HomeMy WebLinkAbout2007-02-20 Public hearing
(,~I)
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
Notice is hereby given that a public hearing will
be held by the City Council of Iowa City, Iowa, at
7:00 p.m. on the 20th day of February, 2007, in
Harvat Hall in City Hall, 410 E. Washington Street,
Iowa City, Iowa, or if said meeting is cancelled, at
the next meeting of the City Council thereafter as
posted by the City Clerk; at which hearing the
Council will consider:
. An ordinance to rezone approximately 12,200
square feet of property from Low Density Single
Family (RS-5) to Commercial Office (CO-1),
located west of Diana Street and south of
Kirkwood Avenue (REl06-00027).
Copies of the proposed ordinances are on file for
public examination in the office of the City Clerk,
City Hall, Iowa City, Iowa. Persons wishing to
make their views known for Council consideration
are encouraged to appear at the above-
mentioned time and piace.
MARIAN K. KARR, CITY CLERK
STAFF REPORT
To: Planning & Zoning Commission
Prepared by: Sarah Walz, Associate Planner
Item: REZ06-00027
Date: January 18, 2007
GENERAL INFORMATION:
Applicant:
MVl Properties
Michael Lensing and Vicki Lensing
605 Kirkwood Avenue
Phone:
319-338-8171
Requested Action:
Rezoning from RS-5 to CO-1
Purpose:
To allow allow expansion of an existing commercial
property
1018 and 1016 Diana Street
Location:
Size:
Approximately 9,796 sq. feet
Existing land Use and Zoning:
Residential, 2-8 dwelling units per acre
Surrounding land Use and Zoning:
North:
South:
East:
West:
Residential; RS-8
Residential; RS-5
Residential; RS-5
Commercial; CO-1
Comprehensive Plan:
Residential, 2-8 dwelling units per acre
File Date:
December 12, 2006
45 Day Limitation Period:
January 29, 2007
BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
The applicant, MVl Properties (Michael lensing and Vicki Lensing), owns the property at 1018
Diana Street and has a negotiated a land exchange with the property owner at 1016 Diana Street.
The applicant is proposing a lot line adjustment and rezoning of the rear (westernmost) 39 feet of
both Diana Street lots as well as a portion of the vacated alley right of way. The applicant
proposes that the described portions of these lots and the former alley, which are currently zoned
Low Density Single-Family Residential (RS-5), be added to the Lensing Funeral Home property at
605 Kirkwood Avenue and be rezoned to Commercial Office (CO-1).
ANALYSIS:
The Comprehensive Plan indicates that the subject residential properties to the east, north, and
south of 605 Kirkwood Avenue should continue to be developed for residential purposes at a
2
density of 2-8 dwelling units per acre. The Comprehensive Plan's discussion of the Central
Planning District identifies Kirkwood Avenue as an area of particular concern with regard to the
capacity of the street to handle increased traffic as well as the need to preserve existing
neighborhood integrity.
In 1993, the City rezoned property to the west at 617 Kirkwood from RS-5 to Commercial (CO-1),
to allow an extension of an existing commercial use, the Lensing Funeral Home. At the time staff
expressed concern that the expansion of the commercial zone would erode a clear demarcation
between residential and commercial uses in the area and result in "further requests for
commercial zoning along Kirkwood Avenue."
A condition of the 1993 rezoning required the property owner to close street access to the
rezoned property at 617 Kirkwood. Access to the rezoned property would be required via an
access easement at 605 Kirkwood. The intent was to direct business traffic entering the site away
from the residential properties and to make it less likely that a strip pattern of commercial uses
would develop along this portion of Kirkwood. In addition the property owner was required to
install a landscaped buffer to provide an area of transition between the commercial development
and the adjacent residential properties.
In 2006, the Planning and Zoning Commission denied a request to rezone the abutting property,
at 619 Kirkwood Avenue, from RS-5 to CO-1. In rendering their decision, the Board cited
concerns over traffic and neighborhood preservation along Kirkwood and Diana Streets and the
desire to maintain a clear boundary to prevent the eastward expansion of commercial
development along Kirkwood Avenue. In addition, Staff and neighboring property owners along
Diana Street, raised concerns over commercial traffic gaining access to the east-west alley
connection from Diana Street.
The proposal to rezone the portion of the vacated alley right-of-way contiguous with the 605
Kirkwood property as well as those portion of the residential lots would allow the applicant to
square up the commercially zoned property. That is, the boundary of the CO-2 property at 605
Kirkwood would take on a more regular shape. Meanwhile the property at 1018 Diana would retain
10,950 square feet, so that it would still exceed the minimum lot area of 8,000 square feet
required in the RS-5 zone. Through the land exchange negotiated by MVL properties, the property
at 1016 Diana, would change from a non-conforming lot (due to the minimum lot area
requirements) to conforming. Both Diana Street properties would retain their RS-5 zoning.
In Staff's view, the proposal makes sense in that it creates a more regular, recognizable boundary
between the commercial and adjacent residential zone. In addition, the Zoning Code has a
requirement that the commercial property provide landscape screening to buffer the adjacent
residential property from any traffic, noise, lighting or other negative externalities associated with
the commercial use. In this case S3 screening would be required between the commercial uses-
the parking area-and the residential property.
Because access to and from the commercial property via Diana Street remains a concern, Staff
would recommend that the rezoning of this property be consistent with the conditions of the 1993
rezoning in limiting access to the commercial property to Kirkwood Avenue.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the proposed zoning change for property located at 1018 and 1016 Diana
Street and a portion of the vacated alley abutting these lots from RS-5 to CO-1 be approved
subject to no commercial traffic having access to the east-west alley connection to Diana Street.
3
ATTACHMENTS:
1 . Location Map
2. Aerial view
3. Parcel maps
3. Applicant's statement
Approved by: ~ )1~
Robert Miklo, Senior Planner,
Department of Planning and Community Development
ppdadmin\stfrep\lemplale,doc
CITY OF IOWA CITY ~
iY I v
w i
~ f- __ (
m -r- Ul 8 i
co I
w
i. 5:
KIRKWOOD AVE
f-
\ CO I ())
I f- ~-1 I ~
-2 !
~- L_ c5 --
Ul ----1
1 I J I D::
I
____~_, D::
\ I <C ---- <C -
I z I U
<C -------~
- I
I -- P2
-
I I
Plum
I
I
--- -- Gra ve
I
I -"
r---
L
SITE LOCATION: Diana Street RS5 to C01, REZ06-00027
Photography Flight
Date Aptil2OO1
City of Iowa City Mapping
Q nol to scale
Parcel Dala Comosy
01 JohnGOn County
~~.",,"
HFC HART - FREDERICK CONSULTANTS P.C.
an State stree
P.O. Box 560
TIFFIN, IOWA 52340-0580
Phone 319 545-7215
~--------~7w--------------:---~~~?~3-~ZP-T--:-4s17----T-----~99~---r-----~slo----~ i--
: I: I : I : :
I I I I I
I I I I I
, 'I' , ,
I I I I I
I I I I I
I I I I I
, 'I' , ,
I I I I I
I I I I I
I I I I 1
, 'I' , ,
I I I I I
I I I I I
I I I .1 I
, 3 ' 12 I :=ll I
i i o~ i Si i
I I I I I I
! i Ii! ~!
I #~'" I ~ I 13 :; :
I ' ~.,.- I I IN :. I
1 &'t'1' I' 1 V) <0 1 I : 1
i ~.~ : uk j i :
: ;;}:<9~..f I: P90 i ) ~~ :
I ?f~ I f-..J ___ I I ~o I
l~':s;' NORTHLINE~2O'ALLEY Q) I I N", :
~ NlI9"57'22"E 1 4-5.12' ~. 51.96' L _L__ 53.79' I ~~ :
59.00' ...............N 89"5%" E 209.87' .~.~.~:~.~:~HFAiLEY ....................~~",i ~~ .;If! ~~
NlI9"57'22"E 189.86' ~'...
150.86' - I : Eel 'I i
eleUeoq.tt. ~""::~ o~t- .,.<1':
~ ~: ;~ 1>.(:; 'j.# I
c9 .-i I ~ -<9.:",. c""'" I
~'9. ""( ~O.*'Itf I
I~' ~o I
I t-~ !
,
:'"
,
"15
o
'"
f"--
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
~
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
"--
,
,
,
,
,
,
>-
~~ N89"53'38"W 189.78'
~. Cb SOUfHLINE-AUOITOR'SPARCEL20041l35 I
: >- ~~'i% 5 :
I 5 "'6~~;s. ~ I
: I:;! "%',...~ ll.o"3 :
l~! (N~ :.t.:~ 1-C"P :
i~: r_~________________~~:~~c~~___ ~~~~;G _____J
: 0: I ~ .\\J-0'J'- -1027----- I
: ('{~ ~ }.'-' DIANAST I
l~ ~ _________ ~
:::1 ~I :
, , ,
, , ,
, , ,
: : 6 :
1 1- I
I lie 1
i : i:E i
I ; I I
I ' I I
I ' I I
'~ '
, , ,
~.---- -------------------------------------------------i
~~ I I
./' I I
// 29 : TWO PLUM 35 I
/ : PGARROTvc ACRES : ,_
APPROVED BY THE CI1Y OF IOWA cm I \:.. N PROPRIETOR: (N. 41' LOT 4J PETERJ. WEZEMAN ]
i SUBO\\f\SIO PROPRIETOR: (AUDITOR'S PARCEL 2004035) MVLPROPERTIES, L.L.C.
: PLAT OF SURVEY
, REZONING EXHIBIT
AUDITOR PARCEL 2006153
AUDITOR PARCEL 2006154
20' ALLEY VACATION
DATE: 11/06 JSR
LEGEND
fj,GOVE1lNWKN'I'CllRNER
@ !lIn'ft/S"DIlIlfROD
. fl}tIlIJ)UlOHROD(-'SHll'mI)
o 70UNIIPlPI
o dTPJ:N.UL
(HI RlCORDEIIllIIOOOIlOH!l
Il"lllI.lSVDlltlDd:llll:lONll
-PRDPD'I'Y"/DOtlHIWnLIHES
---cmlftRUNE!I
---urrUNa 1IY1IUlI
__._SIlCTlONLINIS
_._._._1WImmNT LINIS
-----LOT UNIClI PUmD
l>WI.....ft'Il lI1I~ntftTI nnv RR_S 'WI m_t
AtIbI'tOIPJJlCIL2tHI8183
EZ2all'~.l1 !!QUAD J'D'I'
11llll.ll2O/j.ft.It>A.P.lllll4-llll8
l80eM .q. ft. It> N. 41' Lot 4
lleM.06 O/j. ft. It> .w.,.V.catlon
J.IJDJ'I'lIJlf'J.JICILlllllelM
111111.o1!!QIWtIJ'D'I'
1t>J.f'.l!OO4ll118
p===jPOJlTION II' .IJUY TO BI v.+.C~T!Il
t::::::J -"lM !!QUAD rDT >-
~
-$-N ~
i5
w ~ E:;
Ii'
s
.
1"\--
--
!'i.
~g
,,-
~~
"r
~~ ~~
. ('Ok,)>
q
~-------~8~~~,Vi6M~------
./"
~.
GO
..
+
_""_4<1"
SEE EXHIBIT A FOR DESCRlPI10NS
~
~
("
~-1*
. (:)
6' -0
. .() -11>f-
P "'1.
