My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Building Code Board of Appeals Minutes 2000
PORTAL
>
BOARDS COMMISSIONS COMMITTEES RECORDS (20.000)
>
BUILDING CODE BOARD OF APPEALS
>
2000-2019 Building Code Board of Appeals Agendas and Packets
>
2000 Building Code Board of Appeals Agendas and Packets
>
Building Code Board of Appeals Minutes 2000
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/10/2021 2:01:12 PM
Creation date
10/4/2018 10:28:18 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council Records
Doc Type
Boards Commissions Committees Records
Supplemental fields
Test
BCBOAMIN 2000
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
10
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
Sam Light—If the decision is sound,yes. <br /> Thomas Talboom—Are we under pressure to review the UPC, and give Council <br /> recommendations,prior to the second reading of the ordinance? <br /> Sam Light—If you want to have input that you want Council to hear it would need to be m place <br /> before the second reading and the public hearing. My suggestion is that we stick to the time line <br /> and have another meeting between September 5th and October 3rd Then we can report to Council <br /> what the results of this Board's meetmg that occurred between first and second readmg of the <br /> ordinance. The first reading is nothing more than me reading the title and City Council saymg <br /> lets publish it and set it for a public hearing. <br /> Ray Schlott—So we can weigh some kind of motion that states,based upon practical experience <br /> of the use of the 1997 UPC, it should be adopted by Council. <br /> Sam Light—I can help you draft whatever you are comfortable with. I don't think we are going <br /> to have a legal issue with a recital concerning your recommendation but I think it is important for <br /> you to tell the City Council what you want to tell them about this change. <br /> Ray Schlott—Looking into the future,where do we go from here? The indication is that the <br /> UPC, 1997 version,is an end of the line. <br /> Thomas Talboom—The 2000 UPC is out. <br /> Sam Light—There a couple of things that could happen. You could go to home rule status and <br /> you could then ask City Council to look at this issue again, and put together some hearings at this <br /> Board level to deal with this issue. You may also have to look at the 2000 UPC if the Board of <br /> Examining Plumbers begins to look at rt this year So you may been in a position of visiting the <br /> plumbing ordinance three or four times in an 18 month span. , <br /> Ray Schlott—Is there a way of asking for specific concerns that the litigants had in filing this <br /> suit. <br /> Sam Light—I can do that. <br /> Ray Schlott—The reason I would like that is that I thought we had covered everything that they <br /> had brought before us. <br /> Greg Culhson—Ray is nght. They didn't even know that we had amended the code to address <br /> all of their concerns. <br /> Thomas Talboom—The specifics of the code is not the issue. This is a political battle. <br /> 6 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.