Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1979-10-16 Bd Comm minutes. t- 3� MINUTES cOMMiTTEE ON COMMUNITY NEEDS OCTOBER 3, 1979 -- 12:00 NOON It1i(:ItIiA'I'ION (:IiN'1'1i12 -- Mii1i'I'IN(; ROOM It MEMBERS PRESENT: Swisher, Amidon, hall, Pocina, Bonney, Harker, Ilaldeman, Clark, McCormick, .Johnson, Barfuss MEMBERS ABSENT: Owens, Morton, Patrick STAFF PRESENT: Milkman, Wilkinson, Ilencin, Sandro, Knight, Keller, Meisel RECOM14ENDATIONS TO CITY COUNCIL: Neighborhood Site Improvement Projects: 1. That the alley running north -south between the Burlington Street -Muscatine Avenue intersection to the Court Street -Oakland Avenue intersection be made one-way going south. 2. That the Traffic Department continue to research the feasibility of a pedestrian cycle at the intersection of Highway G and Keokuk. 3. That neighborhood meetings be held in the North Side and hickory hill areas to re-evaluate the sidewalk repair program in these areas. SUMMARY OF DISCUSSION: Chairperson Swisher called the meeting, to order and welcomed the new members of the committee. Following introductions of everyone present, Swisher gave a brief explanation of CCN activities. A short discussion of the possibility of changing the meeting time and day followed. Johnson moved, and Amidon seconded, that the meeting time and day remain the same (12:00 noon on the first Wednesday of each month). Motion carried unanimously. It was pointed out that this information should be printed on the application forms for membership on the Committee. Swisher called for consideration of the minutes of the September 5, 1979, meeting. .Johnson moved, and McCormick seconded, that the minutes he approved as circulated. Motion carried unanimously. Update on Neighborhood Site Improvements Proiect and Curb Cut Proeram: Bruce Knight, Planner/Program Analyst, presented updates on the Neighborhood Site Improvements project and asked for specific recommendations from CCN on (1) the Special Alley Project, (2) the pedestrian cycle at the intersection of Ilighway G and Keokuk, and (3) the Sidewalk Repair Program. Knight explained that the Special Alley Project concerns the north -south alley which runs from the Burlington Street -Muscatine Avenue intersection to the Court Street -Oakland Avenue intersection. Ile further explained that the staff recommenda- tions would be to make this alley one-way leading south. The residents in the area concur with this recommendation. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES /?if Committee on Community Needs October 3, 1979 Page 2 .Johnson moved, and Barker seconded, that the alley running north -south between the Burlington Street -Muscatine Avenue intersection to the Court Street-Oakiand Avenue intersection be made one-way going south. Motion carried unanimously. Knight then explained the recommendation of the 'Traffic lingincer not to request a Pedestrian cycle at the Intersection of Highway G and Keokuk. After some discussion on this topic, Ilaldeman moved and McCormick seconded that the 'Traffic Department continue to research the feasibility of a Pedestrian cycle at the intersection of Ilighway G and Keokuk. Motion carried unanimously. The 1'inni item discussed by Knight was the Sidewalk Repair Program in the North Side I one Hickory Ili 11 wrens. Knight stated that the assessment programs requested by the residents were not feasible and that staff recommended repairing as many of the sidewalks as funds would permit in these areas. It was Pointed out that CCN had recommended at their May 30 meeting that any money remaining from the budgeted amounts on other projects in these areas be put into the Sidewalk Repair Program. McCormick suggested that residents in these two neighborhoods should be given another opportunity to decide what they wanted done in the neighborhood, because the original meetings were held two years ago. After some discussion of this topic, McCormick moved and Hall seconded that neighborhood meetings he held in the North Side and Hickory Hill areas to re-evaluate the Sidewalk Repair Program in these areas. Notion carried 10-I (Ilaldeman opposed). Barker asked what, if anything, could be done about the seats in some of the bus stop shelters. Silo said that she had heard some complaints that the scats were too low and that the elderly had problems getting up. Knight said that he would check with Hugh Mose, 'Transit Director, to see if anything could be done to remedy this situation. Swisher suggested that the Committee read through the Neighborhood Site Improvements Program Monthly Progress Report for September and ask any questions they might have at the next meeting, 'I'll's suggestion met with nPProvai from those attending, i Small Cities Project: i Milkman explained that the City Council had gone along with CCN's recommendation that residents of the Small Cities area be given the option of selling their property if the property was not required for the improvements. Silo also called attention to the neighborhood meeting that will be held Wednesday, October 17, at 7:30 p.m, in the National Guard Armory, Update on Senior Center Plans and Activities: Bette Meisel, Senior Center Coordinator, presented the plans for the Senior Center rind explained that these Plans called for a basement level, first floor level, mezzanine, and second floor level. Included in the basement level will be office Space for service providers, kitchenette, activity room, craft room and classroom. The first floor will include the director's office, receptionist/secretary, dining room, kitchen and a shop for selling crafts. The second floor will include space that will be suitable for offices and an exercise room. The mezzanine will have a library, work room, and conference room. She further explained that the building MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MONIES Committee on Community Needs October 3, 1979 Page 3 will have an elevator, all new stairways, and will he accessible to the h:ndicappod. Milkman asked if it would he convenient for the Committee to meet on October 31, which is the fifth Wednesday, rather than on November 7 since she will be out of town on November 7. The Committee was very agreeable to this change. McCormick requested a progress report on the Zoning Ordinance at the next meeting. There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned for a tour of the old Post Office building so that members could sec how tine Senior Center plans would be implemented. i i Prepared bY<.___frZirr+ S,ndra Wilkinson, PPD Secretary I f f !' I 'f i i i I � _ MICROFILMED BY i JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOIIIES i MINUTES RIVERFRONT COMMISSION OCTOBER 3, 1979 -- 7:30 P.M. CITY MANAGER'S CONFERENCE ROOM MEMBERS PRESENT: Gilpin, Knight, Fountain, Sokol, Vetter, Kroeze MEMBERS ABSENT: Baker, BOUtclIC, Berry, Neuzil, Fahr STAFF PRESENT: Milkman SUMMARY OF DISCUSSION: Chairman Gilpin called the meeting to order and called for approval of the minutes for September 19, 1979. There being no corrections, the minutes were approved as written. Review of CIP Budget: Milkman presented the revised Capital Improvement Program budget for the establishment of a River Corridor Buffer and Trail system. It was moved by Sokol and seconded by Krocze that the CIP budget be adopted and printed as proposed for inclusion in the City's Capital Improvement Program. Unanimous. Boat Ramp: Milkman reported on the meeting of the Airport Commission on September 20, 1979, which she attended with Gilpin, Knight and Sokol. The preliminary boat ramp designs were presented at that meeting. After considerable discussion, the Airport Commission approved the following motion 3-1: That the Iowa City Municipal Airport Commission conditionally okays the construction of the River Front Commission's proposed boat ramp on said Sturgis Ferry Park land, conditions being; ' 1. That the Iowa City Municipal Airport Commission's attorney review any ramifications of ownership on said land. 2. That the total area of ramp and parking area be within the approach zone to runway 24. 3. That a proper lease be drawn between the Airport Commission and the City of Iowa City outlining legal boundaries of said land. Milkman stated that Howard Sokol and the City Legal staff drew up a Memorandum of r ( Understanding (attached) between the City and the Airport Commission. A copy of the memorandum was sent to Richard Phipps, Chairman of the Airport Commission; Mr. Phipps has been asked to attend the informal Council meeting on Monday, October 8, if he has any comments. Milkman also reported that the preliminary boat ramp designs had been presented to Council on September 24, and that the Council approved the plans and favored a speedy conclusion of the project. i 1939 PIICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES IIOIIIES � I I i I I f J f i � i i I 1 i II �j i i i Riverfront Commission Ortobor 3, 1979 Page 2 Streambank Erosion Control: Commission members reviewed a U.S. Army Corps of Engineers publication on erosion control. Gilpin recommended that this booklet be adapted to Iowa Citys standards when these standards are established by the River Corridor Overlay ordinance. River Corridor Overlay Zone Ordinance: There was some discussion on several items in the proposed ordinance as follows: I. There is some confusion due to the use of the word "zone" both as a area and as a "set of rules for the areall, geographical 2. Vetter felt very strongly that single family dwellings should not be exempt from filing a site plan (page 4). She recommended a SO' setback from the river channel as a minimum requirement. totally 3. ' On page 12 under Permitted Uses, special exception for marinas was questioned since this appears to be an appropriate use. In order to expedite review of the ordinance, the Commission set a special meeting for Wednesday, October 17, which will be devoted entirely to a discussion of th ordinance with the assistance of Don Schmeiser, Senior Planner. e There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned. Prepared by Marianne Milkman, Planner/Program Analyst MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES D MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING In accordance with a resolution passed September 19, 1979, the Iowa City Municipal Airport Commission hereby consents to the installa- tion of a boat ramp in Sturgis Ferry Park, due east of the present curb cut along Highway 218 south of the east -west runway centerline. In accordance with a resolution passed 1979, the City Council of the City of Iowa City hereby consents to the installa- tion of the above boat ramp in Sturgis Ferry Park. It is hereby agreed that the execution of this agreement and the construction of the boat ramp is not intended to relinquish or enhance any claim of right with regard to any portion of Sturgis Ferry Park. Dated: Dated: 1979 Chairperson 1979 Mayor Attest: City Clerk MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOVIES Ercy- P'r & .. By THE LEGAL PROPOSED IOWA RIVER CORRIDOR BUFFER AND TRAIT. SYSTEM k Priorities For Acquisition and 'frail Completion 1. Rocky Shore Drive trail $100,000 2. All curb cuts 1,400 3. Riverside Drive: Iowa Avenue to Burlington Trail construction 40,000 Guard Rail 10,000 4. Riverside Drive: Burlington Street to Sturgis Corner Easements $ 45,000 Purchase 65,000 Trail (asphalt) 10,0110 Trail (concrete sidewalk) 45,000 Total T165,000 Note: This cost does not include land donations and trail construction agreed upon by the owner of Sturgis Corner lots. S. Passage under U.S. 6 > Trail $ 4,250 Guardrail 7,500 Cutting 6 Stabalization 15,0110 Total 26,500 6. Sturgis Ferry Park Trail $ 25,000 7. Trail paralleling 218 on Frontage Road between Sturgis Ferry Park and Mesquakie Park Signing and street stencils $ 250 i (Does not include street repairs) 8. Mesquakie Park Trail $ 20,000 i Five Year Capital Improvement Program FY 81 $147,000 Rocky Shore Drive (1) Curb Cuts (2) Riverside Drive Sidewalk Improvements (4) !I PY 82 $ 65,000 Riverside Drive trail (Iowa to Burlington) (3) Easements on Riverside Drive (4) FY 83 $ 75,000 Land acquisition and trail on Riverside Drive (4) PY 84 $ 52,0011 j Passage under U.S. 6 (5) Sturgis Ferry Park trail (6) j 1.� MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB r + CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES I - R f: I -2- FY 85 $ 21,000 Paralleling 218 on Frontage Road (7) Mesquakie Park trail (8) Approved by the Riverfront Commission 10/3/79 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES i i I i I .1 I I I � II' I I I L I L i I i `.I I FY 85 $ 21,000 Paralleling 218 on Frontage Road (7) Mesquakie Park trail (8) Approved by the Riverfront Commission 10/3/79 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES MINUTES SENIOR CENTER COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 19, 1979 - 7:30 P.M. CITY MANAGER'S CONFERENCE ROOM MEMBERS PRESENT: Bourgeois, Carlton, Sando, Scott, Summerwill, Williams MEMBERS ABSENT: Ambrisco STAFF PRESENT: Berlin, Meisel GUESTS: Jo. Co. Board of Supervisors: Janet Shipton; Jo. Co. Council on Aging: Mildred Snider, H. Lee Jacobs, Alvin Logan, Stella M. Cooper, Maggie Penziner, Beulah Cora Pollock, Lee Poynter, Mary Rock, Albertan R. Brunton, Alice G. Fellows, Doris E. Bridgeman, Mary C. MacGibbon. SUMMARY OF DISCUSSION: Chairperson Carlton brought the meeting to order. Summerwill moved to adopt the minutes of August 22, 1979 as read. Williams seconded, action approved unanimously. to the attention the Commission account,lwhich astthe terminology used oin the Commission'sthat recommendation to the City Council regarding the Senior Center Gift Fund, was incorrect. Meisel explained that the Legal Department in reviewing the resolution had changed the wording. The resolution now authorizes the Finance Department to invest the funds in an appropriate manner. JOHNSON COUNTY COUNCIL ON AGING PRESENTATION: Alvin Logan, member of the Johnson County Council on Aging Board, asked the Commission to consider a proposal to make the Council a part of the City services at the Senior Center. He said that presently they have a program but no money with which to finance it. Berlin replied that community f groups can provide some services better than the City. The City Council has been quite definite on the subject of providing no direct services at the Center, but rather providing the space for others to do so. Janet Counnongo ng support for County said aamount forugencies presently n housed tythe Close Mansion is unclear. Doris Bridgeman, Executive Director of Johnson County Council on Aging, 1 showed slides of their program and spoke about the role the Council plays in the elderly community. Berlin suggested that she repeat this presentation at an informal meeting of the City Council. i E' IIICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES /9L110 .k SENIOR CENTER COMMI:. .JN SEPTEMBER 19, 1979 Page 2 PRESENTATION OF DESIGN DEVELOPMENT PHASE OF ARCHITECTURAL PLANS Bill Nowysz and Walter Robolino explained the plans and the changes that have been made since the Commission last reviewed them. The Commission expressed no serious concerns as to these changes. The architects expect to receive an independent estimate of construction costs next week. In this way they will know if they are on target or if cuts need to be made. Berlin mentioned that a letter had been sent to Robert Welsh with carbon copies to Don Sehr and Russ Proffitt reiterated the City's position that the only money available for kitchen equipment was the $50,000 contributed by the County. Attached was a list of the essential equipment recommended by the architect and additional alternatives which could be chosen if the equipment on the essential list comes in low. OTHER BUSINESS: Meisel passed out sample statements of purpose, philosophy, objectives for Senior Center. She asked Sando to moderate the next meeting at which these would be discussed. The Commission decided that they needed a special work session in which to review these and draft their own. It was agreed to meet on September 26 at 7:30 PM in the City Manager's Conference Room. There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned. Thea Sando, Secretary FIICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES .: SENIOR CENTER COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 26, 1979 - 7:30 P.M. CITY MANAGER'S CONFERENCE ROOM MEMBERS PRESENT: Carlton, Sando, Scott, Summerwill, Williams MEMBERS ABSENT: Ambrisco, Bourgeois STAFF PRESENT: Meisel SUMMARY OF DISCUSSION: A discussion was held in which the Commission exchanged information as to the events which lead up to the present status of the Senior Center. It was determined that the priority item of business was the formal recommendation to Council of which agencies should be invited to locate at the Senior Center. At this point there is an informal agreement between certain agencies and the City, but nothing in writing. The Commission advised Meisel to have available at their next meeting material concerning the agencies and their requirements; guidelines and policies for use of Center space by agencies; what exactly the City is offering these agencies; what the City expects in return. A draft of a survey prepared by the Gerontology Project was passed out. This survey could provide the City, County and University with information about the 7,000 county elderly. This information would be useful in planning services, projects, activities and classes to meet the needs and interests of the community. It was agreed that members would be prepared to critique it at their next meeting. The Commission decided that they would again attempt to begin their study of Senior Center purpose, goals and objectives at the next regular meeting. There being no f rther business, the meeting was adjourned. Thea S� cretary. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOVIES MINUTES HOUSING APPEALS BOARD September 27, 1979 -- 7:00 P.M. MEMBERS PRESENT: Klaus, VanderZee, Smithey, Graf, Dennis. STAFF PRESENT: Cook, Steinbach, Kuebler, Vezina. OTHERS PRESENT: Michael Kennedy, David Poula, Ralph Neuzi1. Chairperson Klaus asked for corrections or changes to the minutes of the board meeting of September 13, 1979. VanderZee moved, Dennis seconded, that VanderZee's motion located on page 7 be revised to show that the intent of the motion was not to require the City to cover the cost of the damages to Mr. Bright regarding the installation of handrails. Steinbach stated that the tapes of the hearing would be rechecked and the minutes would be corrected if they showed a misquote. Motion carried unanimously. Graf moved, Dennis seconded, that the minutes of the meeting of September 13 be approved as amended. Acceptance was approved by unanimous vote. Chairperson Klaus swore in those who would testify. NOTE: Willie Wulf was not sworn in as he stated he would not testify. BOARD TO HEAR THE CASE OF WILLIE WULF & MS. ROSE CAMPBELL - Steinbach stated that the appeal had been properly filed and that the appeal had been requested by both Willie Wulf and Rose Campbell. It was noted for the record that this case was being heard for the first time; however, it was being heard on a continuous basis since it was first slated to be heard at the September 13 hearing. Steinbach then asked Mike Kennedy if he was representing both Ms. Campbell and Mr. Wulf. Mr. Kennedy replied that yes he was. Kuebler stated that on June 21 he conducted an annual inspection with manager Willie Wulf on the property located at 915 E. Washington. A notice of violation was served to Mr. Wulf on July 13, and on July 16 Mr. Wulf came to the office of the Housing Division and at that time it was agreed that the inspector would remeasure the ceilings of the third floor apartment as per a request by Mr. Wulf. On July 17, Inspector Kuebler did, in fact, remeasure the ceiling height of the third floor apartment. Inspector Kuebler then read into the minutes the applicable code section which states the required ceiling height in all habitable rooms. Kuebler then entered three photographs of the third floor dwelling unit for the record and they were marked exhibits 1, 2 and 3. Both Mr. Wulf and Mr. Kennedy approved the photographs as accurate record. Inspector Kuebler explained to the Board the layout of the third floor apartment and presented evidence regarding the actual measurements of the knee walls, the sloping walls and the peak ceiling. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES 1401NES 041 HOUSING APPEALS BOARD September 27, 1979 Page 2 Kennedy asked whether "ceiling" was ever defined in the Iowa City Housing Code. Kuebler responded that no, not to his knowledge. Kennedy then read Webster's definition of "ceiling" to the Board members. Kennedy presented his feelings to the Board regarding the language of the ceiling height requirements and stated that a dwelling unit such as this should really not be taken off the market. He stated that he would be willing to work with members of the Board and staff in finding an alternate interpretation of the Code in order that such a dwelling unit could remain on the market. Klaus asked Cook if it would be appropriate to go to the dictionary for a definition of the term "ceiling" if it was not already defined in the Code. Cook stated that most lawyers do go to the dictionary for definitions. However, it should be noted that the interpretation should include a common sense aspect also. The question was brought up by the Board that, in a case such as this where there are slanted areas, when does a wall become a ceiling? Webster's dictionary defines a "ceiling" as being overhead. Steinbach stated that the department's interpretation of the Code is such that a ceiling is measured at that point in which the measurement between the floor and the ceiling is at least seven feet. In single family dwellings and duplexes, the square footage of a room may be figured from that point at which that measurement is five feet. Kuebler read the entire Code section into the minutes, and Steinbach stated that in computing the average ceiling height there are two other factors which enter into the requirements. First, that a computation of the square footage of a habitable room is measured at those points in which the ceiling height is seven feet or above, and secondly, that all habitable rooms must have a width of at least seven feet. Steinbach then went to the blackboard and drew a diagram of this third floor apartment and showed the method by which both ceiling height and square footage of a habitable room are computed. Klaus asked Kennedy about the appeal regarding electrical outlets. Kennedy responded that he had mainly investigated the appeal of ceiling heights and that Mr. Wulf could supply more accurate information regarding the electrical outlets. Wulf stated that he had spoken to an electrician and that all electrical changes could be made. However, they would all be surface mounted. He stated that there was considerable expense in complying with the Code; however, compliance could be made if an adequate amount of time was given, i.e. about 60 days. The question of required light switches was discussed which showed that Steinbach and Kuebler had conducted an inspection to double check the location of required light switches and that the violation had been properly cited as per current departmental policy. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES Mo111ES HOUSING APPEAL.. BOARD September 27, 1979 Page 3 Wulf stated that all other corrections regarding the notice would be made within the alloted amount of time given in the notice of violation. Kennedy asked another question regarding the ceiling height violation - what is a finished ceiling? Steinbach replied that it would be a smooth area that the inspector could stretch a measuring tape from the floor to measure the given ceiling height. Kennedy asked whether that was, in fact, an administrative interpretation. Steinbach replied that there were other code requirements referring to the condition and general maintenance aspects of walls, floors and ceilings, and the interpretation was derived from those types of requirements. Kennedy asked that the Board give the statute a liberal interpretation and that a more accurate definition of the term "ceiling" be sought for clarification. VanderZee stated that even if it were possible to compute the ceiling height in a different manner, perhaps according to Webster, that the apartment would still be in violation of the requirements of space or square footage. Kennedy replied that lack of room area was not listed on the notice of violation. He then asked if it would be possible to compute the dimensions of this dwelling unit in such a way as to show that the unit would conform to the requirements of the Housing Code. Cook then asked whether the computations could be conducted in a different fashion also. Kuebler again gave the Board an explanation of the ceiling configuration and stated that a more liberal interpretation of the Code regarding required floor area would show that at the actual floor level a computation of the square footage would show that the dwelling unit conformed to the minimum requirements. Steinbach stated that the requirements being discussed are requirements which are also found in the State Code. He stated that the problem is primarily being generated in those dwellings which were originally built and used as single family dwellings and had, at a later date, been converted in use to a multiple status. The basements and the attic areas of these dwellings were not originally intended to be used as habitable space. He stated that the method of calculating the requirements and/or deficiencies was an accurate method. However, it was his personal feeling that this unit was, in fact, a clean and safe unit. He stated that the department, in enforcement of these requirements, is being forced to vacate units which otherwise would be perfectly adequate living quarters. Klaus asked Kennedy whether any investigation had been done to find out whether the dwelling would conform to the requirements of the grandfather clause regarding ceiling height. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES 1101HES HOUSING APPEAL.. BOARD September 27, 1979 Page 4 Kennedy replied that no investigation had been done at this time. Cook submitted to the board a definition of ceiling found in the arch- itectural and building trades dictionary. This was read into the minutes by Kennedy. VanderZee stated that although he was very sympathetic to the appellants, he could not see any way in which the Board could not uphold the notice of violation as written. VanderZee moved, Dennis seconded, that the violations be upheld. Klaus stated that for the Board to do anything other than uphold the State Code they would be left open to liability. Klaus stated that the Board, in the form of a Housing Commission, had made recommendations to Council to alter these requirements. However, it was noted in Council that the requirements could not, by law, be less stringent than those found in the State Code. The Housing Board stated that this problem should be put on the agenda of the Housing Commission to make suggestions that the City Council contact the State Legislature in exposing these problems and that suggestions be made to change the requirements on the State level. Steinbach stated that he had just completed an analysis of the State Housing Code, State Building Code, and local housing code, which would be submitted to City Council to show the inconsistencies between the codes and said memorandum would eventually be forwarded to the State Legislature. The notice of violation was upheld by the Housing Board of Appeals on a unanimous vote. BOARD TO HEAR THE CASE OF MR. DOUGLAS EDMONDS - 728 E. COLLEGE Steinbach stated that the appeal had been properly filed and that as was the case with the prior hearing, this appeal was being heard for the first time on a continuance basis. Kuebler stated that he had conducted this request inspection on July 10 as per the wishes of Mr. Jerry Zaiser. Mr. Zaiser came to the Housing Division and picked up the notice of violation on July 19. Kuebler stated that on July 27, an administrative review was conducted regarding this case. Pursuant to that administrative review, two of the light switches which had originally been required in the notice of violation were at that time rescinded due to departmental policy. Kuebler read into the minutes the applicable code sections requiring light switches. Kuebler stated that the departmental policy regarding light switches was such that a light switch would be located at each exterior entrance into a dwelling unit and that switches should be located in such a manner that egress from any habitable room to the exterior of the dwelling unit could be lit in case of an emergency. Kuebler showed the Appeals Board a diagram of the floor plan, drawn from memory, with the approval of Mr. Edmonds. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 140IIIES HOUSING APPEAL- .,OARD September 27, 1979 Page 5 Steinbach presented the policy that was being used by the Housing Division in regards to the light switch requirement, since there was some gray area as to the way the requirement is written. He then went to the blackboard to illustrate the light switch installations being required of Mr. Edmonds. Existing switches were diagrammed and their functions were noted. Steinbach stated that light switches would be required at the exterior entrances to a dwelling unit; however, if there were more than two such exterior entrances, since the Housing Code only requires two means of egress, the same policy is being applied with regard to light switches in that only two exterior entrances would need to have switches for the purpose of illuminating those rooms adjacent to the entrances. Steinbach stated that due to the ambiguity of the code language in regards to light switches, that it had been extremely difficult to formulate a policy to be used to enforce the requirement. Since every dwelling unit is different, the department would certainly welcome any suggestions from the Housing Appeals Board in formulating a policy regarding said enforcement. VanderZee questioned Mr. Edmonds in regards to the fact that this was a request inspection. Edmonds replied that he and two associates had decided to purchase the property and wanted to make sure that it conformed to the requirements of the Housing Code. Upon receiving the notice of violation, they felt that the requirement of light switches was unreasonable and that all the other violations were, in fact, items which they agreed should be corrected. He stated that even though he did not expect the Board to take it into consideration, the installation of said light switches would create an initial hardship for the owners because at this point they were only breaking even on the investment. Graf questioned Mr. Edmonds as to the current use of the dwelling since it i had been stated that the supplied facilities, i.e. kitchen facilities were located in the basement for those roomers who occupy the second floor. Edmonds replied that the house was owned, and the rooming units were operated by, the prior owner who maintained her living quarters on the first floor and that the tenants seemed to be quite satisfied with the geographic location of the supplied facilities. There was some question as to what sort of illuminaries or lights were being required by the Code at this time. Steinbach clarified the intention of the Code by stating that it was necessary that there be a wall mounted switch which activated an illuminary within the habitable room. A viable substitution for a switch would be wall mounted light fixture with a switch attached to it. Kuebler went to the blackboard and made clarification of the light switches that were being required by the City. Edmonds stated that in certain parts of the dwelling, he felt that there was enough spill light from other rooms to meet the requirements of the Code. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES IIOIREs HOUSING APPEAL. BOARD September 27, 1979 Page 6 VanderZee stated that the policy being implemented by the City could be much more stringent than it was in that they could be requiring a light switch at each and every entrance to a room, therefore requiring a light switch on each side of every entry between rooms. VanderZee moved, Dennis seconded, that the notice of violation be upheld as amended. After some confusion and extensive clarification, "amended" was determined to mean that a light switch would be required at the exterior entrance to the kitchen, at the exterior entrance to the living room, and at the entrance to the living room from the kitchen. Motion carried unanimously. Smithey, who had been absent for the first part of the meeting, joined the other board members. VanderZee left the meeting. BOARD TO HEAR THE CASE OF MRS. REGINA HENNESSEY - 234 N. Mg5IS0N Those present in the Hennessey party were Mrs. Regina Hennessey, Mrs. Hennessey's son, Paul, Attorney David Poula, and tenant Thomas Mishak. Those who would testify were sworn in by Chairperson Klaus. an Steinbach inspectiontn atthis property June 26, and oInspector July23 he issued a notKellVezina iceofviolation to Mrs. Hennessey. This notice of violation was received by Mr. Paul Hennessey on July 25. A letter requesting an appeal before the Board i was received by the City Clerk on July 31, it was written by Atty. David P. Poula. Steinbach stated that subsequent to the notice of violation being issued to Mrs. Hennessey, an administrative review had been conducted and it was found that two of the items listed on the notice of violations had been sited under the incorrect chapter numbers. A notice was then sent to Mr. Poula and Mrs. Hennessey to inform them of the proper code sections. Paula stated that pursuant to the notice of violation, all of the elec- trical work being required had already been done and that in regards to the lack of valid permit, he had in his possession a "certificate of compliance" so that the only violation being appealed at this time was the lack of required window area in Mrs. Hennessey's dwelling unit. The letter written in clarification of the notice of violation was read into the record by Inspector Vezina and accepted by the Board as part of the public record. Inspector Vezina then went to the blackboard where he had drawn a diagram of the entire basement of Mrs. Hennessey's dwelling. He stated the requirements of the State Code regarding window area and also gave the board information concerning the required amount of window area if a window is to be used for the second means of egress. Smithey questioned whether the requirement for a second means of egress had been cited on the notice of violation. Inspector Vezina replied that MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 1401IIES HOUSING APPEAL_ BOARD September 27, 1979 Page 7 no, it had not, however the information was being supplied to the Appeals Board such that, if Mrs. Hennessey were required to install more or larger windows in her dwelling unit, that this requirement