HomeMy WebLinkAbout1997-02-25 Ordinance February 22, 199~ ~1~,~'~ ~f~
Dear Council Member( ~/v- ~'Lkar~,~'
I am writing on behalf of my family and myself to urge you to vote for
the college street historic district. We have been living at 1123 E. College
all of our family life together. Our two boys enjoy playing with other
children in the neighborhood. My husband and I are able to walk to work each
day together and enjoy the close proximity to downtown. This location is
ideal for making use of the College Green Park and downtown shops, without the
burden of a car and consequent parking hassles.
In short, we would like to preserve our way of life and feel that if the
block is taken over by apartment buildings full of college students, our
current life-style would be ruined. We have watched the gradual decline of
the blocks closer to town and regret losing the many stately old homes which
were replaced by apartment buildings. Apartment buildings do not make
neighborhoods; they make temporary housing.
We are in favor of the historic district because we hope it will keep
the neighborhood intact. Most of the owners in our district are in favor (my
husband did the survey here and we have numbers to prove this). The apartment
building that was recently built at the end of our block (Summit and College
St.) has already generated more trash, noise, and light pollution to make us
certain of our beliefs. Although we have nothing against the people living
there, we know that this high concentration of humans produces pollution of
all sorts and no one individual living there seems to feel responsible for the
state of the place; therefore, litter collects around the place and loud noise
issues unstopped. Lights blare all night long. We deeply regret the historic
district status was not established in time to prevent this apartment
building. Please don't make us suffer another or we will be forced to move to
the suburbs and the comfortable small-town feeling of Iowa City will be lost.
Sincerely,
Ms. Naomi Novick
Iowa City Council
Civic Center
410 E. Washington St.
Iowa City, IA 52240,
Louis G. Hoffmann
Georgianna S. Hoffmann
1016 E. College St.
Iowa City, Ia. 52240
February 22, 1997
Dear Ms. Novick:
We urge you to vote in favor of establishing the proposed East College
Street and College Green Historic Districts. We believe that the greater good of
the City, as well as the expressed wishes of the overwhelming majority of the
people who actually live in these neighborhoods, should take precedence over the
putative rights of any absentee landlords and future real estate "developers".
The notion that property owners have unlimited rights to do as they wish
with their properties is a fallacy, It is the very nature of zoning ordinances to
limit those rights,
In addition to preserving the architectural integrity and character of our
neighborhoods, establishment of historic districts will stabilize these
neighborhoods because it encourages people to buy homes there for their own
long-term residences, and to maintain them with pride. Allowing these
established neighborhoods to fall prey to absentee landlords and "developers"
means that these properties will be managed for maximum profit -i.e. minimum
upkeep - and inhabited by people who are here to-day and gone to-morrow, and
who could care less about the character of the neighborhood. It seems to us
that that's a good way to grow slums. As illustrated by the fact that the City
has spent two years in legal action trying to bring ~ust one slumlord into
compliance, enforcing housing codes on unwilling property owners can be very
expensive for the City. Long-term owner-residents who take pride in their
homes pay their taxes and cost the city litfie or nothing for enforcement.
Louis G, Hoffmann
Sincerely,
Georgianna S. Hoffmann
City of Iowa City
MEMORANDUM
Date: February 20, 1997
To: City Council
From: Scott Kugler, Associate Planner
Re:
College Green and East College Street Historic Districts
At the February 11 public hearing on the proposed designation of the above referenced
historic districts, there seemed to be some confusion regarding contributing and non-
contributing structures within the districts. It was mentioned that several properties along
the west side of S. Johnson Street were non-contributing, which raised questions about
the appropriateness of including these properties within the district. The following is an
attempt to clarify what these evaluations mean for properties within the two districts, and
to address other issues surrounding the proposed designations.
Contributing vs. Non-contributing: Concurrent with the City's consideration of the
designation of these districts as Iowa City historic districts, nominations have been
proceeding to list the two districts on the National Register of Historic Places. It is due to
the preparation of the National Register nominations for these districts that the
contributing/non-contributing evaluations have been made. This determination is not
specifically required by the City's historic preservation regulations.
In preparing a National Register nomination for a district, criteria must be established to
evaluate how each property fits within the historic context under which the district is being
established. Properties within the two proposed districts were determined to be non-
contributing if any of the following four criteria were met: 1) a construction date after the
"period of significance" for each district; 2) the loss of major features such as porches; 3)
the presence of significant additions which are visible from the street; and 4) the house has
undergone major alterations such as reconstruction of the roofline. Two of the five
properties along the west side of S. Johnson Street have been determined to be non-
contributing for the purposes of preparing the National Register nomination' forms due to
porch alterations. The other three are considered contributing.
