 2 Section 4-19 of the Iowa City code provides that each Airport Commissioner shall execute and furnish a bond in the amount of of,the City. cost of this bond aebondd fromhe ds of the Airport Commissioners. The airport administration building is covered under the City's fire policy at a value of $300,000 for the building. There is no provision in the insurance for contents coverage. I would appreciate an estimate from the Commission on the value of the contents of the building that is "owned" by the Airport Commission. The insurance would not cover contents owned by someone else (i.e. Highway Commission). Further, if you disagree with the amount of coverage on the building don't hesitate to supply me with an estimate. If you should have any further questions about insurance for the airport please direct your inquiries to me at 354-1800, extension 222. jm2/13 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES I40111ES D DOANE MIDYEAR MANAGEMENT REPORT To: Iowa City Airport Commission RE: 3948 Iowa City Airport February 27 10 Municipal Airport DATE: June 25, 1979 inches .75 inches Iowa City, IA 52240 OFFICE: Washington, Iowa 2.45 This report shows the acres of various crops planted and other information relevant to production on the property. Crops Acres Comments See the crop map attached to this report showing the crops planted by fields. nglyt )" The United States Weather Bureau reported that the winter of 1978-79 was very cold and March was slightly wetter than normal. Listed below are the weather conditions for the spring of 1979 in Washinton, Iowa: Month Normal Actual February 27 10 degrees 16.00 degrees 1.15 inches .75 inches March 36.90 degrees 37.90 degrees 2.45 inches 3.03 inches April 51.70 degrees 48.30 degrees 3.53 inches 3.27 inches May 62.40 degrees 63.70 degrees 3.65 inches 2.24 inches June Cool and fairly dry. L The surface of the soil became very dry in May. Most of the soybeans were planted in dry dirt. Most of the soybeans germinated FORM 30A (Aug. 74) FIICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES h10INES - 2 - after they were planted, but about 15% of the soybeans did not germinate until after the rains received on June 9th. GRAIN INVENTORY AND MARKETING PLANS See the attached 1978 Crop Sales and Purchases sheet. Storage for both the 1979 corn and soybeans has been reserved at the Gringer Elevator in Iowa City. CRAPS Corn - Planting completed May 15th which was slightly earlier for the area than average. Furadan soil insecticide was used at plant- ing time. Final fertilizer application was approximately 152-70-137 per acre. Atrazine plus Sutan herbicide was incorporated before planting. The corn has been rotary hoed once and cultivated once. The corn stand is excellent, and is of fairly uniform size, weed control has been good, and yield prospects are very good. Soybeans - Planting completed May 24th which was average for the area. Conditions were very dry on May 24th and about 15% of the soybeans did not germinate until rains later in June. Fertilizer applAcation on the soybeans was 16-41-53 per acre. Treflan plus Sencor herbicide was incorporated for weed control. Grass control seems to be very good, but there are some broad leaf weed problems, such as cockle bur, devil's shoestring, and some sunflowers. Plans are to culti- vate the soybeans twice and then over spray with Basagran where broad leaf weeds are a problem. The small beans that came up after the June rains are big enough so that cultivation can be made easily. The stand of soybeans is very satifactory and yield prospects are good. IIICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOIRES F el Government Farm Program - Our original intentions were to have set aside acres equal to ten percent of the planted corn acreage. This ten percent was with no government payment on the set aside acres but it would guarantee a corn price of approximately $2.20 per bushel. Since commodity prices have improved this spring, we canceled out the farm program and planted all corn and soybeans. TENANT Mr. and Mrs. Tom Williams are very cooperative and get the work done promptly. Plans are to rent the farm to them for 1980. This report is respectfully submitted. DOANE AGRICULTURAL SERVICE, INC. /C A'd I(eif far G. Garton, Farm anager Farm 6 Ranch Management Division cc: Iowa City Airport Commission KGG/eke MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOIMES PROPERTY PLAT acala t Muan . Acna •3948 Iowa City Airport 1979 Crop Map 15.5 I Waste Corn 9.5 1 Corn - - - - - f 12.5 SB, - 26.7/ . !