Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1979-11-06 Bd Comm minutesDRAFT MINUTES BOARD OF ELLCIRICAL EXAMINERS AND APPEALS OCTOBER 17, 1979 MEMBERS PRESENT: James Hynes, Ferrell Turner, Earl Eyman, Dale Flannery. STAFF PRESENT: Neal Berlin, Michael Kucharzak, Paul Bowers, Roger Scholten, Dale Helling, Rose Anne Fink. OTHERS PRESENT: Clemens Erdahl, John Blamer, Mr. & Mrs. Richard Topinka, Mr. & Mrs. Ron Y.ahler, Jim Kessler. Chairman Hynes called the meeting to order and stated that it had been called at the request of the Council in order for the Board to present their griev- ances concerning their lack of confidence in the upper management of the Department of Housing & Inspection Services. .Chairman Hynes called for corrections or additions to the Minutes of the Electrical Board Meetings held August 28, September 14, September 19, and October 3, 1979. There being no corrections or additions, the Minutes were approved as submitted. Mr. Eyman suggested that a new chairman be elected, since Mr. Hynes' term will soon expire. He then nominated Ferrell Turner to be the next chairman. Chairman Hynes called for a vote, all were in favor and the motion carried. The Board then heard the appeal of Mr. & Mrs. Richard Topinka of 310 Morningside Drive. Mrs. Topinka read the following statement: "our main purpose for being here this evening is to try to obtain from the Building Inspection Department in writing specifically what electrical work we must have done in our kitchen so we may complete the project we started in July. All work was stopped by the Building Department on September 7th. On September 10th we met with Mr. Siders and asked him to put in writing specific- ally needed to be done so we could complete our kitchen. To date we have received nothing. We have been given conflicting information on every oc- c?sion. Anything this Board can do to expedite this matter so we can com- plete our kitchen and return to our normal lifestyle will he greatly ap- preciated." There continued a lengthy discussion concerning the chronology of yvcnts that took place between the Topinkas' and the Building Inspection 0-.partfar2nt. Mr. Flannery noted that the Building Permit had been taken out for a sliding glass door only. Mr. Turner read from a memo written by Glenn Siders to Mr. Y,ucharzak dated 10/12/79 regarding 310 Morningside Drive. The, memo states that on September 13th Mr. Siders and Mr. Bowers made an inspection, left a written Notice of Inspection card with the Topinkas' son Rick and at that time thoroughly explained all items that were on that card to him. Mr. Bowers stated that he felt at the time of that inspection that the. NoLica of Inspection card and the verbal communication with Rick were sufficient arid that he was not aware until he received a copy of tors. Topinkas' letter of October 10th to Jim Hynes, that they still had a question about what needed to be done. aoo MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOVIES (l ) MINUILS BOARD OF ELECTRICAL EXAMINERS AND APPEALS (CON'T.) OCTOBER 17, 1979 Nancy Hauserman, a friend of the Topinkas, made a statement regarding the lack of counnuni cation with the Building Inspection Department. Mrs. Topinka again stated that all they want is something in writing stating what work has to be done. Mr. Flannery made a motion that the Department of Housing R Inspection Services go out to the Topinka kitchen, make a thorough reinspection, and write them a letter listing item by item what has to be changed and that a copy of this letter be sent to the Electrical Board Chairman so that if they have any complaints in the future the Board will have a copy of the letter, Turner seconded the motion, all were in favor and the motion passed. Mr. Flannery then suggested that the Topinkas obtain an electrical permit since the Building Permit they have is inadequate for the work being done. Mrs. Topinka stated that they would be glad to and asked when the reinspection would be made. She requested that someone come with Mr. Bowers. An appoint- ment was made for 9:15 A.M. on October 18, 1979. Mr. Berlin suggested to the Board that if they receive complaints of this type in the future that they be referred to Mr. Bowers directly so action could be taken to correct the problem. The Board now began to present their grievances concerning the management of the Department of Housing & Inspection Services. Mr. Turner expressed his concern that changes have been made in the City Code that the Electrical Board has not voted on. Mr. Berlin at this time asked if the Board had something in writing listing each item of concern that everyone could follow along with so that each item could be spoken to in detail and hopefully resolved. Mr. Hynes stated that there would be something in writing coming in the future. Mr. Turner referred to definitions that were at one time in the code that have been deleted. Roger Scholten suggested that possibly this had taken place when the code was recodified and that other Boards and Commissions have encountered the same problem. Mr. Kucharzak pointed out that the definitions were not in the code when it went to the codifer but that it went as it had been approved by the Board and adopted by the Council on 3/7/78, Mr. Berlin stated that should a Board or Commission wish to make recnana-ridatiom, to the City Council, those recommendations should be spelled out r,pr:rJ finally ir, the 11inutes of that Board or Commission which go to the Council. lhr•,r; recommendations will be spelled out specifically on the Council Agenda and by this process will automatically come to the Councils attention, A lrngth.V discussion followed regarding this minutes process and the alleged "Lanq,ering" with the code. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES 6I01nES (3) MINllll S BOARD 01' 1 1 1 L 11? 1(:At LXAMI NI RS AND AI'1'I'At S ((:ON' 1 . ) OCIOBLR 17, 19/9 Mr. Hynes then referred to two proposed admendments to the Code that had been discussed by the Board at it's meeting of 9/14/79. These admendments dealt with definitions and a federally recognized apprenticeship program. The Boards concern was that these had riot yet gone to Council. Mr, Berlin stated that they have gone to Council but have not yet been placed on the Agenda. He stated that in the future any items sent to Council pertaining to a particular Board or Commission will be furnished to that Board or Com- mission members. Mr. Turner referred to another section that he felt had disappeared from the code, that is 9.20.17 "Transfer of License." Mr. Berlin read from Section 11.47 & 11.48 of the recodified code and although the wording and numbers are different, the intent is identical to 9.20.17. Mr. [lyrics stated his concern that the electrical permit for Capitol House AparLments had been improperly issued but also said that he had been advised riot to discuss his particular role in this matter. He then read his letter, arldresr,ed to the Mayor and the City Council dated 10/1/79, regarding the Electrical Boards' lack of confidence in the upper management of the Department of Housing & Inspection Services. He referred to a memo from Neal Berlin to the Electrical Board dated 10/22/77 regarding the A.C.T. appeal. Hynes stated that this memo was the beginning of the breakdown of communications between the City and the Board Chairman Hynes read a memo from Michael Kucharzak to Neal Berlin dated 1/30/78 regarding the raising of fees which Hynes said did not properly reflect the Boards feelings on the matter. Mr. Bowers could not at this time locate the Minutes which reflect the Boards' recommendations regarding the fee increase. There was agreement at this point that more care should be given to the preparation of minutes in detail and that possibly a qualified secretary could be appointed to do this. I Mr, rucharzak asked for more information about a statement Mr. Hynes had made about unlicensed people working on jobs in Iowa City. lie stated that i in the last two years he was only aware of this happening one time and that the Building Department had actively pursued the matter. Mr. Berlin asked for Mr. Bowers' observations for the ektent that this might be a problam. He stated that in Cedar Rapids a memo has gone out to all contractors •.I.al.inq that the provision in the code requiring a licensed electrician to be on the job at all times will be enforced. Mr. Berlin stated that it would be - highly appropriate to do this in Iowa City so everyone is made aware of iL. Mr. Hynes stated that many people are advertising in the newspaper for electrical work who it's commonly known do not possess licences. He stated that the Board Members receive complaints from contractors about this. Mr. Berlin said that these complaints should be referred to Mr. rucharzak for follow-up. Mr, rucharzak stated that he had never received any names from MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES (4) MINUTES 130ARD Of I:IICIII] CAI. I.XAMINIRSAND APITAIS (CON'T.) OCIOHLR 11, 1919 the Board of persons who are operating without a license so he could pursue it. Discussion followed. Mr. Bowers indicated that he could not do any- thing unless he caught the unlicensed person doing the work or had the co- operation of the homeowner. Roger Scholten agreed that you would need a co-operating witness. Berlin stated that possibly the City could file against the homeowner. He suggested that this was an area where the Board could help by taking the contractors calls since the contractors might be reluctant to contact the City directly and then referring the complaints to the Building Department for follow-up. Mr. Eyinan then voiced a concern about a rmnor he had heard concerning phones being monitored. Mr. Berlin asked Mr. Bowers and Mr. Kucharzak to respond. Mr. Kucharzak explained how the directive had come about for Mr. Siders to be a part of conversations between Mr. Bowers exercise that directive. Mr. Berlin stated again that there was no monitoring and there will be no mon- itoring. A lengthy discussion followed. Berlin stated that his goal is to improve communications with the Board and to deal with realistic problems and help to solve them. Mr. Eyman referred to the evening of an electrical test when an application was received only three hours had instructedthetest tobe prior to iven.Eymanthe tstatedMthatr. uitaisacustomark and yato make application 15 days prior to the test. Kucharzak said that he was riot aware of the 15 day requirement because it is not part of the ordinance or the Bylaws of the Electrical Board. Discussion followed. Mr. Berlin suggested that in order to prevent occurances like this in the future that the Board lay out in its Bylaws exactly the way in which applications for licensing are to be handled. He mentioned the possibility of the State giving these licensing exams and Mr. Hynes indicated that he was already pursuing this idea. Mr. Hynes stated that he had been on the Board for eight years and that for the six years previous to the last two that they had never had problems like this. He stated that for the past two