If a property is considered non-contributing on the National Register nomination forms, this
does not necessarily mean that it contributes nothing to the character of the neighborhood.
A good example is the property located at 1039 E. College Street, within the East College
Street Historic District. Although considered non-contributing due to major alterations to
the roofline that significantly altered the building from its original appearance, there is no
doubt that this home is a positive element along this block of E. College Street. There have
also been many instances where homes within existing historic districts that have been
considered non-contributing have been rehabilitated to the point where they would now be
considered contributing. Two recent examples include the homes at 519 Brown Street and
802 S. Summit Street. In each case, homes that had been greatly altered have been
rehabilitated such that they are similar to their original appearance, and blend harmoniously
with the other properties within their respective historic districts. In the case of the two
non-contributing properties on S. Johnson Street, neither has been altered to such an
extent that it could not be restored or returned to an appearance similar to original, and
both still contribute to the overall character of the neighborhood despite the alterations that
currently affect the historic integrity of the buildings.
Demolition Permits: One item that has not been brought to the Council's attention is the
fact that demolition permits have been approved for the properties located at 217-19 and
223 S. Johnson Street. The permits were applied for in late December and approved in
January. However, the permits have not yet been picked up. Since the public hearing was
set for these two districts on January 28, the demolition permits have been on hold. Once
a public hearing is set on a zoning issue, there is a 60-day moratorium on the issuance of
building permits that do not comply with the proposed zoning regulations. If the College
Green district is approved, review of the demolitions by the Historic Preservation
Commission will be required before the permits can be released.
Fire Escapes/Stairways: At the February 11 meeting, questions were raised about adding
fire escapes to properties within historic districts. The Commission has addressed this
issue on at least one previous occasion. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints,
owners of the A.W. Pratt House at §03 Melrose Avenue (designated as an Iowa City
Historic Landmark), requested approval of a secondary exit and exterior stairs that was
required to meet fire and building code requirements in order to make use of the upper floor
of the building. The project was approved by the Commission as submitted, with the
stairway being located at the rear of the building and matching an existing rear porch in
materials and design. Construction of the secondary exit was not yet underway during
staff's last field inspection of the site last month. Issues that were important to the
approval of this application were the fact that the stairs were not highly visible from the
street, and that the design fit with the rest of the building.
PROTEST OF REZONING ~:q co
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL --<~i --o ~
IOWA CITY, IOWA ~ ~
We, the undersigned, being the owners of twenty percent or more of the area of the property
included in the proposed zoning change, or the owners of twenty percent or more of the
property which is located within two hundred feet of the exterior boundaries of the property for
which the zoning change is proposed, do hereby protest the rezoning of the following property:
This petition is signed and acknowledged by each of us with the intention that such rezoning
shall not become effective except by the favorable vote of at least three-fourths of all the
members of the council, all in accordance with §414.5 of the Code of Iowa.
Owner(s) of
Property Address
STATE OF IOWA )
) SS:
JOHNSON COUNTY )
*
o~ day of ~C~Y'U~ ,19 ~ , before m_, the undersigned, a Notary Public in
On this _ ~ ,.q~"~';~.~h ' and
for said County and State, sonally appeared ¢/q. ~ /./.)~'Jd_. and
to me known to bethe identical persons named in and who
executed the within and foregoing instrument and acknowledged that they executed the same
as their voluntary act and deed.
' ,.~,~.~ MICHELLE SCHEWE
MYCOMMI$$1ON EXPIRES ~ .. .
......... /~, c/._ c~-7 ..... '; Notary Public in and f(Sr the .State of Iowa
By:
Owner(s) of
Property Address
STATE OF IOWA )
)
JOHNSON COUNTY )
On this day of ,19 , before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and
for said County and State, personally appeared and
to me known to be the identical persons named in and who
executed the within and foregoing instrument and acknowledged that they executed the same
as their voluntary act and deed.
Notary Public in and for the State of Iowa
TO:
PROTEST OF REZONING
HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
IOWA CITY, IOWA
We, the undersigned, being the owners of twenty percent or more of the area o~the p~perty
included in the proposed zoning change, or the owners .of twenty percent or more of the
property which is located within two hundred feet of the exterior boundaries of the property for
which the zoning change is proposed, do hereby protest the rezoning of the following property:
This petition is signed and acknowledged by each of us with the intention that such rezoning
shall not become effective except by the favorable vote of at least thr.ee-fourths of all the
members of the council, all in accordance with §414.$ of the Code of Iowa.