7, <JO
"?>
/0
~
30
KIRKWOOD AVENUE (70' ROW)
~
109.33'
NAME TITI..E DATE
hereby ce that uu. llIDd turVeying document Wall prepared
~?,ll related ~ 1I'Ork lIlIB ~erfo~e~ ~ul~nco~der my
'rola r an of the State of 101l'l.
//; "
)olJi!a . FNdmi .J.
1111'11. Ucenu Numbllr. 10898
'l.y license reneni date Is December 31. 2007.
~agel covered by th!I "II\; THIS SHXE'I' ONI,Y
"'''
'~O~11~sRQ.llQJ:.h....\dra
E-<
~
~
0::
E-<
U)
~
CI
~
o
0::
o
!!2.
I,S/2oQa:t:135:""wN
January 5, 2007
Lensing Funeral & Cremation Service
Lensing's Oak Hill (Coralville)
605 Kirkwood Ave., Box 167
Iowa City, Iowa 52244
Application for Rezoning
MVL Properties (Michael and Vicki Lensing), the proprietors
of Lensing Funeral and Cremation Service at 605 Kirkwood A venue
are seeking to rezone auditor parcels2004035, as shown on the plat
of the survey dated January 5, 2006.
The rezoning of these properties to C-I would allow for the expansion
of the eastern portion of the funeral home parking area.
MVL Properties presently owns the property at 521 Kirkwood (Governors
Ridge), 605 Kirkwood Avenue and 1018 Diana Street.
~
en b (\)
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
Notice is hereby given that a public hearing will
be held by the City Council of Iowa City, Iowa, at
7:00 p.m. on the 20th day of February, 2007, in
Emma J. Harvat Hall in City Hall, 410 E.
Washington Street, Iowa City, Iowa, or if said
meeting is cancelled, at the next meeting of the
City Council thereafter as posted by the City Clerk;
at which hearing the Council will consider:
1) An ordinance rezoning 0.91 acres of land
at 1902 & 1906 Broadway Street from
Commercial Office (CO-1) to Community
Commercial (CC-2).
Copies of the proposed ordinances are on file for
public examination in the office of the City Clerk,
City Hall, Iowa City, Iowa. Persons wishing to
make their views known for Council consideration
are encouraged to appear at the above-
mentioned time and place.
MARIAN K. KARR, CITY CLERK
City of Iowa City
MEMORANDUM
Date: February 1, 2007
To: Planning & Zoning Commission
From: Drew E. Westberg, Planning Intern
RE: REZ06-00028, Broadway Street Rezoning
As discussed in the Staff Report dated January 18, 2007, staff is recommending approval of
the request to rezone this property form Commercial Office, CO-1, to Community Commercial,
CC-2, only if conditions are placed on the property to minimize the negative effects of
commercial development upon adjacent residential properties. The applicant has agreed to the
recommended conditions with the exception of a requirement for a 50-foot wide buffer along
the south side of the proposed CC-2 zone.
In lieu of the 50 foot buffer recommended by staff, the applicant is proposing an approximately
30 foot wide buffer, provided that the City vacate 6 feet of the street right-of-way adjacent to
Highway 6. Vacation of the right-of-way would allow the proposed development to be shifted 6
feet to the north. The City Engineer has determined that 6 feet is the maximum amount of
right-of-way that could be vacated due the presence of utilities, the Highway Q trail location and
possible future improvements to Highway 6. Staff is concerned that the site layout even with
the 6 feet of additional land from the right-of-way does not provide for good vehicular circulation
between the office site and the drive-in restaurant site and we remain concerned about the
width of the buffer for the adjacent residential building. The applicants plan would require
traffic from the office development to intermingle with traffic from the drive-in. The concept plan
presented by the applicant provides poor visibility of the office site from Broadway Street.
In order to achieve a sufficient buffer and a good circulation route, staff prepared a concept
plan where the development is rotated to give an east/west orientation. This maximizes the
space allowed for buffering between the proposed CC-2 use and the HACAP building. The
applicant has indicated that such an orientation would make it difficult to develop the remaining
CO-1 parcel to the east. The applicant contends that using the original north/south orientation
is the only economically feasible option, which would only provide a buffer of approximately 30
feet.
As previously noted, the applicant claims that the approximately 37,000 square foot CO-1
parcel, as proposed by the staff concept plan, would be too small to develop in an economically
feasible manner. However, there are several,examples of CO-1 development in the area on
lots much smaller than what would be available for development based on staff's concept plan.
Examples include:
. 2048 Keokuk Street is a 4,600 square-foot commercial office building with
ground-floor commercial and second floor residential. The lot is 27, 087 square
feet (0.53 acres).
. 2040 Keokuk Street is a 2,756 square-foot institutional building on an 20,038
square foot (OA6-acre) lot
July 6, 2006
Page 2
. 2030 Keokuk Street is a one story, 2,020 square foot commercial building on a
22,216 square foot (0.51-acre) lot
. 1500 Sycamore Street is a 1,447 square-foot, one-story commercial building on a
13,068 square foot (0.30-acre) lot
These examples support Staffs view that the remaining approximately 37,000 square foot
(.86 acre) office parcel is developable. Staff has prepared a concept sketch showing that an
approximately 10,000 square foot office building could be constructed at this location while
still providing adequate parking and buffering. This concept also provides good visibility and
vehicular access to the office site from Broadway Street.
Staff continues to recommend approval of the proposed rezoning subject to the conditions
outlined in the January 18 staff report, including a requirement for a 50-foot wide buffer
adjacent to the south side of the proposed CC-2 zone. With out this buffer requirement
staff believes that the proposed commercial development will have a negative effect on the
adjacent residential properties and would not recommend approval.
Attachments:
1. Applicants concept plan with 30 foot wide buffer
2. Staff concept plan with 50 foot wide buffer
~~
':t,,'
'"
,~
',>
~
.
~
~
/
/
~~
~
u
'l;
~~
~~
~
fij
.
;
/
/
'~, ~~&'{l>'4fOl>'%:,
'~ ~,~
~, ' ------ , ------ , -------
~~ ~,~,
~'::::---,~
~'---
~~.~
~
...
c.
CI)
u
c
o
()
~
l'/I
...
en
/
/
'" /
~ I
~ '
.t::
,~ /
~
iij
:;::;
l:
Gl
't>
'jji
Gl
ll::
iij
:;::;
l:
Gl
't>
'jji
Gl
ll::
19&./
ISJ{:
e~p
eo./
8
STAFF REPORT
To: Planning & Zoning Commission
Prepared by: Drew E. Westberg, Planning Intem
Item: REZ06-00028
Date: Jan 18, 2007
GENERAL INFORMATION:
Applicant:
Southgate Development
755 Mormon Trek Blvd
Iowa City, IA 52240
Contact Person:
Terri Morrow
755 Mormon Trek Blvd
Iowa City, IA 52240
Phone:
(319) 337-4195
Requested Action:
Rezoning from CO-1 to CC-2
Purpose:
To allow CC-2 uses
Location:
1902 & 1906 Broadway Street
Size:
0.91 acres
Existing Land Use and Zoning:
Commercial Office (CO-1)
Surrounding Land Use and Zoning:
North: Residential (RS-5)
South: High-density Residential (RM-44)
East: High-density Residential (RS-12 & RM-44)
West: Commercial (CC-2)
Comprehensive Plan:
Medium- to High-density Residential
File Date:
December 28, 2006
45 Day Limitation Period:
February 11, 2007
BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
The applicant, Southgate Development, is requesting a rezoning from Commercial Office (CO-1)
to Community Commercial (CC-2) for 0.91 acres located at 1902 and 1906 Broadway Street. The
subject property was originally platted in 1965 as Lots 1 and 5 of Block 2 of the Braverman Center
subdivision. The parcel is located at the intersection of Highway 6, a major arterial, and Broadway
Street, a collector street. Properties to the east and south consist of high density single-family
(RS-12) and high-density multi-family (RM-44).
Currently, Lot 1 is occupied by an apartment complex-Coronet Apartments (1906 Broadway)-
owned by the applicant, and Lot 5 is occupied by the Johnston Law Firm (1902 Broadway). The
applicant is in the process of consolidating these two properties for redevelopment. The rezoning
would create two lots with the western lot being rezoned to CC-2 and the eastern lot remaining
2
CO-1. The applicant has also indicated the current shared driveway access the Coronet and
HACAP buildings would not be removed so that the driveway would continue to serve the HACAP
building after the Coronet building is removed.
The applicant is requesting the rezoning as a potential buyer for the site wishes to locate a drive-in
restaurant on the property. Restaurants with occupancy loads at or below 100 persons are
allowed in the CO-1 zone by special exception. Restaurants with an occupancy load in excess of
100 persons or which utilize drive-through lanes are prohibited in the CO-1 zone.
In 2004, the Planning and Zoning Commission considered an application for 1901 Broadway-
directly across Broadway from the law office- to change that property from CO-1 to CC-2. At
that time, Staff and the Commission focused on the role of CO-1 zone in providing a
buffer/transition between the commercial center (Pepperwood Plaza) and residential properties to
the east. The Commission found that due to the existing CO-1 occupied by 1902 and 1906
Broadway, the CO-1 zone at 1901 was not needed to provide a buffer/transition and consequently
recommended approval to the City Council.
The applicant's proposed rezoning retains a CO-1 parcel east of the proposed CC-2 property that,
when developed (the area is currently a parking lot), would maintain this buffer. However, the CC-
2 property would abut the existing RM-44 (HACAP) residential property to the south, which is not
a desirable situation.
ANALYSIS:
Zoning: The Commercial Office (CO-1) Zone is designed to provide specific locations where
office functions, compatible businesses, apartments, and certain public and semi-public uses may
be developed in accordance with the Comprehensive Plan. The zone is also intended to act as a
buffer between residential and more intensive commercial/industrial uses. The Community
Commercial (CC-2) Zone is designed to create business districts located along major arterials and
collector streets to service large segments of the community. CC-2 uses typically generate higher
traffic, generally have more intense signage and lighting, and have longer hours of operation than
CO-1 uses.
Staff is concerned with the current proposal in regards to its effects on nearby residential
properties, particularly the HACAP building to the south. The intended use is one of the most
intense of the CC-2 uses possible and as a result will affect surrounding properties. Though
some of these effects maybe addressed through zoning code regulations, such as screening
and set backs, staff feels that given the orientation of the HACAP residential units toward this
property, additional buffering is necessary between the proposed CC-2 property and the
HACAP building.
The zoning code requires commercial property to be setback from residential property at a
minimum of the setback requirement for the residential property which it abuts. In the case of
the RM-44 zone, only a five-foot setback would be required. This would not provide much in
the way of shielding for residents of the HACAP building. The code also requires a five-foot
setback from property lines for adjacent commercial properties, as would be the case along the
eastern boundary of the proposed CC-2 property. Staff is concerned with the actual buffering
that would be provided by the CO-1 property for residential properties to the east. Once
developed, the property would provide an adequate buffer; however, until such development
occurs, residential property to the east may not have sufficient shielding from the CC-2 use.
Staff believes that there may be some benefits to redeveloping this property, but that if it is to
be done with CC-2 uses, especially uses that are related to drive-in or drive through activity,
there would be a need for conditions upon the rezoning to provide some of the buffering
functions that are currently provided by the CO-1 zone. Recommended conditions are
discussed in more detail below under Neighborhood Compatibility.