years that the majority of the Board feels that there has been an effort to dominate them. Mr. Eyman asked who was the legal consul represented. Merlin expi'linod I,hal iegal represents the City Council, Boards R Cmmlinissions and the staff. Mr. Eyman objected to the short notice for the meeting. Councilperson Erdahl stated that the council had asked Mr. Hynes to hold the meeting as soon a,. possible because of the serious charges that had been made. The council wants to know specifically in writing what the Department of Housing 8 Inspection Services has done to prompt these charges. Mr. Berlin asked Mr. Hynes what specific behavior or action of the staff does he want the manager or the City Council to change that would remedy the problem of the Board feeling they are being dominated. Mr. Hynes stated that one thing would be to deal with the Boards' proposed amendments to the code and if there is a problem with those changes that it should be communicated to the Board. Mr. Berlin asked for more specific things that could be, Anne to help solve Lhe MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 1101NES 1 (5) MINUTES BOARD OF ELECTRICAL EXAMINERS AND APPEALS (CON'T.) OCTOBER 17, 1979 the problems. Mr. Hynes stated that in the next week or two that Mr. Berlin will be recieving many more specific items. At this point Mr. Eyman stated that he had previous committments and left the meeting. Mr. & Mrs. Kahler spoke to the Board about the Electrical Permit for the Capitol House Apartments. Mr. Turner stated that he questions the validity of this permit because it is taken out in the name of Kahler Electric rather than White Electric. lie said that according to HUD regulations the contractor for that job reads White Electric riot Kahler and that federal funds could be jeopardized because of this. A discussion concerning this followed. Mr. Flannery asked to give a minority opinion at this point. His statement reads as follows: "I feel we should have met witb the staff instead of sending a letter to the Council and, in fact, 1 voted against the motion. I felt there was an overreaction because most have not been substantiated with fact. 1 do feel there are a few constructive changes that could be made to help improve and eliminated problems in electrical inspection, testing and appeals. These changes will help improve the relationship between the Electrical Board and the City staff and will help make everyone's job easier. NI 1 think that all prints should be checked for errors when the permit is issued. N2 I think that anyone with a valid Master License from any town and with four years experience should be allowed to take the Masters' Test, not be given a license, just be allowed to take the test. Likewise 1 feel, anyone with a valid Journeymans License should have at least two years experience. The reason I believe a journeyman applicant should have two years experience is because I cannot think of anyone with less than two years experience who has ever passed our test and because most cities require a four year ap- prenticeship and if you ever go for reciprocity you're going to have to run close to what other cities run. We may even have to up that to four years from two years because I do believe in reciprocity. 1 think these changes should be made because if a person is not qualified I do not think he will I,e able to pass our Journeyman or Master Test and he's just throwing his nrmc,y away. If he wants to give it to the City so be it. I also do not believ(r that this can be called a restriction in trade. 13 I believe in all appeals the electrical contractor on the job Should be required to be present to defend the way the job was done. In many rases the questions which the contractor could answer directly and easily, vie get secondhand answers and heresay information and it's hard to make a decision on these facts. N4 As for suspending a contractors' license or putting a contractor on pro- bation, this should only be done after a formal complaint has been filed by the Department of housing & Inspection Services and a formal meeting has been held with the contractor to show cause why he should not be put on probation MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOVIES W (6) MINUTES BOARD OF ELECTRICAL FXAMINEIRS AND APPEALS (CON'T.) OCTOBER 17, 1979 or suspension. I do riot believe the tloctrical Board should put any contractor on probation or suspension without hearing both sides of the story and having received a formal complaint from the City. These are my thoughts and opinions and no one elses. If the Council, the staff or the Board would like to discuss my ideas further I would be pleased to do so. I believe there are a few problems but most of them can be resolved so that we can get about the business of the Electrical Board which is hearing appeals, testing and interpreting the code. There is no room for petty complaints and politics with the Electrical Board or on the Electrical Board because our reason for being in existance is to insure electrical safety for the citzens of Iowa City. This is the reason I got on the Electrical Board and this is the work I would like to get back to. Thank you. i Mr. Ilynes read a letter dated 10/10/79 to Midwest Electric regarding their work on the Mod Pod Building. He stated that this letter did not represent the Boards motion on this matter and that it should have been a warning, not a reprimand. Mr. Kessler of Midwest Electric spoke to the Board at this time. Mr. Bowers apologized for using the word reprimand instead of warning in his letter. Mr. Berlin noted that when this type of action is required by the Board that a draft of the letter should go to the Chairman rather than a staff member. Mr. Kessler stated that it is really hard to do business in this town with all of this lack of communication. He suggested that the Electrical Inspector ask to see licenses when he is doing his routine inspections of a job. He also referred to a problem he had in June regarding three homes he had wired where occupancy permits were withheld because of the lack of proper GFI. It was later found.that Ralph Taylor, Plumbing Inspector had made these inspections because Mr. Bowers was out of town and Mr. Taylor's GFI tester had been faulty. A discussion followed about who makes electrical or plumbing inspections when qualified inspector is not available. The plan review process was then disru aed. Mr. Kuchar/ak sLaLed that by tradition plans are riot submitted for an electrical pennit but for the Building Permit only and the plans are reviewed for the Building I'enmit only. Mr. Flannery stated that the contractors should be informed of this. Mr. Berlin stated that he thought it would be worthwhile for the Electrical & Plumbing staff to sit down with the Appeals Boards and talk about what the. City's role should be in the plan check process. Mr. Flannery referred to the way fees are changed for electrical permits. Due to inconsistancies between the fees charged for residential arid com- mercial work he suggested that the fees be based on the dollar amount for i all permits. Mr. Berlin stated that this definately needs to be looked into. Mr. Hynes spoke about calls hp had been receiving about problems with the Housing Code. Mr. Balmer stated that the Council is very much aware of these problems and is working to solve therm at this tine. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB I CEDAR RAPIDS -DES h10111ES (7) MINUTES BOARD OF ELECTRICAL EXAMINERS AND APPEALS (CON'T.) OCTOBER 17, 1979 At this time City Manager Berlin listed the items that would be dealt with as a result of this meeting. They are as follows: 1. Send information to Boards regarding preparation of minutes so that in the future minutes will be made out in more detail to make clear what the Boards recouunendations are to the Council. 2. When there are recouunendations from the Board to the City Council, copies of those recommendations as they go to Council will be sent to the Board at the same time they go to Council. 3. The whole question of the role of the licensed journeyman on the job. There is to be a meeting in the near future with the Board and the staff to talk about whether we're going to change the ordinance or continue with it as it currently is and make sure it is complied with. 4. Someone mentioned that there may be people advertising for electrical work who aren't licensed.- check newspapers. 5. Talked about licensed work where the person who did the work cannot be identified. Discussed the possibility of filing against the home- owner. 6. Talked about licensing procedure - possibility of an independent party executing exams. 7. Talked about the follow-up letter requested by the Board, this letter will be signed by the chairman. 8. Sometime in the future the staff and the Board will discuss with some of the other Boards, the whole question of fees. One of the issues being apartments. Mr. Berlin asked if there was any further discussion on these. Mr. Hynes asked to mention a memo coming from the Department supporting the action taken against someone that sometimes these memos do no accurately reflect the position of the Board. Specifically the one about the E & 5 appeal of the triple fees. In that merry from Glenn Siders to Michael Y.ucharzak it states that Paul Bowers met with Mr. Engle and his forman on the job. This bothered the Board. Further discussion follows concerning the statement made. by Hynes about the memo not accurately reflecting the position of the Board. Mr. Kessler stated that he sometimes has a problem getting services r0 c"o.nd. Mr. Bowers said that because he has to speak to different people at Iowa - Illinois, that sometimes these releases are lost. Mr. Y,ucharzak suggested that now that he is aware that the problem is continuing, that forms for the release will be changed to a duplicate form one of which will be sent to the contractor. Mr. Flannery made a motion to issue a new letter to Mr. Kessler and change MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES (8) MINUTES BOARD OF ELECTRICAL EXAMINERS AND APPEALS (CON -T.) OCTOBER 17, 1979 the word "reprimand" to "warning" and strike the words "warning to you about your job performance on the above mentioned address." In addition, leave in the letter that "you are being warned because you did not call for the required rough -in inspection," also leave in the last part referring to Midwest being the electrician on the job and being responsible. All were in favor and the motion passed. Mr. Berlin thanked the Board for meeting with him and expressed his desire to meet again in the near future for follow-up. Ile requested that the Board members feel free to call him or Mr. Kucharzak with any concerns that may arise. Mr. Turner requested that as the new chairman he would like any mail ad- dressed to him to come to him first. Mr. Hynes suggested that the Board call an informal meeting to talk to contractors and receive their concerns and input. Mr. Flannery/made a motion' to adjourn, Tuner seconded, all in favor. SUBMITTED BY: APPROVED BY—Gz MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MOINES BOARD MINUM UNITED ACTION FOR YOUTH SEPMMER 19, 1979 7:00 P.M. M03EM PRESENT: BSelma Connors, Amy Ranard, Judy Kelley, Al Bohanan, Dennis Hedges, Paul Me Cue, Hanna Hierholzer, Ttary Larew, Neal Morris MUMUS ABSENT: Tan Conway, Jeff Schabilion, Roberta Patrick STAFF PRFSEC: Craig Wunderlich, Patty Fugate, Peg Mc Elroy, Marcie Rosenbaum In the absence of the secretary, 1. blarY Larew was appointed to take minutes. Marcie Rosenbaum announced to the Board that a Young Arts is to be held at Governor Lucas Square on Sunday, SepteFestival mber 23 from 12:00 noon to 6:00 p.m. which will include live music, pottery making demonstration, weaving and art tables. The board members were invited to attend. It was announced that Marcie has become an outreach aide again along With Ethan Fox. 2. Minutes from the July meeting were approved, also the June service report and sone budget problems were discussed. Pirmarily the cash flow problem which resulted when the City contract was not signed until September. the Suggestiooccurencen The financialwas made that the reportsefro Julyaandd August were eliminate this 3 August were approved. Peg Mc Elroy discussed the Director's report in Jim's absence. A peer counseling training session is due to be held on October 15 teaching listening skills and paraphrasing. This is underwritten by the Dept. of Public Instruction. One of the recommendations of the State Crime Cenmission in connection with the LEAA funding is an on site evaluation which is being discussed. The July and August Director's reports were unanimously approved. 