Owner(s) of Property Address
STATE OF IOWA )
) SS:
JOHNSON COUNTY )
On this .~/~day of /~/~l/~l~I.1/~, 19 ~_~., before me, ~the undersigned, a Notary Public in and
for said County and State, pe.r~onally appeared .~,..~/4¢Y3 ~'. ~-~v/f'~ and
to me known to be the' identical persons named in and who
executed the within and foregoing instrument and acknowledged that they executed the same
as their voluntary act and deed.
~ MICHELLE SCHEWE i ~' ' ..,,~
/ o,7 J
Notary Public in and for the State of Iowa
By:
Owner(s) of
Property Address
STATE OF IOWA )
)
JOHNSON COUNTY )
SS:
On this day of ,19 , before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and
for said County and State, personally appeared and
'to me known to be the identical persons named in and who
executed the within and foregoing instrument and acknowledged that they executed the same
as their voluntary act and deed.
Notary Public in and for the State of Iowa
PROTEST OF REZONING
TO:
HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
IOWA CITY, IOWA
We, the undersigned, being the owners of twenty percent or more of the area of~.~e pr~erty
included in the proposed zoning change, or the owners of twenty percent or :',n~.(~.t.e
property which is located within two hundred feet of the exterior boundaries of the.;.:property
which the zoning change is proposed, do hereby protest the rezoning of the followJj3g pro~rty:~. ..~
223 SOUTH JOHNSON STREET, IOW~ CITY, IOWA, JOHNSON
IOWA IN ITS ~ ENTIRETY
~.~ r~o
REASONS FOR THIS PROTEST TO HIS REZONING ARE ATTACHED AND MADE
A PART OF THIS PROTEST.
This petition is signed and acknowledged by each of us with the intention that such rezoning
shall not become effective except by the favorable vote of at least three-fourths of all the
members of the council, all in accordance with §414.5 of the Code of Iowa.
By: ~T'homas M. Martin, 119 River Street, Iowa ~
City, Iowa
52246
Owner:[~ of
223 SOUTH JOHNSON RTRV. V.T, TO ~% CITY,
Property Address
IA.
STATE OF IOWA )
)
JOHNSON COUNTY )
SS:
On this19thday of December , 19 96 , before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and
for said County and State, personally appeared Thomas M. Martin and
to me known to be the identical person~ named in and who
executed the within and foregoing instrument and acknowledged that they executed the same
as their voluntary act and deed.
Notary Public in and for the State of Iowa
By:
Owner(s) of
Property Address
STATE OF IOWA ).
)
JOHNSON COUNTY )
S8:
On this day of ,19 , before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and
for said County and State, personally appeared and
to me known to be the identical persons named in and who
executed the within and foregoing instrument and acknowledged that they executed the same
as their voluntary act and deed.
Notary Public in and for the State of Iowa
REASONS THAT THE PROPERTY OWNER OF 223 SOUTH JOHNSON IS OBJECTING
TO ANY REZONING THAT WOULD PLACE SAID PROPERTY INTO A CONTEMPLATED
"HISTORIC DISTRICT" ARE AS FOLLOWS:
1. The City of Iowa City is forever changing and will continue to
change in the future. Future best uses of this property are unknown
to the owner, the City of Iowa City, Johnson County and any other
city, county or government agencies, departments, or commissions.
2. In the event that the owner, or owner's designees, or owner's
heirs, or owners assigns should elect to choose to change the
present use of the building all within the present existing restrictions
set forth by the City of Iowa City, the City of Iowa City Water and
Sewer District, City commissioned utility and cable services, any
rezoning of this property to a "historic district" would result in
additional and unpredictable requirements before such a change would
be approved.
3. Additional encumbrances, regulations, and requirements that this
property would inherit 'were it to be placed into a "historic district"
are unnecessary, unwarranted and duplicative all because of either
individual or several subjective evaluations of the property as "histori~
in some manner.
4. Should property owner wish to change the use of the Droperty,
the resultant requirements to overcome yet another regulative se~'~of
requirements would require time, effort and funds of the property
owner, the City of Iowa City and the city taxpayers.