\ Soybeans, I 8.3 ` � orn � 1 4. b` • 6.ybeanb `•� , , I 36.5 \ i Soybeans Crops Aores 1 Corn 71.3 - i 5.1 \ ' I Soybeans 79.4 I \ 1 1 Soybeans • Roads 6 Waste 16.4 I Total 167.1 16.5 I SB4•0 i / 6,5 I a j / 15.01 Corn Corn I � � j I i Corn i I � _ I ,-1 1 � I, I I 1, I it 1 I .I I i i i l MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES I4011IES DOANE AGRICULTURAL SERVICE, INC. 1978 CROP SALES AND PURCHASES Owner's Share Re: 3948 Iowa City Airport From: Jan. 9 19 79 to June 25 19 79 DATE CROP AMOUNT UNIT TOTAL OWNER'S NET PRICE VALUE COMMENTS SHARE Sales Esi 1/9/79 Corn 3965.89 bu. Annual Report Balance j 3/30/79 Corn 1900.00 bu. @ $2.22 $4218.00 5/7/79 Corn 1000.00 bu. @ $2.40 $2400.00 f; 5/16/79 Corn 1065.89 bu. @ $2.31 $2462.21 I. I� 1/9/79 Soybeans 820.33 bu. Annual Report Balance 4/6/79 Soybeans 500.00 @ $6.77 $3385.00 6/11/79 Soybeans 220.33 @ $7.09 $1562.14 1 i i 1 32A (REV. 6-661 I MICROFILMED BY I JORM MICROLAB ' CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 1101RES i ;imated Balance i Corn Balance I 0 bu. Soybean Balance 0. bu. MINUTES CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION AUGUST 6, 1979 9:02 A.M. IOWA CITY RECREATION CENTER, ROOM A MEMBERS PRESENT: Anderson, Nusser, Orelup. STAFF PRESENT: Higdon. OTHERS PRESENT: Craig, Hanson and Kinney (part of meeting), Hazlett W25 P.M.). RECOMMENDATIONS TO CITY COUNCIL. The certified list for the position of firefighter. RECOMMENDATIONS TO CITY MANAGER AND STAFF, None. RECOMMENDATIONS TO CITY ATTORNEY None. SUMMARY OF RELEVANT DISCUSSION. Bill Nusser presiding. Anderson briefly compared the Ames testing procedure used previously to the procedure before the Commission now. She pointed out that Ames ranked the applicants. This time the Commission is looking at items individually. The test written July 16 had some fire content and general ability. Dr. Sines looked at the MMPI related to the firefighters situation. No applicant was disqualified for oral interview on the basis of the MMPI since this is the first time it was used in Iowa City. Anderson and Orelup reviewed the applications. APQTC test results were reviewed. Nineteen applicants were scheduled for interviews. Seventeen were interviewed. Higdon was instructed to prepare the certified list for signatures as follows: Silva, Gary R. Samuels, Ronald L. Hora, Jerry L. Kaiser, Stephen R. Lowe, Larry R. Olney, Daryl L. Mahoney, Stephen J. Satariano, Frank G. Gatrost, Keith W, MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES IIOIIIES /7,_'�( 2 Hazlett arrived. After discussion, the procedure; Commission outlined the following he contact A (1) Contact Attorney Bruce Walker and request that ttorneys Hayek and Honohan to arrange a meeting of the three attorneys and the Commission to discuss procedural and/or jurisdictional matters relatedto the Civil Service Omission findings and decision dated November 20, 1978, in the matter of the hearing of Ronald R. Fort. (2) Following the meeting with the attorneys a meeting w Coal/mint to meet with ill be scheduled for the Department receithe command staff of the Police to data, Comm missionve imembnput related to Fort's service record ers may, if they so choose, speak to the command staff individually prior to this meeting. (3) Subsequent to If the meetings above, oryyduring the procedure Coemiasion ed above Will render addecision, Criatehir Nusserthe mwilliconthe tact Attorney Walker. Available dates discussed. of the Commissioners was Meeting adjourned at +;59 p,N, prepared by June Higdon, MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES MINUTES CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION AUGUST 29, 1979 9:00 A.M. CIVIC CENTER, ENGINEERING CONFERENCE ROOM MEMBERS PRESENT: Anderson, Nusser, Orelup. STAFF PRESENT: Ryan, (Higdon arrived at approximately 9:30). OTHERS PRESENT: Walker and Honohan. RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE CITY COUNCIL None. RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE CITY MANAGER AND STAFF None. RECOMMENDATIONS TO CITY ATTORNEY None. SUMMARY OF RELEVANT DISCUSSION Discussion of the Commission decision related to the demotion ' of Ronald Fort was held. John Hayek's letter dated August 21, 1979, to Bruce Walker and Judge Honsell's decision ! (specifically the phrase "as modified by the Civil Service Commission") were discussed. The Commission stated this is a matter of reinstatement and not a promotion and Bruce Walker was retained as a hearing officer, not an attorney for the Commission. The Commission made the decision to use a broad framework for input, that is, command staff, Ron Fort, and other employees of the Police Department. The central point is Fort's rights, due process, and the intent of the Commission as stated in the idecision on November 20, 1978. The Commission scheduled a public hearing for Monday, September 17, 1979, at 11:00 A.M. in Room A at the Recreation Center, 220 S. Gilbert. Honohan agreed with the procedure outlined by the Civil Service Commission, acknowledged receiving notice of the hearing, and waived any further notice of hearing. Angela Ryan i will discuss this with Attorney John Hayek and made no 1 commitment for the City at this time. After discussion the decision was made to issue subpoenas to formalize the procedure. Bruce Walker will prepare subpoenas for those the Commission chooses and schedule at 10 minute /jr)G MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES IIOIRES intervals. Questions regarding performance since the demotion will be asked. Honohan will submit additional names for the Commission to consider. The Commission and Honohan expressed desire to have a cross-section among those subpoenaed. Walker indicated that his role should be clarified and payment for his services should be determined in any future undertakings that might occur. No action was taken. The meeting adjourned. Prepared by June Higdon. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES I I I r' I I I L' f: I I_ I. II ' I I i i I i i I i I I l ' r I intervals. Questions regarding performance since the demotion will be asked. Honohan will submit additional names for the Commission to consider. The Commission and Honohan expressed desire to have a cross-section among those subpoenaed. Walker indicated that his role should be clarified and payment for his services should be determined in any future undertakings that might occur. No action was taken. The meeting adjourned. Prepared by June Higdon. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES i MINUTES IOWA CITY HOUSING APPEALS BOARD JUNE 14, 1979 MEMBERS PRESENT: Jerry Smithey, Pat Owens, Diane Klaus, Rev. Vanderzee STAFF PRESENT: Terry Steinbach, Bruce Burke, David Malone, Pam Barnes, Linda Cook ACTION OF THE BOARD Board members accepted minutes of May 10, 1979, meeting as written. i Members accepted minutes of May 18, 1979 with the revision on the last page that (1) Mr. Juilfs represented all but one person who was out of town, and (2) that the Board upheld the citation as written i (not as enforced). Board approved certified transcript of minutes dated April 19, 1979 and April 30, 1979, concerning the appeal of Black's Gaslight. BOARD TO CONSIDER THE APPEAL OF MR. J. SITYMANSKY CONCERNING 420 NORTH i% GILBERT Steinbach asked which violations were being contested. Shymansky specified items N4 and N8 of the April 18th Notice of Violation. Barnes presented her observations of the property based on her r j inspection. She used a blackboard sketch as illustration, and presented photos of the dwelling unit. Steinbach asked the Board to uphold the citations. !, Shymansky said he felt the citations were arbitrary because of information he received earlier in 1978. He objected to the fact that these items were not cited in an inspection which took place in the Spring of 1978, and that his investigation of the housing file on the property before he purchased the building did not show these problems. He did not contest the measurements but felt the circumstances were similar to entrapment. i Board members discussed with Mr. Shymansky possible methods for correcting the present conditions. Smithey asked to see the letter written by James Hammond from the City, and asked that all attachments to letters requesting an appeal be included in Board j members' packets. It was determined that the ceiling height requirement had never been applicable to a "grandfather clause" in the City Code or in the State Code. Rev. Vanderzee moved that the Appeal of item H8 as presented by Shymansky be upheld and the citation not be enforced. Klaus seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously. Board suggested Mr. Shymansky get bids on costs for changing the doorway. Rev. Vanderzee moved to continue the case for two months FIICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES Iowa City Hous' i Appeals Board June 14, 1979 Page 2 i and at that time be informed of the bid estimates. Klaus seconded the motion pertaining to item N4. Motion carried unanimously. Rev. Vanderzee left the room. 1.1 24 Mr. and Mrs. Ross were introduced to those present and sworn in. Steinbach stated that the violation being appealed was under chapter 9.30.7.F.1.,lack of required electrical light switch in apartment N2 at 24 N. Gilbert. He stated that the appeal had been properly submitted. i Burke stated that his knowledge of this property went back to the previous owner, Dr. Dohrer, at which time the condition of the building was quite poor. He said that Mr. Ross has done extensive work on the building since he purchased it. Burke said that he had conducted an inspection, as he remembered, in 1976. On February 26, 1979, he conducted another inspection on the property with a realtor, and on March 27, 1979, he issued a notice of violation containing the appeal violation. MMr. Ross stated that they (Mr. and Mrs. Ross) had purchased the property subject to the previous owner bringing the interior of the structure into compliance with the Code. They requested an inspection, which was conducted on June 14, 1978. He too stated that at that time the property was in poor condition. He felt that it was unfair to list this violation, since all the other orders from the Housing Department had been fulfilled. Ross read the applicable code phrase and expressed his feelings as to the vagueness of its language. He also expressed his concern that if this had been an oversight on the inspector's part, it was unfair to leave the expense of the oversight to the owner. Steinbach stated that the inspectors had been asked to interpret the housing code in such a way as to require a light switch at every entrance to every habitable room. Smithey asked if this code had been amended. Steinbach answered yes, on May 19, 1979. Smithey read through Mr. Ross's appeal letter and requested that all attachments be included in Board packets. Smithey asked about connecting a switch to the existing switch int he t hallway. Ross said that that could be done. Ross stated that the nearest switch already located within the apartment is four feet eight inches from an entryway other than the one listed as in violation in the living room. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROIAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 1401NEs Iowa City Hou•'_'1 Appeals Board June 14, 1979 Page 3 Smithey stated that it was the Board's responsibility to deal with the old Code and with the violation as written. Smithey asked that if there were a floor lamp or other such illuminary located close and convenient to the room entrance, if the City would accept that as being in compliance. Steinbach answered that it would as written in the 1978 Code. Ross asked if he could receive some assurance from the Board that if he located a wall mounted switch about four feet from the entrance, he would not be in violation at the time of the next inspection. Smithey replied that the Board could not grant that assurance. Smithey stated that he felt Mr. Ross could remedy this violation as written under the 1978 code and that it was up to Mr. Ross to decide whether or not he wished to remedy it so that it would comply with the amended code of 1979. Klaus moved that the violation be upheld as cited. Owens seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously. Steinbach wished to present Mr. and Mrs. Ross with amendments pertaining to lighting in dwelling units. TO CONSIDER APPEAL OF TOWN & CAMPUS APARTMENTS. 1100 ARTHUR. Johnson and Potratz were sworn in and introducted. Johnson specified that he is contesting citations of section 9.30.4.I.2.g. of the Housing Code. Malone presented his observations of the property. Steinbach clarified that Johnson's original appeal has been amended in order to apply to all buildings on the premises. Johnson agreed that this was his intent. Malone continued his description of the windows and patio doors on the premises. Rev. Vanderzee returned to the meeting. I Johnson presented his reseacrh into the costs and energy savings of installing storm doors and windows. lie said that this retroactive enforcement is inappropriate as there is no health or safety hazard. Johnson's calculations indicate a $25.50 energy savings per year for a two bedroom apartment and $19.64 for a one bedroom apartment. To install storms would cost $72,093 according to a bid received by ! Johnson. He also included the life expectancy of the equipment, and concludes that the installation is not cost effective. He said thermal drapes could achieve the same level of energy conservation. Double sealing the doorways could prevent the heat loss of an air migration. Johnson described the financial interest of the buildings ownership. Steinbach asked that violations be upheld. Johnson summarized his presentation and read the appropriate code section. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOItIES a ■ : Iowa City Hous'-'*! Appeals Board June 14, 1979 Page 4 j Cook disputed Johnson's reference to an r:toppel argument. Klaus said she would have liked to hear from the energy expert on the City staff. Discussion continued concerning whether other devices could be used instead of storm doors and windows. Klaus moved that a decision be postponed for 60 days until a legal opinion (as to whether alternative devices to storm doors and windows could be provided) and an opinion by the energy staff member be presented to the Board. Owens seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously. (Rev. Vanderzee did not vote.) OTHER BUSINESS Board members elected Diane Klaus as the new Chairperson and Pat Owens as the new Vice -Chairperson. Steinbach requested a July 12, 1979 meeting of the Board. Meeting adjourned. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROIAB CEDAR RAPIDs•DU MOInEs ■ 1 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DFS MOINES MIND fLS IOWA CITY HOUSING APPEALS BOARD JULY 12, 1979 8:01 A.M. MEMBERS PRESENT: Klaus, Smithey, Owens, VanderZee and Dennis STAFF PRESENT: Steinbach, Cook, Malone and Kuebler SUMMARY OF DISCUSSION AND ACTION IAKEN Chairperson Klaus asked for corrections to the minutes. Smithey asked that it be noted that the staff had been instructed by the Board to supply all attachments to letters requesting an appeal and that they be included in Board members' packets. Secondly, he asked that a misspelled word on page three be corrected. Smithey also asked that the Byron Ross minutes be reprepared and clarified. i.: Smithey then moved that the minutes be accepted and the corrections be made. VanderZee seconded. Minutes of the Appeals Board meeting of June I 14 were accepted by a unanimous vote. VanderZee asked the question of who prepares the minutes. Smithey asked that the bylaws be consulted for clarification as to the designated person responsible for preparing minutes. Steinbach said that he would, after investigating, advise the Board as to the designated secretary. Klaus asked why more specific information