4. As head of the Personnel Committee Neal Morris discussed the new job de- scriptions pertaining to the Secretary, Office Aide, Studio Assistant Positions. The position of Jim Elnisky as administrative head of Syn- thesis was clarified an,i the appointment of Chuck Hollister and Sonny Lott as studio assistants was discussed. The position of Secretis -being advertised for 20 hours per week. ary Peg He Elroy asked that her position be changed to that of Assistant Director rather than Office Manager. A lengthy discussion ensued in which Amy Ranard and Mary Larew questioned the addition of a new position to the staff. Peg explained that in light of her talents in grant writing tthelce�er unting, she was in atalitone. 7bere was somecmisunderssttand ngnaasttosthehiobexas actpdivision Of Peg's job. As head of the Personnel Committee Neal endorsed the change. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES !IOIIiES Neal asked that the Board accept the job description as stated with the exact title to bo—,Lrnished later by the Personnr'- Ommittee The Board voted unanimously .a do so. 5. The Boared members discussed the best times for meetings in the future. '!here seerd to be no particulr time that was good for everyone. October 22 Monday at 7:00 will be the next meeting. Mary will bring refreshments. 6. The Board passed unanimously the United Way fund request after looking at the proposed budget for 1979 and 1980. 7. Peg gave a short discussion on the audit report from Greenwood and Crim There were three points that they suggested for improvement in accountin procedures. 1. the use of time cards by staff 2. The person who signs the checks should not reconcile the bank statements 3. accrued sick leave should be shown in the budget The audit was approved by the Board unanimously. 8. Peg discussed the new bookkeeping mr:thod known as Safeguard. This type of entry can eventually be adapted to computerization. A discussion ensued on the advantages of computerization of the UAY accounts. No motion was made at this time. 9. The Membership Committee Chairperson, bfary Larew discussed the fact that there was some question concerning criteria standards of Board members. Al stated that the selection of Board members was exclusive to the Board and that since no one on the Board objected to the present policy we would continue using the good judgement of the Board members as the only prerequisite to a persone being nominated. The Board tabled any further action on this matter. Mary reminded Al that the City of Iowa City has not appointed another member to the Board to represent their interests. Al agreed to write a letter to Neil Berlin concerning this matter. Hanna Hierholzer announced that she will remain on the Board for an indefinite period contrary to a prior announcemnet that she might have to quit. 10. The possibility of moving the Synthesis studio to the fourth floor of the Paul Helen building was discussed. The Johnson County Community Arts Center will be located there and we would be in a centralized area. There were various queotions concerning the attitude the young people would have being in such a structured atmosphere, would the noise level of the youth be prohibitive to enjoyment on the part of others. The Board discussed the possibility of having Synthesis absorbed by some other ccnmmity organizations. Hopefully at the next meeting Imre information will be available. The Board adjourned at 9:00 p.m. Respectfully submitted, +, 1Y , Mary L. Larew for the Board Secretary MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES /� 11 J� MINUTES RIVERFRONT COMMISSION OCTOBER 24, 1979 -- 7:30 P.M. CITY MANAGER'S CONFERENCE ROOM MEMBERS PRESENT: Gilpin, Knight, Vetter, Fountain, Baker, Fahr, Kroeze. MEMBERS ABSENT: Sokol, Berry, Neuzil, Boutelle STAFF PRESENT: Milkman, Schmeiser. GUESTS: Cathy Carlyle (KXIC/KICG),Loren Horton (CCN), Clyde Hanson, K. Thayalan, Colleen Carr (U. of I. Urban & Regional Planning). SUMMARY OF DISCUSSION.: Chairman Gilpin called the meeting to order and called for approval of the minutes for October 3, 1979. There being no corrections, the min- utes were approved as written. Boat Ramp: Milkman reported that the Memorandum of Understanding between the Airport Commission and the City had been signed by both parties, and that work was proceeding on final designs and permit applications. Gilpin recom- mended the installation of a sign at Sturgis Ferry Park denoting the site of the future boat ramp. Vacancies on Co�mnission: Gilpin noted that the terms for Knight, Fahr and Neuzil expire Decem- her 1, and that Commission members should encourage interested Persons to fill these vacancies. New appointments will be made by City Council on November 27. i bikeway Reoort: Milkman distributed the draft Bikeways Report and Plan for discussion at the next meeting. River Corridor overlay Zone: Gilpin read the recommendations in the Stanley, Iowa River Corridor Study Phase II, for regulations on land use in the corridor, and re- minded Commission members that the ordinance was intended to implement these recommendations. The Commission the Schmeiser explained that uthe dordinance thad dintentionally inance in ebeenamade as restrictive as possible. Commission members felt that the site plan requirements for single -family dwellings were excessive, and suggested requiring detailed "Plot Plans" instead. r' adb,55 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES -2- A number of changes, deletions and additions in the ordinance were recommended; these are on file with Don Schmeiser in the Department of Planning and Program Development, The Commission recommended for- warding the ordinance with the approved changes to the Planning and Zoning Commission. Next Meeting: The date for the next Riverfront Commission meeting was set for TUESDAY, Room. NOVEMDER 13, 1979, at 7:30 P.M. in the Engineering Conference There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned. Prepared by 14arianne Milkman ti Planner/Program Analyst MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 140111ES i i i. i j i 1 ' I I I ' 1 i 1 i 1 I f I i l I. 1 -2- A number of changes, deletions and additions in the ordinance were recommended; these are on file with Don Schmeiser in the Department of Planning and Program Development, The Commission recommended for- warding the ordinance with the approved changes to the Planning and Zoning Commission. Next Meeting: The date for the next Riverfront Commission meeting was set for TUESDAY, Room. NOVEMDER 13, 1979, at 7:30 P.M. in the Engineering Conference There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned. Prepared by 14arianne Milkman ti Planner/Program Analyst MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 140111ES i ., i II I r! r MINUTES IOWA CITY HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION October 22, 1979 7:30 p.m. CITY MANAGER'S CONFERENCE ROOM MEMBERS PRESENT: Braverman, Costantino, Kuhn, Marcus, McCartt, McGuire, Munzenmaier. MEMBERS ABSENT: Reyes, Yates. STAFF PRESENT: Brown, Mejia, Ryan, Zukrowski. VISITORS: Nancy, Bruce, KXIC; Loretta Beady. RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE CITY COUNCIL: None. RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE CITY MANAGER AND STAFF: Commissioners requested Pat Brown to supply a report on employment of females by department and by occupational title for next month's meeting. Also request- ed that more agenda items be mailed ahead of time to allow commissioners time to study them before the meeting. SUMMARY OF RELEVANT DISCUSSION: I. The October 22, 1979 meeting was called to order at 7:30 p.m. by Chairman Braverman. 2. Steve Munzenmaier noted a correction in the September 4, 1979 minutes. In item H8 Munzenmaier abstained, not Yates. Motion was made by Kuhn and seconded by McCartt to accept the minutes from July 23, July 25, September 4 and September 24 with the above noted correction. Motion passed unanimously. 3. Annual Report. Comments to be received at next meeting. 4. City as a Model Employer. The employment statistics for the years 1973- 1978 were discussed. It was explained that the Human Relations Department is in the process of working with department managers in an attempt to sensatize them to female employees in non-traditional roles or professional roles. The goal is to increase female and minority employment so that it j is representative. Another primary goal is the adaptation of uniform quidv- lines on selection and validated test procedures. 5• Reuse of Applicant Pool. If an applicant pool does not, have women, rninori0f:-, and white males in it, we will not reuse. The Human Relation; Department is in the process of implementing this. Within the termination interview we are seeking the reason for the recent high turnover within city emplgyer;,. There is the possibility of having an intern review these statistics to see what the reasons for termination are. The Commissioners requester) a list of the numbers of females by occupational title and by departrnnnt for discussion at next month's meeting. aola� - -- MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES Inwa City Human Rights Commission Minutes October 22, 1979 Page 2 6. Affirmative Action. The Human Relations Department now has the responsibility of reviewing the budget in terms of affirmative action compliance. The question of human rights training within the City was discussed. Eventually the responsibility should be taken from the Human Relations Department and built in to each department. It must also be a permanent plan. The new Personnel form (DP102) has information on it which will help to monitor affirmative action. 