3
Comprehensive Plan: The South District Plan designates the subject property for apartment
use. As noted previously, the CO-1 zone is an appropriate transition zone between residential
and more intense commercial uses. The proposed rezoning creates a CC-2 use that is bounded
by CO-1, which provides the necessary transition to the east. However, the CC-2 property would
abut multi-family residential to the south, creating an undesirable situation where residential
property is subject to the negative externalities posed by an adjacent intense commercial use.
The Comprehensive Plan states that as new commercial developments emerge, these
developments should take care to ensure that:
1. Old and new development can be served most efficiently with the least vehicle trip
distance;
2. The commercial development has the least negative impact on the neighborhood; and
3. Vehicular and pedestrian traffic is sufficient to support commercial entities.
Staff's main concern is the effect of this commercial development on the neighborhood and how
any negative impacts can be minimized. The Comprehensive Plan states, "Since commercial
development occurs close to where people live or along transportation corridors, special care
should be taken in the site design of these establishments. Landscaping to soften the impact of
the structures and lessen the effect[s]...should be a part of each development (p. 29)" The
Plan also notes the importance of unobtrusive signage near neighborhoods and entryways to
commercial corridors, landscaping within the public right-of-way, additional setbacks, and
organized access points in minimizing negative impacts to the neighborhood from commercial
development.
In Staff's opinion, the rezoning would still maintain the transition envisioned by the Comprehensive
Plan between commercial and residential properties to the east with the CO-1 zone serving as the
buffer. However, the rezoning would create an undesirable situation in which a CC-2 use abuts
residential property. As per the Comprehensive Plan, appropriate measures need to be taken to
minimize the negative effects of the intense use on the RM-44 HACAP building.
Neighborhood Compatibility: The subject property is bounded by RM-44 to the south; CO-1
and RS-12 to the east; CC-2 to the west; and RS-5 to the north across Highway 6. The CO-1
property to the east is currently occupied by the Coronet Apartments along the southern property
line, with parking for the apartments to the north of the structure. Abutting the Coronet parking to
the east are RM-44 apartment buildings. The RS-12 zone abuts the Coronet Apartment building
along its eastern property line. The RM-44 to the south of the subject property contains the
HACAP building, which shares parking with the Coronet Apartments. Pepperwood Plaza, zoned
CC-2, is directly across Broadway Street.
The general character of the neighborhood east of Broadway is mid- to high-density residential.
At present, Broadway Street provides a clear delineation between the CC-2 zone and the multi-
family structures to the east. However, the subject parcel is located at the intersection of a major
arterial and collector street and subsequently, is somewhat isolated from the neighborhood. In
Staff's opinion, with appropriate conditions such as requirements for a substantial buffer, the
heightened commercial use could be designed in a manner to be a positive benefit to the
redevelopment of the area.
The area east of Broadway Street is a neighborhood that has faced significant challenges in the
past, and some redevelopment may serve to benefit the residential and commercial properties
in the area. The Coronet Apartment building is declining in value and occupancy and provides
little in the way of aesthetic value. The building's planned demolition could provide a substantial
improvement to the area's aesthetic appeal if the proposed development is well designed and
includes landscaping and open space. Also, increased commercial activity at the subject
property could be synergistic with Pepperwood Plaza.
4
The design of the CC-2 use will partially determine the development's impact on the
surrounding neighborhood. Staffs recommendation is based partly on the effect this
development may have on existing and future development. For this effect to be positive, the
design and aesthetic appeal of a CC-2 use at this location-a gateway into the neighborhood-
must be appropriate for an area that transitions from commercial to residential but also is
highly visible from Highway 6. Any nuisance created by the use should buffered from the
existing residential developments in the area. Other issues of concern include signs, intercoms,
lighting, and building appearance.
To address the concerns raised by the proposed increase in commercial intensity Staff has
worked with the applicant to draft conditions that would ameliorate negative effects on adjacent
residential properties and also promote the development of an attractive commercial addition to
this entryway to Broadway and Pepperwood Plaza. Recommended conditions include:
1. Providing a buffer strip between the CC-2 property and RM-44 property of no less than fifty
feet wide to include a minimum 5 foot tall masonry wall located within the northern 10 feet of
the buffer, and evergreen and deciduous over story trees and shrub plantings to a minimum
S3 standard
2. Closure of the Hollywood Boulevard access point to the CO-1 property and use of a shared
access point. The shared access should utilize the existing access for 1902 Broadway and
extend to the CO-1 property but shall not infringe upon the fifty-foot buffer.
3. A landscaped 20' setback from the property line along Broadway Street.
4. Limit of one free-standing sign located in the northwest corner of the property. No building
signs on the south and east sides facing the residential development. Other fascia and
monument signs permitted per the code.
5. S3 screening of the remaining CO-1 parcel along its southern and eastern property
boundaries or alternatively along the east boundary of the CC-2 parcel.
6. The building and canopy should be a quality of design appropriate for a transition to
residential zoning. If the property is developed with a drive-in or drive-through a design that is
similar to the Woodland, California Sonic Burger, which uses stone piers and standing seam
metal roof and muted colors for the building and canopies is an example of what would be
appropriate in this location.
In absence of such conditions staff would not recommend CC-2 zoning in this location.
Traffic implications: CO-1 uses such as medical/general offices, multi-family dwellings, or
institutional uses may generate high traffic volumes but these would generally be associated with
travel to and from places of employment. CC-2 uses, on the other hand, such as commercial
recreational uses, eating and drinking establishments, and sales-oriented retail are more likely to
generate consistently high-volume traffic flows throughout the day and into the evening. If a CC-2
use, such as a restaurant, were to be located on the subject property, traffic to the site would likely
increase. The intersection of Broadway and Highway 6 is capable of handlirig additional traffic to
the property in question. The recommended conditions noted above would help to alleviate the
affects of the additional traffic on the areas residential development.
Access to the proposed CC-2 site would be directly from Broadway Street. According to a 1989
conditional zoning agreement for 1906 Broadway, any commercial development of the property
must be accessed from Broadway Street. Effectively, this closes the Hollywood Boulevard
access point which currently is the only means of accessing the property. As both properties
must be accessed by Broadway, a shared access would be most appropriate.
5
Summary: The subject property, if rezoned to CC-2, would be bounded by multi-family to the
south and CO-1 to the east. The CO-1 would maintain the transition between CC-2 and the
residential property to east emphasized in previous decisions and the Comprehensive Plan.
The intended restaurant use is one of the most intense CC-2 uses, and Staff has several
concerns regarding the location of this use nearby residential properties. Specifically, the existing
residential units to the south and, until the CO-1 property is developed, the residential properties
to the east would be exposed directly to the externalities posed by the intense commercial
development.
Staff has worked with the applicant to identify an conditions which protect the surrounding
residential properties while still allowing for the commercial redevelopment of this property. In
Staff's opinion, rezoning of the property subject to the proposed conditions benefits the City, the
applicant, and the surrounding neighborhood.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that REl06-00028, an application to rezone approximately 0.91 acres located
at 1902 and 1906 Broadway Street from Commercial Office (CO-1) to Community Commercial
(CC-2) be approved subject to a conditional zoning agreement which addressed the following:
1. Providing a buffer strip between the CC-2 property and RM-44 property of no less than fifty
feet wide to include a minimum 5 foot tall masonry wall located within the northern 10 feet of
the buffer, and evergreen and deciduous over story trees and shrub plantings to a minimum
S3 standard
2. Closure of the Hollywood Boulevard access point to the CO-1 property and use of a shared
access point. The shared access should utilize the existing access for 1902 Broadway and
extend to the CO-1 property but shall not infringe upon the fifty-foot buffer.
3. A landscaped 20' setback from the property line along Broadway Street.
4. Limit of one free-standing sign located in the northwest corner of the property. No building
signs on the south or east sides facing the residential development. Other fascia and
monument signs permitted per the code.
5. S3 screening of the remaining CO-1 parcel along its southern and eastern property
boundaries or alternatively along the east boundary of the CC-2 parcel.
6. The building and canopy should be a quality of design appropriate for a transition to
residential zoning. If the property is developed with a drive-in or drive-through use, a design
that is similar to the Woodland, California Sonic Burger, which uses stone piers and standing
seam metal roof and muted colors for the building and canopies is an example of what would
be appropriate in this location.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Location Map
2. Rezoning Exhibit
~/
Approved by:
Robert Miklo, Senior Planner,
Department of Planning and Community Development
ppdadmin\stfrep\lemplale.doc
I ~
I CITY OF IOWA CITY
I
I
I
-~ I! I I '~ P1
! ~tc--"-1-
~-~ -- Mark
I I iI/ON AGc I/o
I T wa in
I
School
~ I
~
I I
I
I " ... I i
, " 'I--:-ri.,' I. I I
0- II
<D / BRQOKWOD R
I I I , I ,
CC2 /- -~~~__ , ! I , II I I
CI1 OL YMPI ,
I -j '. 1-:;;
,
I I I ---l-- ~
n- -,--- --t--~L-l I - ~ / ,
II I I ~ , I I
. I ~, , , I I
I I I I
I I
I SOUTHGATE AVE ~~
I ~
I I -1-__ I RM- I ,
I I I ----- / ii,,' I'-I
! ~_PPERlwoOD -~N--~~~__j/ I TrirlTJr
i c T I -I 44
! I TRACY LANE
T-1 -1 tHE
OPD/RS12 --
CROSS PA K A ---.!
E' I
CROSBY LANE
I I I
w I
~ --+-- -
a::: I-- 0:: I
IRONWOOD CIRCLE o _+-_Vl_ O---c
- ~ I, ~ t __I
----- --.l -1- > -- -' 0 >-- ~
>- << 0-
:: __I CI -~ :::J
-----"--- ~-- bj
I -1 ~
SANDUSKY AVENU ---r-- a:::
, Ftl _r-
/ i I \ -l- f-~
>-L,-J_ i \ \" -t---+ -
--- / / I T'--j-' --, ----!--~
SITE LOCATION: 1902 & 1906 Broadway REZ06-00028
bJ
,
'-~
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
Notice is hereby given that the City Council of
Iowa City will hold a public hearing on the 20'h day
of February, 2007, at 7:00 p.m. in Emma J. Harvat
Hall, City Hall, 410 E. Washington Street, Iowa
City, Iowa, or if said meeting is cancelled, at the
next meeting of the City Council thereafter as
posted by the City Clerk; at which hearing the
Council will consider a resolution authorizing the
conveyance of the portion of McLean Street
located between Lexington Avenue and
Hutchinson Avenue in Manville Heights Addition,
to adjacent property owners.
Copies of the proposed resolution are on file for
public examination in the office of the City Clerk,
City Hall, Iowa City, Iowa. Persons wishing to
make their views known for Council consideration
are encouraged to appear at the above-
mentioned time and place.
MARIAN K. KARR, CITY CLERK
_____.__~__._____._u.~._._._._____________.____._____ ---.-.--.----,....------..--.----------.~-.~-.,.-.--.------.-.---...-----.-.....-.---...---...
?
Form631.'