regarding the appeals was not included in the Board members' packets. Steinbach stated that it was an administrative decision not to include staff reports in Board members' packets. He further stated that the packets would include a copy of the notice of violation and a copy of the letter requesting an appeal. Vanderzee stated that, at times, it is difficult to determine the specific appeal that is being made. Steinbach agreed and stated that it has been the case in many appeals that the specific violation being appealed is not known until the time of the appellant's presentation. Klaus suggested that since Mr. Bright, the first case to be heard, had not shown up yet, that Assistant City Attorney Cook present an explanation of the limitations, the powers and the responsibilities of the Appeals Board to the new Appeals Board members. Smithey voiced a concern as to the scheduling of those requesting an appeal. Steinbach explained the problems that had been involved in scheduling for this particular Appeals Board meeting. He stated that MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DFS MOINES IL k i (lousing Appea 'loard July .12, 1979 Page 2 there had originally been four appeals scheduled for July 12, 19]9. However, due to pending approval of amendments in front of the City Council, that three of the four regularly scheduled appeals have been held in abeyance. He further stated that there had been an 8:00 appeal scheduled for Mr. Steven F. Bright. Cook and Steinbach explained to the Appeals Board members the reasons behind Housing Code amendments and the process by which those amendments are written and submitted to the City Council. Cook informed the Board as to their specific duties in interpretations of the Code and a general discussion followed. BOARD TO CONSIDER THE CASE OF MR. STEVEN F. BRIGHT; 712-720 EAST Mr. Steven F. Bright not in attendance. Steinbach entered into the record the certified letter to Mr. Bright giving notice of the hearing of July 12, 1979. The return receipt was dated July 9 and signed by Becky M. Laursen. Steinbach stated that the letter requesting an appeal had been properly submitted. Steinbach presented background information in the case stating that the property located at 712 and 720 E. Market had been inspected on March 8, 1979, by Inspector Phyllis Kelley. She issued notices of violations to the owner at that time, who was Katherine Boatman, and the return receipts issued by the Post Office indicate that Katherine Boatman received these notices on March 19, 1979. Inspector David Malone reinspected this property on April 9, 1979, and found all violations had been corrected. A rental permit was issued. Cook explained that there had been a code change, in that an amendment had been, adopted on May 19, 1979, which directly affected the appeal. She then read the applicable code change. Those who would testify were sworn in by Klaus. Kuebler stated that on June 8, 1979, Senior Building Inspector, Glenn Siders, received a complaint from an elderly gentleman who claimed to have fallen down the stairway located at the entry of the property located at 712 or 720 E. Market Street. The person making the complaint referred to the fact that there were not handrails located on these steps. The complaint was then referred to Inspector Barnes who, in turn, referred the complaint to Inspector Kuebler. Kuebler stated that he and Inspector Vezina responded to the complaint and conducted an inspection of the stairways on June 8, 1979. They noted the alleged violation and documented it with photographs. Kuebler went on to say that on June 11, 1979, he and Mr. Vezina went back to the property, as per instructions from Senior Housing Inspector Steinbach, and documented measurements of the concrete steps. Kuebler stated that a notice of violation regarding the lack of handrails was issued to Mr. Steven Bright on June 13, 1979 and .fp,— MICROFILM BY DORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES i Housing Appeals Board July 12, 1979 Page 3 was received by Mr. Bright on June 15, 1979. On June 21, 1979 the Housing Department recieved a letter from Mr. Bright stating that Inspector Kelley had issued a certificate of compliance. Therefore, it was Mr. Bright's feeling that the notice issued by Kuebler was invalid. The letter also stated that in the event that the notice of violation would not be rescinded to consider the letter as a petition requesting a hearing before the Housing Appeals Board. Kuebler stated that on July 2, 1979, as per requests from Mr. Bright and instructions from Steinbach, he sent a copy of the complaint to Mr. Bright. Steinbach entered photographs of said stairways into the file of the Housing Appeals Board. l Klaus asked if the complaint had been registered for both properties and stated her feelings thta if it had not there would be no reason to reinspect both properties. Kuebler explained that due to the current code requirements, two handrails, one on each side, would be required to comply with the code. Cook further clarified code changes to the Appeals Board. General discussion as to the