7. Fire Affirmative Action Plan. Suggestion was. made to change the wording at the beginning of the pledge to read "unless that disability relates to job performance." The Apprenticeship Training Program which is certified by the Department of Labor was explained. Firefighters start at the entry level (apprentice) and when they have completed the program they are at the journey level (takes two years). Entry into this program is on a voluntary basis. Civil Service recently passed a policy which states that if a Fire Fighter or Policeman voluntarily quits he/she may be reinstated within one year without retesting. This may help the affirmative action program. Kirkwood was contacted regarding setting up a course focusing on the skills necessary to pass the physical test to get Pole on the Kirkwood is interested in this idea. June Higdon wil program. I meet rwith eothert area personnel managers to see if they have any interest in this type of requested that all tests would be validated before undertaking Skills Workshop. Is day workshop sponsored by WRAC. Linda McGuire this workshop. She is afraid we would be discouraging women in they a program and found out that it was not job related. completed Brochure. Sophie Zukrowski is working on a brochure with members of the Fire Department. 8. Affirmative Action Compliance Analyst. Commissioners felt the job descrip- tion might be too limiting in the Education and Experience area. In order to get specific enough it was suggested we used the words "required" theand elwork eemphasison knowledge and abilitiesintheweducationrequirements. 9. DOT Section 504 Handicapped Regs. Sophie sent a letter to Barry Hokanson regarding the Regs. We have met the handicapped obligations of October 1 and more obligations will have to be met on January 1. 10. A.D.E.A. Sophie wrote a memo to Pat Brown interpreting changes in the benefit plans at the state and federal level. She will use these changes to bring out life and health insurance up to date, A letter was also sent to Thomas Mann regarding irregularities at the state level. Currently awaiting a reply. 17. Nepotism. City has a policy of not hiring relativP.s. However, 1ora1 ordinance prohibits discrimination on the basis of marital status. Thr. nepotism question we are attaching to the application will be remnvr..-d before the application is sent to the department provided the. Human MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MINES Iowa City Human Rights Commission Minutes October 22, 1979 Page 3 Relations Department has determined that no problem exists (such as one spouse supervising the other). Further discussion on (1) nepotism, (2) no spouse rule, and (3) job description will be included on next month's agenda. 12. Woodfields. Since the judge has not ruled Angie Ryan suggested that it would be better to wait for this discussion. It will be put on the agenda for next month. 13. Training Session for Commissioners. Costantino moved and McGuire seconded that the training session take place in January or later with the new commissioners. Motion carried with Marcus, McCartt, McGuire and Costantino voting yes; Braverman, Kuhn and Mun enmaier voting no. 13. Civil Service Commission Meeting. Short discussion of Commission proceedings 14. Outreach Efforts. Discussed the possibility of having the commissioners go into the community and the high schools to discuss non traditional jobs. It was suggested we compile the statistics of employment availability within the city. 14. Appeal Meetings by Complainant. A situation occurred where the complainant wanted to bring a supervisor and the respondant wanted to have a representative there. It was suggested that this not be allowed because there is a potential conflict with the open meetings rule and it is also better to try to avoid polarizing the parties prior to conciliation. IS. Iowa Advisory Committee to U.S. Commission on Civil Rights. Tama situation Discrimination complaints are often filed but no further evidence is ever provided upon request. This situation is in investigation. 16. EEOC. Iowa complaints formerly were docketed in St. Louis, however, they will now be in Milwaukee. 17. Education Subcommittee. Presently in limbo, awaiting open house. Open House. Looking at a longer time frame(1 year). January 1 deadline for letter of intent to write grant. Looking at three aspects: (1) keynote speaker in human relations, (2) cultural diversity, arts, music, dance, poetry and (3) direct input by commissioners during these events. Possibly could have, small group workshops- would appreciate topic ideas from commissioners. Ordinance Revision. Braverman appointed Munzenmaier to this committee. Mrfuire. sent letter to Thomas Mann asking for state help and letter to Angie asking for help in this project. Memo from Angie on jurisdiction at the University and memo on human rights ordinance to be discussed next month. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES Mo RIES . . I Iowa City Human Rights Commission Minutes October 22, 1979 Page 4 Baseball team. Letter written and will be mailed. Compliance Monitoring Guide. Purpose is to develop a resource for the commissioners to provide consistency and case file documentation. Copies of information will be made and sent to commissioners and will be discussed at next month's meeting. Affirmative Action - Chamber of Commerce. Letter will be sent, Marcus will serve as representative. 18. Staff Report. It was requested that more items be mailed to commissioners so they could be studied before each meeting. Letter to Vernon Burroughs was discussed as a case of "problem solving." 19. Complaints. Letter from Colleen Jones thanking commission for action on Woodfiele',; letter from Maxine McIntosh thanking commission for doing the best thc'could in her situation. E/R 12-22-7810. No report HR 2-15-7901. Last date of appeal October 24. PAR 2-15-7901. Conciliation team met 10/11/79. E/Re 2-15-7901. Waiting on green card - has 10 days after that to appeal. E/R 2-15-7902. Meeting to be held in light of Angie's memo. E/S 3-27-7903. Parties are reaching settlement. E/S 3-27-7903. To be reviewed with Mace and Angie. E/S 5-2-7905. To be reviewed with Mace and Angie. PA/R 5-7-7902. Awaiting appeal. E/R 7-10-7906, E/R 7-1.0-7907, H/D 7-23-7902, E/Re 9-13-7908, E/R 9-18-7909, all are in investigation. 20. Test Situations. Sophie asked commissioners for the names of reliable testers Courts have viewed testing as other than an entrapment technique. 21. Next Commission meeting, November 26, 1979. A 7:00 p.m. time was suggested. McCartt moved and Kuhn seconded that the meeting be adjourned. Meeting adjourned at 10:35 p.m. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES 7 MI NUTHS IOWA CI'T'Y PLANNING 1; ZONING CONNISSION SPHCIAL Mlili'I'ING Y OCI'OBI:R 22, 1979 -- 7:30 P.M. LAW LIBRARY MEMBERS PRINNT: Ogesen, .lakobsen, Blinn, Lehman, Lundquist MEMBERS ABSENT: Kammermoyer, Vetter S'I'AIT PRI:SI:N'I': Schmeiser The Commission held a special meeting to review the new proposed zoning ordinance and in particular, the PD -II (Planned Development Ilousing) Zona Schmeiser explained the various aspects of the zone and the Commission discussed the overall concept. Revisions and additional requirements suggested by the Commission are on file with Don Schmeiser of the Department of Planning and Program Development. With no further business, the meeting was adjourned. Prepared I MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES 140INES I �i 1 . i f� i 1 L i MEMBERS PRINNT: Ogesen, .lakobsen, Blinn, Lehman, Lundquist MEMBERS ABSENT: Kammermoyer, Vetter S'I'AIT PRI:SI:N'I': Schmeiser The Commission held a special meeting to review the new proposed zoning ordinance and in particular, the PD -II (Planned Development Ilousing) Zona Schmeiser explained the various aspects of the zone and the Commission discussed the overall concept. Revisions and additional requirements suggested by the Commission are on file with Don Schmeiser of the Department of Planning and Program Development. With no further business, the meeting was adjourned. Prepared I MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES 140INES MINUTES RESOURCES CONSERVATION COMMISSION OCTOBER 9, 1979 4:30 PM CIVIC CENTER CONFERENCE ROOM MEMBERS PRESENT: Denniger, tmezano, Shepherd, Singer. Hotka and Stager arrived at 4:45 PM. STAFF PRESENT: Steinbach, Tinklenberg RECOMMENDATIONS TO CITY COUNCIL The Resources Conservation Commission recommended to the City Council that: 1. The wording of the storm door and window provision in the Code is effective as written. There are no loopholes. i 2. The alternatives which would satisfy the Code must have an R value of 1.5625 or more (or an U value = .64) which is the thermal resistance value of a double hung casement window with a storm window and an air infiltration rate equal to or less than a double hung casement window with a istorm window. 3. Storm doors and windows are cost effective most of the time, but probably not all of the time. Storm doors and windows are always energy effective. The determination of cost effectiveness can only be done on a case-by-case basis. 4. Staffinember Tinklenberg's report to the Housing Board of Appeals is accurate except for the infiltration rate of metal clad insulated doors which Chairperson Denniger is assigned to verify. SUMMARY OF DISCUSSION AND FORMAL ACTIONS TAKEN i Shepherd moved, Singer seconded, to table the approval of the minutes of the July 10, 1979, meeting until later in the meeting i' when more of the existing members would be present. Approved unanimously. i ` Housing Code Storm Door and Window Requirements Denniger summarized the situation and had Tinklenberg read the section of the Code in question. Dealing first with the question of equivalency, the RCC looked at some of the various alternatives available. Twp aspects must be looked at in each case: conduction of heat through the doors and windows and infiltration of air through the crack around the doors and MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 140111ES I mlt RESOURCES CON.._,NATION COMMISSION October 9, 1979 Page 2 windows. Additional caulking and weatherstripping handles only one-half of the equivalency. Anything that has an overall U value and an infiltration rate equal to that of a double hung casement window with a storm window -those two items in conjunction -would create equivalency. Equivalency should be based on an R value or U value equivalent to a double hung casement window with a tight fitting storm window. Stager moved, Shepherd seconded, that the Resources Conservation Commission recommend that any alternatives must have an R value of 1.5625 or more (or U value = .64) and an infiltration rate equal to or less than a double hung casement window with a storm window. Approved unanimously. Another question dealt with was: Are storm doors and windows or insultating