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
BUDGET ESTIMATE
FISCAL YEAR BEGINNING JULY 1. 2007 ENDING JUNE 30. 2008
City of
Iowa City
Iowa
The City Council will conduct a public hearing on the proposed Budget at 410 E Washington 51 - City Hall
on 2120/07 at 700PM
The Budget Estimate Summary of proposed receipts and expenditures is shown below
Copies of the the detailed proposed Budget may be obtained or viewed at the offices of the Mayor,
City Clerk, and althe Library
The eslimated Total tax levy rale per $1000 valualion on regular property
The estimated lax levy rate per $1000 valuation on Agricultural land is
AIlhepublichearing,anyresidentortaxpayermaypresentobJ6clionsto, orargumenls in favor of,
any part of the proposed budget
(319)356-5041
17.78254
3.00375
MarianK Karr
phonefluml>er
CilyClerklFillanceOfficer'sNAME
BudgetFY Re-est. FY Actual FY
2008 2007 2006
......................... .... ................... {'I (bl {ej
Revenues & Other Financina Sources 1 .Lo;, locllL;, LL.U
Taxes Levied on Property
Less: Uncollected Property Taxes-Levy Year 2 0 0 0
Net Current Property axes .122788 39.0941OE
Delinquent Property Taxes 4 0 0 44,310
TIF Revenues 5 1,798.206 2467,144 976,097
Other City Taxes 6 1,466,584 1382,222 1,274.350
Licenses & Permits 7 1,260,091 1.219,543 1,289.809
Use of Money and Property 8 3,938,963 2.940,815 4,255486
Intergovernmental 9 21,657,383 38440,614 23,629.267
Charges for Services 10 37,721,095 37.824,958 35,822.522
Special Assessments 11 0 0 0
Miscellaneous 12 4,566,683 3,751,646 4,425.588
Other Financing Sources 13 53,959,143 61,480,000 47,445,144
0," evenuesan to< ources I"
.. \\ ...\ I......................
Exoenditures & Other Financino Uses I >>
Public Safety 15 1,7,49 34:
Public Works 16 11.135,061 10,821,178 9,625,096
Health and Social Services 17 0 0 0
Culture and Recreation 18 10,646,775 10,892.285 9.450,151
Community and Economic Development 19 6,041,351 6,052.821 7.411,290
General Government 20 7,891,847 7,456,343 6.470,454
Debt Service 21 11.717,610 12275,997 11.299,376
Capital Projects 22 14,251.738 37.651,869 12.971,182
Total Government Activities Expenditures 23 79,189.106 102.299,836 73.414,858
Business Type I Enterprises 24 45,878.428 47.768,134 40,018,701
Total Expenditures 26 125,067.534 150.067,970 113,433,559
TranslersQut 27 42,986,213 51.942,914 39,780,204
Total Expenditures/Transfers Out 28 168,053,747 202,010,884 153,213.763
Excess Revenues & Other Sources Over ..... ..................1.... =7.
(Under) ExpendituresfTransfers Out 29 -562,811 -13.409,834 2,602.850
on mUlng ppropna Ion
Beginning Fund Balance July 1 30 97}90,612 111,200,446 108,597,596
Ending Fund Balance June 30 31 97.227,801 97,790.612 111,200,446
~
Marian Karr
From: Carol Thompson [carolt@inav.net]
Sent: Monday, February 05, 2007 3:26 PM
To: 'City Council
Subject: Senior Center
I applaud your initiative to have a searching look at the Senior Center and the possibility of merging it with the
Recreation Department. As you know, I have a long history with the Senior Center and, now that I am a senior
myself, I see why the model that worked so well in the 1970's and '80's is less effective now. Older seniors tell me
they feel the Center has "passed them by" in favor of younger folks, and there is a certain amount of resentment
about this since they contributed significant amounts of money and volunteer time to the Center in the past.
Younger seniors see the Center as a "club" for older folks and don't find enough there that is (1) relevant to their
interests or (2) offered at a convenient time, for them to pay a membership fee to join. The negative comments I
hear do not support the Press-Citizen's thought that the Center is well-beloved among seniors. Neither do the
numbers on members or participants (and participant numbers are not precisely-calculated). I hear many
comments from non-member participants in Center activities, principally senior dining, that they feel unwelcome in
the Center.
If you divide the total Center budget by the number of members, or even the number of participants, it's a pretty
high price per person. Certainly not the value for tax dollars that we expect from the library or the recreation
department.
One of my biggest joys in retirement is playing with my foster grandchild. I would never join a facility where she is
unwelcome. I think tomorrow's seniors will want to learn and grow with people of all ages. Perhaps the model of
the segregated senior center should be replaced with a model of integration with other recreation participants.
Knowing Iowa City Recreation's record on inclusion, I feel confident they could devise safe ways for even frail
seniors to participate, and that they would know when exclusively-senior activities would be beneficial. They could
offer a wider range of activities to suit more-active seniors, leaving space in the senior center building for more
community-oriented events.
I know it takes a lot of courage for a governmental body to address an issue like this, and I commend you for
doing it.
2/5/2007
Page j of I
Marian Karr
From: Katie Roche [katie@summerofthearts.comj
Sent: Friday, February 02, 2007 9:05 AM
To: 'City Council; Steve Atkins
Subject: Information on line item of SolA budget
Dear City Council and Mr. Atkins,
When presenting to you on Monday, Dee Vanderhoef asked me about the line item "cost of merchandise" on the
budget that we submitted with our application for funding. That item is listed as $13,000 in our budget. We do
spend $13,000 on these merchandise items, but receive a discount in exchange for sponsorship with Old Capitol
Screen Printing. Last years discount was nearly $3000. The majority of merchandise items are t-shirts that we
give to volunteers. We also sell t-shirts. These shirts, posters, etc. generally make us approximately $15,000
profit, a year as I said at the meeting on Monday, but the exact figure for last year was $14, 075.
I hope that is helpful.
Thank you again for the opportunity to present this information to you.
Best Regards,
Katie Roche
2/2/2007
Dear Council Members:
I write to support your efforts to find resources to fund staffing of a new fire station.
I agree that the additional fire station should be a top priority in your budget deliberations and
applaud your creative exploration of a variety of avenues to make it a reality.
There are some 23,000 seniors (over age 50) in John son County. Of this group 960 are members
of the Iowa City Johnson County Senior Center. The Senior Center competes for
students/participants in scheduled classes/activities with the popular VI Senior College, a variety
oflibrary, church, social and community events. Most recently the VI Center for Aging has
announced classes it is presenting under the auspices of an Osher Foundation Grant. Most seniors
engage in non- centralized, "non- seniors-members- only" activities. While the library and rec
building meeting rooms are in heavy demand daytime, evenings and weekends, the rooms at the
Senior Center are virtually under utilized. If you fmd it is cost effective for the Senior Center and
ParkslRecreation to share facilities, staff and programming which will help the city provide
necessary fire protection to its citizens I believe our senior population will respond positively.
I wish you the best in your deliberations.
Sincerely,
/~ a.
L .~ 1t:J~'l'.4fr?cJ
'Bm'~m, PhD
349 Koser Ave
Iowa City, IA 52246
319-338-4139
,-----,
~.
-0:;;:,,---,
--;.:-:; ~.../
~-..
,'--'.
>~~
~;:.> ,-.....'
N
Page 1 of I
Distributed at 2/9 work session as requested by sender
Marian Karr
From: Aleda Feuerbach [aleda@pleasantvalleyic.com]
Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2007 11: 14 AM
To: 'City Council
Subject: Gilbert Street & Highway 6 Road Construction Concept Plan
Gentleman and Ladies:
I am writing in regards to the city's plans for the Gilbert Street and Hwy 6 intersection in the coming months.
Pleasant Valley Garden Center at 1301 South Gilbert Street has been on this corner since 1961...We are a locally
owned and operated business with Iowa City as our home since 1952. We have changed our business because
of needs by the city for Gilbert Street at least twice in that time frame....inciuding reducing our store square
footage so that we could keep parking & frontage on Gilbert Street.
The Concept Plan that you are considering for the latest Gilbert Street improvements will harm and damage us
greatly
You are suggesting that we service our Garden Center & Flower Shoppe customers from our back door---some
120' from our current front entrance, and in the process turn a private alley into a dangerous thoroughfare. In
addition you would take away our display areas, accesses and parking areas in the front of our store.
We will not be able to provide the service (in a competitive service business) with the concept plan that the city is
suggesting.
If we could survive the proposed changes in access, parking and display space, the construction time that you are
planning would severely restrict any seasonal spring/summer business that we would have.
Our concerns have been voiced to the City Engineers and Planning Staff prior to this writing.
Based on what we have been told and seen on the drawings as proposed, it will be difficult to continue in
business as we know it today.
In a related matter, our family owns the property at 1225 & 1226 Gilbert Street. These are presently rented with
happy tenants. Your concept plan shows an "X" thru the building at 1226 and you propose taking more parking
and access from 1225 along with changing the in/out convenience for it's car and truck traffic. These plans will
severely limit how they do business. We do not want to jeopardize our agreements with our tenants, nor have
their location on Gilbert Street adversely affected because of City of Iowa City proposals.
Anything that you do on Gilbert Street near or close to the intersection will adversely affect our businesses. We
would ask you to reconsider your present "Concept Plan".
Sincerely,
Aleda Kroeze Feuerbach
General Manager
Pleasant Valley LP & Inc.
2/7/2007
Marian Karr
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Rod Sullivan [rodsullivan@mchsi.com]
Thursday, February 08, 2007 9: 12 PM
*City Council
City budget
This correspondence will become a public record.
Dear Iowa City City Council and City Manager:
My name is Rod Sullivan, and I live at 2326 E. Court Street in Iowa City. I am writing you
today as a private citizen of our fine city; my letter is intended to represent the
opinions of no one but myself. I am writing you today with a concern over the City budget.
I believe that government plays an important role in society. Because I value government,
I do not generally feel as though I am overtaxed. I do, however, expect the tax dollars I
pay to the City to be used for City services. I strongly object to the notion of Iowa City
keeping 30% of the total tax revenue in reserve. I am personally and professionally very
frugal. I believe it is important to maintain a safety net. That said, this budget is
simply too conservative.
Iowa City has seen the floods of 193 and the tornadoes of 106, yet there have always been
enough in reserves. History tells us that we do not need this much in reserve. If you need
to spend it, I will not object.
(Personally, I believe Iowa City has needs.)
If you are not going to spend it, I want my sha~e back. I have heard councilors speak
concerned about a loss of interest income. All of us who pay property taxes are
experiencing a loss of interest income- this is because the City is holding our money! If
this money is gOlng to go unspent, allow me to earn the interest! For the City to count
lleavily on interest income is poor budgeting, in my opinion.
If the AAA Bond rating is the complicating factor, let1s dissect this issue.
First, how much money is saved by having a AAA rating versus a AA rating? Is this total
worth it? Assuming the AAA rating is worth it, surely representatives from the City can
speak to representatives from Moody1s to determine the minimum reserves that are necessary
to maintain a AAA rating.
If Moody1s has an unreasonable response, Iowa City should begin lobbying Washington for
more reasonable standards.
I hope you will consider my opinions as you finalize your FY08 budget. Thank you for your
hard work for our city.
Sincerely,
Rod Sullivan
2326 E. Court St.
Iowa City, IA 52245
354-7199
1
February 8, 2007
;
, ,
Iowa City Council Members
410 E. Washington Street
>::' F
Iowa City, IA 52240
-
..v
.c-
RE: Proposed Pedestrian Bridge
Dear Council Members,
We the undersigned, representatives of Iowa City's Peninsula Neighborhood, are writing in show of
support of the proposed Pedestrian Bridge across the Iowa River to link the Peninsula Park area with
Rocky Shore Drive.