location of the steps followed. Safety aspects of handrails were presented by Cook. VanderZee moved that the appeal not be upheld. Smithey seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously. I � Board took a 15 minute recess. I OTHER BUSINESS Smithey absent from remainder of meeting. j While waiting for the next case to be heard, discussion of departmental policies in regards to issuing violations and methods of inspection ensued. Steinbach explained to the Board that under normal conditions the Housing Department does not conduct inspections on single family, owner occupied or duplex properties. He further stated thta many inspections have been conducted on properties such as these due to complaints from i neighbors and requests from prospective buyers. i f Cook explained that discussion of appeals outside of public Appeals Board meetings is in violation of the bylaws of the Housing Appeals Board. She stated that it is the responsibility of the Appeals Board member to gather sufficient factual information before casting his or her vote. Cook explained the liabilities of the City in those cases where violations are not inspected nor enforced. She also urged all Board members to familiarize themselves with the Housing Code. i VanderZee asked which properties are required to have an annual inspection. Steinbach explained that only those properties which the City is required to license receive annual inspections. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAP IDS- DES MOINES Housing Appeals Board July 12, 1979 Page 3 was received by Mr. Bright on June 15, 1979. On June 21, 1979 the Housing Department recieved a letter from Mr. Bright stating that Inspector Kelley had issued a certificate of compliance. Therefore, it was Mr. Bright's feeling that the notice issued by Kuebler was invalid. The letter also stated that in the event that the notice of violation would not be rescinded to consider the letter as a petition requesting a hearing before the Housing Appeals Board. Kuebler stated that on July 2, 1979, as per requests from Mr. Bright and instructions from Steinbach, he sent a copy of the complaint to Mr. Bright. Steinbach entered photographs of said stairways into the file of the Housing Appeals Board. l Klaus asked if the complaint had been registered for both properties and stated her feelings thta if it had not there would be no reason to reinspect both properties. Kuebler explained that due to the current code requirements, two handrails, one on each side, would be required to comply with the code. Cook further clarified code changes to the Appeals Board. General discussion as to the location of the steps followed. Safety aspects of handrails were presented by Cook. VanderZee moved that the appeal not be upheld. Smithey seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously. I � Board took a 15 minute recess. I OTHER BUSINESS Smithey absent from remainder of meeting. j While waiting for the next case to be heard, discussion of departmental policies in regards to issuing violations and methods of inspection ensued. Steinbach explained to the Board that under normal conditions the Housing Department does not conduct inspections on single family, owner occupied or duplex properties. He further stated thta many inspections have been conducted on properties such as these due to complaints from i neighbors and requests from prospective buyers. i f Cook explained that discussion of appeals outside of public Appeals Board meetings is in violation of the bylaws of the Housing Appeals Board. She stated that it is the responsibility of the Appeals Board member to gather sufficient factual information before casting his or her vote. Cook explained the liabilities of the City in those cases where violations are not inspected nor enforced. She also urged all Board members to familiarize themselves with the Housing Code. i VanderZee asked which properties are required to have an annual inspection. Steinbach explained that only those properties which the City is required to license receive annual inspections. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAP IDS- DES MOINES ■, Housing Appea�Board July 12, 1979 Page 4 Steinbach explained that the Housing Department is currently designing keypunch data sheets for the Planning and Program Development DepartmenL. these sheets wiII be used by the Housing lnspectors to compile data for the City to determine the effectiveness of enforcement of the Housing Code. The check sheet will contain information as to the type of violation and the location of the violations and will be categorized by structure, block and district. This will enable the City to get an accurate overview of the activities of the Housing Department. The Board questioned the staff as to what methods they used when first inspecting a property. Steinbach explained that the Housing Inspectors attempt to make as much rersonal coeinspects nntact and thisan relations is of isWithedoneager for twooreasonsrlo Het stated nthat tpubl�c efficiency of thutmost importance and it adds to the effectiveness and e Inspectors' time scheduling. BOARD TO CONSIDER THE CASE OF LAKESIDE APARTMENTS 2401 HIGHWAY 6 EAST - VERNE 0. PHELPS Representatives of Lakeside Apartments not in attendance. 