HomeMy WebLinkAbout1977-07-05 Info Packet•ci1ty of Doves Citf
DATE: June 30, 1977
TO: Department Heads, City Council
FROM: City Manager � J
RE: Change of Address
Councilman David Perret has a new address and phone number as shown below.
Please change your records accordingly.
I
I
1015 Oakcrest, 2I
Iowa City, Iowa 52240
351-5350
0
parks & recreation
department
0
MEMO
to. Neal Berlin, City Manager from: Dennis Showalter, Dire or
i
re. Elm Grove Tennis Courts date: June 22, 1977
The old concrete tennis courts in Elm Grove Park, which were �\
built approximately 35 years ago, were abandoned as tennis courts
in approximately 1963. They have received some use since that
time as basketball courts; the concrete is still in good
condition. Gene Gietz has inspected the courts and feels that
the concrete still has many years of usable life left.
In March, I started thinking of reviving the tennis courts and
asked for asphalt re -surfacing estimates from three firms. Only
one, Construction and Recreation Service, Inc., owned by
Gerald Downey, a local resident, submitted an estimate with
the amount being $2,766.40. This would include re -surfacing
with five coats of asphalt, the necessary striping, and all
associated services to put the court in good, playable condition.
The bid has been approved by Tom Struve and Gene Dietz.
The area was originally divided into two singles courts with
almost no area outside the boundary lines. It is much more
practical to use the area as one doubles court, which is what
we propose to do.
There are some old, inadequate lights at the site which will
provide some light for night play, but at a much lower than
normally acceptable level. We can try the lights to see if
anyone will 'play under them and decide later what to do regarding
lights.
The Staff would like to proceed on this project. Mr. Downey will
be able to start work in a few days.
/ef
3212-
•City of Iowa CHIP
MEMORANDUM
DATE: June 29, 1977
TO: Neal Berlin and City Council
FROM: Dick Plastino, Director of Public Works `
RE: Area Transportation Study
After reading the transmittal to the Council from the Johnson County Regional
Planning Commission it appears the Commission has forgotten the purpose of the
Area Transportation Study. In Item No. 4 of that memo it reads:
"The Commission herewith adopts as part of its continuing
work program a transportation planning element aimed at
providing coordinated planning and policy development to
its members -along the lines suggested by the Policy Advisory
-
Committee."
ATS 3.was never meant --to be the final product of the Area Transportation
Study. .A period of public discussion should now begin with the end result
being a coordinated transportation plan. I noticed in the minutes of the
CAC that there is continued discussion about auto vs. transit. That is good
but.the discussion seemed to center around disproving or proving ATS Report
No. 3.
The question of auto vs..transit is admittedly a political one but it is
best to address it now in'an open forum rather than being disguised under the
iuspices,of "providing coordinated planning and policy development to its
members..."
Once a plan is adopted, whether it be auto -dominant, transit -dominant, or a
mixture in between, we should constantly update the plan and take into con-
sideration elements --that we were -not aware of earlier. Not knowing the future
in complete detail is no reason:not to develop and adopt a plan. Some multi-
million dollar expenditures hinge on whether the community is designing for
transit or autos.
It is my recommendation that the City Council advise the Johnson County
Regional Planning Commission that:
1. A timetable for public discussion be prepared.
2. A level two transit computer run be prepared.
3. A plan be adopted by the summer of 1978.
It should be expected that there is going to be heated public discussion and
a squaring off between transit and auto advocates. This is as it should be.
3Z /z1
I
• -2-
The bottom line is whether City Council can feel comfortable authorizing
construction of transit garages, new road networks, signal systems, zoning
decisions, etc. With the present policy statement provided by the Johnson
County Regional Planning Commission, there appears to be no hope in the
future that Council will know whether it is making plans in comformity with
the transportation policy or is not. Only one small element, that of
reserving right-of-way, has been answered. The hundreds of other decisions
relating to transportation have been unanswered.
The status of the Area Transportation Study at this point is inadequate and
unacceptable. It is my recommendation that Council push and push hard to
get a workable area transportation plan. I know urban renewal is utmost in
everyone's mind at the present time, but a few bad decisions related to
transportation are going to make waves for many years to come.