would certainlbe a consideration in said installation. y Poula asked when the requirement of window area had been adopted as a City Code. Steinbach stated that to the best of his knowledge, it would seem logical that since this requirement was found in the State Housing Code, that it would have been part of the Iowa City Housing Code at whatever time the housing code was adopted by the City. The specific date was not determined; however, Poula stated that it really was not necessary information for this hearing. Mrs. Hennessey stated that she had lived at this dwelling for 50 years, it had been a rooming house for 50 years, and that there was no longer any private property surrounding her dwelling. She stated that all adjacent property belongedf Iowa. whichShasstloc t daacrossCtity he street, and built a waterworks there. She stated that she had no place to go except for where she was. According to Mr. Poula's question to Mrs. Hennessey, she stated that approximately 20 years ago, an agreement had been reached between Mr. Poula's senior partner; Mr. Cahill, and the University stating that Mrs. Hennessey could live at her residence as long as she wanted to. She stated that this was the only reason she was the last one still living in this neighborhood. She stated that her age was 88 years and that she wished to live at her residence until she died. Paul Hennessey stated that he had all the electrical work done that had been requested and that the total cost had been $1244. He stated that the monthly income on the property was approximately $450. i Poula stated that it is unreasonable for the City to require Mrs. Hennessey to add approximately $10400 of windows since the University will acquire Mrs. Hennessey's property upon her death. He stated that he was asking the Housing Appeals Board to overrule this requirement and to let Mrs. Hennessey live in peace and she should have the right to live wherever she wants to. Graf stated that she felt they could not require Mrs. Hennessey to change the windows since this is her private residence and the City does not require that of other owner occupied residences. Steinbach stated it had been the previous policy of the division not to inspect those portions of a rental property which were occupied by the owner. However, as of a year ago, inspections had begun of each and every dwelling unit within a complex or rooming house for the purpose of determining total compliance within any given structure so that when a rental permit was issued, it could be shown from a liability standpoint of the City that the whole structure conformed to the requirements of the Code. i- -- - - .. .,..,.., MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES HOUSING APPEALa dOARD September 27, 1979 Page 8 Cook submitted information found in the Housing Code which gives authority of the Housing Inspector to inspect all dwelling units which are either lived in by an owner/operator or by tenants. She stated that the scope of the Housing Code would include private dwellings within the City. She stated that an administrative policy was such that inspections were only conducted on single family dwellings due to complaints or in a situation such as this where the owner lived in one of the units located within the rooming house or apartment building. Poula stated that this structure had been built some 80 years ago and that it had been operated as a rooming house for at least 50 years and that the lack of required window area in no way affected the tenants which rented from Mrs. Hennessey. It was also stated that there were no grandfather clauses which would affect this window requirement. Poula stated; the fact that Mrs. Hennessey continues to live at this residence is due to an oral agreement by the University that Mrs. Hennessey can continue to live at this residence for as long as she lives. This agreement has been honored by the University through at least a half a dozen instances. Steinbach asked Mrs. Hennessey and Mr. Poula if this residence had in some way changed use, i.e. was the basement originally built as a basement or was it originally constructed as a dwelling unit. Mr. Hennessey and Mr. Poula replied that the basement rooms had been used for sleeping purposes by Mr. Hennessey and Mrs. Hennessey for approximately 49 years. Mr. Hennessey's bedroom was originally the coal room. Poula submitted to the Board a certificate of compliance issued in March, 1978. This was done to show that Mrs. Hennessey was not operating without a valid permit. Vezina stated that, although it is not noted on the certificate of compliance, the expiration date would be in May, 1979. Mr. Hennessey stated that it was the City's fault in not contacting Mrs. Hennessey to let her know that a new permit must be applied for at the proper time. After further inspection of the property file, it was found that application for a housing permit was made on June 6, 1979. Inspector Vezina explained to the Board members the policy regarding application for a permit and the scheduling of annual inspections. It was then noted that a permit is not issued until all corrections are made; however, a copy of a permit application is sent to the owner if proper application has been made and a fee has been paid. Poula stated, for the record, that the only violations that are being appealed are those of lack of valid permit and lack of required window area. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES 110111ES HOUSING APPEAL- BOARD September 27, 1979 Page 9 Smithey stated that due to the unusual aspects of this case that he felt it was the Board's responsibility to treat it as a separate case and therefore he moved that the violation of lack of permit be upheld and that the violation of lack of required window area not be upheld. Graf seconded, motion passed by unanimous vote. BOARD TO CONSIDER THE CASE OF ROBERT RHODES - 611 N. JOHNSON Mr. Rhodes and Atty. Ralph Neuzil were sworn in by Chairperson Klaus. Steinbach stated that the property was inspected by Inspector Brian Kuebler on August 2, 1979. Mr. Rhodes received a notice of violation regarding the property on August 6. On August 10, a letter was received by the City Clerk from Mr. Rhodes requesting a hearing before the Housing Appeals Boar. Therefore, the appeal was properly submitted. Kuebler asked Mr. Rhodes for further clarification of the actual items being appealed. Mr. Neuzil replied that they wished to amend the appeal due to the fact that after Mr. Rhodes had contacted a carpenter, a doorway listed as a violation could not, in fact, be raised to meet the requirements of the Code without causing structural problems. That item is listed as 3.a. Lack of sufficient doorway height. It was agreed by all in attendance that this matter could also be addressed at this hearing. Kuebler stated that in his annual inspection it was determined that the maximum ceiling height in the basement unit was six feet, six inches. Kuebler read into the minutes Chapter 17-6.(d) which he stated was the reference made on the notice of violation, however, the less restrictive code section which would actually apply to this case was 17-6.(f)3. Inspector Kuebler then read that code section into the minutes. He stated that the less restrictive code section required a 7 foot ceiling in the basement apartment. In the basement unit the minimum ceiling height was 6 feet, 4 inches and the maximum height was 6 feet, 6 inches. He also stated as per the amended appeal, that the doorway in question measured 5 feet, 9 inches in height, whereas, the requirement for the height of said door is 6 feet, 4 inches. Cook asked Atty. Neuzil whether he would accept the amended code section. Mr. Neuzil replied that he had no objection to that amendment. Mr. Rhodes stated, in response to questions asked by Mr. Neuzil, that he had purchased the property a little over four years ago and that at time of purchase there was representation that the dwelling did comply with the Housing Code. He stated that the basement apartment had been in use for at least 25 years and that during the inspection, Inspector Kuebler had stated that it was one of the nicer apartments he had inspected. lie stated that currently the building is not paid for; however, the money received from rental of this unit was necessary to make payments on the building. He stated that if the Appeals Board were to uphold the City's violation, that the only means of correction would be to raise the whole house or to lower and replace the floor. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MONIES HOUSING APPEAL. BOARD September 27, 1979 Page 10 Mr. Neuzil asked Mr. Rhodes how much equity he had in the house. Mr. Rhodes replied that the property was appraised at $55,000 last May. He stated that he would have to sell the property if he could not continue to rent out the basement unit. There have never been any complaints from tenants due to the lack of required ceiling height. Neuzil asked Kuebler if he was aware of the reason that there was such a requirement. Kuebler replied that it was not instituted for the purpose of headroom, that the purpose, to his understanding, was for air space, especially in case of a fire. It would provide a few extra seconds or minutes for a person to have time to escape from a unit. Kuebler stated that he was not prepared to determine the safety aspects of the apartment regarding the current ceiling height. Neuzil asked Kuebler when this property was last inspected in order to issue a permit. Kuebler replied that according to the file a reinspection had been conducted to determine code compliance in 1977. Mr. Rhodes concurred with that information. Kuebler stated the last applicable permit regarding this property expired in April, 1978. The age of the structure was discussed by the Board, however, an actual date of construction could not be determined at this meeting, nor, could any change of use or classification in accordance with the exemption clause of the Housing Code. Smithey asked Mr. Rhodes, as had Mr. Neuzil, how much equity he had in the house. Mr. Rhodes replied that he had paid $289 a month on the property since he purchased it, and that he had put approximately $4,000 into the house in the form of windows and about that much also in the form of furnaces for each floor. He stated that he had mortgaged the house that he lives in now in order to purchase the property. i Smithey explored the question of equity a bit further by asking what would be the financial impact if the Board were to uphold this notice of violation. Mr. Neuzil replied that he would definitely have to sell the property if this violation was upheld, Mr. Rhodes concurred.He stated that with the loss of income from the basement apartment, $160 monthly, he would not have enough to keep up payments on his other responsibilities of paying for the windows and furnaces. He stated that total income on the property per month is $600. Klaus felt that a consideration which could be made would be to postpone a decision regarding the ceiling height to see if more information could be gathered as to the age of the house and whether it would fall within the scope of the grandfather clause. Steinbach voiced an objection to that proposal since, if it could be proven to the Housing Inspector that the structure did meet the quali- fications, enforcement of that citation would at that time be suspended. He stated that even if the Board chose to uphold the violation, the City would drop enforcement under those circumstances. f�_— _ -- —,..,,, MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES HOUSING APPEAL, BOARD September 27, 1979 Page 11 Neuzil stated that Mr. Rhodes had done every reasonable thing a prospective buyer could