Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1979-07-03 Bd Comm minutesti MINUTES IOWA CITY RIVBRFRONT COMMISSION JIVE 27, 1979 -- 7:30 P.M. CITY MANAGER'S CONFERENCE ROOM MEMBERS PRf:5ENT: Gilpin, Fountain, Fahr, Ncuzil, Sokol, Knight, Berry, Boutelle MEMBERS ABSENT: Vetter, Baker, Kroeze STAFF PRESENT: Milkman, Deevers, liencin, Campbell, Tegler GUESTS: Nancy Ross, KXIC RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL: Considering that the Sturgis Corner site seems to be unfeasible for a boat ramp, the Riverfront Commission recommends that the City employ Stanley Consultants to study the Sturgis Ferry sites (north and south) and make a recommendation regarding feasibility of a ramp at either site. If the consultants find neither site at Sturgis Ferry Park suitable, they should make an investigation of Napoleon Park for the same purpose. The Riverfront Commission strongly recommends that the City Council take steps to develop the Sturgis Corner riverfront area for recreational purposes particularly for access for shoreline fishermen and parking facilities. SUMMARY OF DISCUSSION: Chairperson Gilpin brought the meeting to order. The minutes of May 30, 1979 were adopted as written unanimously. Milkman introduced Jim Iioncin, the new CDBG Program Coordinator, Milkman also introduced Gretchen Tegler and Kathy Campbell, two summer interns who will be working on riverfront improvements. BOAT RAMP: Milkman explained her memo of 6/22/79 to the City Council which provides information for the Commission on the problems of a Sturgis Corner boat ramp. Gilpin attended the City Council meeting on June 19, 1979 and informed the Commission that the City Council was very concerned about the apparent unfeasibility of constructing a boat ramp at Sturgis Corner. Most Council members strongly favored construction of a boat ramp on the Iowa River, Council also asked for a yearly budget for riverfront improvements from the Commission. Knight asked who hired Stanley Consultants. Milkman said she and Gene Dietz from the Engineering Department had hired Stanley Consultants. Five firms were inter- viewed and Stanley had the meat experience. Berry asked who had done the prelimi- nary work with the Conservation Commission and on the boat ramp. Milkman said the City's Engineering Department which had no previous experience did the pre- liminary estimates for the boat ramp. Milkman indicated that a Conservation Commission representative had expressed some concern about the availability of parking. Milkman presented the plans from Stanley Consultants for the boat ramp and parking at Sturgis Corner. Additional parking and maneuvering space is needed for the area. Boutelle felt 40 foot long parking spaces were not needed for the whole area. Neuzil wondered why more property could not be acquired in the area, Milkman MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES IIDIIIES 13f9 i MINUTES IOWA CITY RIVERFRONT COMMISSION JUNE 27, 1979 -- 7:30 P.M. PAGE 2 explained the total cost of the lots adjacent to the ramp site was $100,000 to $225,000 and Braverman was not willing to subdivide the land. Other discussion centered around the length of the ramp, costs and the need for a retaining will. Alternate locations for a ramp, the Pollution Control Plant, Sturgis Ferry Park north, Sturgis Ferry Park south, and Napoleon Park were discussed. Gilpin said the Parks and Recreation Commission's budget includes a ramp in Napoleon Park in 1981. Fahr suggested that one reason for building a ramp at Stugis Corner was for rescue operations. Napoleon Park would not be suitable for rescue procedures because it is too far down the river, however, if the ramp is for recreational purposes, Napoleon Park would be ideal. If the ramp is built in Napoleon Park, Parks and Recreation may help with the funding. Gilpin said the entire remaining portion of the $75,000 could be used for the construction of the ramp and parking if necessary. Fahr asked what problems could be encountered with ownership of land at Sturgis Corner. Milkman pointed out that there is still some question to the nature of the interest held by the Airport Commission in this land, and she would get a legal opinion on this matter. Gilpin said the Airport Commission would probably ; be favorable to a boat ramp. Fountain said if the primary reason for building the ramp was for rescue then the Pollution Control site would be best. Gilpin said Sturgis Ferry Park provided unlimited parking. At Sturgis Corner the fishermen may complain due to the lack of parking facilities. Neuzil felt that a ramp should still be built at the Sturgis Corner site. Milkman said Stanley has made the preliminary evaluations for the other sites, now the Commission needed to decide if they want to spend additional funds for more detailed evaluations. After some further. discussion Fahr moved the following recommendation to the City Council: Considering that the Sturgis Corner site seems to be unfeasible for a boat ramp, the Riverfront Commission recommends that the City employ Stanley Consultants to study the Sturgis Ferry sites (north and south) and make a recommen- dation regarding feasibility of a ramp at either site. If the consultants find neither site at Sturgis Ferry Park suitable, they should make an investigation of Napoleon Park for the same purpose. Neuzil seconded; motion approved unanimously. Neuzil moved to strongly recommend to the City Council to take steps to develop the Sturgis Corner riverfront area for recreational purposes particularly for access for shoreline fishermen and parking facilities. Fahr seconded; motion approved 7-1, with Berry opposed. OTHER BUSINESS: The next meeting is scheduled for July 25 unless a special meeting is needed to consider the plans for a boat ramp. Milkman said the draft of the River Corridor Overlay Zone is complete and the Commission will be receiving it in the mail for review and consideration. There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned. Julie Deevers, Senior Clerk Typist MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MONIES ii 1 MINUTES IOWA CITY PLANNING 6 ZONING COMMISSION INFORMAL MEETING JUNE 18, 1979 -- 7:30 P.M. CITY MANAGER'S CONFERENCE ROOM MEMBERS PRESENT: Jakobsen, Ogesen, Kammermeyer, Cain (left early) MEMBERS ABSENT: Lehman, Blum, Vetter STAFF PRESENT: Boothroy, Schmeiser Review of an innovative parking area design plan for American College Testing Program, located south of Old Solon Road (Old Dubuque Road) and southeast of I North Dodge Street. i j The "Innovative Parking Area Design Plan" for American College Testing Program is I to be revised according to Commission comments. Also staff is to discuss plan with City Forester; no action taken. S-7915. Public discussion of a final plat, PAD, and Large Scale Residential Develop- ment plan of Court Hill -Scott Boulevard, Part VII, located northeast of Amhurst Street; 45 -day limitation period: 7/25/79, 60 -day limitation period: 8/9/79. i Staff indicated that because the final plans deviate substantially from the approved j preliminary plans, the Commission may exercise the same discretion in its review of the preliminary plans and is not required to approve the final plans as submitted. Further discussion; no action taken. Discussion of the proposed schedule for review of the new zoning ordinance. Ground rules for the review of the new zoning ordinance were discussed. It was f agreed that a minimum of 4 members present were needed at every discussion with 3 votes required to recommend, and that time for discussion be limited. Also the Commission requested the staff prepare a letter to be sent to various organizations in town regarding the new zoning ordinance requesting written comments. I Discussion of a memo from Legal regarding application Z-7901. 1 Discussion; no action taken. Preparec MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES 13Sd I IOWA CITY HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION May 30, 1979 7:30 PM CITY MANAGER'S CONFERENCE ROOM MEMBERS PRESENT: Kuhn, Costantino, Reyes, Munzenmaier, Marcus, Yates. MEMBERS ABSENT: Braverman, unexcused; McGuire, McCartt, excused. STAFF PRESENT: Allen, Zukrowski, Brown, Ryan. VISITORS: Holly, Woolard, KCJJ Radio and Mary Abboud, KKIC Radio, RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE CITY COUNCIL: None RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE CITY MANAGER AND STAFF; Constantino asked Zukrowski and Ryan to research the subject of couples who cohabitate, and the fact that they can work together at job sites, but married people can't. Is this discrimination? Perhaps it is also an issue that should be mentioned in the monthly Human Rights Commission flier. SUMMARY OF RELEVANT DISCUSSION: 1. The May 30, 1979 meeting was called to order at 7:45 PM by Vice -Chairperson Kuhn in the absence of Braverman. Kuhn moved that the April 23, 1979 minutes be accepted as read and all Commissioners present voted aye. 2. Braverman corresponded with Susan Hester, President of NOW, expressing his appreciation on behalf of the Commission for contacting the Human Rights Commission regarding women's softball facilities, 3. City budget request was corresponded. A letter was sent to the City Manager regarding the Commission's concern to have the Human Relations Department review and report on each departmental budget request to see that it is in compliance with EEO laws and to inform the Human Rights Commission of any inadequacies. 