5. Using the guidelines set forth in the "Iowa City Neighborhood
Design Book" a publication evidently commissioned and approved by
a Historic Preservation Commission, 223 South Johnson does not
qualify as a "historic place" for the following reasons:
a. The property is not significant to American or Iowa City
history, architecture, archaeology and culture~ and
b. The property does not possess integrity of location, design,
setting, materials and workmanship since for approximately one-
half of the life of the building the property has been partitioned
into five separate apartments and the exterior and the interior
reflects this present useage of the building; and
c. The original wood lap siding has been exteriorally insulated,
sealed and covered with a textured vinyl siding; and
d. The roof has been altered from original wood singles to the
present silver painted steel roof; and
e..~-The original window frames have been replaced with silver
aluminum framed metal combination storm/screen windows; and
f. One original exterior door has been eliminated and other
original doors have been replaced with a shiny white aluminum
storm door combination glass/screen storage making this door
not "historically appropriate" according to page 10 of the
Iowa City Neighborhood Design Book (ICNDB).
-2-
g. door openings have been blocked down to accommodate the
existing stock door changes (contrary to ICNDB); and
h. doorways have been removed sealing off door openings to
accommodate the insulation and siding application (contrary
to ICNBD); and
i. a non-functioning television antennae on the roof has long
been in place in the event future tenants choose not to subscribe
to cable television.~ (contrary to ICNBD); and
j. the original drainage and built-in gutters have been removed
and replaced with leak-proof seamless cutters and downspouts
(contrary to the recommendations found in ICNBD); and '"
k. the original porch has not been maintained but as required
by Iowa City Inspection of Housing Department, porch handrails
were added in the late 1970s along with step handrails for
safety purposes which has necessarily and obviously deterred,
detracted and contrasted with the original historic appearance
(contrary to the recommendations found in ICNBD); and
1. There is no continuity of architectual style in the six
building proposed to be included in this "historic district"
that are located on the west side of Johnson Street between
College and Burlington -- all are different because they were
built at different times on different sized lots (contrary to
guidelines for a "historic district" set forth in the commissions
own publication -- ICNBD); and the west one-half of the this
block is currently zoned CB2 with a convenience store, business
buildings and office buildings occupying this westerly one-half
of this block and to include the east one half of the block in
a "historic district" would be tantamount to spot zoning, and
would serve no reasonable economic purpose or reasonable asthetic
or historical purpose.
Therefore, the property owner of 223 South Johnson Street,
Iowa City, Iowa requests that this property be omitted and not
included in any proposed and new "historic district" for any
and all of the foregoing reasons.
223 South Johnson Street
Iowa City, Iowa 52246
TO:
PROTEST OF REZONING
HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
IOWA CITY, iOWA
We, the undersigned, being the owners of twenty percent or more of the area of the property
included in the proposed zoning change, or the owners of twenty percent or more of the
property which is located within two hundred feet of the exterior boundaries of the property for
which the zoning change is proposed, do hereby protest the rezoning of the following property:
COLLEGE GREEN HISTORIC DISTRICT. I object to the rezoning of this
"area for aesthetic reasons. The additional requirements this would
impose on property owners, for the sake of someone elses sense of
what is appropriate, are unrealistic. ;~any properties in this area
are used for business purposes ( rental properties ) and are already
This petition is signed and acknowledged by each of us with the intention that such rezoning
shall not become effective except by the favorable vote of at least three-fourths of all the
members of the council, all in accordance with §414,5 of the Code of Iowa.
closely regulated by existing City requirements. An additional set
restrictions on what may be done with a property in this area could
~: very possibly have an adverse effect on future use or sale of my
property. I ask you to think about how you would feel if your home
or business property were to have these same restrictions' imposed
upon it ( you ) .
Owner(s) of Property Address
of
STATE OF iOWA )
)
JOHNSON COUNTY )
eS:
On this day of ,19 , before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and
for said County and State, personally appeared _ and
to me known to be the identical persons named in and who
executed the within and foregoing instrument and acknowledged that they executed the same
as their voluntary act and deed.
By:
Owner(s) of
Notary Public in and for the State of Iowa
Property Address
STATE OF IOWA )
)
JOHNSON COUNTY )
es:
On this ~5'P~day of-~,~,~7 ,19 9,~ , before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and
for said County and State, personally appeared %'~.~ /~,.,.- and
.to me known to be the identical persons named in and who
executed the within and foregoing instrument and acknowledged that they executed the same
as their voluntary act and deed.