CUM N[IICRi
June 28, 1977
M
MAYOR
\�//// • ('IVIC.LIN111E41111 WAb11NGIIIN5I
'� I�IYIA I:II Y. IIIW .\ '�JJ BII
LIIUI LA 11[W
MANY NW.AWER
Letter mailed certified, return receipt requested
COUNCIL MEMBERS
XINN BALMER
CAROLU.IROSSE
LI.BOSTER
DAVID YERRET
MAX SELZER
ROBERT VEVERA
Dr. Frederick D. Staab, Mayor
City of University Heights
901 Melrose
Iowa City, Iowa 52240
Dear Dr. Staab:
This is in response to your letter of June 16, 1977, to Mayor Neuhauser
requesting a meeting with Iowa City. Previously the City Council directed
that Councilperson Selzer and the City Manager carry out appropriate
negotiations with the City of University Heights. Both Mr. Selzer and I
are prepared to meet at your convenience to discuss matters relating to
services with University Heights. However, we would appreciate receiving
a written proposal from University Heights prior to the scheduling of the
meeting.
Sin a iy yours,
r
Neal G. Berlin
City Manager
is
cc: City Council
S2/5'
June 23, 1977
William Chalmers, President
Ilawkeye Kennel Club
It. R. $5
Iowa City, IA 52240
Dear Bill:
I have just received a copy of a letter sent to you by
William G. Gerhart, 1.109 Prairie du Chien Road, Iowa City,
Iowa, and find that it is practically identical to a "headers
Comment” written in conjunction with a Rebecca Bardwel.l that:
appeared in Wednesday evening's Iowa City Press CiLiven. Bill,
I'm not an authority on animals or the Iowa City Animal Shelter
and its method of operation, but I have had almost Tour years
of experience with dogs in Oakland Cemetery and I'd like to
share it few of my experiences with you and the members or your
organi rsation.
Since I was assigned to the Cemetery in August of 1973 and up
to the present, I am aware of having seen only one man who
carried a "pooper scooper" and a plastic bag to remove his pet's
excrement from public property. I might add that this man has
never, to my knowledge, been inside Oakland Cemetery. Ile's
usually seen walking on North Governor and the pet is always
on a leash. A check with the crew indicates the same opinion -
no one has ever seen a pet owner in Oakland who wits equipped
v:ith means for "clean up" or excrement.
We would be happy to share with you the pictures we have taken
of monuments festooned with piles of dog manure and it classic
one of an accumulation of major proportions that wwaS in the canker
of the road just 1.5 minutes before a funeral procession was to
hr. escorted to grave site. Perhaps these people should talk to
the elderly man who had his two small pets on it leash in Oakland
and was knocked to the ground by it large dog who was under voice
control (that's why a leash wasn't necessary, or so the dog owner
assured us).
CITY OF IOWA CITY
CIVIC CENTER, 410 E. WASHINGTON ST.
IOWA CITY, IOWA 52240
319-354.1800
321b
WiIIJam
Page 2.
June 23,
Chalmers
1977
I'w wondering if Ms. Ilardweli and Mr. Gerhard are proponents of
the .idea so aptly expressed by one Irnntleman who, when I advised
him that a leash was necessary (this was before the "no clogs
a"flowed" rule), indignantly responded, "well., you must think
this Cemetery is for people only". I assured him that that was
indeed my opinion.
It isn't: pleasant to visit the graves of family and/or friends and
find :it has been used by a dog. It's decidedly unpleasant to tend
flowers planted to honor the dead and find, upon standing up, that
vou've heen kneelina in doe manure.
Until ,just recently, there was a pedestrian entrance into Hickory
Ifil.l Park from the back part of the Cemetery. This entrance has
now been closed because of the lack of consideration by pet owners.
The area is directly adjacent to a newly established expansion
area of the Cemetery and pet owners arriving in vehicles released
their dogs in the Cemetery, allowing them to relieve themselves
on Cemetery property before taking them on into Hickory Hill.
This accumulation is repulsive, to say the ]east, and certainly
contributes to the anguish of an already sorrowful occasion.
Yapping dogs tearing through the Cemetery during a service, pet
owners with several pets on leashes who walk through the funeral•
group allowing the dogs to relieve themselves as they proceed,
and dog walkers who refuse to properly control their dogs within
sight of a service have been additional probl.ems for me and the
Cemetery crew.
A major part of my job as Superintendent of Oakland Cemetery is
to contribute a neat and well groomed setting, an efficiently
organized burial procedure, and the peace and dignity that should
accompany the interment of the deceased. My crew and I feel.
that we can't meet the high standards we've set for ourselves and
still allow dogs to be in Oakland Cemetery unless they are "seeing
eye" dogs and dogs confiner] quietly (not barking) within a vehicle.