We hope bridge construction wiil not be postponed, but will be built in next year as was planned and
budgeted.
The proposed bridge will be a significant improvement to the area. In no particular order, the benefits
would include:
. Providing an alternative point of access to the Park facilities, including the Thornberry Dog
Park and the Disk Golf Course. The route and parking areas currenliy provided for these
facilities are regularly being overwhelmed.
. Providing more cohesion between lihe Peninsula area and lihe rest of Iowa City by making the
Park area and Manviile Heights and University areas more mutuaily accessible.
. Providing much-needed nexus wilihin lihe area's pedestrian trail network
. An aestheticaily pleasing addition to lihe landscape along Rocky Shore Drive.
We hope that you will give these benefits strong consideration as you finalize the City's budget for lihe
coming year.
With Sincere Regard,
Name
Address
iIo? ~L\Ji4v'7t" IOlUl Ci+y /A 1J7Z~
I"CLLIl SUI",!.V st, 1o,-",C~I,If\ 'S;B,~;
J a g'1 ~wj."hell jt. IGuJA.. t!.ihlJ IA
) 6oi~~
[5~' r o~R,Q I \~<.L':+orzz<f'r
1.527 fPsf<~ ~
I 'Z-/t PO'i>+V- ~,~~. ~Z#S
I Cy;-4- u' <; f1?VL.- /2.1) I C. t;' z--1J;4- S
1~lq fbsw fL1 'Fowl! 011'0- SZZ-ifS-
Iowa City Council:
The Youth Advisory Commission is urging you to support the establishment of a new late-night
bus route. In light of the string of assaults that have occurred in the past few months, expanded
public transit would provide a safer option.
Based upon the proposal of University of Iowa Student Government City Council Liaison Austin
Baeth, the bus service would run on Friday and Saturday nights from 9:30 P.M. to 2:30 A.M. It
would run for 28 weeks of the year, coinciding with the academic calendars of the locals schools
and university. The route would run along a northern border of Market or Church Street, eastern
border of Summit or Governor Street, southern border of Bowery Street, and western border of
Clinton Street. This encompasses some of the most densely popUlated neighborhoods. It would
essentially provide a safe means for people to return to their homes after enjoying the many
offerings our downtown has to offer.
Naturally the price of this service must be considered. According to Baeth's estimates, the
service would cost the city approximately $34,000 annually. This cost could be defrayed by
charging for the service, either the standard $0.75 or $1.00 per ride. However, the hidden cost of
people not visiting the downtown due to fears for their safety must not be forgotten. By providing
a safe alternative to waiking or driving, more people could frequent the many businesses that
make this city special.
We urge you to consider this proposal.
Youth Advisory Commission
r
r",.}
,""\
(.5"1
----i
,
..j
C)
r'..)
Page 1 of 1
+~
Marian Karr
From: june braverman [bravejune@earthlink.net]
Sent: Sunday, February 04, 20076:35 PM
To: 'City Council
Subject: Budget considerations
I write to support efforts to determine the cost effectiveness of merging two city departments, Parks and
Recreation and the Iowa City Johnson County Senior Center with the goal of funding personnel for a new fire
station. I agree that the safety of our citizens should be paramount in budget considerations and all avenues to
assure their safety should be apriority. There are some 23,000 Johnson County residents over the of 50 and the
Senior Center boasts a membership of 970 some. While the library and rec center facilities are well utilized, the
Senior Center building by comparison is virtually unused during the day, weekends and evenings. Meanwhile
programming for seniors has increased in our area with the popular UI Senior College, library classes and now
the Center for Aging with the advent of the Osher grant.
I think many seniors would agree that sharing facilities, programs and staff would be advantagous for all
age groups should this be seen as cost effective. I salute you for looking at the harsh realities of funding a fire
station with a creative approach.
June Braverman, Ph.D.
349 Koser Ave.
Iowa City, IA 52246
319-338-4139
bravejune@earthlink.net
2/20/2007
Page 1 of 1
-if?
Marian Karr
From:
Kathryn Johansen
Thursday, February 15, 20072:41 PM
Marian Karr
Sent:
To:
Subject: FW: Preliminary Program Schedule - Irving Weber Days
Attachments: 2007 Master Plan2-09-07.pdf
Marian,
Per Council's request, attached please find information provided by Barb Coffey regarding Irving Weber Days.
Thanks- Kathi
~-----~,--~-~~~.~~~~~-~--_.~----~---~-~~~--~'--'_..~-----~~~-----------------_.
From: Barb Coffey
Sent: Thursday, February 15, 2007 2:36 PM
To: Kathryn Johansen
Subject: Preliminary Program Schedule - Irving Weber Days
Kathi - this is what the chair of the Weber Days Committe Kara Logsden, ICPL, has worked up for programming
so far (she is on vacation right now). Some items are still tentative and being worked on. I'm sure we will not use
all the funds budgeted. Kara knew about budget concerns and we are keeping an eye on the overall
cost. Friends of Historic Preservation, Johnson County Historical Society, Iowa City Geneological Society, and the
UI Project on Place Studies (Tom Dean) are active members of the committee and are providing complementary
activities. The events occur throughout the month of May, Historic Preservation Month. Ice cream is served at
many of the activities in honor of Weber's Quality Chekd dairy connection.
As far as promotion, there will be a utility bill insert detailing the Weber Days program to be distributed in April,
media releases, and web pages on both the Library and City websites. The UI website always links to it as well.
The local media always give it good coverage with their own reports.
If you need any other information at this time, just let me know.
Barb Coffey
Document Services Supervisor
319356.5061
2115/2007
Weber Days 2007 Master Plan
Updated 2/15/2007 2:22 PM
Event Presenter Location/ Person in Other notes
Date/Time Charlie
Sundav nioht KRUI Radio Show Tom Dean
Training - Tracing Your Roots Iowa City Ka ra Logsden/ Kara will go to ICGS
Genealogical Rosemary board meeting 2.12.07
Societv Tiwari
X UI Archaeology Field School at Plum Grove Thomas Charlton, 05.14.07-
Excavating Monday-Friday, weather permitting. UI 06.01.07
The grounds of Plum Grove are open to the publiC during the Monday -
three-week fieid school. Members of the public are welcome to Friday
visit the site and observe the excavations in progress and talk with (no dig on
the archaeology students about their findings. Memorial
Day)
8:00 AM -
5:00 PM
X Irving Weber Our Favorite Stories Kara Logsden, Tom 5.09.07 Kara Logsden 6 readers
Come to the Library to hear local residents read their favorite Dean Noon
Irving B. Weber stories. 4 others - anyone ICPL Room A May serve ice cream
volunteer?
X Brown Bag Lunch - University of Iowa Architecture Rod Lehnertz 5.15.07 Kara Logsden May serve ice cream.
2007 Weber Lecture. 12:00
ICPL Room A
x Weber Chautauqua - Music for children with the Drollinger Family Drollingers 5.19.07 1 $200 honorarium
10:30 AM May serve Ice Cream
ICPL Room A
X Open House Johnson County Historical Society and Antique Car 5.19.072 Margaret $ needed for
Museum of Iowa 1-5 PM Wieting food/beverages
860 Quarry
Road
Coralville
x House Tour - Houses restored using salvaged historic house parts Friends of Historic 5.20.07 Helen Burford
Preservation 3 houses
X Old Time Music and Ice Cream Social - High and Lonesome with Aleda and AI 5.21.07 Kara Logsden $200 to Legion Arts.
Aleda and Ai Murphy (A Cultural Express program co-sponsored Murphy 7:00 PM They will cover
with Legion Arts). We will serve Ice Cream at this event. Iowa ICPL Room A remainder of $1,400 cost
City Host Noon Lions Club may serve the ice cream. of program. Cost of Ice
Cream.
X Plum Grove Open for the Season Old Fashioned Games Johnson County 5.26.07 Margaret Call 351-5738 for more
Historical Society 5.27.07 Wieting information.
1-5 PM
Plum Grove
1030 Carroll
W:\wpdata\IrvingWeber\2007\2007 Master Plan2-09-07.doc
Street
Iowa Citv
X ICPL Online History Resources Training ICPL Staff 5.26.07 Maeve Clark
10:30 AM
. ICPL Training
Room
x Display - Historic Preservation Awards Friends of Historic All Month Helen Burford
Preservation ICPL
x Display - Little Dairy on the Prairie State Archeologists All Month Lynn Alex
Office
X Local History Month on The Library Channel Cable Channel 10 All Month Beth Fisher Tune in at :
ICPL
x Display Weber Days-Local History Resources Iowa City Public All Month Kara Logsden /
Library ICPL MaeveClark
x Display - Oxford Project Photographs Humanities Iowa Ali Month- Kara Logsden 61" diagonal, sound, 80
ICPL pounds doesn't move
Committee:
Burford Helen Friends of Historic Preservation hburford(QJmchsi.com
Coffev. Barb Citv of Iowa Citv barb-coffev@iowa-citV.orq
Dean Tom Iowa Proiect on Place Studies UI thoma s-k -d ean@uiowa.edu
Loosden Kara - Chair Iowa City Public Librarv kioosdenaDicDl.oro
Wietina Marqaret Johnson Countv Historical Societv mwietinq@Jaol,com
Tiwari Rosemarv Iowa Citv Genealooical Societv retiwari@mchsi,com
Randak Leiah Ann Johnson County Historical Societv laiichs. iuno.com
Cochran, Brandon Johnson Countv Historical Society bra nd on. coch ran@y a hoo. com
Notes/Pendinq:
Iowa Avenue Walking Tour-Survey of damage and celebration of Friends of Historic Heien Burford
orooress Preservation
Weber School Modeis Weber School Kara No models this
Loosden vear
W: \wpdata\lrvingWeber\2007\2007 Master Plan2-09-07 .doc
I ~ I
~~~~Ilf:
~" "=Im~
......~
~l
CITY OF IOWA CITY
MEMORANDUM
Date February 9, 2007
From:
Steve Atkins, City Manager
Deb Mansfield, Budget Management Analyst
D.d3- ;r,~
To'
Re: FY 2008 Budget - Public Hearing Notice
Attached are the state budget forms for Iowa City's FY 2008 Proposed Budget. The public hearing notice
appeared in today's Iowa City Press Citizen.
The proposed FY 2008 city levy rate published was $17.78254. City Council directed staff at a subsequent
budget meeting this morning to keep the levy rate at the FY 2007 levy rate This reduced the proposed city
levy from 17.78254 to 1729662. Per $100,000 of taxable valuation, a residential property would pay $2214
less than proposed and a commercial property would pay $48.59 less than proposed.
The general fund balance was reduced by $1.17 million and FY08 property taxes decreased from the FY08
public hearing notice by $1.15 million. The general fund will fund $934,947 in debt service expenditures in
order to remain at the current levy rate.
Republication for the Public Hearing will not be required since there were no increases in property taxes or
program expenditures.
Other City Council revisions included within the public hearing notice for FY 2008 include the following
Description: FY 2008
Budaet
Add Napoleon'Park Restrooms I Concession $225,000
Defer Rocky Shore Pedestrian Bridge to FY 2011 ($1,300,000)
Add back a placeholder in CIP for Trail projects $1,000,000
The public hearing for the FY 2008 budget is scheduled for February 20, 2007. Adoption of the budget is
scheduled for March 6, 2007.
Please contact me or Kevin O'Malley, Finance Director if you have any questions.