9:35 a.m. Steinbach entered into the minutes that Mr. Phelps had been officially served notice and time of Appeals Board meeting. Malone presented the case for the City stating that on May 11, 1979 he conducted an annual inspection on buildings 40 and 42 and that he cited violations of lack of screen doors on exterior doors for these two buildings. Malone stated thatprior to September of 1978 annual inspections had been done on a spot check basis rather than the Inspector entering each and every dwelling unit. Malone clarified that one screen El oor had been installed at apartment #4211, building #42. Klaus asked if these exterior doors had storm doors. Malone replied that the exterior doors were steel insulated doors, however, there were no _ supplied storm doors. Klaus asked if there would be any problems in installing the screen doors. Malone stated that the screen doors could be installed. Klaus clarified that. the only violation being appealed was that of lack of screen doors on exterior doors. Malone then read the letter requesting an appeal into the minutes. Malone used the blackboard to show the Board members the configuration of apartments and buildings at Lakeside Apartments. Klaus asked if this was a new violation due to changes in the code. Cook replied that there were no code changes affecting this violation. Malone stated that under different administrators in the past this violation had not been issued in cases where dwelling units were supplied with air conditioning. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 1101DEs ■: i Housing Appea Board July 12, 1979 Page 5 Malone stated that the Lakeside Apartment buildings are over 15 years old. Dennis questioned the need for screen doors where air conditioning was supplied. Malone responded saying that the code does not require air conditioning but does require specific standards for ventilation. He further stated that the use of air conditioning is at the option of the tenant. VanderZee questioned Malone as to what time of year this violation is being written. Malone stated that, under this administration, the code is being interpreted such that during that portion of the year when the Housing Inspector does not deem it necessary to have screens installed, the manager or operator should be able to show the Inspector that there are, in fact, screens to be used during that portion of the year when their use is necessary. 9:46 a.m. Rose Ann Fink entered the room and stated that Verne Phelps had called and stated that the Lakeside representatives would be late in attending the meeting. II; VanderZee stated that he saw no reason that the hearing could not proceed. Klaus stated, in the event the Board would uphold the violation, that in a case such as this where there are many buildings and therefore many doors involved, the Board may want to consider an extension above and beyond the extension given by the Inspector to comply with the code. Cook reminded the Board that this appeal only affected buildings 40 and 42, unless representatives of the Lakeside owners requested that it include the entire complex. Dennis asked for an explanation of how the airconditioning system functions in the dwelling unit. Malone went to the blackboard and diagramed the configurations of the buildings and stated that each air conditioning unit, located in the center buildings that house the efficiency units, supplied the air conditioning to the townhouse units. fie noted that each air conditioning unit is responsible for the cooling of five entire buildings. Each dwelling unit is supplied with its own thermostat, therefore giving the option of using the air conditioning system to the tenant. He further stated that in the event that an air conditioning unit would break down, it would affect all five buildings. Malone stated that the exterior doors of the townhouse units swing into the dwelling unit, therefore, there would be no conflict in installing screen doors which would swing out. VanderZee moved that the violation be upheld and that a 60 day extension be given. No second. Vanderzee asked how many units this order could be affecting. Malone replied that there were 16 buildings with 16 units each. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOIRES a Housing Appea�\Board July 12, 1979 Page 6 Klaus moved that the violation he upheld and that there be a 90 day extension. VanderZee seconded. Vander -Zee moved that the mo Lion he amended to state that a 90 day extension be given and that upon receiving a letter from the owners that materials could not be supplied, an additional extension would be considered by the Board. His motion would include reasons of a truckers strike or other problems in supplying materials but would exclude the inability of the owners to pay for such materials. Motion seconded by Klaus. Amendment to Klaus' motion was carried unanimously. Smithey absent from vote. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RARIOS•Or.S IIo IMEs