Sincerely,
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS & RECREATION
DII; of
Dillie
Ilauber
Superintendent of Cemetery -Forestry
DII; of
*EIVED JUM 1 3 1'977
William G. GJM.rl
1109 hn h k- ilu CIO,.
lawn C.11q. (122 1C
3 June 1 J•('1
William Chalmers
prosidunt, flawkoye Kennel Club
R.R. 5
lown City, Iowa 52240
Lear fr. Chalmers,
I ala an lova City homeowner and have in the past been in the business
of raising Belgian Yervurens arrd ern still a pet owner. As a pet owner, I
am disturbed by the following:
4) the recent city ordinance prohibiting walking dogs in cemeteries;
2) the overly strict leash laws;
3) the lack of responsiveness to the rights of pot owners by the
Iowa City Animal Shelter.
regarding the prohibition of walking dogs in the city cemeteries, I
feel that there are few enough large open areas in the city. I think the
cemetery with its sparse traffic aIid use is an ideal place for walking and
exercising a pet without unduly disturbing others. In my opinion it is
preferable to the city parks with their large crowds of people.
I feel that the leash laws are overly strict because they do not take
.late consideration the dogs which can be kept under control by voice cocuaand.
]father fine the individual whose pet is out of control, i.e., creating a
disturbance or doing such damage as to elicit a complaint, than to penalize
all pot owners by the current leash laws.
As a tax payer and purchaser of a dog license, I feel that, for ray
tax dollar, the Animal Shelter falls dismally short of fulfilling its
obligations to the pet owner -- one of which is the speedy return of a lost
anir:ral to the owner with a minimum of expense. Why should a pet owner pay
an impowrdment fee and a fine plus court costs when our tax dollars and
license fees alreaay cover the expense of the Animal Shelter? I dislike
being treated like a criminal when 1 pick up my lost pet.
Since the llawkeye Kennel Club is the only organization representing
the pat owner in this area, it should be of particular interest to you to
see that some of these ordinances wumecessarily restricting the pet owner
were changed. I would like to see us, as pet owners, take some action in
this ruattar by petitioning the city council and manager either by phone or
letter, expressing our dissatisfaction with unnecessarily strict ordinance:;
and the performance of the Aninal Shelter. On this matter 1 solicit your
help as an organization.
V
Sinceroly," A
cc: City Council members
City knnager
eface
is: report is`a preliminary assessment of the People's
ide'and Survey that was distributed to most Iowa City
useholds toward the end of April.
er:2,000 responses have been received to date. This
presents over 5;000 people (over 100 of.Iowa City's
pula£ion).
om initial analysis the survey looks very good in that
is 'generally well representative of the population.
ceptions`are9noted in,the preliminary analysis.
oss tabulations.(for,example,.comparing number of cars
eked on: the, street to, area of residence) continue.
eh.is 11, 1 of"the 'analysis is completed a more com-
ehensive analysis report will ,be issued.
is report was prepared by the Advance Planning Division
S,ahe.Department .of Community Development, July 1, 1977.
iecial thanks .to Jane Jakobsen of the Comprehensive Plan
ordinating_Committee who performed the computer program -
.ng necessary for data processing.
GENERAL SURVEY FOR IOWA CITY PLAN
The Ciiy Council, the City Manager, the City Planners — all of us—are working on a
plan for Ipwa City and its future. A very diffldull problem is to plan all the parts so
that most people are pleased with the way things turn out. We are doing this
survey to get ideas on what the people want the city to be,
Actually, the first step in the citizen participation propess was taken earlier this
year when we distributed a Special Survey to about 250 residents of Iowa City.
We asked them many very broad questions to see what they thought the
imponam issues were in Iowa City. Since the 250 residents were chpsen at
.random, their responses were a good representation Of the total city population.
. These responses were used in preparing this General Survey.
Tha General Survey, then, Is the second step in this cooperative process to include
the public in the work of pl5nning the city. There will be continued oppotdrnities
lot you to contribute as the plan develops and those of us working on the plan look
forward to your assistance.