CITY OF Iowa City PROPOSED BUDGET SUMMARY
*AS REVISED BY CITY COUNCIL ON 2/9/07
Form6352A
C)epa'trrlent of Management
YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2008 Fiscal Years
SPECIAL DEBT CAPITAL BUDGET RE.ESTIMATEO ACTUAL
GENERAL REVENEU$ SERVICE PROJECTS PERMANENT PROPRIETARY 2008 2007 2006
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ m
Revenues & Other Financing Sources
Taxes L_l'1vied?_~_i'~~er!y __ 77 22,292,342 106 8,652,524 134 9,028,600 161 0 234 39,973,466 264 39,094,108 2~ 36,654.040
Less Uncollect~_~ Property Taxes-levy Yea~ 78 _ 0 107 0 135 0 162 0 235 0 265 0 295 0
Net Currenl Property Taxes 79 -22,292,342 108 8,652,524 136 9,028,600 163 0 236 39.973.466 266 39,094,108 296 36,654.040
DelinquenIPr?eerty:Ta~~s_ 80 0 109 0 137 0 164 0 237 0 267 0 297 44.310
TIF Revenues 110 1,798.206 238 1,798,206 268 2,467.144 298 976,097
~~herCitYT-a-;;:~s _ __ 81 1,116,846 1q H2,~80 138r~57.259 --;-651 0 239 1,446,385 269 1,382,222 299 1,274,350
Licenses~Permits______ 82 '_,?!55_,691 112 01--_ __n__ _____ __un 212 4,400 240 1.260.091 270 1.219,543 300 1,289.809
Use of Money and Property 83 1.284,078 113 59.676 139 50,384 166 0 194\ 3,310 2'3 2,541.515 241 3,938.963 271 2.940,815 3C1 4,255.486
Int;~overnmental 84- 3.160.599 114 7,978,550 140 0 167 2,173,176 426 8,345,058 242 21,657.383 272 38.440.614 302 23,629,267
-c-ha~~e~.IorFee~&Service 85 4,312,199 115 0 141 0 168 0 1951 0 2'4 33.408,896 243 37,721,095 273 37,824,958 303 35,822.522
~p~iaIAs~essme~ts_ 86 0 116 0 142 0 169 0 427 0 244 0 274 0 304 0
Mis~lianeous --- 87 1,940,756 117 245,455 143 100.000 170 0 1961 0 215 2,280,472 245 4.566,683 275 3,751,646 305 4.425.588
S~b-TotaIRevenues---- 88 35,362,511 118 18,906.691 1~4 9,336,243 ~71 __2,173,176197 3,3102'6 46.580,341246 112.362.272 276 127,121,050306 108,371.469
Other Financing Sources:
Transfers In _ 89 13,964,804 119 519,920 145 2,431,751 172 11,975,602 19B] 0 2'7 14,794,509 247 43,686,586 277 51,942.914 307 39,780,204
Procee~ofDebt ----- 90 - 0 459 0 146 0 173 10.250,000 21B 0 248 10,250,000 278 8,400,000 30B 7.340.852
Proceeds of Capitol Asset Sales 91 101,330 0 147 0 174 0 1991 0 219 621,600 249 722.930 279 1.137,086 309 324.088
T~tal Reve~ues and Othe~-Sources 92 ---49,428,645 120 19,426,611 14B 11,767,99'4 175 24,398,778 20~1 3,310 220 61.996,450 250 167,021,788 280 188.601,050 310 155,816,613
Expenditures & Other Financing Uses 1_ ____
Public Safety 600 17,372.811 609 131,913 623 0 335 17,504,724 632 17,149,343 642 16.187.309
PublicW;;-~s ----- 601 ---11,133,250610 U{a-f1 624 0 336 11.135,061 633 10,821.178643 9.625.096
Health and Social Services 602 0 611 0 625 0 352 0 634 0 644 0
~--~ --~ -. .~
Culture and R!,:crealion _ ___n__ 603 _lQ-,-?_46,775 612 0 626 0 371 1q,~~6,775 635 10,892,285 645 9,450,151
~_ommunityand~~nomicD_evel,:,pm_e_nt 604 !_,_~?_1,_031 613 4,180,3?q 627 0 372 6,041,351 636 6.052,821 646 7,411,290
General Government 605 7,480,794 614 411,053 628 0 373 7,891.847 637 7.456.343 647 6.470.454
~~btService_----- - 606r------ -- 0615 9.5i181 11cZl?,610 629 0 440 11.717,610638 12,275,997648 11,299.376
C~prt;IProjects - 607 0 616 0 6211 14,251,738 630 0 441 14,251,738 639 37,651.869 649 12,971,182
Total Govemment Activities Expenditures 608 48,494,661 617 4,725,097 6191 11,717,610 622 14,251,738 631 0 442 79,189,106 640 102,299.836 650 73,414,858
Business Type Proprietray Enterprise & ISF 45,878,428 374 45,878,428 641 47,768,134 651 40,018,701
Total Gov& Bus Type Expenditures 97 48,494,661 125 4,725,097 153 11,717.610 180 14.251,738 205 0 225 45,878,428 255 125,067.534 285 150,067,970 315 113,433,559
TransfersOUl 101 2,301,952 129 14,699,182 156 ..0 184 1q,_541,607 207 0 229 16,143,845 259 43,686,586 289 51,942,914 319 39,780.204
TotaIALLExpendituresfTril~~f~rsOut n__ 102 -50,796,613 130 19,424,279 157 11,717,610 185 24,793,345 208 0 23C 62.022.273 260 168.754,120 290 202,010,884 320 153,213,763
Excess Revenues & Other Sources Over I" '
(Under) ExpendituresfTransfersOut 1031 -1,367,968 1311 2,332 1581 50,384 186 -394,567 2091 3,310 23~ -25,823 261 ~1,732,332 291 -13.409,834 3211 2,602.850
Continuing Appropriation 652 0 653 0 654 0 655 0
Bo:l~i~..!:lin!:!Fund8alancEl_J~ly_1 __104 18,100,462 ,32 3.892,153 159 2,269,259 187 2,056,146210 96.296232 71,376,296262 97,790.612292 111.200,446 322 108,597.596
Ending Fund Balance June 30 105 16,732,494 133 3,894,485 160 2,319,643 188 1,661,579 211 99,606 233 71.350,473 263 96.058,280 293 97,790,612 323 111,200,446
,""., ti]~ ,
u..po""",,,, or...........,....",
As Reduced by City Council on 2/9/0752 -48 3
Adoption of Budget and Certification of City Taxes
The City of:
Iowa City
County Name:
FISCAL YEAR BEGINNING JULY 1, 2007 - ENDING JUNE 30, 2008
JOHNSON
Date Budget Adopted:
A' a m"c\IOY 01 tho C~y CounCil. hok:l ""or Ihe public hearing as reqUired by law, as 5pec,ried abQv~, Ihe propu,ed budgel wa' adopled a, ,umrnanlOd and allaclwd ~er~lu anoia> le"'~' ., "~rT"/cd
1",1"", w~r(, "p~ruved lur all ta>able ~w~er1y ,,1 1t1l< Clly Thurc ,s all~cl1ed a Long Term Debl S~Mdule Fun" 7113 1(11 Ihe detJl <crv,~e needs. 01 any
I --:^""-'-
Regular
DEBT SERVICE
Ag Land
i31913:.o:.041
I.~,I OIl,cl.1 eel"'"
January 1, 2006 Property Valuations
With Gas & I:loclrlC Wlthoul Ga, & I:lectflc
"_" """__nn.... ""_un_nnn_.n
"
2,331,569,522 2b
2.426.433,096 Jb
1.533,849
2,290,027,117
2,384,890,691
Code Dollar
See limit Purpose
3841 810000 Regular General levy
13841
12(&1
12(10l
12(11)
12(12)
12(131
121141
12(Hl
12(16l
12(1&)
12(22)
(384)
12(11
12(2l
12(3)
12l4)
1215)
12(61
12(9l
12(11)
12l1~)
12(21)
28E.22
Non-Voted Other Permissible Levies
067500 Contract for use of Bridge
o 950110 Opr & Maint pubiicly owned Transit
AmI Nee Rent, Ins. Maint of Civic Center
013500 Opr & Maint of City owned Civic Center
006750 Planning a Sanitary Disposal Project
0271100 Aviation Authority (under see 330A, 15)
Amt Nee Joint city-county building lease
006750 Levee Impr. fund in special charter city
Ami Nec Liability, property & self insurance costs
Ami Nee Support of a Local Emerg,MgmLComm
Voted Other Permissible Levies
0.13500 InstrumentalNocal Music Groups
Memorial Building
Symphony Orchestra
027000 Cultural & Scientific Facilities
A, Vot~d County Bridge
135000 Missi or Missouri River Bridge Canst
003375 Aid to a Transit Company
020500 Maintain Institution received by gift/devise
100000 City Emergency Medical District
Support Public Library
Unified Law Enforcement
"
0.51000
013500
0.27000
150000
384,1
Total General Fund Regular Levies (5 thru 24)
300375 Ag land
Total General Fund Tax Levies (25 + 26)
Special Revenue Levies
021000 Emergency (if general fund at levy limit)
Ami Nee Police & Fire Retirement
Ami Nee FICA & IPERS (if general fund at levy limit)
Ami Nee Other Employee Benefits
TO/ill Employee Benefit Levies (29,30,31)
Sub Total Special Revenue Levies (28+32)
Valuation
As Req vWh Gas & Elec ltVi/houl Gas & Elec
..