doors and windows cost effective? Denniger felt that this question was answered very well by Tinklenberg's report, given the information available to him. Hotka disagreed. He stated that apartments are much more efficient than single family homes and that the percentage savings indicated appears too great to be realistic. It was pointed out that what was used was the degree days and the calculated current infiltration rate and resistance of the doors and windows compared to what the infiltration rate and thermal resistance would be with the addition of storm doors and windows. Another criticism was that the rate of return does not benefit the owners who are bearing the cost of installing the storms. Tinklenberg replied that while that was true in this case, the analysis has to be done in that way because in the case of the single family home owner there is that direct relationship between cost and payback. In this case, there is an indirect relationship in that the owners will increase the rent to cover the cost. However, he hoped that the increase in rent would not be too much so that the reduction in fuel use could compensate for the increased rent, leaving the additional benefit of increased comfort. Hotka also felt that the fuel escalation rate used was too high. He felt that a 15% increase for the short term is correct, but that the trend would not hold for the next 15 years. However, he had no suggestion as to a long term escalation rate to use. Tinklenberg based the 15% per year escalation rate on past RCC discussions of fuel cost escalation rates and the natural gas escalation for the last several years. Tinklenberg will attempt to verify the escalation rate by other sources. In conclusion, the Commission agreed that storm doors and windows are cost effective most of the time. However, possibly not every time. That question would have to be answered on a case-by-case basis. They pointed out that storm doors and windows are always energy effective. FIILROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOIDES �•K RESOURCES CON. ,VATION COMMISSION October 9, 1979 Page 3 Regarding the wording of the Code, the Commission discussed whether exceptions for hardship cases should be incorporated into the Code or not and decided that is totally unrealistic. Also the Code, as a whole, provides for hardship cases and no provision should be made in individual clauses. Is the wording of the Code effective? Yes, very effective. There are no loopholes. Is the report accurate? (See discussion under question of whether storm doors and windows are cost effective.) Hotka Pointed out that the infiltration rate used for the new metal doors was less than the rate used for the old wooden doors. Tinklenberg acknowledged that that was one figure he was not sure of. Denniger stated that he would check on the infiltration rate for metal clad doors in the ASHRAE Handbook of Fundamentals. — Shepherd moved, Stager seconded, that the RCC accept Tinklenberg's report as accurate with the provision that Denniger check what the rate of infiltration is for metal clad insultated doors. Approved unanimously. Shepherd moved, Hotka seconded, that the RCC not comment further on the wording of the Code at this time and that it be put on the agenda of the next meeting for discussion at that time. After discussion, the motion and the second were withdrawn. Shepherd moved, Hotka seconded, that the RCC recommend to the City Council that the stormdoor and window provision in the Code is an effective one as written, and that there are alternatives which will satisfy the Code. Motion passed; 5 ayes, 1 abstention. The Commissioners decided to review the entire Code as it applies to energy conservation at the next meeting. Senior Center Preliminary Plan Review Stager moved, Shepherd seconded, to table the review of the plans until the next meeting when a more complete set of plans will be available. Approved unanimously. Pilot Solar Demonstration Project Gormezano moved, Stager seconded, to add "/or" after "and" to make the definition of "family" read: "Family. The applicant's family includes the applicant and/or any other person or persons related by blood, marriage, or operation of law, who share the same dwelling unit. A family may also be two, but not more than two persons, not related by blood, marriage, or operation of law." Approved unanimously. FIICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOInES RESOURCES CONSL.,VATION COMMISSION October 9, 1979 Page 4 Tinklenberg reported that there are currently three active applicants -the rest of the people who inquired were not qualified for one reason or another. The necessary carry-over of funds in the CDBG budget will not occur until next April, however, the CDBG Program Coordinator has indicated that the project can proceed. Tinklenberg also raised the question of having a technical engineering review of the bids and proposals. The RCC felt that the decision to have a technical review should wait until the number of bids and proposals is known so that a firm price can be determined. Denniger asked that the RCC review the applications at the next meeting. Denni ger turned the meeting over to Hotka and left at 6:30 PM. RCC Goals and Objectives I The Commissioners decided to postpone this item until the next meeting and that each member would bring their priorities to the next meeting. Election of Officers Stager moved, Singer seconded, to table the election of officers until the meeting of October 25. Approved unanimously. Other Business Stager moved, Singer seconded, that the RCC temporarily meet on Thursday, October 25 rather than Tuesday, October 23. Approved unanimously. j - Gormezano moved, Stager seconded, that the RCC hold a special meeting on Thursday, October 18, to specifically review the Housing Code. Motion passed; 4 ayes, 1 abstention. - Street lighting. Gormezano raised the issue of street lighting. It was agreed that this should be dealt with at the next regular meeting. Singer reported on the Alternatives Fair where Shepherd and he had "manned" a table for the RCC and proposed some additional ideas for public outreach, e.g. an energy workshop for school children. - Hotka reported that there would be a Kurtz lecture on coal gassification at 4:00 on October 18 at the University. Therefore, the Commissioners decided to hold their special meeting at 5:15 PM on the 18th. I I' MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES HOMES a W k n RESOURCES CONa_VATION COMMISSION October 9, 1979 Page 5 - Tinklenberg informed the Commissioners that Free Environment is sponsoring a day -long conference on Earth Sheltered Homes on October 27, to be conducted by the Underenter om the whiichgisund one oface theCfoemostrcente s regardingyof earth Msheltered housing in the nation. The cost is $20 if you register prior to October 21. The Commissioners decided to have someone report on the conference to them. - Tinklenberg also distributed the new bikeways plan. - Tinklenberg informed the RCC that he has an intern paid by East Central Iowa COG who is working on the new zoning ordinance from an energy conservation standpoint. After the Zoning Ordinance is completed, he will be working on the new Subdivision Ordinance to do the same thing with it. - Tinklenberg also reported that DOE is soliciting comments on federal regulations which commenters believe might create impediments to the use of renewable energy resources. The Commissioners requested a copy of the notice. The meeting adjourned at 7:15 PM. Respectfully submitted, Roger Tinklenberg. Ira Bolnick, Secretary. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOVIES MINUTES RESOURCES CONSERVATION COMMISSION OCTOBER 18, 1979 4:30 PM CIVIC CENTER CONFERENCE ROOM MEMBERS PRESENT: Bolnick, Gormezano, Hotka, Shepherd, Singer. STAFF PRESENT: Tinklenberg. SUMMARY OF DISCUSSION AND FORMAL ACTIONS TAKEN Vice -Chairperson Hotka called the meeting to order. Gormezano moved, Singer seconded, that the RCC approve the minutes of the July 10 meeting. Approved unanimously. Singer moved, Bolnick seconded, that the RCC approve the minutes of the October 9 meeting. Approved unanimously. Election of Officers i Bolnick moved, Singer seconded, that the RCC conduct the election of officers at this meeting. Approved unanimous) y. moved, f Singer seconded, that the RCC accept nominations for lthekofficer Positions. Approved unanimously. iBolnick nominated Philip Hotka for Chairperson. Singer seconded that nomination. I Bolnick nominated Keith Gormezano for Vice -Chairperson. Singer seconded that nomination. Gormezano nominated James Shepherd for Secretary. Singer seconded that nomination. Bolnick moved, Singer seconded, that the RCC vote on all three i offices at once by acclimation. Approved unanimously. The new Resources Conservation Commission officers are Philip Hotka, Chairperson; Keith Gormezano, Vice -Chairperson; and James Shepherd, j Secretary. Housing i There was a question concerning Section 9.30.5. C. "More than One Structure Per Lot The RCC questioned whether this section has I legal ramifiwalcations for solar access or bars garden homes (homes with )• The RCC requested that the Legal Staff look at this question. The RCC also requested that Steve Carter, the intern working on solar access provisions for the new Zoning Ordinance, attend the next regular meeting, after the one on Octo6Qr 25, to discuss solar r access. ae6� MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 1401NES i Resources Cor�vation Commission October 18, 19/9 Page 2 ' The RCC also would like more information concerning the Iowa State University experimental house and the experimental passive solar home in Iowa City. Hotka noted that there was no provision in the Housing Code regarding utility doors. It is a common practice in apartment units to have a separate room for the water heater and furnace which has openings directly to the outside for combustion air. The door leading to the utility room is generally unsealed allowing cold air to pass directly through to the utility room into the apartment. After discussion it was decided to refer the question of whether thresholds and weather stripping should be required on utility doors to the Housing Inspection staff. Another question for the Housing Inspection staff was whether the section regarding storm doors and windows applied complexes with an inner hallway. The PP to apartment - Y• question was whether the entrance door and the individual apartment doors satisfied the storm door criteria or not. Other Business The RCC asked Tinklenberg to make a report on the Earth Shelter Homes seminar which he was planning on attending on October 27. i October 25 agenda items: -Street lighting. -Children's energy fair. The meeting adjourned at 6:30 PM. Respectfully submitted, Roger Tinklenberg. James Shepherd, Secretary. 