4. Equal opportunity complaints. Braverman wrote to the City Manager to express the Commission's desire to know of any complaints in early stages of the action. In addition, the Commission talked about the City's role in handling City complaints. John Hayek wrote Mace and expressed that the Commission's role in handling City complaints is a role in an advisory capacity only. Members wanted to follow up MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES Human Rights mission May 30, 1979 Page 2 with Mace to see what correspondence was done after receiving the letter from John Hayek. They felt that some follow up was necessary if Mace had not already done so. Munzenmaier felt the Commission should have a very active role. Ryan explained the Commission does not have jurisdiction to take the City of Iowa City to court. It was questioned whether conciliation was included in the restrictions. Members would like to key in on credibility of the Commission. Ryan pointed out that different cities have different charters that govern them. 5. Review of Iowa legislative activity. Two of the items discussed under the legislative activity was age amendment and veteran's preference. Both clauses, as far as the City is concerned, are still being operated under the federal law until the state acts upon the law in their own capacity. 6. Orientation program. Zukrowski briefly reviewed three subjects under the orientation programs: A) Differences in protection offered, B) review of terms and C) summary to date. A Glossary of terms was also distributed. 7. New Business. Commission's annual report to the City Council. Mace and Sophie are to work on this during the weeks to come. The annual report is due July 15, 1979. i Commission Bylaws. Munzenmaier reported that some of his concerns were Commissioner attendance, committee structure, how.many meetings are required by members to attend, and how many excused absences are allowed. 8. Discussion was done regarding the summer schedule. After some discussion it was decided that August would be the month that the Commission would not meet as part of the summer schedule change. i. 9. In addition to new business, Brown distributed the Human Relations Department organizational chart and memorandum to the Human Rights Commissioners explaining changes in the roles and job descriptions of the members of the Human Relations Department. A. Committee Reports: 1. Affirmative Action: Chamber of Commerce Commissioner pending. No action had been taken yet. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOIRES Human Rights '�'nission May 30, 1979 Page 3 Compliance monitoring guide report due. Munzenmaier, Chair; Reyes and McCartt were the two other members of the Committee. No final report has yet been prepared. Blue Ribbon Subcommittee. Commission decided to support the Blue Ribbon Committee and monitor progress. The Chair is Yates. Brown is to meet with this Blue Ribbon Committee to discuss future plans. Commission priority projects. Linda McQuire, Chair. There was not report as McQuire was absent. i Baseball team resolution. Linda McQuire, Mace Braverman. Zukrowski reported that Showalter and Lee were very receptive and they are starting to work on the winter schedule of women's activities at the Recreation Center. Staff report was not printed yet and will be mailed to the Commissioner later. COMPLAINTS: Zukrowski reviewed the status of all the complaints as it appeared on the agenda. Some discussion about the complaints were the problems of getting witnesses and other involved persons to come into the office to talk to Zukrowski about certain complaint cases. Some suggestions were that when witnesses were contacted by letter, a deadline date be set to notify the complainant that a witness for their case had not responded to the letter and that if they wanted their case to be settled and handled in a smooth and quick manner they would need the witnesses to contact Zukrowski as soon as possible. This procedure would put more of the responsibility for helping resolve the case in the hands of the complainant. The Commissioners felt that the new bylaws should address time limits for these types of situations. Three questions for Commissioners to complete from the College of Business administration were referred to the Human Rights Commission by Art Breif. Commissioners requested Zukrowski to respond and ask for results of the questions. June meeting is June 25, 1979, 7:30 PM. The agenda setting is June 15, 1979 at 3:30 PM. Adjournment. Munzenmaier motioned, Yates seconded, all Commissioners present voted aye. The meeting adjourned at 9:55 PM. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES MINUTES IOWA CITY HOUSING APPEALS BOARD MAY 10, 1979 8:11 A.M. MEMBERS PRESENT: Pollock, VanderZee, Owens, Hillstrom MEMBERS ABSENT: Smithey, Klaus STAFF PRESENT: Kucharzak, Steinbach, Ryan, Barnes, Malone, Vezina, Kuebler SUMMARY OF DISCUSSION AND ACTION TAKEN Decisions of the Housing Appeals Board meetings of April 19 & 30, 1979, were read and approved. Kucharzak stated that the transcript of said hearing was not available at this time, however, when the minutes were completed they would be distributed to Board members for their review and adoption at the next regularly scheduled meeting of the Housing Appeals Board. Kucharzak introduced new staff members Steinbach; Senior Housing Inspector, Vezina and Kuebler; Housing Inspectors. Kucharzak stated that on May 8, 1979, the City Council heard concerns of the residents of Black's Gaslight Village. As a result, the Council scheduled time during their informal meeting on Monday, May 14, 1979, to hear discussion on Black's appeal and the action taken by the Housing Board of Appeals. Council requested that members of the Housing Appeals Board be present. TO CONSIDER THE CASE OF MR Chairman VanderZee swore in those who would testify. Kucharzak entered the City's documents and stated information of alleged violation of handrails on four units at Carriage Hill. Malone reviewed background information as contained in the staff report stating that, as he understood, Housing Code Chapter 9.30.4.I.2.(b), handrails are required at said locations. Kucharzak stated the violation notices and letter requesting an appeal were correctly filed. He also added that at the City Council's meeting on May 8, 1979, the Housing Code was modified and the changes would go into effect on May 19, 1979, after publication. Kucharzak further stated that the Code, as amended, would not grant relief from violations and he then asked that the Board sustain the City's order. Hibbs stated that he felt the order he had received had stretched the ordinance beyond the reasonable interpretation of the Code. He showed pictures of the steps in question and gave the approximate - I . ,..,__,-_ MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES 1101MES Iowa City Hous;")Appeals Board r May 10, 1979 Page 2 distance of the steps in relation to the dwellings and to the street. Hibbs read the applicable code and stated the definition of "exit" from the dictionary. He then stated the meaning of the term "egress." Hibbs contended that the word premises rather than the word dwelling in the code would constitute a violation. He went on to define both the terms "premises" and "dwelling" and restated his opinion that no violation existed. VanderZee asked if there were any elderly people living at Carriage Hill. Hibbs replied yes. He further added that the depth and width of the steps provided safe use. Hibbs stated that there are two alternative routes to leave the building. Kucharzak stated that these steps are a direct access from a private dwelling to a public way and that this order has continuously been enforced with this interpretation. Kucharzak stated that handrails had been installed a year ago in order for Code compliance, however, they had subsequently been removed. Hibbs stated that the handrails that were installed previously were indeed temporary. Ryan questioned whether the function of the steps changed with their location to the dwelling. Hibbs pointed out that there are other routes to leave once a person is outside of the building. Further discussion of terms ensued. Kucharzak stated views on enforcement ane proposed the question of safety liability. Hibbs stated that his insurance representative has inspected the steps and has not required handrails. Hillstrom moved that the violation not be upheld. Motion seconded. Motion carried three in favor, one opposed (VanderZee). Meeting took five minute recess. BOARD TO CONSIDER CASE OF JOHN PENNICK - 130 E. JEFFERSON STREET Attorney Tom Cilek present. Chairman swore in those who would testify. Kucharzak read applicable code, Chapter 9.30.6.A., Notice of Violation and letter requesting appeals hearing. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOVIES Iowa City Hous' Appeals Board May 10, 1979 Page 3 Barnes stated her findings upon reinspection and clarified those with blackboard drawings. In her opinion, of the six inspections that she did, only three were in violation of the Code. She also slowed photos of those dwelling units that she inspected. Kucahrzak agreed. Kucharzak suggested that the Housing Inspectors reinspect all dwelling units that were originally cited by Calef. It was also suggested that dwelling units N2, N37, and k48 be stricken from the letter of violation and others remain as written until such time of reinspection so that the violations cited are in direct reference to the Code. Cilek referred to the letter written by him to the City Council. He stated that the structure was built in 1851 and has been placed on the National Register of Historic Places. He further questioned making structural changes in buildings 7 having historical significance. Cilek suggested that remeasuring and re-evaluation of violations take place and those findings be presented at a later date to the Board. VanderZee questioned Cilek regarding the g g portion of the violation dealing with storm doors and windows. Cilek questioned the validity of the code requirements and asked that the sum of the violations be dealt.with at the same time. IKucharzak gave general code background in reference to its effect on the building located at 130 East Jefferson Street. Kucharzak supported the granting of a continuance on this case. Owens moved, Pollock seconded, that the case be continued by the Board. Board upheld the motion unanimously. Kucharzak and Cilek further explored code background and it was agreed that reinspections would be scheduled. I BDARD TO CONSIDER THE CASE OF MR. FRANK CARTHEY AND MR. DANIEL ZIOOR - 216 EAST FAIRCHILD ST. Carthey present and sworn in by Chairman. ' Kucharzak read letter requesting appeal from Carthey and Zioberek. Barnes stated her findings of reinspection stating that she had measured finished floor to finished ceiling and found that distance to be 6' 7". She also presented photos of said dwelling unit and clarified the actual violation. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES IIOIIIES Iowa City Hous;"+, Appeals Board ^ May 10, 1979 Page 4 Kucharzak supported her interpretation of the code. Carthey stated that the dwelling was in compliance with the code when he and Zioberek purchased it and he voiced his confusion as to why the code shows his property in violation at this later date. Kucharzak stated how this particular code came to be and asked the Board to sustain the violation. He further explained the City's responsibility to enforce the code. Carthey questioned the reason for older structures needing to comply with a newer code. Pollock questioned when this section of the code actually came into use. The exact date was not known. Ramifications of this particular code were discussed by Board members. Hillstrom moved, Owens seconded, that the Board uphold the cited violation. The Board upheld the motion unanimously. Kucharzak suggested that Carthey petition the Council on this matter. Kucharzak stated that the City would consider the duration of the tenant's lease as a reasonable time to vacate. The meeting took a five minute recess. BOARD TO CONSIDER THE CASE OF A. GILES WARRACK - 812E DAVENPORT ST A. Giles Warrack present and sworn in by Chairman. Kucharzak read the letter requesting an appeal. Barnes presented her findings and documented them with a photograph I} of the dwelling stating that she had originally been contacted by the previous owner Mrs. Adrian Flatt to'do an inspection on June 1, 1978. Barnes stated that on September 28, 1978 she proceeded to do a reinspection and discovered that the property had been sold to the Warrack's. She learned that they were unaware of the Notice of Violation. In October she delivered a copy of the letter and requested a letter of intent from them. She received no letter. Barnes stated that the ceiling heights on the first and second floors of the dwelling measured 6' 9". Kucharzak explained the obligation of the City to enforce the code upon a request even though the property is a single family dwelling. Warrack told of the age of the house and questioned enforcement on an owner -occupied dwelling. Kucharzak stated that the code has no provision granting relief in this type of situation. Kucharzak read Section G.6. Service of Notice clause that states ("notice" literally means being on public record). He also mentioned the problems that emerge in a situation such as this and suggested that the Warrack's seek legal assistance and/or peition the City Council. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES 110111ES Iowa City Hous Appeals Board !"1 May 10, 1979 Page 5 Pollock suggested that this case might constitute a "taking" such as is done in road construction. The Warrack's stated that their initial intention was to occupy the dwelling themselves rather than renting it. Kucharzak sought legal assistance however none was available at that time. The Board explored the idea of "what would happen if everyone abstained from a vote?" Owens moved, Hillstrom seconded, that the case be continued until the next meeting and that there be legal counsel available. The Board . upheld the motion unanimously. Kucharzak encouraged the same Board members present at the May 10; 1979 meeting to hear the continuances in the future. Meeting was adjourned. Y MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES IIOVIES .< /I MINUTES IOWA CITY HOUSING APPEALS BOARD MAY 18, 1979 8:30 A.M. MEMBERS PRESENT: Pollock, Owens, Smithey MEMBERS ABSENT: VanderZee, Hillstrom, Klaus STAFF PRESENT: Kucharzak, Ryan, Steinbach, Vezina BOARD TO RECONSIDER THE CASE OF BLACK'S GASLIGHT VILLI Those who would testifv were sworn in by Chairman Smithey. Kucharzak asked for clarification of who the people were that were sworn 'in to testify. They were identified by spokesman Juilfs. Kucharzak stated that the City had no new evidence to enter into the record. Juilfs read letters from Fay's Fire Equipment, Inc. and Rocca Welding and Repair, both of which are contract companies involved in the construction and installation of fire escapes needed at 414 Brown Street. The letters stated that due to circumstances beyond their control they would probably be unable to meet the June 1, 1979 deadline. They both asked for time extensions. Juilfs then read a letter from Mori Costantino of 407 Brown Street_ This letter questioned whether or not the City was taking a responsible stand in this case. Smithey suggested that the three letters be entered into the public record. Juilfs stated that the inability of the contractors to meet the June 1, 1979 deadline was the reason the tenants of Black's Gaslight Village requested the hearing. Flemming stated that she felt the meeting was untimely and that more people would have been present if held at a later date. She added that it was the contractor's responsibility, not the tenants', nor Mrs. Black's, to get the fire escapes installed. Flemming voiced concern that different members of the Appeals Board have attended separate hearings. Smithey replied that no one has control over that situation. Smithey stated that he felt the violation regarding fire escapes was the most serious of those cited. Flemming stated that at Black's there is always someone home and awake so all fires would be reported immediately, therefore, reducing the. risk of danger to the residents. --- MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 110114ES 1 ?53 L _. Iowa City Housing Appeals Board May 18, 1979 Page -2 Smithey asked when the violation of two means of egress was cited. Kucharzak stated that the violation was originally cited in the 1960's, however, the Board need only be concerned with the violation which was cited on April 13, 1978. Service was made on April 18, 1978. The violation was never appealed. Smithey stated that he felt the ultimate responsibility for code compliance rested with Mrs. Black. He further stated that the City has a certain amount of liability in enforcing the code and that the code not only protects the residents, but visitors and the general public as well. Juilfs felt that the City relieves itself of responsibility when it notifies a tenant of a code violation. Smithey expressed his doubts about Juilfs' statem3nt. Flemming stated that Mrs. Black had a $124 phone bill (last month) in connection with trying to find someone to do the work. She further stated that the Fire Marshal had not been responsive in this matter. Kucharzak clarified the fact that the housing inspector does not determine the route for the second means of egress nor the type of fire escape needed. Those responsibilities belong to the Fire Marshal. The Fire Marshal was notified February 17, 1978 of the fire escape concern at Black's. Juilfs asked that an additional 60 days be granted to install the fire escapes. Pollock voiced concern regarding the Fire Marshal's involvement. Kenney stated that he did not feel that the Fire Marshal, nor the Fire Marshal's office, had in any way caused a delay in the installation of the fire escapes. He also stated that it was his opinion, after speaking to Mike Rocca, that the fire escapes would be installed by June 1, 1979. He added that Rocca Welding is in possession of the specifications used by the Fire Marshal for fire escapes. Kuzharzak explained to the Board what the sequence of events had been prior to the hearing and what the procedures would be after the hearing depending upon the variables involved. Kucharzak asked that the names of all people affected by the decision be read into the record so that the proceedings would be proper. The names, without addresses, were read into the record by Juilfs and Smithey. i Kucharzak asked Juilfs if he had been asked to represent those people who were affected by the hearing. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOVIES Iowa City Housing Appeals Board May 18, 1979 Page•3 Juilfs answered that he was representing the interest of those people with the exception of one tenant who was out of town. Pollock moved that there be a 60 day time extension in reference to the citation. No second. Pollock moved that there be a 30 day time extension in reference to the citation. No second. Pollock moved that the Board uphold the citation as presently cited. Owens seconded. Motion carried unanimously. Meeting was adjourned. PREPARED APPROVED MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAFIDS•DES MO RIES Lo M I NIPITS ' SENIOR CENTER COMMISSION .LUNE 20, 1979 -- 7:011 P.M. CITY MANAGER'S CONFERENCE ROOM MEMBERS PRESENT: Ambrisco, Bourgeois, Sando, Scott, Summerwill MEMBERS ABSENT: Carlton, Williams STAFF PRESENT: Berlin, Deevers, Meisel GUESTS: Bill Nowysz, John Pfiffner RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL: That the City Manager proceed with receiving approval of the City Council for the pre- liminary design plans for the Senior Center with the provision that the architects pro- vide an estimate of the additional cost for the mezzanine to be extended across the middle of the first floor. VIEWING OF THE SENIOR CENTER SITE: The Commissioners and staff met with Nowysz at the Old Post Office. Nowysz explained how the building dictated certain design of spaces. He also pointed out the spaces which must be preserved because of their historical significance. Sando and Scott suggested ! that a large corner room on the third floor be appropriated as an exercise room for Senior Center participants. i SUMMARY OF DISCUSSION: Meisel, staff liason, brought the meeting to order as Chairperson Carlton was absent. Ambrisco moved to adopt the minutes of June 6, 1979 as read, Sando seconded, minutes were approved unanimously. ADOPTION OF BYLAWS: i j Summerwill moved to adopt the Senior Center bylaws, Ambrisco seconded, vote unanimous. ii j ELECTION OF. OFFICERS: { Ambrisco nominated Scott to be Vice Chairperson, Summerwill seconded. Ambrisco moved to mase the nominations and to unanimously elect Scott as Vice Chairperson. Vote unanimous. Ambrisco nominated Sando to be secretary, Bourgeois seconded. Summerwill moved to cease nominations and to cast a unanimous vote for Sando. Vote unanimous. 'j VIEWING OF THE SENIOR CENTER DESIGN PLANS: li Bill Nowysz and John Pfiffner, architects for the firm of Wehner, Nowysz, Pattschull and Pfiffner, were present to discuss the design plans for the Center. Nowysz distributed copies of the preliminary cost estimates for the Center rehabilitation. Nowysz then presented the preliminary design plans for the Senior Center. The mezzanine floor will be left open over the main space. Administration offices and a library lounge will be located on the mezzanine level. Scott felt it would be too noisy with'the open space and the balcony. Sando said the administrative office of the Program Director should be located with the activities. There was discussion around the question of the services area being on the lower level in the congested traffic area. Sando added 11 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES FIOIIIEs MINUTES SENIOR CENTER C0141ISSIoN JUNE: 20, 1979 -- 7:00 P.M. PAGE 2 that from experience in other centers the offices of service personnel are more often placed a little removed from the activities area. The Conference Room should be left on the mezzanine. Sando commented that the lower level would be very congested with the elevator and the services. Berlin reminded the Commission this was the last meeting in which changes could be made. The Commission decided to locate the Director in the Old Post Master's office on the main level, and the secretary in the adjacent lobby area, and the Program specialist and other general administration on the mezzanine. Meisel asked if there could be a space designed for interviewing. Nowysz suggested the exam room in the health complex in the lower level for this purpose. Meisel suggested dividing off a room in the library lounge for the Social Service people if they decided to be located in the Center. Pfiffner said the library lounge in the mezzanine should be left as is and in the future if the office space is required it could be divided. Nowysz said there will be an extended stairway on the northside to the second floor. When the stairs reach the second floor the hallway turns 900 so the present restrooms will not have to be replaced. The ramp, on the northside of the building will be a scissored type ramp with an ongrade entrance. Pfiffner explained the kitchen design and distributed copies of the cost estimates. He then read a letter from Bob Welsh' asking that the internal layout of the kitchen be redesigned. Berlin asked when the plans would be expected to be returned to Welsh for approval. Pfiffner said the plans had been redesigned according to the requests and could be returned to Welsh at any time. Berlin said the plans needed to go to the City Council and suggested giving a deadline for approval. The next City Council meeting is scheduled for July 2 at which time the Senior Center plans should be discussed. reminded the Commission that every delay for City Council approval meant delay in coBerlin n- . i struction. Ambrisco asked if the automatic sprinkler system had ever been discussed Pfiffner said the range hood had a dry powder system which was totally interlocked w the other sprinkler systems. ith J Summerwill felt the space was not being utilized to the utmost because there is room for three floors. Berlin explained there was not enough money for three floors. Scott asked if a whole floor instead of a mezzanine had been considered. Nowysz said the flexability of the bids for a whole floor could be $50,000 either way. Berlin suggested designing an alternate floor and getting a closer estimate on cost. Nowysz said they could not extend over the whole floor because of Federal government's request to his- torically preserve the lobby. Berlin suggested constructing the floor across the middle. Sando moved to recommend to City Council that the City Manager proceed.with receiving approval of the City Council for the preliminary design plans for the Senior Center with !. the provision that the architects provide an estimate of the additional cost for the mezzanine floor to be extended across the middle of the first floor. Ambrisco seconded, motion was approved unanimously. DISCUSSION OF SENIOR CENTER ACQUISITION FUNDS: Meisel distributed a resolution for the Establishment of a Commission for the Management Of Gifts and Memorials to the Multi-purpose Senior Center. This item will be discussed at the next Senior Center Commission meeting. ROLE OF COUNCIL OF ELDERS: Meisel explained that the Council of Elders (Co E) was a group of people 55 or over who MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MONIES i f - I i MINUTES SENIOR CENTER COMMISSION JUNE 20, 1979 -- 7:00 P.M. PAGE 3 want the Senior Center and are willing to give their time to help develop the Center. The CoE does not want to be a policy making board. Summerwill suggested having an infomal meeting with the CoE members. Berlin suggested that the Officers be asked to attend a Senior Center Commission meeting to gather ideas. Berlin asked the Commission members to come to the next meeting with ideas on how the CoE can help. OTHER: Berlin excused Meisel and Deevers so that he and the Commission members could discuss the position of the Senior Center Director. Written By: Approved by: Secretary of the Senior Center Commission MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES u MINUTES: IOWA CITY A114POR11' ('OMM SSION MAY 24, 1979 IOWA CITY MUN1('1PAl, AliwoRT MEMBERS PRESENT: Bleckwenn, Embree, Phipps, Kedick, Saeugling OTHERS PRESENT: Ekhard 'Ziegler, Lois Carroll, Gundula Bosch, Raymond Tannons, John D. Shanley, Lynn Hansen, Lois Hatch, Sue Young, K. Gleaves, Dennis Gordon, Leo Brachenbach, John Redick, Sue Lee, Ken Lowder, Earl Ossoinig, E.K. Jones, JY. SUMMARY OF DISCUSSION AND ACTIONS TAKEN: Chairman Phipps called the meeting to order at 7:30 P.M. and asked the Commission'to rescind all their actions of the May 17th meeting. It was moved by Embree, seconded by Redick to rescind all actions by the Commission at their May 17, 1979 meeting. Motion carried. I It was moved by Embree, seconded by Redick that the minutes of last months meeting be approved. Motion carried. Embree made a motion, seconded by Bleckwenn to approve the bills for the month. Motion carried. Awarding of the contract for the additional hardsurface tie -down i area. It was moved by Bleckwenn, seconded by Redick to award the contract, subject to receiving the funds from the i.D.O.T., to the low bidder L.L. Pelting Company in the amount of $22,821.05. Motion carried unamously. f I Mr. Tom Alberhasky resubmitted a proposal to lease an area immed- lately west of his property located at the northeast corner or the airport with the corrections the Commission had requested at. their April meeting. It was moved by Bleckwenn, seconded by 9 Embree to authorize the chairman to sign the proposed lease between Alberhasky and the Commission once the lease has been drawn up. Motion carried. A proposal for crop hail insurance was submittedby Doane Agricul- ? tural Service. Seventy-two acres of corn at 85.00 seventy-one acres of beans at 60.00 per acre and not to exceed $10,380.00 for $248.00 dollars. fMovedxbyuRedickrance seconded by Bleckwenn to purchase the insurance. Motion carried. Redick made a formal motion stating, "The Iowa Cil.y Municipal Air- port Commission voted to prohibit all pilots with student status licenses from taking off on runways 35 and 30 between the hours or 4100 P.M. and 9:00 P.M., seven days a week. Landing on runway 17 and 12 would be permitted to all pilots during this period. This Policy would become effective June 1, 1979 and be subject to i' review by the Airport Commission at its September, 1979 regular meeting. This restriction also applies to students while they are receiving i dual instruction. i 135.5 i MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB 1 CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES -2 - Redick explained the reason for such a motion was to alleviate the noise problem the resident-: living off the end of those run- ways were experiencing. There followed a long discussion Con- cerning whether or not it. was rrasibk- or loyal to adopt. such a restriction for noise abatement .ind whether or not the mo Lion would restrict the use of the airport, by the flying service's student.s. Redick read a presentation entitled "Airport Noise -How it Compares" addressed to the Iowa City Community