384.&
384,6
'"
SSMIO 1 1"<
SSMID 2 IA)
SSMID3 <A)
SSMID4 tAl
SSMID5 tAl
SSMID6 '''<
Total SSMfD
'"
'"
'"
'"
'"
",
(34 thru37)
TAXES LEVIED
IAI
Request with
Utility Roplacement
iBl
Property Taxes
levied
18,885,713
18,549,220
w
"
"
"
"
'"
o
2,214,991
o
o
o
o
o
o
961,808
o
o
2,175,526
o
o
o
o
o
o
944,682
o
"
"
"
'"
"
"
"
n
'"
"
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
629,524
o
22,692,036
4,607
22,696,643
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
618,307
o
22,287,735
4,607
22,292,342
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
o
o
o
8,809,494
8 809 494
8,809,494
o
o
o
8,652,524
8652,524
8,652,524
"
"
"
"
00
00,
",
"
"
o
Total Special Revenue Levies (33+38) 39 8,809,494 8,652.524
3B4,4 Ami Nee Debt Service Levy 76.10(6) 40 9,185,859 40 9,028.600
3547 Oijl,OO Capital Projects (Capitallmprov. Reserve) 41 0 41 0
Total Property Taxes (27+39+40+41) 42 40,691,996 42 39.973.466
COUNTY AUDITOR I certify the budget is in compliance with ALL the following:
Iludgets submitted that DO NO 1 meet the follOWing crrterla are not legal documents and Will be returned 10 the city for correcllon
1'1
Rate
" 8.10000
.. 0
" 095000
'" 0
" 0
.. 0
" 0
;0 0
;, 0
" 0.41252
'"' 0
" 0
,. 0
" 0
" 0
" 0
" 0
" 0
eo 0
'"' 0
" 0,27000
"' 0
"
"' 0
Q
65 3,77835
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
" 0
" 0
" 0
69 0
'" 0
'" 0
Do NOIAdd
;0 378575
n 0
n 17.29662
I) nle ~rescnbed Notice ull-'ulJlic Hearing eudgel bt""ale (Form 6J1 1) ....as lawrully pUbli<hed, or pu,led il applicable, and not.riled, filed proof wa, evidenced
2'1 e"dg"'~earr"gnolices....erepul>li"heO(]rpostednotlesslh.n 10 days, nOf mom Ihan 20 d.ys, p<iorlothc budget he",ing
JI Al1o~led property laxe5 do nOI e>ceed pUbli,lledm I'usted amount<
4) Adopled exp~ndil\Jresdo nolexceed published o<po<ted amounls in each of the nine program area<, orin lotal
I CoonI)"A"""", ,
h'rn6311
DepertrnentoTMen.gern.nl
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
BUDGET ESTIMATE
FISCAL YEAR BEGINNING JULY 1,2007 - ENDING JUNE 30, 2008
Cllyof
Iowa City
, Iowa
The City Council will conduct a publiC hearing on the proposed Budget at
410 E Washington 5t - City Hall
on
2/20/07
at
700 PM
(Date) JlxlxxlxJl (hour)
The Budget Estimate Summary of proposed receipts and expenditures is shown below
Copies of the the detailed proposed Budget may be obtained or viewed at the offices of the Mayor,
City Clerk, and at the library
The estimated Total tax levy rate per $1000 valuation on regular property
The estimated tax levy rate per $1000 valuation on Agricultural land is
$
.$
17.78254
300375
At the public hearing, any resident or taxpayer may present objections to, or arguments in favor of, any part
of the proposed budget
(319) 356-5041
phone number
Marian K. Karr
City ClerillFinance Officer's NAME
Budget FY Re-estimated FY Actual FY
2008 2007 2006
(a) (b) (e)
Revenues & Other Financina Sources
Taxes Levied on Property 1 41,122,788 39,094,108 36,654,040
Less: Uncollected Property Taxes-Levy Year 2 0 0 0
Net Current Property Taxes 3 41,122,788 39,094,108 36,654,040
Delinquent Property Taxes 4 0 0 44,310
TIF Revenues 5 1,798,206 2.467,144 976,097
Other City Taxes 6 1.466,584 1,382,222 1,274,350
licenses & Permits 7 1,260,091 1,219,543 1,289,809
Use of Money and Property 8 3,938,963 2,940,815 4,255.486
Intergovernmental 9 21,657,383 38.440,614 23,629.267
ChargeS for fees & Service 10 37,721,095 37,824,958 35,822,522
Special Assessments 11 0 0 0
Miscellaneous 12 4,566,683 3,751,646 4.425,588
Other Financing Sources 13 53,959,143 61.480,000 47.445,144
Total Revenues and Other Sources 14 167.490,936 188,601,050 155,816,613
EXDenditures & Other Financina Uses
Public Safety 15 17,504,724 17,149,343 16,187,309
Public Works 16 11,135,061 10,821,178 9,625,096
Health and Social Services 17 0 0 0
Cullure and Recreation 18 10,646,775 10,892,285 9.450,151
Community and Economic Developmenf 19 6,041,351 6,052,821 7.411,290
General Government 20 7,891,847 7.456,343 6.470.454
Debt Service 21 11,717,610 12,275,997 11,299,376
Capital Projects 22 14,251,738 37,651,869 12,971,182
Total GOVernment Activities Expenditures 23 79,189,106 102,299,836 73.414,858
Business Typel Enterprises 24 45,878.428 47,768,134 40,018,701
Total ALL Expenditures 25 125,067,534 150,067,970 113.433,559
Transfers Out 26 42,986,213 51,942,914 39,780,204
Total ALL Expenditures/Transfers Out 27 168,053,747 202,010,884 153,213,763
Excess Revenues & Other Sources Over
(Under) Expenditures/Transfers Out 28 -562,811 -13.409,834 2,602,850
Continuing Appropriation 29 0 0
Beginning Fund Balance July 1 30 97,790,612 111,200.446 108,597,596
Ending Fund Balance June 30 31 97,227,801 97,790,612 111,200.446
.
CITY OF Iowa City PROPOSED BUDGET SUMMARY
. AS PUBLISHED IN IOWA CITY PRESS CITIZEN ON 2/9/07
(before City Council Reductions)
Form 635.2A
Oe01l't'1en~ 01 Managemen~
YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2008 Fiscal Years
SPECIAL DEBT CAPITAL BUDGET RE-ESTIMATED ACTUAL
GENERAL REVENEUS SERVICE PROJECTS PERMANENT PROPRIETARY 2008 2007 2006
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ m
Revenues & Other Financing Sources
Tax_es Levle?,()r: Property 77 22,292,342 106 a.,_~82,9~ 134 9,947,522 161 0 234 41,122,810 264 39.094,108 294 36.654,040
Less_~~ollectecPrcpeT!YTaxes.Le\lyY~ar 78 0 107 0 135 0 162 0 235 0 265 0 295 0
Net Current Property Taxes 79 22,292,342 108 8,882,946 136 9,947,522 163 0 236 41.122,810 266 39,094,108 296 36.654,040
gelinquentPrcperty_I1:Ixes 80 0 109 __ 0 ~~!_ ____ 0 164 0 237 0 267 0 297 44,310
TIFRevenues 110 _ !,,}9a,206__ _ _ __ 238 1,798.206 268 2.467,144 298 976,097
~!!i~S:il!,:Taxes _ 81 1.116,846 111 ____~!6,4:g~r-- 173,284 -16S[ ------- - 0 239 1.466,562 269 1,382.222 299 1,274.350
Licenses & Permlls 82 1.255,691 11? 0 ___ _ _ 2'2 4,400 240 1,260,091 270 1.219,543 300 1.289,809
~seof.M_on~J'..~nd Property 83 1,284,078 113 _ _~9,67~ 13~ -- - 50,3-84 -166 0 194] 3.310 213 2,541 ,5]_~ 241 3,938.963 271 2940,815 301 4,255,486
!n_!.ergove!nmental, __ __ 84 3,160.599 114 ,!,978,550 140 0 167 2,173,176 426 8,345,0?8 242 21,657.383 272 38,440,614 302 23,629.267
Ch!3-rgesforFees&Servlce - 85 4,312,199 115 ----O~141 0 168 01951 0 214 33,408,8_~-6 243 37,721,095273 37.824.958303 35,822.522
~eciaIA~~~sments 86 0 116 0 ~42 0 169 0 t.27 0 244 0 274 0 304 0
Miscellaneous 87 1,940,756 117 245,455 143 100,000 170 0 196 0 2'5 2,280,472 245 4,566,683 275 3,751,646 305 4,425.588
Sub-Total Revenues 88 35,362,511 118 -1~~.~_41,261_~' 10,271,190 171 2,_~73,1_?6 197\ 3,310 216 46,580,341 246 113,531,793 276 127.121,050 306 108,371.469
Other Financing Sources:
Transfers In 89 14,199,378 119 519,920 145 1.496,804 172 11,975,602 1981 0 2'7 14,794,509 247 42,986,213 277 51,942,914 307 39,780.204
~~_~edsofD~~ 90 0 459 0 146 0 173 10,250,OQO 2'8 0 248 10,250,000 278 8.400,000 308 7,340.852
Proceeds of CaPitol Asset Sales 91 101,330 0 147 0 174 0 1991 0 219 621,600 249 722.930 279 1,137,086 309 324.088
T~taIRe~;nuesand-OtherSources 92 49,663,219 120 19,66f.f8-S 148 11.767,994 175 24,398,7782001 3,310220 61,996,450250 167,490.936280 188,601,050310 155,816,613
Expenditures & Other Financing Uses f--
Publi~_:s.afety__ 600 17,372,811 6'09 131.913 623 0 335 17,504,724 632 17,149.343 642 16.187.309
Public Works __ ____ 601 11.133,250 610 j~~11 624 0 336 11.135,061 633 10,821,178 643 9,625,096
Health and Social Services 602 0 611 0 625 0 352 0 634 0 644 0
c:ultureandR~crealion_____ ___ 603 10,646,775612 """,0 626 0 371 10,646,775635 10,892.285645 9,450.151
Com~unity ~~~~_~~omlc Devel()P!r1_e.,nt__ 604 1,861,031 613 4,180--,.3_~ 627 0 372 6,041,351 636 6,052,821 646 7.411.290
General Government 605 7,480,794 614 411,053 628 0 373 7.891,847 637 7.456,343 647 6.470.454
DebtS~~i~e ---~-_ __ ---- _ 606 0 615 _-0 618L 11717610 629 0 440 11,717,610 638 12,275,997 648 11,299,376
Capital Projects 607 0 616 - 0 - 621 I 14.251,738 630 0 441 14,251.738 639 37.651,869 649 12,971,182
Total GovemmentActivitiesExpenditures 608 48,494,661 6~7 4,725.097 619 11.717,610 6221 14,251,738 631 0 442 79,189,106 640 102,299,836 650 73,414.858
BusinessTypeProprietray Enterprise&ISF 45,878,428 374 45,878,428 641 47,768.134 651 40.018,701
TotalGov& Bus Type Expenditures 97 48.494,661 125 4.725,097 153 11,717,610 180 14,251,738 205 0 225 45,878,428 255 125.067,534 285 150,067,970 315 113.433,559
_~~nsfersO!:l~__ _ __ ______ 101 1,367,005 129 14,933,756 156 .. _ 0 184 ~O,541.6~)7 207 0229 16,143.845259 42,986,213289 51.942,914319 39,780.204
Total ALL ExpendituresITransfers Out 102 49,861,666 130 19,658,853 157 11.717,610 185 -24.793,345 208 0 23G 62.022,273 26G 168,053.747 290 202.010.884 320 153,213.763
Excess Revenues & Other Sources Over
(Under) ExpendituresrTransfers Out 1031 -198,447 1311 2,332 1581 50,384 186 -394,567 2091 3.310 231 -25,823 261 -562,811 291 -13,409,834 3211 2,602.850
Continuing Appropriation 652 0 653 0 654 0 655 0
Beginni~J!~~~dBalanceJl!lx1 __ 104 18,100.462 132 3,89~,153 159 2.269.259 187 2,056.146 210 96,296 232 71,376.296 262 97,790,612 292 111.200,446 322 108.597,596
Ending Fund Balance June 30 105 17,902.015 133 3,894.485 160 2,319.643 188 1,661,579 211 99.606 233 71,350,473 263 97,227,801 293 97,790.612 323 111,200.446
'0'",5}0'
D.C.~.rn.n'or ....~.II""""'t
As Published 2/9/07
52-483
Adoption of Budget and Certification of City Taxes
FISCAL YEAR BEGINNING JULY 1, 2007. ENDING JUNE 30, 2008
The City of:
Iowa City
County Name:
JOHNSON
Date Budget Adopted:
At a r",,"lln~ ollhe [,Iy COLU1~i1 lleKJ aile' II'l' ~u~I'" ncan,,~ a, requ",e,1 ~~ I~w. a' 'pecll'e<! abuve It", ~mpUleo ~udgel wa. adopled as sumrnanIeo and illlacl1CO Ilerclu. ano lax le",es, "S Ile<1l1ieO
!Jill"", were "p~ru'Je<ll{)( alll"~a~l~ ~ropt'rty 01 n,,, C~~ n'ere rS allaclwcJ aiuny ferm Dl,bl Sc;hecJule Furm/OJ lorlhellelll SUfVlce need~, II any
(319)356.5041
'-.-..~,"",,- <",...".