Notary Public in and for the State of Iowa
eMOI ~0 etelS eqt Jot pue u! o!lqnd/urn, ON
'peep pue lo~/uelunlo^ J!eql se
eLues eLI1 Pelnoexe ~eql leql pe§PelMOU)lOe pue lueLunJlsU! I~u!o§eJoi pue u!ql!M eql pelnoexe
oqM pue u! peLueu suosJed leO!luep! eql eq ol UMOml eLU 01
pue peJeedde/~11~uosJed 'elelS pue/qunoo p!es JOi
pue u! o!lqnd/u~loN e 'peu§!sJepun e41 'ew eJoteq "----6 ~ ' to ~eP s!41 uo
:S$
( A.I. Nr100 NOSNHOr'
(
( YMOI 40 :I.LV. LS
sseJppv/qJedoJd
1o (e),~euMo
eMOI JO elelS em Jol pue u! o!lqnd/u~loN
'"'~ ~'" sseJppv/qJedoJd
'eMOI JO epoo eql 1o c~'t~ I.~'§ ql!M eouepJoooe Ul lie '1!ounoo eql 1o sJequJeuJ
eq~ fie jo sqlJnoj-eeJq~, lseel le io elo^ elqe~o^ej eql ~q )deoxe e^!loe~e e~uooeq tou IleqS
§u!uozeJ qons leql uop, uelu! eql HI!M sn jo qoee Aq pe§pelMou)loe pue peu§!s s! UO!l!led S!LLL
:/~uedoJd §U!MOIIOJ eq~, ~o §u!uozeJ eql lseloJd ~qeJeq op 'pesodoJd s! e§ueqo §u!uoz eql qO!qM
JOt/qJedoJd eql to se!mpunoq Jo!Jelxe eql jo 1eel peJpunq o~1 u!ql!M peleoOl s! qo!qM/qJedoJd
eql lo.eJo~u Jo lueoJed /que~ 1o $JeuMo eql JO 'e§ueqo §u!uoz pesodoJd eql u! pepnlou!
/qJec~d e?;'/.~ eeJe eql ~o eJoLu JO lueoJed/que~ to sJeuMo eq~, §uleq 'peuB!sJepun eq~, 'eM
VMOI 'A.LIO VMOI
91ONnOO ALIO aNY BOAVI~I q9BVBONOH
:OJ.
~DNINOZ3~ :10 ISglOl:ld
Ms. Naomi Novick
Iowa City Counci]
Civic Center
410 E. Washington St.
Iowa City, [A 52240.
Louis G. Hoffmann
Georgianna S. Hoffmann
1016 E. College St.
Iowa City, la. 52240
February 22. 1997
FEB 'Z 1997
Dear Ms. Novick:
We urge you to vote in favor of establishing the proposed East College
Street and College I~r~en I~isto~ic Distr~cts. We believe that the greater good of
the City, as well as the expressed wishes of the overwhelming majority of the
people who. actually live in these neighborhoods, should take precedence over the
putative rights of any absentee landlords and future real estate "developers".
The notion that property owners have unlimited ~ights to do as they wish
with their properties is a fallacy. Zt is the very nature of zoning ordinances to
limit those rights.
In addition to preserving the architectural integrity and character of our
neighborhoods, establishment of historic districts ~ri11 stabilize these
neighborhoods because it encourages people to buy homes there for their own
long-term residences, and to maintain them with pride. Allowing these
established neighborhoods to fall prey to absentee landlords and "developers"
means that these properties will be managed for maximum profit -i.e. minimum
upkeep - and inhabited by people who are here to-day and gone to-morrow, and
who could care less about the character of the neighborhood. It seems to us
that that's a good way to grow slums. As filustrated by the fact that the City
has spent two years in legal action trying to bring just one slumlord into
compliance, enforcing housing codes on unwilling property owners can be very
expensive for the City. Long-term owner-residents who take pride in their
homes pay their taxes and cost the city little or nothing for enforcement.
Louis G. Hoffmann
Sincerely.
Georgianna S. Hoffmann
Prepared by: Ron Boose, H&IS Dept., 410 E. Washington St., Iowa City, IA 52240 (319)356-5122
ORDINANCE NO. 97-3774
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING TITLE 14,
CHAPTER 5, ARTICLE B, ENTITLED
"PLUMBING CODE" TO EXPAND THE TYPES
OF MATERIALS ALLOWED FOR THE
INSTALLATION OF POTABLE WATER LINES
AND BUILDING DRAINAGE LINES.