through the Iowa City Airport Commission prepared by Dennis P. Bordon. (Copy attached to these minutes) It was the opinion of the majority of the Commission that the only way to find out whether these restrictions would work was to give it a try and see what would happen. As for the enforcement, Redick asked that the Manager enforce the regulation on the fixed base operator's students and employees. The manager attempted to emphasise that prior to the implementation of any regulation, the Commission should check with the F.A.A., State I.D.O.T. and the Commission attorney to see whether or not Lhe Commission can do it. The manager attempted to point out that the Federal Aviation Agency and the I.D.O.T. have control over the airspace around the airport and over Iowa City. It was also pointed out that in the 19 years the present- fixed base operator has been aL Iowa City there has only been two incidents involving students and no one was hurt.. The majority of the pilots arc very careful and are aware of the noise bothering some areas and they attempt. to stay away from those areas, but sometimes they can't. It was pointed out that such a restriction will encourage pilots, not capable of using a runway other than the favored runway to use: them increasing Lhe danger of intersection collisions and mid-air collisions ds the Lransil pilot will uso Lhc runway Lha wind tetrahedron favor. The manager pointed out Lhat Lo implement the student restriction would mean the only safe means of traffic seperation would be by the establishment of a control tower. The chairman pointed out that the Commission is in the process of having a Master Plan done and if the Commission would just wait until it was completed many of the issues would be answered. Mr. Gordon pointed out to the Commission that in the material sent to him by the E.P.A. that nothing should be attempted by the E.P.A. to restrict or change the flow of traffic established by the F.A.A. the reason being the Commission would have to assume responsibility in case the change or restriction cont.rlbuled to an accident Chairman Phipps pointed out he felt any such proposal was bad and was establishing a dangerous precedent and he hoped each Commission member has only the interests of the Iowa City Airport and its operation as it applies to all the citizens of Iowa City in general and asked each member 1-o consider this when they vote. Redick read the motion again, was seconded by Saeugling. (Motion carried with Embree, Redick and Saeugling voting aye, Bleckwenn and Phipps voting nay. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICRDLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES WINES 14 h< Chairman Phipps asked Lhe C'ommission's approval to contact: Lhe Commission's attorney concerning I:ho A.lberhasky lease. it was moved by Embree, seconded by Bleckwenn to have the Chairman contact the attorney. Motion carried. j Kevin Gleaves brought up the question of "hang gliders", and would like to have permission to fly one off the Iowa City Airport. General discussion followed. Phipps brought up for discussion that the Airport Manager had pointed out the government mandatory price and allocation on aviation fuel had expired effective last February 26th, which had been reported to the Commission in his March report and felt the Commission should consider raising the flowage fee. The Commission last December had decided that once the controls were recinded and it was agreeable with the leasee to ammend his lease, the Commission would negotiate to raise the flowage fee from two to three cents. The Fixed Base Operator agreed it was wrong for the Commission to receive 2 cents per gallon, with all of the increased costs, but pointed out they might need a public hearing also, or check with their attorney. It was moved by Embree, seconded by Bleckwenn to have the Chairman check with their attorney concerning the amendment to the lease and whether or not they need a public hearing. Motion carried. Ken Lowder reported the First Phase is completed on measuring noise around the airport. The noise level in and around the airport is reasonable in some cases - the noise level is also reasonably loud due to garbage trucks, which happen to come by. There are no recommendations at this time. The manager presented literature on retrocffective airport markers for I.axi-ways to the terminal building. It was moved by Bleckwenn, seconded by Embree to have the manager look in to the cost or purchasing and installing Lhe units at the Iowa City Airport. Motion carried. The next meeting was scheduled for June 28, 1979. Meeting adjourned. 0;7. . MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES J 1 The drone of an airplane overhead may be music to your ears, but for the•slumbering nonflyer next door it can be as grating as the gleeful band of trash collectors seeking to finish a day's work between 5 and 6 a.m. As Iowa City has spread, the airport and residences have become wedged together. The fact that "the airport was here first" presents an unconvincing argument to homeowners who have established their homes off the departure end of the runway. Maybe they knew, the airport was there and thought it wouldn't be a problem. Others acquired housing ignorant of the nearby airstrip. [dost people can live with airplane nois--particularly the sounds generaged from a general aviation airport. Those sounds are a lot more timid than a cacophony of trucks, sirens, construc- tion sites, and motorcycles that one confronts walking down a' street. But for some people the intrusion of airplane sound into their home, is a source of irritation that becomes magnified because airplanes are conspicuous, unfamiliar, and may be perceived as unnecessary. In many cases, too, people may transfer a subconscious fear of an airplane crash in their neighborhood into anxiety over the plane's noise. The FAA has set noise standards for machines that fly, and all users of the airspace agree that noise standards or limitations should be applied uniformly throughout the country. Most pilots would argue, too, that any noise standards set in a community should —,-• . MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROIAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES 2 be applied equally and fairly to all noise sources --not just airplanes. But while all the legal :iassles are being played out in the courts, state legislatures, and city halls around the country, Pilots need to realize that their aircraft do, in fact, make noise; that there are people underneath them who detest that noise. While the manufacturers continue to take steps to quiet V airplanes that roll from their plants, the way a pilot operates his airplane today can effect changes in the sound at the ground. Obviously, safety in flight is the first concern of any aircraft operation. The following recommendations are not intended to introduce or create any unsafe operational conditions. 'I And they are not a cure for aircraft noise but, instead, represent steps that can be taken today toward a good neighbor i policy and the pilots respect for our friends who live around the I � airport. F PILOTS: HERE'S WHAT WE CAN DO... i Be aware of noise -sensitive areas, particularly residential areas near the airport. Avoid flying low over them. { Fly traffic patterns tight and high, i gkeeping in g your airplane in as close to the field as possible. j In constant -speed prop airplanes, do not use high rpm settings in the pattern. Prop noise from high-performance singles and twins increases drastically at high rpm. On takeoff, reduce to cruise climb power as soon as safe and j' practical. ! ..Climb after liftoff at best angle of climb speed until cross- ing the airport boundary, then climb at best rate. I � I � I I � I { i I i ' MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES i i 3 Depart from the start of the runways, rather than inter- sections, for the highest possible altitude when leaving the air- port vicinity. i Try low-power or gliding landings, and avoid like the plague low, dragged in approaches. .If you want to practice night landings. Do you practice at major fields where a smaller airplane's sound is less obtrusive. INSTRUCTORS: Here's what we can do Teach noise abatement to all students, including pilots you take up for their biennial flight reviews. Treat noise education i as you would any other element of instruction. .Know noise sensitive areas and point them out as you come i and go with your students. .Assure that your students fly at or above the recommended pattern altitude, and remind them constantly that airplanes will land quite successfully with low power settings. .Assure that you and your students practice maneuvers over unpopulated areas. Vary practice areas so that same locale is not subjected to repeated flight training exposure. .During practice of ground -reference maneuvers be particularly aware of houses and businesses near the flight path. .Stress that high rpm prop settings are reserved for takeoff and for short final, but not for flying the pattern. Pushing prop rpm to high results in extra noise. FIXED BASE OPERATOR Here's what you can do Identify noise -sensitive areas near your airport and create abatement flight patterns. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES 0 4 .Post the anti -noise procedures neatly and prominently, and remind pilots who rent your airplanes or fly from your airport of the importance of adhering to them. Mail mimeographed copies of noise -abatement patterns with monthly hangar and tiedown bills. Post anti -noise departure procedures and headings on signs at departure ends of runways and in runup areas. I .Assure your flight instructors are teaching noise awareness. Call•for use of the least noise -sensitive runway whenever wind conditions permit. Try to minimize high touch-and-go training. .Establish a 1,000 -foot agl pattern (as recommended by the FAA) I I .Respond professionally, knowledgeably, and courteously to airport neighbors who call with noise complaints. Try to determine if reports are coming in from a particular locale, or are about a particular airplane. Then do something to alleviate the problem. .If you have a chronic complainer, make a personal visit to his home for a calm discussion of the problem. Invite him to the airport, and possibly for an airplane ride, for a firsthand look at what the airport is doing to reduce noise in the area. The VASI lights will help pilots prevent low, dragging approaches. AIRPORT COMMISSION Here's what you can do .Send a copy of the noise abatement procedures established for the airport, with a brief explanation of its purpose, to local newspapers. Let the public know pilots are concerned. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES 110IRES ! 1 5 See that the pattern, approach, and departure paths around the airport are designated on official zoning and planning maps so real estate activity is conducted in full awareness of such areas. Lobby for land -use zoning, and building codes in these areas that are compatible with airport activity, and will protect neigh- boring inhabitants. .Stress, publicize, communicate the value of the airport to the community and how its operation adds to the safety, economy and over all worth of Iowa City. .Sponsor "aviation days" at the airport to involve nonflyers with the business of aviation. .Encourage "beautification" projects at the airport. Trees and bushes around runup and departure areas have proven quite effective in absorbing ground noise from airplanes. These recommendations are within the guidelines of the "Model Community Noise Control Ordinance" Section 6.2.8 Airport and Aircraft Operation published by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA 550/9-76- 003) pp. 30, pp. 46, Sept. 1975 Other references. EPA Noise Control Program --Progress to Date pp. 14', pp. 15, pp. 16, March 1978. EPA Noise A Health Problem August 1978. EPA Airport Noise Abatement Planning June 1977. EPA Report on Aircraft --Airport Noise August 1973 Public Law 92-574 Enacted 92nd Congress, H.R. 11021 October 1972 EPA Regional Assistance to State and Local Noise Programs See pp. 20, pp• 25, pp. 28. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES a 6 AIRPORT AND AIRCRAFT OPERATIONS (a) The SPO/NCO shall consult with the airport proprietor to recom- mend changes in airport operations to minimize any noise dis- turbance -•which the airport owner may have authority to control in its capacity as proprietor. (b) Nothing in this section shall be construed to prohibit, restrict, penalize, enjoin, or in any manner regulate the movement of aircraft which are in all aspects conducted in accordance with, or purduant to, applicable Federal laws or regulations. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES 110RIES I I i ii 1� I i, I 6 AIRPORT AND AIRCRAFT OPERATIONS (a) The SPO/NCO shall consult with the airport proprietor to recom- mend changes in airport operations to minimize any noise dis- turbance -•which the airport owner may have authority to control in its capacity as proprietor. (b) Nothing in this section shall be construed to prohibit, restrict, penalize, enjoin, or in any manner regulate the movement of aircraft which are in all aspects conducted in accordance with, or purduant to, applicable Federal laws or regulations. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES 110RIES I Table 4. Continuous Sound Levels which Pose an Immediate Threat to Healthand Welfare (Measured at Receiver)* Sound level limit (dBA) Duration 90 24 hours 93 12 hours i I 96 6 hours I I � 99 3 hours ! 102 1.5 hours 105 45 minutes i 108 22 minutes I j ! *Use equal energy time-intensity tradeoff if level varies; find energy equivalent over 24 hours. , 4 1 i Table 5. Impulsive Sound Levels which Pose an Immediate Threat - to Health and Welfare (Measured at Receiver)* I Number of repetitions f Sound level limit (dB) per 24 hour period 145 1 I 135 10 125 IOD 1i I i i ! ! MICROFILMED BY 1 ( JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS-DES FIOIIIES i SOUNL LEVEL ICOMPI 1ISONS dB Threshold of pain Rock group _ I l• �,. • Heavy truck p� i !� -; E-- CenvmetMnd speech It'• Llbnry !� �I I r� 7 'I �iF �• lk 11 l.. Bedroom .I.muety 1978 G 130 120 110 Electronic elan 100—>,: .y. pneumatic drill 80-�""'.. .70 Avenge strut tralic VV /udneu office -50� i -30 f;l:,; L Living room �� ~ 20 r t, r., ; r;1 t •. �7 10 i u ,0 Threshold of hearing ke ,flirt wIr'ni ni•ur nftrinuHum MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 110HIE5 r r,4 Sound levels in decibels (dB) are calculated on a logarithmic basis. An increase of 10 decibels represents a 10 -fold increase in acoustic energy while an increase of 20 decibels corresponds to a 100 -fold increase in acoustic energy. - However, the human ear also works logarithmically. Hence, our perception of the noise increase (loudness) works in such a way that each 10 dB Increase in sound level is perceived as approximately a doubling of loudness: The weighted A scale approximates the frequency response of the human ear by placing most emphasis on the frequency range of 1000 to 6000 Hertz. Sound levels measured using A -weighting are often expressed as dBA, and is the scale used for measuring small propeller -driven aircraft noise. Effective Precelved Noise Level in decibels (EMB) is the noise level corrected for differences in tone and noise duration. Generally speaking, EPNdB can be roughly calculated by adding 13 to the dBA measured noise level. EPNdB is used in the measurement of turbine -engine aircraft noise. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 1101MES PROPELLER -DRIVEN SMALL AIRPLANE NOISE Airplane maximum certificated takeoff weight (W) —pounds 0 600 1000 1500 2000 3000 4000 5000 5700 Kilograms MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB FDA!' 4APi05•:II •101:1[ BEECH B"' - SPORT BC23 - SUNDOWNER B2AR - SIERRA BF33A - BONANZA 9V3SB - BONANZA BB55 -BARON SE55 - BARON 8860'- DUKE 8050 -GUEEN AIR OC90 - KING AIR CESSNA 0150 - CESSNA 150 ll C. - SKYHAWK 1 0177RG - CARDINAL RG C-182 - SKYLANE C.U206 - STATIONAIR 07210 - CENTURION W10 - CESSNA 310 0337 - SKYMASTER C-340- CESSNA 340 0402 - CESSNA 402 C•414 - CESSNA 914 0421 - GOLDEN EAGLE BELLANCA 17.30A - VIKING 17.31A - VIKING 17.31ATC - TURBO -VIKING GRUMMAN AMERICAN AA' III- TRAINER M -1C - TRAVELER PIPER PA28.140 - CHEROKEE 140 PA28.151 - WARRIOR PA28•11200 - ARROW PA28-235 - CHARGER PA32-300 - CHEROKEF PA23.250 - AZTEC PA31.325 - NAVAJO PA31*350 - CHIEFTAIN PA31T - CHEYENNE ROCKWELL INTERNATIONAL 8112- ROCKWELL 112 15005 - SHRINE COMMANDE R605 - AERO COMMANDER R69OA - TURBO COMMANDO • Single * Twin 00 AO PA APTI11977 B FOWA AERONAUTICS DIVISION SIATECARTOL UES MOINES. IOWA M319 515 28142M June 4, 1979 REF, NO. Mr. E. K. Jones, Manager Iowa City Municipal Airport Iowa City, Iowa 52240 Dear Mr. Jones: We have been advised of a resolution by your Airport Commission which prohibits student pilots from taking off on Runways 35 and 30 between the hours of four and nine p.m. We feel that your Commission should be made aware of Chapter' 328.19, Code of Iowa, (copy attached) which requires municipal airports to "adopt safe air traffic patterns" To restrict student pilots from take -off' on 35 and 30 would be inviting downwind and crosswind take—offs by a group least able to handle those conditions. Without an Air Traffic Control Tower, you are apt to have a mix of traffic operating in opposite directions. Both of the foregoing situations present an unacceptable possibility for an accident. If we can assist in any way in resolving this problem, please do not hesitate to call on us. Sincerely, JACK GRIFFITH Aviation Specialist JG:de Enc. cc: Mr. Wm. Sasser, Chief Airports Division, FAA COMMISSIONERS JULESM. BUSKER BARBARI DUNN DONALD K.OARONER WILUAMF.McORATN ROBERTA. RIOLER ALLAN TnOMS•fs�nr9R%K'MMn4wn'. FtICROFILME BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES NOINES c, �r. ar• lir• b. g•1' f„• r'la t of 1Lo Wal the lent. 1 ti, Ow t i• Ln•• s,n• z 1667 of the project, except for those contractual stipula- tions agreed to by all parties prior to receipt of state funds. 2. The department shall include in the annual re- port made by the department to the governor a re- port of all federal moneys it accepts, receives and re- ceipts for under the provisions of this section. [1346, .i0, 54, 58, 62, 66, 71, 73, 75, 77,6328.141 Penrod u 111/22116 328.15 Contracts -law governing. All contracts for the planning, acquisition, construction, improve- ment, maintenance, and operation of airports, or other air navigation facilities made by the depart- ment, either as the agent of this state or of any gov- ernmental sub,livision, shall be made pursuant to the laws of this slate governing the making of like con- tracts; provided, however, that where such undertak- ing is financed wholly or partially with federal mon- eys, the department, as such agent, or the govern- mental subdivision acting for itself, may let contracts in the manner prescribed by the federal authorities, acting under the laws of the United States, and any rules or regulations made thereunder, notwithstand- ing any other state law to the contrary. [C46, 50, 54, 50, 62,66, 71, 73, 75, 77,1328. 