do in regards to purchasing a property, and that he felt that the City keeps changing rules and that it is not fair to the property owner that they are made to comply with all new changes that the City wishes to make. He further asked that if this requirement was a state law at the time Mr. Rhodes purchased the property, why did the City go ahead and certify the use of the basement unit. He felt that the City is penalizing the owner for a mistake of the City. Cook asked the board members to refer to the memorandum which was included in the board members' packets written by Angela Ryan regarding the estoppel argument. She stated that if an inspector had misapplied the law with no intent to deceive the owner, then the City could not be held responsible for such actions. She stated that it was her opinion that there was no intent to deceive or defraud in the past. Steinbach stated that this violation was probably found at this time due to the fact that, initiated one year ago was the policy of drawing floor plans of those structures which the City inspects annually and issues rental permits for. This is done to show that an accurate and thorough inspection is conducted at that time. Neuzil asked that if the purpose of the Board was simply to hear and uphold notices of violation without applying a sensitivity to the problem, why was the option of having an appeal heard before the Board even implemented. He felt that it may be just as well to start a lawsuit in district court rather than take the time to go before the Housing Appeals Board. He asked whether it was not the purpose of this hearing to determine a practical way to solve the problem. He felt that jacking up the house six inches or lowering the floor six inches was not a practical way to comply with the code. He asked why there could not be some sort of variance granted if all of the other requirements were met, provided that all other requirements were met. He asked if this was a serious enough violation to warrant the closing of the entire dwelling unit. i Discussion ensued regarding a valid permit. Neuzil stated that they would concede that they do not have, at this time, a valid housing permit. Dennis moved that items 1, 3 and 5 of the notice of violation be upheld. Motion died for lack of second. Smithey, too, questioned the purpose of the Housing Appeals Board, stating that, on one hand, he felt it was Board's responsibility to rely on the decisions made in courts of -law, but that to his knowledge only one or two decisions of the Housing Appeals Board have been further appealed in district court and he did not remember that they dealt with this particular violation. He stated that he would very much like to hear what the district court would have to say regarding this housing violation. He further stated that the constitutionality of these requirements could be determined in district court and such a precedent would be quite helpful to the Housing Appeals Board. Smithey stated that the estoppel argument was of great concern to him and that if the Appeals Board does not grant exceptions in particular cases, then the burden and expense of a decision in district court is put on the owner. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOVIES HOUSING APPEAL..;OARD September 27, 1979 Page 12 Klaus stated that recently it had been the determination of the City Council that they would not intervene in a decision which should be made by the Housing Appeals Board. It is the purpose of the Housing Appeals Board to make decisions in regards to interpretations of the Code. Cook stated that it was her feeling that the violation of ceiling height being discussed did not leave any flexibility to the Board in making its final determination because the interpretation of the Code, she felt was quite specific. Klaus stated that the situation was such that the Housing Appeals Board was appointed by the City Council and that the staff was actually responsible to the City Manager. However, Cook replied that her responsibility was also to represent the Housing Appeals Board. Smithey stated that there is an obvious conflict there, in that, the attorney must represent both the board and the staff. Smithey stated the situation at hand is such that the City is intervening between an agreement between the landlord and the tenant. He felt that perhaps the responsibility of the board would be to intervene in this conflict. He felt that perhaps it was the responsibility of the Housing Appeals Board to force the City into court to resolve this problem. Klaus stated that members of the Housing Appeals Board were, of course, also members of the Housing Commission. The duty of the Housing Commission is to find adequate housing and there is some conflict, in that the Housing Appeals Board is forced to, in effect, close other housing units. Neuzil asked that if a case is real close in regards to complying or not complying with the code, where is the cutoff of those violations which would be cited. Cook replied that there is discretion implemented; however, she did not feel that this was a close case. Cook asked Mr. Rhodes whether he had purchased this property with the advice of legal counsel. Mr. Rhodes replied that yes, in fact, he had retained an attorney to research the property prior to purchase. He stated that at time of purchase there was a valid permit issued for the property. The Board asked Inspector Kuebler to explain his finding regarding inadequate plumbing. Kuebler stated that during his inspection, it was found that the faucet on the tub was located below the rim of the tub and that that constituted a violation insofar as it could cause a backflow problem and water contamination. He then explained the series of events that could lead to such backflow and water contamination. He submitted a diagram which is part of an inspection manual issued by the government showing how this installation could constitute inadequate and dangerous plumbing. Kuebler further stated that after a discussion with the Plumbing Inspector of the MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOIRES HOUSING APPEAL_ BOARD September 27, 1979 Page 13 City, he was informed that there are installations in Iowa City such that if a second floor faucet is in the open position and a first floor faucet is opened, smoke from say, a cigarette, would be drawn right into the faucet on the second floor. The Board considered the question of if there was no motion regarding the case, what would be the outcome. It was determined that precedents have been set in previous appeals board hearings that the violation would be upheld in such an event. Board took a three minute break. Graf left the hearing. Klaus asked Cook if the City had pursued any cases in court regarding the ceiling height violation. Cook replied no, not to her knowledge. Smithey then asked Steinbach if there were any cases where the Board had upheld a notice of violation regarding ceiling height and the City had pursued no further enforcement action. Steinbach replied no, that to the best of his knowledge the City had gone ahead and enforced the decision of the Housing Appeals Board. Klaus brought up the fact that there had been a previous case that the Housing Appeals Board had not upheld the City in a notice of violation and that the Director of Housing & Inspection Services had recommended to the City Council that the City appeal that decision in Court and that the City Council had chosen not to do so. She said that particular case was based on particular circumstances which warranted such action and that it was not done to set a precedent and so the Appeals Board did not honor any future arguments which were brought in connection with that specific case. She stated that it was the Council's decision to appeal any decisions made by the Housing Appeals Board. Klaus stated that there is one other case currently in court that the Council has chosen to appeal the decision of the Board; however, the Council has not asked for any resignations from any members of the Board. Smithey moved, Dennis seconded, that M1, Lack of valid permit be upheld, and that k3, N4, and N5 dealing with inadequate plumbing, lack of sufficient doorway height, and lack of required ceiling height not be upheld. Klaus stated for the record that in not upholding these violations, it was an attempt to get the Council to pursue these types of problems in the Housing Code. Smithey stated that he wanted it also on the record that the Board did not feel that the staff was in error in issuing this notice of violation and this decision was not meant to set a precedent for future inspections. Cook stated that she would be much more comfortable with the board's decision if the evidence presented would show that in upholding this violation it would, from a financial viewpoint, constitute a "taking" Smithey stated that he felt that this had already been implied by MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES 140111ES r HOUSING APPEAL_ dOARD September 27, 1979 Page 14 Mr. Rhodes' statements. Cook replied that as an evidentiary matter, she did not feel that had been proven. The City is not authorized to take property without due process. Smithey's motion to uphold violation #1 and not uphold #3, #4 and #5 was passed by unanimous'vote. OTHER BUSINESS Steinbach stated that he has received a couple of requests for hearings which were filed past the 10 day deadline. He further stated that the City has tried to give everyone appeal rights in a generous fashion; however, he was not comfortable with accepting these late requests. He stated that it is obvious that enforcement of the Housing Code has been stepped up, otherwise there would not be backlog at this time of some 28 cases. He stated that the individuals requesting these hearings had contacted him personally and he had told them he would take their requests to the Housing Appeals Board. However, he stated; it must be the City's stance that they not be honored since it is administrative policy and City law that application be made within a prescribed amount of time. He stated that if the appeal deadline were to end on a weekend day, that he would accept applications for an appeal hearing on the following Monday. However, such was not the case in the two letters that he was presenting at this time. It was the Board's decision that individuals had waived their appeal rights if they had not made proper application within the prescribed amount of time. Meeting adjourned. PREPARED BY: APPROVED BY: MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES 3 V Minutes: Iowa City Airport Commission September 20, 1979 Iowa City Civic Center Members Present: Bleckwenn, Embree, Redick, Saeugling Members Absent: Phipps Summary of Discussion and Actions Taken: The meeting was called to order by Saeugling, in the absence of Chairman Phipps. Approval of the minutes of the August meeting was deferred until next month. It was moved by Embree, second by Bleckwenn to approve the bills for the month. Motion carried. Embree reported that she had inspected Sturgis Ferry Park, and that she could substantiate Gleaves' allegations that the City uses it for an equipment dump and salvage yard. She reported that the City Manager assures that it will be cleaned up this fall. General discussion followed. Bill Gilpin, Chairman of the Iowa City Riverfront Commission, and Mary Ann Milkman presented their proposals for the design and location of a boat ramp on the Iowa River. It would be on the west bank, directly across from the airport's brick hangar, which sits next to the threshold of runway 24. Design plans were distributed to Commission members. General discussion followed. i Embree asked why the Riverfront Commission chose