1 I I I � i i 'I MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB ' CEDAR RAPIDS•DES I401-11ES i I MINUTES HOUSING APPEALS BOARD October 11, 1979 - 8:00 AM MEMBERS PRESENT: Dennis, Klaus, Smithey, Owens, VanderZee STAFF PRESENT: Cook, Steinbach, Vezina, Malone, Kuebler OTHERS PRESENT: John T. Nolan, Donald Griffin, Robert Fox, Dick Breazeale, Jim Calkins, Jill Smith ACTIONS OF THE BOARD Chairperson Klaus asked for corrections or additions to the minutes. Smithey moved, Dennis seconded, that the minutes of the September 27 meeting be approved as written. Minutes were approved by unanimous vote. Chairperson Klaus asked for discussion of the proposed bylaws to the Appeals Board. Steinbach stated specific changes to the previous bylaws which were proposed due to questions which had arisen at Housing Appeals Board meetings. Applicable changes were drafted using language taken from the bylaws of the Housing Commission and the City's Housing Code. Dennis moved, Smithey seconded, that the bylaws be adopted as written. First reading of the bylaws was approved by unanimous vote. BOARD TO CONSIDER THE CASE OF JOHN T. NOLAN - 424 E. DAVENPORT Chairperson Klaus swore in those who would testify. Steinbach stated that Inspector Vezina had conducted an inspection on July'24, 1979. He then prepared a notice of violation which was received by Mr. Nolan on August 8, 1979. On August 13, 1979, the City Clerk received a request for a hearing before the Housing Appeals Board; therefore, the request was properly filed. Inspector Vezina asked Mr. Nolan whether he was, in fact, appealing all the violations listed on the notice of violation. Mr. Nolan replied that he had been previously aware of some of the deficiencies at this residence and had already made arrangements to make corrections. He stated that many of the violations had already been corrected and that his major concern was in regard to not being notified that his property was going to be inspected. Mr. Nolan further noted that two years ago he had a contractor do work for him and at that time he was told by the contractor that his property was in compliance with all applicable city codes. He voiced his concerns in regards to quality of inspections performed by different inspectors. He felt that this property had been in compliance two years ago, that it seemed unfair at this point that he was not operating in compliance with the City laws and that due to the changes in inspectors and codes, it was unjust to 0964 ,r.._ ... - I.,_.,,,__ MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB 1 CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES L MINUTES HOUSING APPEALS BOARD October 11, 1979 - 8:00 AM MEMBERS PRESENT: Dennis, Klaus, Smithey, Owens, VanderZee STAFF PRESENT: Cook, Steinbach, Vezina, Malone, Kuebler OTHERS PRESENT: John T. Nolan, Donald Griffin, Robert Fox, Dick Breazeale, Jim Calkins, Jill Smith ACTIONS OF THE BOARD Chairperson Klaus asked for corrections or additions to the minutes. Smithey moved, Dennis seconded, that the minutes of the September 27 meeting be approved as written. Minutes were approved by unanimous vote. Chairperson Klaus asked for discussion of the proposed bylaws to the Appeals Board. Steinbach stated specific changes to the previous bylaws which were proposed due to questions which had arisen at Housing Appeals Board meetings. Applicable changes were drafted using language taken from the bylaws of the Housing Commission and the City's Housing Code. Dennis moved, Smithey seconded, that the bylaws be adopted as written. First reading of the bylaws was approved by unanimous vote. BOARD TO CONSIDER THE CASE OF JOHN T. NOLAN - 424 E. DAVENPORT Chairperson Klaus swore in those who would testify. Steinbach stated that Inspector Vezina had conducted an inspection on July'24, 1979. He then prepared a notice of violation which was received by Mr. Nolan on August 8, 1979. On August 13, 1979, the City Clerk received a request for a hearing before the Housing Appeals Board; therefore, the request was properly filed. Inspector Vezina asked Mr. Nolan whether he was, in fact, appealing all the violations listed on the notice of violation. Mr. Nolan replied that he had been previously aware of some of the deficiencies at this residence and had already made arrangements to make corrections. He stated that many of the violations had already been corrected and that his major concern was in regard to not being notified that his property was going to be inspected. Mr. Nolan further noted that two years ago he had a contractor do work for him and at that time he was told by the contractor that his property was in compliance with all applicable city codes. He voiced his concerns in regards to quality of inspections performed by different inspectors. He felt that this property had been in compliance two years ago, that it seemed unfair at this point that he was not operating in compliance with the City laws and that due to the changes in inspectors and codes, it was unjust to 0964 ,r.._ ... - I.,_.,,,__ MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB 1 CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES Housing Appeals and October 11, 1979 Page 2 cite an owner for these violations since corrections had been made in the past. Inspector Vezina stated that on July 16 he had contacted Mr. Nolan's secretary and requested that Mr. Nolan return his call. This request was not responded to and on July 20 Inspector Vezina again called and spoke to Mr. Nolan's secretary, who stated that she had presented Inspector Vezina's request to Mr. Nolan and that he had given permission, through her, for him to inspect the property. Vezina further stated that he had also contacted all the tenants prior to the inspection and received their permission to conduct such an inspection. Mr. Nolan stated that he was unaware that his secretary had given his permission and would contact her for concurrence. Inspector Vezina stated that Mr. Nolan's previous permit for this property had expired on December 31, 1978 and that he had not received the file until June, 1979, however, it should be noted that Mr. Nolan had made application for a permit which was accepted by the City on February 28, 1979. Questions arose regarding code changes which went into effect May 19, 1979. Inspector Vezina went to the blackboard and explained and clarified these changes for Mr. Nolan. Inspector Vezina then read through the entire notice of violation and explained the location and reasons for citing all violations listed on the notice. Discussion by the Board and City staff ensued in regards to the following violations. It was noted that #5(b) and #8 had been corrected, and #13, it was agreed, would be referred to the plumbing inspector for further clarification as to the validity of the citation. #16, lack of light in hallway, was discussed and Steinbach requested that even though it had been noted the previous day that the hallway was lit, he was not satisifed that the correction had been completed in a safe manner. 1 Smithey replied that since the violation as written had been corrected, ! he felt it was the Board's duty to look upon that correction as final 3 since the correction had been made in regards to the code section that the citation was written from. He further stated that if it had not 9 been corrected in the proper manner, that a violation may exist under a different code section. Steinbach stated that he was uncomfortable with that interpretation and due to the nature of the violation he would not approve the correction until he felt that it had been done in a safe manner. f Cook asked Steinbach whether he would be willing to withdraw violations #5(b), #8, #13, and #16. He replied that yes, he would be willing to withdraw these specific violations. He further stated that he wished to enter the photographs taken the previous day into the record. The Board approved such a request. VanderZee moved, Smithey seconded, that the notice of violation be upheld as amended. The motion was passed by unanimous vote. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MINES Housing Appeal! ,ard October 11, 197y Page 3 Board took a five minute recess. 22-0- TO CONSIDER THE CASE OF MR. ROBERT FOX - 2220 M- Mr. Fox was sworn in by Chairperson Klaus. I Steinbach stated that this property had originally been i Inspector Vezina and that the property had been helpected by d out nsns the inspector as either a motel or hotel. A notice of violation was issued to Mr. Fox. However, h uent to that Issuance and due toCthe timeu Mr* Fox's appeal itetook tovconductisuchuaneinvestigation, With Mr. fox durrights had expired due to the time. In conversations rights this period, it was agreed by the Senior Inspector that a new notice of violation would be issued to that appeal rights would also be included in that new notice 0fuvix anion. He further stated that the notice of violation beinga Mr. Fox and August 14, which Mr. Fox received on August 20, and a letter requesting appeal was appealed is dated Properly submitted by Mr. Fox and received by the City Clerk on August 28, 1979, i � It was clarified by y Mr. Fox that he was only appealing violations #8 and Clarification as to the apartment numbers listed on the notice of violation was made by Inspector Vezina and Mr. Fox in that there are no apartments i 1 or 2• However, the proper numbers are 3 through 10. The notice of Violation was amended by all to reflect the Inspector Vezina stated that in a Proper numbering. heating units located in the wallsOfsleepingand rooms,tand ethat ethe location of these heating units was in violation of the City Code. units Mr. Fox replied that these heating units were wall -mounted gas fired there whichfwereduse air supplementary heat. He further stated that Inspector Vezina stated that the reason systems within each apartment. i used for combustion is taken fromrthe0sleering code is that the air outside and that the purpose of the code sectionowasrtohno than the oxygen in the sleeping room to be used for that purpose, not allow such With the help of a diagram on the blackboard y unit within the sleeping room was determined and it was shown that the only method of making the correction would be to eductaaishow m tion Of that th ting outdoors into the unit for combustion or disconnect the unit comthe pletely. VanderZee asked Fox for further clarification in regards to whether these units were used as supplementary heat or whether they were used for emergency purposes in case the main heating system were somehow. to malfunction I i MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES 110IIIES I Housing Appeal Card October 11, 197V Page 4 Fox replied that the purpose of the unit could be either supplementary or the primary source of heat in case of a breakdown or in case the main units were not functioning due to not having been turned on for the season. He further stated that the main forced hot air system would keep the unit heated to a temperature of 75 degrees under normal circu- mstances, even if the exterior temperature is down to 0 degrees or below. Vezina stated that in apartments 6, 7, 8 and 9, the ceiling height varied from 6'5's" to 617". He further stated that there are obstructions in these units due to furnace ducting that allows a ceiling height of 5'10" to 5'11". Again, clarification of this violation was made by j using a diagram drawn on the blackboard. Klaus asked when this structure had been built. Fox replied that to the best of his knowledge it had been built sometime in the 1940's. The intent of the question was to determine whether this structure would fall into the grandfather clause regarding ceiling heights. E 1 Smithey moved, Dennis seconded, that violation #8 be upheld as written. 