151 328.16 Disposition of federal funds. All moneys accepted for disbursement by the department pursu- ant to section 328.14 shall be deposited in the state treasury, and, unless otherwise proscribed by the uu- thor ty from which the money is received, kept in sep� ante funds, designated according to the purposes for which the moneys were made available, and held by the state in trust for such purposes. All such money's in hereby appropriated for the purposes for which Ur same were made available, to be expended in ac- cordance with federal laws and regulations anal with this chapter. The department is authorized, whether acting for this state or as the agent of any of its gov- amental subdivisions, or when requested by the C1lited States government or any agency or depert- lamt thereof, to disburse such moneys for the desig• stated purposes, but this shall not preclude any other 14I110rited method of disbursement. [C46, 50, 54, 58, 466,71,73,75,77,§328.161 I1M17 and 328.18 Repealed by 65CA, ch 1190, M19 Registration. L The department shall promulgate rules pursu. tt us the provisions of chapter 17A governing the is. assaare by the department of certificates of registra- k�ti`to all airports in this state which are open for use Public and governing the annual renewal of certificates. These rules shall require that an libliert applying for a certificate of,regislralion or �a renewal shall comply with minimum standards �Vety a I promulgated by the department, adopt air traffic pattern, and demonstrate that such baffle patterns aresafely co-ordinated with those ob esitting airports and approved airport sites in �nty before the certificates of registration or �feate of renewal may he issued. (irtificates of �lnVon or renewal may be issued subject to tiny �tdtons the department deems necessary to carry BEST. DOCUMENT AVAILABLE AERONAUTICS, gs_.x.20 out the purposes of this section. The department may after notice and opportunity for hearing as provided in chapter 17A, revoke any certificate of registration or renewal, or may refuse to issue a renewal, when it determines: a. That there has been an abandonment of the airportas such; I b. That there has been a failure to comply with the conditions of the registration or renewal thereof: or c. That because of change of physical or legal con- ditinns or circumstances the airort has become ei- ther unsafe or unusable for the aeronautical purposes for which the registration or renewal was issued. 2. The department shall promulgate rules pursu- ant to the provisions of chapter 17A governing the is- suance by the department of certificates of airport site approval. These rules shall provide that any per- son or governmental subdivision desiring or planning to construct or establish an airport shall obtain a cer- tifdl'a6te of site approval prior to acquisition of the site or prior to the construction or establishment of the airport. The department shall charge a reasonable fee, bused on the cost of a safely inspection pf the site approval application, for the issuance of a certificate of site approval, and shall issue such a certificate if it finds: a. That the site is adequate for the propruseJ air- port; 5. That such proposed airport, if constructed or established, will conform to minimum standards of safety as promulgated by the department; and c. That safe air traffic pa}terns are esdlblished for the proposed airport which are safely co•ordi- noted with the traffic patterns of all existing airports and approved airport sites in its vicinity. 3. A certificate of site approval shall remain in ef- fect until a certificate of registration his been issued to an airport located on the approved site as provided in subsection 1, unless the department, after notice and opportunity for hearing, revokes the certificate of site approval upon a finding that: a. There has been an abandonment of the site as an airport site; b. There has been a failure within two years to develop the site as an airport, or to comply with the - conditions of the approval; or • c. Because of change of physical or legal condi. tions or circumstances the site is no longer usable for the aeronautical purposes far which the approval was granted. 4. No certificate of site approval shall le required for the site of any existing airport. 5. In considering an application for approval of a pmposed'airport site or the issuance of an airport registration certificate under subsections I and 2, the department may, an its own motion or upon the re• queslof an affected or interested person, hold a hear. Ing au provided in chapter 17A. [G31, x5,§9.938 -c•2; C39,16338.15; C46, 50, 54, 58, 62, 66, 71, 73, 75, 7T §328.191 aefrnnl In an 111'2136,10113 328.20 Registration of aircraft. Every civil air. craftowned either wholly or in part by persons resid. ing in this stale, unless specifically excepted under MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MINES '11111.1 L,' r l.nnl.l:'. A. F!uw:rl 'T.ru 1:11 !'1N nrG 1..'Nnl.n l:n Pv!\nr' Tu:: nl:u nnn w-. i!!iir.1.1�InN SHULMAN, PHELAN, TUCKER, BoYLE &/MULLEN ATTORNEYS AT LAW IINI:MI:N 11III1.01NG r. [I. 11ux J.o.o IOWA CITY, IOWA 52240 Mr. Dick Phipps, Chairman Iowa City Airport Commission 825 Normandy Drive Iowa City, Iowa 52240 Dear Dick, June 12, 1979 I have two matters which I wish to call to your attention. The first is in reference to the McCrabb lease. I wrote a letter to Jim McCrabb at McCrabb Engineering in West Liberty and sent the letter certified. In the letter I advised him that I had been informed that he had not paid the rent as provided under the terms of his lease and that the notice I was giving'to him constituted a three day notice to correct such matter or that a forcible entry and detainer action would be instituted against him to vacate said premises. On June 11, I received a telephone call from him advising that he had received my letter and the reason he had not paid the rent was that he had made a formal request approximately sixty days ago that he be allowed to sub - rent the property to somebody else and that the matter had been tabled by the Airport Commission; and he was waiting for a response. 'f. 1.1 NN,... Imp r n Cooc S c.l I indicated to him that the failure of the Board to respond to such request did not relieve him from the responsibility of payment of rent. tie admitted such fact and stated that he would forward the delinquent rent which he felt was solely for the month of June. I have no know- ledge as to the amount of rent which he has either paid or nonpaid, but I advised him that he should pay all rent which was due under the terms and provisions of his lease. If he does do this, he is.entitled to continued possession. In MCROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES IIOIIIES Mr. Dick Phipps, Chairman June 12, 1979 Page 2 the absence thereof, I will have to institute a Legal action in District Court in order to obtain his technical removal. I also discussed with him the question of the fact that he had failed to pay the lumber bills in connection with the remodeling. I indicated that the Iowa City Airport Commission would like to see this matter paid, but it was not a matter which could legally affect the validity of his lease. I told him that I indicated to the lumber yard and to the Airport Commission that the matter of the payment of the lumber bill was directly between the lumber company and Mr. McCrabb and any actions for lien enforcement would have to be taken under the statute. You should be receiving rent payment within the next day or two, and if it is full and complete be sure and let me know. Also let me know if you do not receive payment. I do know that Mr. McCrabb has a sub- stantial number of other judgments against him and there— fore, there could be some question about his present j ability to pay the back rent. The second matter is in reference to a resolution passed by the Airport Commission prohibiting student ipilots from taking off on Runway 35 or 30 between the hours of 4:00 and 9:00 p.m. I originally received a telephone call fYorn one of the pilot instructors who advised that this is creating a very dangerous situation inasmuch as to require the students to use other runways would require them to either take -off or land cross -wind and would create a situation which would be adverse to the interests of the saf=ety of said pilots and personnel on the ground, The second contact was a letter from the Iowa State Department of Transportation, Aeronautics Division, directed to Mr. E.K. Jones, advising him that they have been advised of the resolution and they feel it fails to comply with the provisions of Chapter 328'.19 of the Code of Iowa. I subsequently discussed this matter with Mr. Jones and he reiterated the position taken by the instructor as to the danger of such matter as well as raising; the question as to air traffic control. I do feel there can be some question concerning the legality of the resolution apparently passed by the Airport Commission. It is discriminatory in that it affects solely student pilots and additionally it is regulatory im a matter MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES IIOIIIFS 1 I fi I j t { j t I s I s yll Ifff, ,i I ' i J i i , June 12, 1979;, Page 2 which is probably under the sole control of either the LMO ronautics Division of the Department of Transportation of the Federal Aviation Agency. I suggest this matter ght be reviewed by the Commission. Very truly yours, William M. Tucker 101T/k lw A FIICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES Pol""r'•a,VyM•w', DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION CENTRAL REGION 901 EAST 12TH STREET KANSAS CITY, MISSOURI 94109 June 15, 1979 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES tg01MES Mr. C. E. Peterson, Chairman Iowa City Airport Commission Civic Center 401 E. Washington Street Iowa City, Iowa 52240 Subject: Iowa City Municipal Airport Iowa City, Iowa Student Flying Restrictions Dear Mr. Peterson: We are in receipt of a letter from Mr. E. K. Jones, Airport Manager, copy enclosed, dated May 26, 1979, advising that the Airport Commission has passed a resolution prohibiting student pilots from using Runways 30 and 35 between 4:00-9:00 p.m, daily. Enclosed is a copy of page 4, Sponsor's Assurances, of the Project Application attached to, and made a part of, a Grant Agreement -Project No. 9-13-041-0503, executed by the City of Iowa City on September 9, 1964. Under paragraph 2 of the Sponsor's Assurances, the city agreed to operate the airport for the use and benefit of the public and to keep the airport open to all types, kinds, and classes of aeronautical use without discrimin- ation between such types, kinds, and classes. The city may prohibit or limit a gdven type, kind, or class of aeronautical use of the airport if such action is necessary for safe operation of the airport, or necessary to serve the civil aviation needs of the public. ,,:;- I Bated on the information available, we are unable to determiae.that the restrictions placed on student flying are necessary for safe operation of the airport. On the contrary, we believe these restrictions would I not be feasible, creating a safety hazard due to conflicting traffic. Unless the Iowa City Airport Commission can demonstrate that such restric- tions are necessary for the reasons enunciated in paragraph 2, Sponsor's Assurances, or removes the restrictions on student flying, the city would be in violation of its agreement with the Federal Government. Request that we . be kept advised of the Authority's action in this matter. i; F MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES tg01MES z A copy of this letter is being furnished Mr. I,.K. Jones, Airport Manager. Sincerely, X10H JON$B"� Cb ef, rograms'Branch ` Enclosure �I 1 i 4. i! I ! I i i ill. '.. li ii ,l i I� n ( I I� I ! f MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES r•. BEST DOCUMENT AVAILABLE r ttr•i. IIn t)fvt tllt.,t /Ofi5l1l,.AfYC,i.S I:1 wdIr I„ f11rni::h I],1. :la:11r;olres rrgnirod I,,v the Act :oai Regulalions the ruvcmn(s ail l ^.retie will) IIIc United Sltit1:¢, ;is follows: I. 'I'Ir.•,o t•:n•en:11Its A I a I I 1n•ruuu• effective it pun acreplalice by the SII(o r of 1111 olli•r til Ped1.ral aid fur the I'ro•je(•L or any portion lhereol'. made by Lilo FAA, :owl shall ronAlitntr a pian ni the llrutl Agrcetturnl thus formed. Thew cuvun;uus shall remain in full Fort -v and eil't•rl Ihroophnot the 11.41.1'111 life ol,dw I'acilitios developed undrr this I'n,irrt. 11111 in anv eveal 11ot In rxrccd twvnly (°O) years from the date of said arcvIll- auro III, :(It olfer of Federal aid 1'or tht• Project. ?. Tliv Sponsor will uper:ue the Airport as such for the use nod henefll of the puhlir. In furt11ernnco of this roven:ntl. (hull withoutlimning its general appliva• bility and 1,11,v t), the Spn11sor sprrificolly agrees Ihat it will keep the Airport open to all types, lands, and classes Lit' ueroanulicatl use without discrimination betwern such toper., kinds, and classes: /'rucided,'1'lint the Sponsor may establish such L•1ir, equal, :nut not un,jttstly discriminatory conditions to he met by all users of the Air- port it.,; may he necessary fur the side ;tad offk•ient. operation of the Airport: And Provided Farther, That lite Sponsor may prohibit or limit any given type, kind, or class of avronntlicai use of the Airport if sn(:h action is aocessar for the safe oper- ation of the airport or neves:-11y In serve the. civil aviation needs of the public. 3. The Sponsor will out. grant or permit any exclusive right for the use of the air- parl forhiddrn i,y Soction :108 of the lTedpral Aviation Act. of 1958, and will otherwise: comply v:irh ::11 applirnble laws. In furtherance of this covenant (hut without limit- ing its general applicability and effect.), the Sponsor specifically agrees that., unless ant ],prized I, %. (he administt'atnr, it will not, either directly or indirectly, grant or per- mit any parson, firut, or corporation the excausive right for the conduct of ally aero- nautical aotivities on the Airport, including but not limited to, charter flights, pilot training, airrral'1. rc•utal and sightseeing, aerial photogrnphy, crop dusting, aerial adver- t iniug and so: VP. •iug, air carrier operations, aircraft solos and services. sale of aviation petrulemn prodncls whether or nut cond111-lod in coujonction with other aerommlticul Liclivil;,, re•p tir and nminten:uo•a of aircraft, sale of ltirct,-lft parts, and Lilly other acLivi- t ics which her;nlse of I heir dire, t relal.ionship to the operation of aircrnft can l>r regarded os Ml ncr011:111tic(d activity: 1'ruridcrl, That the prohibition against the grant or permit of an esdusitr rigid asset forth herein in no %tray alters the rights or obligations of the Sponsor under a surplus property instrument of transfer pursuant to which surplus property wilts conveyed to the Sponsor by the. United Slates pursuant to the SurlAs -Promripy Irl of /944, (5) Shrl. 678), a.1. untended. 4. Thr Spam;or agrees that it will operate lin, Airport for the use and benefit of I he pid,lic, an fair and rc:isonohle terms, uui wilhoul unjust discrimination. In furtheranre [if' this ruernnnl (11111 without limiting ils general applicability and effect)• the Sponsor specific:dly covenaols and agrees: a. 1'11:11 in its operal ion and the operation oflnll f,rilities on I he airport, neither it nor :111Y person or orgaminlion urrnpyittg spare Lir facilities (hereon will disrrim- imne ngoin•'.t tiny pet:.on or dans of parsons by reason of race, color, creed. Lir na- liom-1 ori ;; 1 in I he 11re of :n.v of the I'acililies im-m-Mcd I'or the public on the Airport. h. '1 11a1 in ally :lgrrrna•nt, roulrnr•t, It,:tse, or other arnugemonl under which It ri;:rtl or pricib•ge til til,• Airport is granted Io any person, firm, or carp:,r,llinn Ill condor to Ihr ;whlir ;tn}• ser•irc (including the fnrnishiup; or MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 1101tiES CITY OF 10 IVIG 0 -BIER 410E W SI IINGTUSI W/1 C IOWA CITY IOWA. 52240 (31913,54 or n May 26, 1979 Mr. William Sasser, Chief Airport Division Federal Aviation Agency, Central Division 601 East 12th Street Kansas City, Missouri Dear Mr.. Sasser: The Iowa Ci.ty Airport Commission passed at their meeting May 24, 1979; the following resolution 600 V G10 I move that the ICC vote to prohibit all status licenses from Laking off on runway 3pilots with student hours of 4:00 and 9:00 I seven days a week. Landing on 17 Policy would b i and 12 would be permitted ed 5 and 30 between the I all pilots during this period. This review by the Air_come to June 1, 1979 and be subject to rport Commission at its September 1979 regular meeting.-- As eeting,^As Airport Manager I wish to s Potential safety tress such a restriction creates a ha;_ard. Not only the possibilit collision, but mid-air Collis- y of intersection ons also. The only way proper and safe spacing could be accomplished would be with a control tower. It is di.ffir_tl.it enough at a non -controlled airport to enforce the .:Iandard left hand traffic pattern and mak use Lhe favored runway. e certain all traffic Thr_ track record of student pilots is excellent at this airport. 7 have b'on the Airon onlL two of this airport the past 19 years and there n0 Property damaged; y gine failures; no one was injured; 9 d; and the aircraft were slightly damaged. These restrictions not only create a safety hazard, but also discriminate against the student pilot, who can only fly during the hours of restriction. To be very frank withou I can see no airport to onforre r y way Cor the Manager of this P fixed ase a restriction except those aircraft owned aga.instlthe lowners, btheirOperator tand that would be discriminating jl f lur the foregoing reasons I urge you to review the Commissi.on's / :c!•lon:: and to Lake the necessary action to eliminate the Commission's Sincere l ; y, r_ �- / S'e's � ir A.i.rrort• 'Manager MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPI DS -DES IIOIIIES BARKER, BARKER, CRUISE & KENNEDY LAWYERS FNAR1-r5 A. BARXF.R 311 IOWA AVENUE . P.O. BON 2000 N scnri BARKER IOWA CITY, IOWA JOHN O. CRUISE 52240 AREA CODE 010 WCHAFI. W KrNNFBY TELEPHONE 351.5181 June 27, 1979 i Mr.. R. D. Phipps . 14 South Linn Street Iowa City, Iowa 52240 i Re: McCrabb Manufacturing - Airport Lease I Dear Dick: I . I am writing to you in your position as Chairman of the Airport Commission. I have been retained by McCrabb Manufacturing to represent them in connection with the matter of the assignment of their lease to a portion of the hangar building at the Iowa City airport. I have been in touch with Dill Tucker. Dill tells me that he sees three objections to the assignment of the lease. 1. Unpaid rent. 2. Failure to repair or replace the roof, 3. Unpaid bills. I would appreciate an opportunity to discuss mattur wiL-h you informally or with the Commission on a formal or informal basis. My'client has celled checks for the last given me can - the has been inadvertently overpaid. The roof was thatrepairedt at the time my client took possession of the premises. My client's position is that the payment of bills incurred incident to the remodeling of the premises is not a proper i and sufficient basis for the Commission to withhold its consent to the assignment of the lease to a reputable party. I would appreciate a telephone call from you letting me know the date of the next meeting. I went to the Civic Center at 7:30 P.M. on the 21st and my best interpretation of the notice posted on the bulletin board is that there is another meeting on the 28th. Very tr„uiy yours, RSD/jp Scott Iffarker cc: Mr. James McCrabb MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 140111ES