that particular location. Milkman replied that the local fishermen would like to j have a ramp close to the Burlington St. dam. She also commented that, at present, there is no boat ramp on the Iowa River in Iowa City. Also, the location proposed is near highway 218, a main entryway to j Iowa City; a dock there would focus attention on the river. Gilpin reported that the funding will come 50/50 from the State Conservation Commission Marine Fuel Tanks Fund and from Community Development. Embree asked about other possible locations. Milkman reported that a ramp could not be built near the sewage plant because of many eddies and currents, and also the liability of people walking around the open tanks. Napoleon Park was another possibility, however it is farther downstream from the Burlington St. dam than the proposed site. General discussion followed. f Redick asked if the ICMAC would be making a statement as to owner - i ship of the property in question by permitting a boat ramp to be built there. Gilpin quoted a letter from Berlin, dated July 16,179 f stating that it would not affect the position of the ICMAC or City Council as to ownership. General discussion followed. Jones commented that the Riverfront Commission's proposed site near the airport's hangar was, in his opinion, ideal, and he encouraged such a development. General discussion followed. It was moved by Bleckwenn, second by Redick, that the ICMAC conditionally O.K. the construction of the Riverfront Commission's proposed boatramp on MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES 1: (2) said Sturgis Ferry Park, conditions being: (1) that the ICMAC's attorney review any ramifications of ownership on said land (2) that the total area of the ramp and park be within the approach zone to runway 29 (3) that a proper lease be drawn between the ICMAC and the city of Iowa City outlining the legal boundries of said land. Motion carried, with Bleckwenn, Redick, and Saeugling voting aye, Embree nay. Dave Byers, the Master Plan consultant, presented the major alter- natives open to the ICRAC and the Iowa City communitys (1) no development of the airport (2) obtain a new site (3) develop the existing site Advantages and disadvantages of each alternative were discussed. General discussion followed. Embree stated that many people would not accept lengthening a runway as a primary alternative. Redick commented that while many people would be in favor adding aircraft parking spaces and taxiway lights, they would not be in favor of longer runways. General discussion followed. Byers commented, in response to several questions, that should plans for runway extension be on the Master Plan Study for 1986-90, the runway would not necessarily have to be extended between 186 and '90. General discussion followed. Embree questioned the part of the Master Plan Study (MPS) which stated that jets cannot be prevented from using the Iowa City airport. Byers answered that the statement stemmed from a Federal Court case involving the Santa Monica airport. General discussion followed. iByers stated that the money to improve the existing airport would come from the FAA's planning grant program which is funded by people who buy aircraft tires, airline tickets, and avgas. General discussion followed. Embree commented that on the next MPS draft, she would like to see more footnotes, page numbers, better spelling and punctuation, and less text ambiguity. She specified that the draft should explain how the estimated costs were obtained. General discussion followed. Redick asked about the status of the environmental impact statement. Byers reported that the environmental assessment report can't be written until the ICMAC decides which alternative to go with. He also reported that, for federal funding, the ICMAC needs only an airport layout plan and an environmental assessment report. General discussion followed. Carol deProsse asked that three points be clarified: (1) that the figures used in the MPS forecasts through the year 2000 are in 1979 dollars] Byers stated that they were. (2) would the MPS address the question of what land might be acquired by Iowa City as a protective area around the air- port; Byers stated that this would not be done until the ICMAC recommends an alternative, e.g, to develop the existing site. In that case, the problem of acquiring land would be part of airport development and would be part of the study. (3) an explanation of the court case in Santa Monica; MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES (3) Byers stated that he would try to obtain documentation within a week. Ed Thomas questioned whether the Kimball Co. has studied what he termed deficiencies and points of violation around the airport. He stated that these should be in the report. General discussion followed. Mr. Sonnig mentioned that although prime farmland would be sacri- ficed for a new airport, industry does this anyway. Byers commented that it is not easy or sometimes possible to take someone's farm to use for an airport. Sonnig commented that the Kimball Co. has based its study on projected use of the Iowa City airport. New developments may take place in the next twenty years to make the airport insufficient. Byers reported that the first two forecasts are for ten years, and that such things as hangars and aprons would be built on demand. General discussion followed. Ken Lowder asked if Byers could project ten to twenty years into the future to get the impact of the airport on the surrounding area, with and without a runway extension. Byers stated that if the ICMAC opts for developing the existing site, that such a study will be added to his contract. Lowder commented that the existing study shows no recommendation to change the situation of people affected by the traffic pattern at Iowa City. Byers reported that noise abatement will be part of the MPS after the ICMAC makes a decision concerning the three major alternatives. Dale Rockenbrach commented that advancements in aircraft technology might soon permit jets to land safely on relatively short runways. Byers reported that the MPS has taken that into account. Rockenbrach also commented on the monetary.advanbages of building a completely new airport. Duane Ingram commented that a new airport would not be the equivalent of the present one, as it would have only two runways. He also commented that should a certain runway be made more convenient to pilots, they would use it more often, and thus avoid runways with potential noise problems. Dick Blum, chairman of the Iowa City Planning and Zoning Commission (ICPZC) stated that his commission is considering providing the ICMAC with a plan of artificial surfaces through which ground construction couldn't penetrate. It was moved by Bleckwenn, second by Redick that the ICMAC endorse and actively encourage the ICPZC to proceed with flat plane zoning of the Iowa City area. Motion carried. Saeugling read a letter from the FAA dated August 17, 179, concerning student flying restrictions. Redick read a letter from Willard Binns in which he reported that a Crystal -Shamrock airplane flew too low over his house, near the Iowa City airport, on August 28, 179. Redick had a similar complaint. It was moved by Redick, second by Embree to direct the chairman of the ICMAC to write to Crystal -Shamrock Airlines in Minneapolis, advising them that they are creating anxiety in the Iowa City community, and to suggest that they land at Cedar Rapids if possible. It also should be suggested that, when landing at Iowa City, they avoid overflying residential areas. Motion carried, with Embree, Redick, and Saeugling voting aye, Bleckwenn abstained. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES 1101OES a 1' i i i i I I j i I (4) It was moved by Bleckwenn, second by Redick that the ICMAC hold a special meeting at noon at the Iowa City airport on Thursday, September 27, to inspect the physical plant. Motion carried. Redick reported that Ken Lowder has arranged for EPA lawyer Bob Wright to talk to the ICMAC and FAA people about actions that the community can take concerning noise abatement. A tentative date for the meeting has been set for October 11. It was moved by Embree, second by Redick that a Public Information Meeting be held Thursday, September 27, at 700 PM in the Iowa City Civic Center. Motion carried. The meeting adjourned at 10145 PM. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MONIES i i i i I I j i I i I I I ( I 1 It I I i i (4) It was moved by Bleckwenn, second by Redick that the ICMAC hold a special meeting at noon at the Iowa City airport on Thursday, September 27, to inspect the physical plant. Motion carried. Redick reported that Ken Lowder has arranged for EPA lawyer Bob Wright to talk to the ICMAC and FAA people about actions that the community can take concerning noise abatement. A tentative date for the meeting has been set for October 11. It was moved by Embree, second by Redick that a Public Information Meeting be held Thursday, September 27, at 700 PM in the Iowa City Civic Center. Motion carried. The meeting adjourned at 10145 PM. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MONIES . -. Iowa City Airport Commission Master Plan Study Public Information Meeting #3 Na_r Alternatives Iowa City Civic Center - 27 September 79 Airport Commission Members Present: Bleckwenn, Embree, Phipps, Redick, Saeugling Summar of discussion: Phipps called the meeting to order at 7:30PM, and turned the meeting over to Dave Byers, the Master Plan Study (MPS) consultant. Byers stated that the background for the major alternatives came from Phase I of the MPS, e.g, traffic forecasts, airport capacity to accommodate that traffic, and facility require- ments to meet future needs. Byers listed, as major alternatives, (1) no development,(2) obtain a new site, (3) develop existing site. Advantages and disadvantages of each were discussed; Byers recom- mended developing the existing site. He showed plans of the airport, illustrating different improvements, such as new parking areas and taxiways. Byers emphasized that the ICMAC is not obligated to go along with any one of the alternatives. or suggestions for airport improvements; they are simply his own recommendations. He did comment, however, that the FAA would probably not fund much that wasn't on a MPS. Byers then opened the meeting for questions and comments from the public. Barry Ginsberg asked how long it would take to build a new airport. Phipps said that, with all funding immediately available, it would take one year. Ginsberg discussed the possibility of obtaining municipal bonds, and related that to the financing of a new airport, John Nett compared projected uses of airport land with current use. He mentioned that the City could buy land around the airport, and restrict its use. He stated that, on a twenty year scale, the airport, at its present location, would be incompatible with the city of Iowa City, and should be moved. Elliott Full congratulated the Kimball Co. and Mr. Byers on a careful and thoughtful study. He then asked about the financing necessary to buy 'clear zones at the end of the runways. Byers replied that full funding Could be obtained for that. I Mr. Sonnig did not agree that the MPS was either careful or thoughtful. He stated that significant data was witheld. He also stated that local pilots use a particular runway not because of wind conditions, but because of accessibility and convenience. He suggested that merely lengthening runway 6/29 would not guarantee that pilots would use it a good deal of the time. Also, he pointed out that the consultant's suggested taxiways would make 12/30 easily accessible. Mr. Sonnig also discussed the consultant's recommen- dations for new airport locations. Saeugling agreed that there were better sites than those listed in the current phase of the MPs. He commented that, in his opinion, Iowa City needs an airport, and that it should be something more than a patchwork that will, in his opinion, result from the consultant's report. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES (2) Ed Thomas stated that he didn't like the report. He stated that it did not include violations around the current airport facility; specifically, approach clearance over highway 1 and 218. Pete Peterson stated that the report was a good one. He discussed runway extension, and commented that 6/24 was the only logical choice. He had polled former airport commission members, and found that they all agreed that Byers.' third alternative was the practical solution to the difficult problem at hand. He read a paper from the former commission members, concerning the third alternative of improving the current airport. John Redick stated that much data in the report was unsubstan- tiated, but that there were good points made in the study, particularly regarding improvements suggested for the existing airport. He commented that the report did lack environmental impact information. He also discussed runway extension, saying that this would invite jet traffic. In addition, he stated that the report too quickly dismisses the alternative concerning re- locating the airport, which should be seriously considered. Dick Blum, as chairman of Iowa City Planning and Zoning, showed a comprehensive land use map. He showed that new housing was excluded from critical approach and departure paths of the Iowa City airport. He pointed out that no new subdivisions are contemplated along existing approach and departure paths. His personal comments first concerned clarification of Byers' airport plans, and possibilities for future traffic patterns. He then commented that he doesn't think that the noise from airport traffic has gotten worse in the past few years; he stated that it has been improved in the years since United and Ozark left. He stated that can be arranged to bar certain categories of aircraft from certain runways. He also challenged pilots, members of the ICMAC, and local citizens to join him to discuss the impact of aircraft noise on the Iowa City community, and to help find a solution. Barry Ginsberg commented that he would like to see data proving that aviation is necessary for local business. He also discussed whether an increase in business and industrialization would lower property taxes - he thought not. Concerning the U. of Iowa Hospital, yet not reflecting hospital policy, he discussed whether it makes any difference if critically ill patients and transplant organs are brought into the Cedar Rapids or Iowa City airport, before they are transported to the hospital. Ken Lowder stated that if the airport were redeveloped at its present site, and if the city didn't grow and airport traffic increased, the problems of noise and safety would also increase. He remarked that this problem was not addressed in the MPS. Byers replied that this was not in his contract. Lowder asked for evidence that extending runway 6/24 sould decrease or alleviate noise and safety problems for Iowa City. Byers explained that a computer was used for that part of the study, and that it showed a sub- stantial reduction in noise. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOIRES (3) Dale Rockenbrach stated that moving the airport to a new loca- tion should be given serious consideration in the study. He also asked to whom one should complain about an airplane flying to low. Phipps replied that the FAA was the proper agency. Phipps commented that many people had been complaining to the consultant, but that the ICMAC should also accept responsibility for the study. He stated thet when the decision was made to employ the consultant, the runways needed repair. The ICMAC was irformed at that time that in order to receive federal funding, it was necessary to have a MPS. Therefore, the study is a method to get federal and state aid for runway and other airport repairs. Ginsberg commented that the study was too qualitative. Phipps stated that there was presently no funding available for a more quantitative study. Sonnig asked what restricted the study, and how much it cost. Byers replied that his report was outlined in his contract, and that the study cost $32,000. Dick Blum stated that when the concept of a MPS was first presented two years ago, both the City Council and the ICMAC were opposed to moving the airport. Three years ago, the Iowa City Comprehensive Plan Committee looked at alternate sites for the airport, and unanimously advised the ICMAC that the probability of relocating the airport was virtually nil. In addition, he commented that a new airport would invite more jet traffic, and that cities generally tend to expand in the direction of the local airport. E.K. Jones pointed out that the Iowa City Flying Service is one of three companies in Iowa licensed to fly critically ill patients, and that the Flying Service does transport many of them. He also discussed the MPS of 1962. Saeugling stated that the MPS of 1962 did not preclude development near the airport. Embree discussed keeping the airport open at its present site, and and the need for compromise and public input. She commented that the airport's present location was unsuitable for industrial development, because of nearby housing and the high water table. She stated that many local citizens are in favor of airport improvement without runway extension. General diccussion followed. Rockenbrach asked at what level of flight operations would a tower be necessary. Byers stated that Iowa City was nowhere near it. Lowder and Byers discussed the practicality of alternate site selection. Phipps then closed the meeting to public discussion, after asking if there were any further comments. Byers commented that Phase II must be approved before he could continue with the MPS. The possibility of expanding Byers' contract to include additional research of alternate sites was discussed. Embree stated that there sould be four major alternatives, instead of threes (1) no improvement (2) alternate site (3) improve the present airport (4) improve and expand the present facility. General discussion followed. Resurfacing runway 17/35 was also discussed. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOIRES (4) It was moved by Bleckwonn, second by Embree to defer any action this evening, and that the Chairman should set up a working meeting for the ICMAC and Byers so that corrections can be made on Phase II. Motion carried. It was moved by Embree, second by Bleckwenn to go ahead with the application for federal funding for improvement of runway 17/35. Motion carried. Phipps read the list of those who had applied for the position of Airport Manager. Commission members had previously read their applications, and selected their preferred candidates. They collaborated on a list of candidates that everyone thought were especially well-suited for the jobs John Davis Dennis Gordon Ronald Hanelt Ernest Nelson James Wachendorf Garret Winter Fred Zehr Richard Zmolek Phipps commented that the City will send letters to all the appli- cants as soon as the ICMAC indicates those to be interviewed. A letter from the Department of Human Relations concerning such applications was read. The meeting was adjourned at 10s95PM. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES w MINUTES IOWA CITY PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION RECREATION CENTER ROOM B SEPTEMBER 12, 1979 MEMBERS PRESENT: Boutelle, Crum, Hillman, Humbert, Berry MEMBERS ABSENT: Thayer, McLaughlin, Hayek, Robertson STAFF PRESENT: Howell, Lee, Showalter SUMMARY OF DISCUSSION AND FORMAL ACTION TAKEN: i The June 13th minutes were approved. i Marilyn Nickelsburg was present to discuss the Chl'ldrens Museum.. She distributed information regarding attendance for the past 3 years and this summers programs. Marilyn feels that it is no longer possible for the Friends to operate the Museum as they have in the past, due to lack of funding. This year, they didn''t open until mid-June and will not be open on weekends this fall, The Museum directors have been working 52 to 70 hours per week, and only getting paid for 20 hours, CETA help is becoming more unreliable. The availability of students for internship from year to year. will vary Showalter asked the Commission if they would like to recommend that funding for Museum operations be included in the FY'81 Recreation operating budget. Lee has a prepared cost estimate of $7,500 for operation on weekends in the spring and fall and 6 days week in the per summer, It would be possible to reduce this some by using interns,etc. Boutelle asked Nickelsburg if the Friends board would still be active, and if they would support and assist in Museum operation, Nickelsburg will meet with the board and report back at the October meeting, I The future of Black Hawk Mini-Park was discussed, Howell and Showalter felt that the Park had been a splendid idea and very successful, but that it was designed as a temparary park, and if kept as a permanent park would require substantial attention, The bricks are settling, causing low spots where water stands in the summer, and freezes in the winter. After considerable discussion it was decided that no recommenda- tion on the future of the park be this given at time. Election of officers. Berry nominated Crum for Chairperson. Unanimous Crum nominated Hillman for Vice Chairperson, Unanimous i The meeting was adjourned at 9:30p.m. f/ Dennis Showalter ! " j 1 � Director-Parks and Recreation �i I I j i i 19�F3 I I MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS-DES 610IIIES MI 2V, MINUTES CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 22, 1979 8:00 AM CIVIC CENTER, CITY MANAGER'S CONFERENCE ROOM MEMBERS PRESENT: Anderson, Nusser, Orelup STAFF PRESENT: Higdon OTHERS PRESENT: Walker, Hearing Officer; Jay Honohan, Attorney for Ronald R. Fort; and two members of the media RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE CITY COUNCIL None RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE CITY MANAGER AND STAFF None RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE CITY ATTORNEY None SUMMARY OF RELEVANT DISCUSSION Chair, Bill Nusser, presiding, called the meeting to order for the specific purpose of considering the information from the public hearing of September 17 which related to the Commission's decision regarding the demotion of Ronald R. Fort and possibly arrive at a decision. No other items are to come before this meeting. Nusser expressed that he did not believe a closed session would be of any, value if each member of the Commission had deliberated over the information individually as he had. Anderson and Orelup agreed that a closed session would not be necessary as there was no information to exchange in a closed session that would be helpful to any of the Commission members. Attorney Honohan was given an opportunity to speak. He addressed some comments to the media stating that he felt his client's rights had been violated by the media flap and Fort was the one who had suffered. He stated that the Commission was acting properly on September 17, the media sneaked out and returned with a xeroxed copy of the open meetings law and this was done only for the benefit of the media. Honohan stated that open meetings are wonderful, we are all for it, but in this instance the media had trampled on a citizen's rights for the sole benefit of the media. Orelup moved that the Civil Service Commission vote to rescind the action of Harvey D. Miller of September 28, 1978 and to reinstate Ronald R. Fort as a sergeant of the Iowa City Police Department effective September 22, 1979. Anderson seconded. The vote was unanimous in favor of the motion. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES Civil Service'",mmission September 22, _j79 Page 2 Chair Nusser instructed Walker to prepare the necessary documents for signature. The meeting adjourned at 8:09 a.m. Minutes prepared by June Higdon MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES I j N i i I i i j I j r i 1 N it 1j j. I< i l,l ' 1 N I I 'i i MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES IOWA CITY HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION September 4, 1979 7:30 PM ENGINFERING CONFFRFNCF. ROOM MEMBERS PRESENT: Braverman, Kuhn, Costantino, Reyes, Munzenmaier, Marcus Yates, McGuire, McCartt. MEMBERS ABSENT: None. STAFF PRESENT: Brown, Morris, Mejia. VISITORS: Woman from radio station not introduced. RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE CITY COUNCIL: None RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE CITY MANAGER AND STAFF: Staff is to prepare a monthly flow chart for complaints. Civil Rights Specialist is to put probable cause or no probable cause at the end of investigative report. Staff is t0 report on the progress of the City as a model employer. SUMMARY OF RELEVANT DISCUSSION: 1. The September 4, 1979 meeting was called to order at 7:30 PM by Chairman Braverman. 2. Committee of Priorities discussed their purpose which was to look at projects outside of what the commission does as a whole and make suggestions for relevant projects. 3. The Human Rights Ordinance was discussed. It was decided that the basic concerns are: A. To look at the ordinance as it pertains to processing complaints. The possibility of hiring an outside consultant to investigate procedures and process was discussed. Who to get to do this was discussed and the fact that the Human Ri0hts Commission does not have a budget was mentioned. B. The question of the Human Rights Commission processing complaints against the city was discussed. C. The possibility of reviewing internally using city staff was discussed. D. As a result of the above discussion, the following motion was made by Munzenmaier and seconded by Kuhn. Motion that the Commission conduct an investigation of the City's Human Rights Ordinance and all promulgations of that ordinance utilizing MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 1401NES 1945 . e Human Rights Commissi,,., September 4, 1979 Page 2 such internal and external resources as are necessary. Areas of concentration shall be: 1• parallel structuring to 601A, 2. jurisdictional authority, 3. procedural aspects. Further, that two commissioners be appointed by the chair to initiate this investigation and monitor its progress and report back to the commission as a whole and formalize final recommen- dations to the commission. 4. As part of the above the possibility of hiring legal independent counsel for the commission in the event of a public hearing was discussed. The motion was made by Marcus and seconded by Braverman that in the event the commission decides to hold its own public hearing, an outside legal consultant will be hired for the interim period of the investigation. The question of this being a simple motion or a bylaws change was brought up. The motion was tabled by a unanimous vote. 5. Discussion of guidelines for processing of complaints. It was suggested that a three month time period be used as a reasonable guide from the time of the complaint to the time the investigative j team receives the report. It was suggested that a status report/ i tracking sheet should be initiated to more closely monitor the Rrocess. The eyes. Motion ftolhave gmotion aspart ofsthe dmonthly e by treport aes and eflow echary t of every complaint beginning with when the complaint is formally filed. specify when the case was received, assigned, went to legal, current status. Motion carried unanimously. 6. Motion was made by McGuire and seconded by Yates that the Director of the Human Relations Department or her designated appointee report on the progress of the City as a model employer at monthly commission meetings (i.e. what kinds of changes are being made to encourage minorities and females). Motion carried unanimously. i 7. Motion was made by McGuire and seconded by Yates that money be approved for ID's for the Commissioners. It was mentioned by Pat Brown that the City has an arrangement with the bank for ID photographs for employees so Commissioners should be able to get IDs there. Motion carried unanimously. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES ., Human Rights Commission September 4, 1979 Page 3 8. Motion made by McGuire and seconded by Yates that the Civil Rights Specialist put the probable cause or no probable cause finding aL the end of the investigative reports. All voted aye except Yates who abstained. 9. It was brought up that what has been learned from Woodfield's in terms of the complaint process and public hearings should be put on the agenda for a future meeting. 10. Motion was made by McGuire and seconded by Yates that the commission hold an open house that is well publicized as a method of letting the public know the commission exists and that this be done some time in October. A Human Rights Day with movies, panels, etc. was suggested. It was decided to find out what is available and go from there in determin- ing a date. A public hearing was suggested. This would be a public hearing on the commission at which minorities, women and handicapped could ask questions, bring complaints and suggestions. Employers could be invited to tell what is wrong with the commissions procedures from their point of view. Original motion withdrawn. Motion made by McGuire and seconded by Yates that a subcommittee be assigned to draw up a tentative program and date for some type of public event. Motion carried unanimously. Braverman appointed Reyes, Marcus, Kuhn and Yates as a subcommittee. Meeting adjourned at 9:00 PM. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOVIES MINUTES IOWA CITY PUBLIC LIBRARY BOARD OF TRUSTEES REGULAR MEETING September 27, I979 Director's Office 3:30 I'M MEMBERS PRESENT: MEMBERS ABSENT: STAFF PRESENT: HANSEN LIND MEYER: OTHERS PRESENT: Summary of Discussion Bartley, Bezanson, Gritsch, Hyman, Immermann, Ostedgaard, Richerson, Zastrow None Eggers, Tiffany, Ingersoll, Kelley, Craig, Jehle Loren Ellarson, John Benz Vawter $ Walter, Inc. - Marshall Winders, Mike Short Modern Piping - Dave Brown Shay Electric - William VanDuyn The meeting was called to order at 3:35 PM by Lynda Ostedgaard. Loren Ellarson, Contract Administrator for Hansen Lind Meyer, led the discussion during the Pre -Construction Conference between the general contractor, subcontractors, Library Board of Trustees and the architects. Ellarson presented 24 points relative to the duties and responsibilities of the general contractor, and his subcontractors, the architects and the Library Board of Trustees during the construction period. Complete minutes of this portion of the meeting will be prepared by Ellarson and will be on file in the Library as an attachment to the minutes of this meeting. The minutes of the Regular Board meeting of August 23; and Special meetings of September 11 and 21 were approved. The disbursements of September 1 and 15 were approved. Zastrow/Bartley. Ostedgaard moved and Immermann seconded the adoption of a resolution to revise the responsibilities and membership of Building Committee N1 and to empower it to serve as the owner's representative at any meeting or for other purposes in behalf of the Library hoar([. The Committee shall consist of the Library Director and three Board members selected by the Board. Any decision by this group must have the concurrence of at least two of its members in attendance at a meeting or who are consulted in advance of a decision. This Committee shall be authorized to take action on behalf of the Library Board in its capacity as owner's representative but in no event shall it authorize any action which will exceed $25,000 in cost without prior Board approval. Unanimous. Richerson moved and Zastrow seconded the adoption of the following resolution: "That the Library Director be authorized to make decisions concerning construc- tion of the library that involve total cost increases on any one item of no more than $2500.00" Unanimous. (over) MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES IdoillES J MINUTES ICPL Board 9-27-79 Page 2 A resolution authorizing the Board President to sign a contract with Te1Com Systems, Inc. for telephone equipment in the new library was approved. Immermann/Ostedgaard. Unanimous. The Board reviewed the draft of goals and objectives for FY1981 and gave tentative approval pending a full budget draft in October. The purchase of two Panasonic Omnivision II NV -8170 1/2" video cassette players from the Gifts and Bequests Fund for $2200 was approved. Immermann/Richerson. Unanimous. These players will be used to meet requests of library users and to allow the library to begin purchasing and circulating this Format. Ilalf-inch video cassettes are highly repre- sented by subjects the library wishes to get under the $16,000 LSCA audio- visual grant, and by entertainment films. There is a strong possibility that this more convenient format eventually can replace 8mm films and the library needs to get experience using it. One player would be used for in-house needs and to train borrowers; the other would be loaned. A proposal to revise reimbursement rates for expenses incurred by library trustees, employees or agents while using private vehicles for library business from 15¢ to 18¢ permile effective immediately and from 18¢ to 20¢ permile effective July 1, 1980 was adopted. Richerson/Hyman. Unanimous. Director's Report: 1) Will have graphics contract and a review of Board's policy on circulation records on the agenda of the October meeting. 2) Reported the City Manager's concern over use of the Storyhour Room as a general meeting room because of its lack of a second exit. 3) Work on the lease with Ilawkeye CableVision has moved slowly because of figures needed from IILM regarding utilities and cost of electrical wiring. q) have asked City Human Relations Director Pat Brown to draw up a list of key personnel functions so that an agreement between city staff and library can be reached on who is responsible for each aspect of library personnel matters. 5) The circulation system is ready to begin Monday, October 1. Over 95% of the collection has been entered. The staff has received many hours of training and is ready to operate the new system. A few people from the temporary con- version staff will be working into October to clean up areas not completed. 6) Shive-Hattery will be hired as the testing agency for the augercast piling, concrete and earth compaction tests. 7) the City will purchase and the project will pay for the all-risk property insurance and liability insurance required by the contract. President's Report: Bezanson appointed himself and Board members Zastrow and Ostedgaard to serve on the newly constituted Building Committee N1. Gritsch will serve as the Board's Collective Bargaining Representative at strategy sessions with the City Council. Bartley, Chairperson of Building Committee a3, urged each Board member to review the list of prospective donors and con- tact her soon about persons they wish to contact. Eggers is preparing a de- tailed list of gift ideas. A general orientation session on the goals of the private funds drive will he held before contacts begin. Meeting adjourned at 6:15 PM. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES NOIRES