Counly AudllOr Oate Slilmp January 1, 2006 Property Valuations
l With Gas& Electflc W,lhout Gas & Electrrc LastQllieralCcnsu.
__nnun_nn_n____ "_____________n____
Regular " 2,331,569,522 " 2,290,027,117
DEBT SERVICE " 2,426.433,096 " 2,384,890,691
Ag land .. 1,533,849
TAXES LEVIED
'" '" '"
Code Dollar Requeltwith Property Talles
Sec. Limit Purpose Utility Replacement Levied Rilte
384.1 810000 Regular General levy 18,885J13 1!3,?49,220 " 8,10000
(384) Non-Voted Other Permissible levies
\2(8) 067500 Contract for use of Bridge 0 0 .. 0
12(10) 095000 Opr & Maint publicly owned Transit 2,214,991 2,175,526 ., 095000
1Z(11) Am1Nec Rent, Ins Mainl of Civic Center 0 0 .. 0
12112) 013500 Opr & Mainl of City owned Civic Center 0 0 " 0
12(131 006750 Planning a Sanilary Disposal Project " 0 0 .. 0
12(141 021000 Aviation Authority (under sec,330A 15) " 0 0 .. 0
12(151 Ami Nee Joint city-county building lease " 0 0 5' 0
12(161 0.06750 levee Impr, fund in special charter city " 0 0 5' 0
12(181 AmtNee Liability. property & self insurance costs " 961,808 944,682 5' 041252
12(22) ArnlNce Support of a local Emerg.Mgmt Comm .., 0 0 "5 0
(384) Voted Other Permissible levies
12111 013500 InstrumentalNocal Music Groups '5 0 0 " 0
12(21 081000 Memorial Building " 0 0 5. 0
1213) 013,00 Symphony Orchestra " 0 0 55 0
12(4) 0.21000 Cultural & Scientific Facilities " 0 0 5<; 0
12(5) A,Voted County Bridge " 0 0 5' 0
12(6) 135000 Missi or Missouri River Bridge Canst " 0 0 5. 0
12191 003375 Aid to a Transit Company " 0 0 " 0
12(171 0.20500 Maintain Institution received by gift/devise " 0 0 "' 0
12(191 1.00000 City Emergency Medical District ." 0 0 ... 0
12(211 0.27000 Support Public Library " .6_2_9,~24 618,307 " 0.27000
28E.22 1.50000 Unified Law Enforcement " 0 0 "' 0
Total General Fund Regular Levies (5 thru 24) " 22,692,036 22,287,735
384,1 300375 Ag land " .4,~QL 4.607 " 3,00375
Total General Fund Tax Levies (25 + 26) " 22.696.643 22,292.342 I 00 NolAdd I
Special Revenue levies
384.8 0.27000 Emergency (if general fund at levy limit) " _~~~2~4_ 230,400 .. 010061
384.6 AmtNee Police & Fire Retirement " 1915,587 .1,881,463 082159
Ami Nee FICA & IPERS (if general fund at levy limit) " 2,372.438 2,330,.E1 1.01753
AmtNee Other Employee Benefits " 4,521,469 4,440,912 1.93924
Total Employee Benefit Levies (29,3{1,31) " 8 809 494 8652.546 0; 3.77835
Sub Total Special Revenue Levies (28+32) " 9,044,068 8,882,946
Valuation
'" AsReq With Gas & Elec WithoutGas&Elec
SSMID 1 ,~ ," " 0 .. 0
SSMID2 ,~ ,B', " 0 "' 0
SSMIl) 3 ,~ .., " 0 .. 0
SSMI04 ,^, .., ", 0 .. 0
SSMID S 'A> ," ", 0 '"5 0
SSMIO 6 iA\ '"i " 0 5.. 0
TotalSSMID (34thru37) " 0 0 00 Not Add
Total Special Revenue Levies (33+38) '" 9,044,068 8.882,946
384-4 ArnlNec Debt Service Levy 76,10(6) " 10,120,806 " 9,947,522 " 4.17106
384.7 0.67500 Capital Projects (Capitallmprov. Reserve) " 0 " 0 " 0
Total Property Taxes (27+39+40+41 ) " 41,861,517 " 41,122.810 n 1778254
COUNTY AUDITOR - I certify the budget is in compliance with ALL the following:
Budgets submllted that 00 NOT meet the following criteria are not!egal documents and will be returned to the cily for correction
jl The preSCribed Nol,e" of P"LJlic Heating 8udgel EslirnJlc (Form 831.1) was lawlwlly published. Dr po.led if appl,eallle. and nOlarired, filed prool was evicJenced
2) lJud'letl,earing nolrees were pu~l,"h"d Of pn'ted ~oll"ss than 10 daY5, nor mOre than 20 da~', prior 10 Ihe bwdgel hearing
3i Auupl"u ~ropeny la.e' do nol e.coeu l1ubli~hed or posled amounls
4i {lQDpl"d ~/pen(jlture, UU nol e,~eed published or p05led amownl, in "ael, olllw ~i,,~ prograrn area5, or In lolal
iCo",>,A""'",j
::ffl
Iowa City City Council Meeting
February 20, 2007
Iii, my name is Jean Walker and I am a board member of the Johnson County Dog Park Action
Committee.
Last month we communicated with you our strong support of the proposed pedestrian/bike trail bridge
across the Iowa River from Rocky Shore Drive to the Peninsula Neighborhood and Parkland, which
includes thc dog park and the disc golf course.
In summary, the reasons we saw for needing the bridge were:
I. Relief of over-crowding ofthe parkland's parking lot (even before the disc golf course opened).
2. Rei ief of traffic through the Peninsula neighborhood.
3. Reliefofthe Water Division's concerns about excessive parking in the parkland.
4. A way of getting people (on foot or on bicycle) to and from the parkland whether for recreational or
commuter purposes and of being yet another aspect of Iowa City that would attract people to settle,
work, and enjoy life in this city.
5. To supply a missing link in the trails system from Iowa City to the northern trails.
6. This project is a winning situation for neighbors, bikers, runners, hikers, dogs, and disc golfers, as
well as any other Iowa Citian or visitor who would like to use the bridge.
7. Promotion of a healthy lifestyle.
8. Promotion of a respect for the environment (by reduction of vehicular traffic).
This bridge is the highest priority of the Parks and Recreation Commission, was included on the City
Manager's recommended list of Capital Improvement Plan projects, and was recommenced tor funding in
FY08 in the amount 01'$1.3 million (where the total CIP budget is about $19 million).
At the Special Capital Improvement Plan Budget Work Session January 16, five Council members
expressed at least some support for this project. However, three of these Council members expressed
reservations about its funding, suggesting that help (outside of the City) should be obtained for its
funding.
Subsequently the Council decided to remove this item trom FY08's budget and suggested it be deferred
for consideration until FY 11.
We strongly urge the Council to consider approving this project no later tharFY09. City staff have
said that funds from JCCOG are possible and the Parks & Recreation Commission will be
discussing the possibility of pursuing multiple grants to help finance it. We understand that in
order to obtain such grants, the Council would need to provide some local funding and so we ask
that the Council consider committing to do this in order to secure those outside funds that the
Council would like to be obtained for this project.
Note: The longer the building of this bridge is delayed, the more expensive it will be - probably at an
increase of 3 to 5% per year.
Thank you,
Jean Walker, for the Board of the Johnson County Dog Park Action Committee
335 Lucon Drive
337-5201
walkersic@yahoo.com
2<
'~
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
Notice is hereby given that the City Council of
Iowa City will hold a public hearing on the 20th day
of February, 2007, at 7:00 p.m. in Emma J. Harvat
Hall, City Hall, 410 E. Washington Street, Iowa
City, Iowa, or if said meeting is cancelled, at the
next meeting of the City Council thereafter as
posted by the City Clerk; at which hearing the
Council will consider an ordinance amending Title
16, entitled "Public Works," Chapter 3, entitled
"City Utilities", Article A, entitled "General
Provisions", by amending section 5 to allow for
deposits to be billed instead of paid in advance
with proper payment history.
Copies of the proposed ordinance are on file for
public examination in the office of the City Clerk,
City Hall, Iowa City, Iowa. Persons wishing to
make their views known for Council consideration
are encouraged to appear at the above-
mentioned time and place.
MARIAN K. KARR, CITY CLERK
I ~ j
!~~~Ilt~
-.;;:;:;..... _l1li"
.....~
CITY OF IOWA CITY ~
MEMORANDUM
Date:
February 14, 2007
From:
City Council , ,- It
,I, U0
Melissa Miller, Revenue & Risk ManageryVV'
Proposed Change in Utility Deposit Procedures
To:
Re:
The Revenue Division would like to enhance our services by allowing customers to sign up for
utility services via the City's website. Currently, customers can pay their utility bills and
discontinue service online. To facilitate this enhancement, a modification will need to be made
as to how the utility deposit is collected.
Currently, if a deposit is required it must be paid prior to establishing an account. The Customer
Service Representative determines the deposit amount by reviewing the customer's payment
history and new residence information. If customers are allowed to start service via the web,
the deposit amount will not be known at the time they are submitting the request. Once the start
service request has been processed and the account added to the utility billing system, a
confirmation e:mail will be sent to the customer outlining the deposit requirements and the
options of paying the deposit online or being billed. Other customers (walk-ins and phone)
would also be allowed this flexibility. If a customer elects to be billed, the deposit will be billed
separately from the first regular monthly usage bill. It will be generated within 14 days of the
request for service and due 15 days later. If not paid, the deposit will be included in the
collection process with the first monthly usage bill.
As part of our research, we contacted five other municipalities that allow start service over the
web. Of the five municipalities, two required a deposit. The City of Ames was closest to Iowa
City in demographics. The two municipalities that required deposits both changed their
procedures from requiring the deposit up front to billing the deposit when this service was rolled
out. The flexibility in regards to payment of the deposit was well received by their communities
and neither felt that there was an adverse affect on their revenue. Both outlined that
approximately 50% of new accounts elect to have the deposit billed. Ames also outlined that
the online start service was very popular with their student population.
Benefits of this enhancement include a reduction in the number of walk-ins and phone start
services by enhancing our online capabilities. Students would be able to establish utility
accounts while out of town during summer months and provide proof of service to landlords.
Finally, creating flexibility in regards to the deposit requirements will allow those individuals who
need time or assistance in gathering the deposit to still have City services.
Please let me know if you have any questions.
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
Notice is hereby given that the City Council of
Iowa City will hold a public hearing on the 20th day
of February, 2007, at 7:00 p.m. in Emma J. Harvat
Hall, City Hall, 410 E. Washington Street, Iowa
City, Iowa, or if said meeting is cancelled, at the
next meeting of the City Council thereafter as
posted by the City Clerk; at which hearing the
Council will consider a resolution approving a fifth
amendment to a real estate contract-installments
between the City of Iowa City and United Action
for Youth for condominium unit 1-C in Tower
Place and Parking.
Copies of the proposed resolution are on file for
public examination in the office of the City Cierk,
City Hall, Iowa City, Iowa. Persons wishing to
make their views known for Council consideration
are encouraged to appear at the above-
mentioned time and place.
MARIAN K. KARR, CITY CLERK
\~
_ __~___..._____~._,..____~_"_____..____.__.~._m'__.'____..._._,_.. ___~_..._._~____._"_._'__