1 Motion made by Smithey was approved by unanimous vote of the board. Dennis moved that violation #11, lack of required ceiling height, not be ! upheld by the board. Motion died due to lack of second. VanderZee moved, Owens seconded, that the notice of violation in regards to #11 be upheld as written. j VanderZee stated that due to the fact that there was a beam running across the middle of the apartment unit at a height of approximately 5'10", he felt that this was a severe enough violation of the code and presented a hazard to the occupants thereof, that it should be upheld by the board. Smithey stated that in the event of a fire, the lack of sufficient ceiling height would cause a danger in regards to the stratification of air and smoke within the apartment. VanderZee's motion to uphold the violation as written was approved by a 3 to 2 vote. Klaus and Dennis voting against the motion. BOARD TO CONSIDER THE CASE OF MR. DONALD GRIFFIN - 320-322 5. JOHNSON a Chairperson Klaus swore in Mr. Griffin and Inspector Malone. Steinbach introduced Jim Calkins and Jill Smith to the Board, due to the F fact that they are prospective buyers of this property and would, in turn, have a vested interest in the outcome of this hearing. These two individuals were sworn in by Chairperson Klaus and invited to sit at the discussion table. Steinbach further stated to theBoard that it should be noted that this notice is a notice of intent to placard rather than a simple notice of violation. r .Y--- --- --- MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOVIES Housing Appeal--4oard October 11, 19. Page 5 Steinbach stated that this property was inspected by Inspector Malone and himself on August 17, 1979. A notice of intent to placard was issued and presented to Mr. Griffin on August 23, 1979. Mr. Griffin's letter requesting an appeal was properly filed in the office of the City Clerk on August 30, 1979. Inspector Malone stated that at time of inspection it was determined by the Senior Housing Inspector and himself that this property was supplied with the facilities and being used as a 3 multiple. VanderZee asked why this property had been inspected. Steinbach replied that he had received several complaints regarding this property and that was the purpose of the inspection. It was noted by Inspector Malone that due to the storage of personal effects and due to the conditions of the inspection, certain violations could have been overlooked during the inspection period. It was noted that at times during the inspection they were up to seven people accompanying the inspector and that it would be possible that some violations could be overlooked due to that reason. Violation #2. a. lack of electrical service, was questioned as a violation by the Board in that Mr. Malone had stated that the electricity had been turned on since the notice of intent to placard had been issued. The Board asked why, if that was the case, the City would ask that the Board would uphold that particular violation. Steinbach explained that it is policy that the City not take any action on any piece of property which has been appealed, and that even if that was the case, he would be uncomfortable in dismissing this violation in connection with this particular hearing. He stated that he had visited the property on October 10, but that visit was only to acquaint himself with violations and gathering information in the form of photographs for the hearing. He stated that an emergency order had been issued to Mr. Griffin in regards to the lack of electrical service and that subsequent to that issuance, Mr. Malone had conducted a reinspection at which time the electrical service had been turned on to the property. Steinbach felt that since these were two different notices to Mr. Griffin that, even though the emergency order had been closed, the violation listed on the notice of intent to placard should be upheld by the Board and at time of reinspection by Inspector Malone, it would then be determined if the correction had been made. The Board felt that if the City was aware the violation no longer existed, that the particular violation should be dismissed by the City during the Appeals Board meeting and that only those violations which were known to continue to exist should be considered at such meeting. Cook stated that it would be up to the discretion of the Housing Division to withdraw a violation at the Appeals Board hearing if they were aware that said violation no longer existed. VanderZee stated that he felt that the Board shouldn't be concerned if a correction had been made, especially if a formal reinspection had not MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOIRES Housing Appeals^iard October 11, 1979 Page 6 been conducted and the Board should simply determine whether the infor- mation gathered by the inspector at the original inspection was valid or not. Smithey stated that since the Senior Housing Inspector had been on the property and was aware that this violation no longer existed, that he felt the City should withdraw the violation so that the Board would not be forced to deal with any violations which no longer existed. Steinbach replied that in the event that he acquainted himself with the property and the applicable inspector was not accompanying him, that he would not be comfortable in withdrawing the violation since it was the inspector's responsibility to conduct the reinspection and approve corrections made regarding the violation. He further stated that since an emergency order had been issued on this property, lack of electrical service, and the fact that Inspector Malone had conducted a reinspection pursuant to that emergency order, he would under these circumstances, { withdraw this violation from this notice of intent to placard for that reason only. i Mr. Griffin stated that the violations on the notice of intent to placard { did, in fact, exist. However, the reason he was appealing this notice ? was that he had received a certificate of compliance in 1978 and had, at that point, contacted then Senior Housing Inspector Bruce Burke to determine the criteria to classify this property as a duplex. He stated that at that time Inspector Burke had approved the use of this dwelling as a duplex. This classification would not require that fire escapes and other specific facilities be installed at this dwelling and that it would not have to be a licensed property. He stated that he, at this point, was living in a basement room at the structure and that the new owner, who would receive possession on November 1, intended to make the necessary repairs in order to comply with the code. Klaus asked for further interpretation of the use and classification of this structure in regards to whether it was a duplex or a multiple dwelling. Malone and Steinbach went to the blackboard and drew a diagram of the dwelling units at 320-322 S. Johnson, stating that there were two dwelling units, one located above the other at 322 S. Johnson, and one dwelling 3 unit at 320 S. Johnson. s Mr. Griffin stated that he was currently living below the two dwelling { 1 units located at 322 S. Johnson. I { Malone clarified the question regarding the addresses of this property, 1 ± in that, there are two addresses pertaining to one structure. It was determined that there were, in fact, three complete kitchens and three complete baths, and that this information did constitute the determination of three complete dwelling units. The Board concurred with the City that at time of inspection this property was being used as a 3 multiple. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB iCEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES Housing Appeal•^-)ard October 11, 19i, Page 7 VanderZee asked about violation d18. Malone replied that this violation was written as not being maintained in sanitary condition. He further stated, to the best of his ability to remember, that the hallway contained bits of mud and dog hair and that was reason he cited it as not being kept in clean and sanitary condition. Klaus asked a question regarding the wood stove in the basement of the north side. The violation stated that the flue from this wood stove did not seal properly into the chimney. She asked that if it was a heating stove and if it was not being used, why was it being cited as a violation. Malone replied that he had been asked to cite it by the Senior Housing Inspector and that since there are different seasons in the year and, of course, a heating stove would not be used year around, that it was cited because if it were going to be used it would, in fact, constitute a hazard and a violation. Further clarifications were made of other violations such as inadequate plumbing and closets which were water stained. However, it was noted that Mr. Griffin was not contesting any of these violations. VanderZee moved that the notice of intent to placard be upheld. Smithey seconded this motion. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES NOIRES Steinbach stated that due to the severity of this notice of intent to placard, that he requested that the Board grant him the discretionary powers to enforce this in notice such a manner that if the property were to change owners, that he would be allowed to grant the new owner a sufficient period of time to make the corrections without placarding the property. He stated that Mr. Calkins had made an appointment with him to discuss such a plan, however, that appointment had been made at the exact time that Mr. Griffin's case was to be heard by the Appeals Board. He had, in turn, invited Jill Smith and Jim Calkins to e the Appeals Board Meeting in order that the Appeals Board could be aware of their plans. Smithey asked for an explanation of the actions of the City in placarding the sl property and what time frame these actions would be under. %+ Steinbach replied that a notice of placard would be sent to the owner in 90 days and 10 days after that a notice to vacate would be issued to all of the tenants, giving them 20 days to vacate the property. Therefore, he stated that the ?i property would have to vacated within a period of 120 days. Jill Smith stated that her intentions were to purchase this property and that she intended to use the property as a duplex. She stated that the more serious violations, of course, would be repaired and corrected first and that within a reasonable time, she would make all of the corrections listed on the notice of intent to placard. VanderZee stated that it was difficult to determine what could happen within the original 90 days period and that if, for reason, the new owners did not have enough time to make the necessary corrections, that they at that time could request another appeal. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES NOIRES . 4 Housing Appeals and October 11, 1979 Page 8 Steinbach stated that it was his understanding that there would not be appeal rights for the new owner since this action was concerning an intent to placard. Steinbach stated that pursuant to departmental policy, if it was founa that corrections had been made which would not pose a danger to other dwelling units and a good faith effort was being made to make all corrections, that he wished the motion to be amended such that extensions of time could be given to the new owner to make necessary corrections without vacating the entire property. VanderZee withdrew his motion. Cook stated that the board has the power to modify the time limit given to make corrections and that, also, the new owner would have appeal rights at time of actual placard. VanderZee stated that in order to simplify matters, would it not be best to have the new owner make application for an appeal to the Senior Housing Inspector, if it was not possible to make corrections within the alloted period of time. Jill Smith stated that it was her intention to request a time extension i on this notice of intent to placard. That request would be that she be given a six month period to make such corrections. ISteinbach stated that, it is his understanding, there were no appeal rights which would be applicable subsequent to the notice of intent to placard. Therefore, the new owners would have no appeal rights. jCook stated that her interpretation of the administrative code was such I that any action to placard this property without extending appeal rights would be done without due process. VanderZee moved that the notice of intent to placard be upheld as written, j with the understanding that the new owner would have appeal rights at time of placarding. Smithey seconded the motion. Motion carried by unanimous vote. Board took a three minute recess. BOARD TO CONSIDER THE CASE OF MR. RICHARD BREAZEALE 630 S. GOVERNOR Mr. Breazeale and Inspector Kuebler were sworn in by Chairperson Klaus Steinbach stated that Inspector Kuebler had conducted an inspection of this property on August 10, 1979. Mr. Breazeale received a notice of violation on August 23, and submitted a letter requesting an appeal on i August 31. Therefore, this request was properly filed. 1 It was clarified that only items N2 and N3 were being appealed by Mr. Breazeale. NICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES MINES MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES 11011JES Housing Appeals and October 11, 1979 Page 9 Inspector Kuebler submitted photographs of the exterior stairway in question and stated that all but one of the listed violations were in regards to this particular stairway. He stated that during the time of his inspection, the handrails of this particular stairway were in violation of the Housing Code. He further stated that Mr. Breazeale had come to the office of the Housing Inspector and requested that Brian reinspect the stairway because it was Mr. Breazeale's feeling that it was not a normal stairway, rather a fire escape. Inspector Kuebler stated he did, in fact, conduct a request reinspection regarding the stairway and determined that the stairway led to a second story door which did not open from the outside and did not have a landing that, in effect, went anywhere. He returned to the office and referred the situation to the Fire Marshal, asking whether it was a policy to accept wooden fire escapes such as this. The Fire Marshal responded that this exit way "could" be a fire escape. Kuebler went on to say that there was an interior stairway for the occupants to use, and that it was his under- standing that the Fire Marshal would approve the construction of the s fire escape. He stated that he considered this stairway to be an ordinary exit way at time of inspection. Mr. Breazeale stated that he too, had conferred with the Fire Marshal and had been informed that due to the age of this structure, it was S policy to accept a wooden fire escape as an adequate means of secondary C egress. Mr. Breazeale stated he felt the policy of inspection had undergone a recent change and that this was the reason this violation had been written. He stated that this was the basis for his appeal and requested that the Appeals Board not uphold the violation as written. It was determined by the Board and the City staff that there was a requirement of secondary egress and that the egress constructed to be used as a secondary means, could be a fire escape. It was further determined that this particular stairway was not used normally as an r exit way and was rarely, if ever, used as a means of ingress. I Cook left the meeting. S Mr. Breazeale stated that he was at odds with the current enforcement of the City Code in regards to handrails and guardrails and that the violation of lack of safety terminals on the interior handrail was confusing. He had not been able to determine what the definition of a safety terminal was up to this point. 3 VanderZee moved, Smithey seconded, that violations N1, N2(b) and #4 would be upheld as written, and that violations N2(a) and N3(a,b,c) not be upheld. Motion as carried unanimously. i 4 j OTHER BUSINESS Steinbach gave explanation to the Board regarding departmental policies in enforcing the Housing Code. He explained the memorandum given to the City Council in regards to State Code changes. Discussion ensued regarding I� the function of appeals boards and the right of said appeals boards to grant variances and exemptions. He further explained to the board that MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS•DES 11011JES Housing Appeal"_�'ard October 11, 1979 Page 10 a tour would be given on Monday, October 15 to the City Council and 7 other interested parties which would consist of investigating several dwelling units that the Housing Division inspects annually. Objections, criticisms, and suggestions of interested parties in regards to enforcement i would be heard at that time. The participation of Appeals Board members in the Council tour was discussed and it was determined that in order not to violate the open meetings law, that not more than two members would attend this tour. Steinbach stated that he had attended the latest meeting of the Resources Conservation Commission and that they had made some determina- tions in regards to acceptable alternatives to the stormwindow and door requirements. He further stated that he would include this decision in the next packet for the Appeals Board members and would schedule the Town & Campus continuance within the very near future. Meeting adjourned. PREPARED BY:� sz�r__-2 1/ APPROVED BY:�L 1 MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES 1 MINUTES IOWA CITY PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION RECREATION CENTER, ROOM B OCTOBER 10, 1979 MEMBERS PRESENT: Crum, Hillman, Humbert, Berry, Boutelle, McLaughlin MEMBERS ABSENT: Thayer, Robertson, Phelps GUESTS PRESENT: Kathy Carlisle (KXIC), Anne Glenister, Mike Moore, Ralph Villhauer RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE CITY COUNCIL 1. That approximately $7,500 be added to the FY '81 Recreation budget for personnel to operate the Children's Museum. SUMMARY OF DISCUSSION AND FORMAL ACTION TAKEN Napoleon Park --Jaycees Mike Moore of the Jaycees was present to discuss the possibility of the Jaycees financing some of the needed capital improvement projects in Napoleon Park. He stated that the Jaycees want to put their money back into Iowa City, and want several yearly projects - Napoleon Park, or other parks. They would probably have $12,000 to $15,000 per year. Also, they need a weekend project for 50 to 75 members to clean up a park area or work on a project. Hillman asked if the Jaycees would be interested in funding the Children's Museum, at a cost of approximately $7,500 for FY '81. Showalter reported that the Jaycees had been furnished a list of six projects with costs, in June, for Napoleon Parka lie stated that what we now need most is four backstops at approximately $2,000 each plus bleachers and players' benches. Moore asked that a Park and Recreation Commission representative come to their board meeting; Crum agreed to go. Little League Baseball Lights Howard Villhauer was present, and asked that one of the Little League diamonds at City Park be lit for the older league, with 180' outfield distance. There are now 800 boys in the program. Probable cost would be $20,000 to $25,000. Showalter asked if there would be two additional games per night on the lighted diamond; Villhauer said probably only one. Showalter noted that it might not be practical to light any more diamonds because of energy considerations and i because there are no plans to light the girls diamonds at Napoleon. Boutelle liked the idea, but wondered where the money would come from, and asked staff to investigate possibilities of one lighted diamond at City or Napoleon with shared use of boys and girls, and to come up with costs. Berry suggested that Howard Villhauer be commended for his long service and leadership to the Little League. Boutelle seconded. Passed unanimous. MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES Minutes, Page 2 October 10, 1979 Boutelle asked staff to investigate multi -use of proposed lights for soccer and other activities. Villhauer thanked Howell and Showalter for the good cooperation of the Park Division for the past few years. BMX Bike Racing Area Showalter announced that the people interested in possibly using a park, area for a youth (ages 6-16) bike racing area had secured a privately owned site, and withdrew their request to appear. i Children's Museum Marilyn Nickelsburg was present to discuss the proposal from the Museum board regarding their involvement, if the City could supply funding for personnel. In answer to questions from several Commission members, Marilyn said she hoped to increase Museum board and member participation and increase membership. The Museum board will complete the trading post. * Hillman moved and Humbert seconded a recommendation that the Children's Museum operation costs of approximately $7,500 be added to the Recreation budget for FY '81. Unanimous. Other Business Crum asked for discussion of possibility of expanding the Farmers Market to be open one weekday night, probably Wednesday. After discussion, it was decided to take this up at the March meeting. Showalter reported that the grant for the Conklin Lane shelter had been filed in August, and that the grant for the Willow Creek tennis courts would be filed in November. Boutelle commented on the bikeways plan, saying that the City needed to do more than just plan. Hillman inquired about status of University fitness trail in regard to proposed location of new arena. There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 9:35 p.m. Res�pe tfully submitted,, Dennis E. Showalter Director of Parks and Recreation MICROFILMED BY JORM MICROLAB CEDAR RAPIDS -DES MOINES