WHEREAS, the City wishes to allow the use
of new construction materials and methods
when they can be demonstrated to be safe and
beneficial;and
WHEREAS, PEX and PVC pipe have been in
use for several years in other jurisdictions and
have proven to be safe and economical when
properly installed; and
WHEREAS, the Board of Appeals reviewed
the product information associated with the use
of these materials and recommends their
inclusion as permitted materials under the
Plumbing Code;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF IOWA
CITY, IOWA:
SECTION I AMENDMENTS. Title 14, Chapter
5B, entitled "Plumbing Code" be hereby
amended by repealing Sections 604.`1,701.`1.1,
701.'1.2.4, 701.1.2.5, and 701.2.5.2 of the
Uniform Plumbing Code as adopted in Section
14-5B-1 of the City Code and adding new
sections 604.1, 70'1.1.'1, 70'1.1.2.4, 70`1.1.2.5,
and 701.2.5.2 as follows:
604.1 Water pipe and fittings shall be of brass,
copper, cast iron, galvanized malleable iron,
galvanized wrought iron, galvanized steel, cross-
linked polyethylene (PEX)tubing manufactured
to ASTM F876 and ASTM F877, or other
approved. materials. A cross-linked
Polyethylene (PEX) plumbing system used for
water distribution shall be certified to ASTM
$tandards F876 and ASTM F877, and shall
include requirements for the tubing and fittings
tested as a system by an independent third
party laboratory. Lead pipe, lead solders and
flux containing more than two-tenths of one
percent (0.2%) lead shall not be used in any
potable water system. Asbestos-cement,
Ordinance No.
Page 2
97-3774
CPVC, PB, PE, (PEX), or PVC water pipe
.manufactured to recognized standards may be
used for cold water distribution systems outside
a building. All materials used in the water
supply system, except valves and similar
devices, shall be of a like material, except
where otherwise .approved by the administrative
authority. All installations shall be made in
accordance with the manufacturer's
recommendations.
701.1.1 Galvanized wrought iron, galvanized
steel, or ABS pipe shall not be used
underground as a building drain and shall be
kept at least six inches (6") above the ground.
701.1.2.4 Installations shall not be made in
any space where the surrounding temperature
will exceed one hundred forty degrees (140°)
Fahrenheit or in any construction or space
where combustible materials are prohibited by
any applicable building code or fire regulations
or in any licensed institutional occupancy,
701.1.2.5 PVC pipe of weight SDR 35 or
better may be installed as a building sewer and
Schedule 40 or better PVC may be installed as
a building drain under the following restrictions:
701.1.2.5.1 Pipe shall be installed in a twelve
inch (12") envelope of clean granular fill, such
as sand or limestone screenings, three-eighths
inch (3/8") in size or smaller. The fill shall be
installed uniformly with a minimum of a four inch
(4") base and a four inch (4") cover (see
'diagram).
701.2,5.2 PVC pipe used as the building drain
must be sleeved where it passes through the
concrete slab. PVC pipe may not be used as
the building drain where cast iron or copper is
used as all or part of the DVVV system above
the floor.
SECTION II. REPEALER. All ordinances and
parts of ordinances in conflict with the provisions
of this Ordinance are hereby repealed.
SECTION III. SEVERABILITY. If any section,
provision or part of the Ordinance shall be
adjudged to be invalid or unconstitutional, such
adjudication shall not affect the validity of the
Ordinance as a whole or any section, provision
or part thereof not adjudged invalid or unconsti-
tutional.
SECTION IV. EFFECTIVE DATE. This Ordi-
nance shall be in effect after its final passage,
Ordinance No.
Page 3
97-3774
approval and publication, as provided by law.
Passed and approved this .ZETA day of
Februar.v , 19 97 .
MAYOR ~-.= g/
ATTEST:/f~
CITY CLERK
City Attorney's Office
hisblg~14-5-B,ord
Ordinance No. 97-3774
Page 4
It was moved by Kubby and seconded by
Ordinance as read be adopted, and upon roll call there were:
AYES: NAYS: ABSENT:
Baker
Kubby
Lehman
Norton
Novick
Thomberry
Vanderhoef
lehman that the
First Consideration 2 / 11/97
Vote forpassage:AYES: Vanderhoef, Baker, Kubby, Lehman, Norton,
Novick, Thornberry. NAYS: None. ABSENT: None.
Second Consideration 2/20/97 ~
Vote for passage: AYES: Baker, Kubby, Lehman, Norton, Novick,
Thornberry, Vanderhoef. NAYS: None. ABSENT: None.
Date published 3/5/97