This survey is divided Into two sections and each section into several parts, In the
following manner;
SECTION I: YOUR HOME AND YOUR NEIGHBORHOOD
Part A: Where You Live Now
Part B: What is Important to You In Housing
Part C:Your Neighborhood
SECTION II: IMPORTANT ISSUES
Part A: Iowa City Growth
Part B: Transportation
Part C: Chlzan Participation
Part D: City Services
Part E: Energy Conservation
Part P! Human Needs and Services
Pari G: Your Comments
It may take some time to complete this survoy, but the Information we receive will
be very valuable in planning for our future and in making Iowa City what we all
went it to be.
Thank you for your coopnraeoq:
SECTION 1: YOUR HOME AND YOUR NEIGHBORHOOD
Part A: Where You Live Now
1. What type of building do you live in? (Check one.)
Single-family 62.
Duplex 7.
Apartment building 22.
Mobile home 2.
Dormitory 1.6
Other (what?)) 3.1
9
Approximately 20,000 surveys were sent to Iowa City house-
holds. Over 2,000 have been completed and returned.
Calculations were based on the responses of 1,996 surveys.
Percentages may not total 100% because those not respond-
ing to the question were not included in the following
tables.
2. If your personal living quarters take up only part of the
building, the rest of the building is (check one):
Residential only 36•
Commercial only
Residential and commercial r
Other (what?) 9
Personal living quarters take up the entire building. 37. f
3. How many years have you lived in Iowa City?
4. Your response to the questions above indicates the nature of
your household. A household consists of one or morb persons,
who may or may not be related, who occupy a single room or
group of roams (living quarters) which constitute a housing unit.
People in a household live together in some manner -usually as
a family, as roommates, or as boarders. Please answer the
questions below for yourself and for each person in your
household. Others in your household are designated PERSON
2, PERSON 3 and so forth. If there are more people in your
household than there are spaces below, squeeze in the answers
on the side. Put an X in the appropriate space for each person
in your household. % % % % %
Sex: Male 5 309 9.91__ � A4.811.2
Female 44. 44 R 7.911.. 4�.5 2�0
Age: Oto 4 years
5 to 19 years
20 to 24 years
25 to 44 years
45 to 64 years
65 aI d ovei
Highest grade completed:
8th grade or less
Some high school
High school graduate
Some college
College graduate
Master's degree
Doctorate
.617.
5 •5. 111.
3 .5
1.5 3.0
2.615.
7.6 2.5
16D 14A
7.4 3.
1.0 .6
47.7 37.3
3.1 1.
.5 .6
19 A 15.2
.5
.1 .8
95 4.0
.2
.2 .3
1.1 2 5
L6.712.
6.111.8
q
.5 3
5
8A 99
3.2 2.
'.3 .1
21.2 17.8
6.9 3.
.5
245
3 1:7
.5 .3
20A 111
1.0 .
.2
.1
143 93
.4
.2 .2
3. How many years have you lived in Iowa City? ,
0 years
1-2 years
3-5 years
6<10 years
11-20 years
over 20 years
0
,7
15.5
20.4
20.4
13.7
1 4
As compared to the 1974 Census,.the survey respondents
constitute a reasonable cross-section of the'community.
Age groups over -represented were 25 to 44 and 45 to 64;
the 20 to 24 age group was under -represented.
Age:
0-4 years
5-19 years
20-24 years
25-44 years
45-64 years
65 and over
Total persons per household:
0
1977
1974
1970
6.0
6.4
8.3
21.3
26.8
27.0
17.0
24.5
23.8
35.9
25.2•
23.0
14.0
10.7
8.5
5.8
6.3
6.6
%
1 person 20.1
2 persons 16 8
3 persons 15.6
4 persons 16.3
5 persons 7,0
6 persons 3.1
over 7 persons F _4
r5. This questioh is concerned with gross income received in 1976.
..This includes salary, wages, earnings, fees received; income
from investments, trusts and savings accounts; grants, gifts,
and prizes it you control how they are used, It does not include
the value of a scholarship covering room, board and tuition, for
example, since you•do not control how it is spent. For yourself
and each person in your household, place an X in the
appropriate space. * % % % % % %
.....n I,.,...
$0 to $999
.$1,000%o$2,909
_$3,000 to $4,999
$5,000 to $7,499
$7,500 to $9,999
$117,000 to $14,999
" $15,000 to $24,999
$25,000 to $34,999
$35,000 to $49,999
$50.000 and over
d *Comparing our 1977 results to 1970 Census income
information adjusted for inflation, it would appear
J that families making over $25,000/year are somewhat
over -represented, families making between $7,500
and $24,999/year are somewhat under -represented,
and families making below $7,500 are accurately '
represented in proportion to the population.
6. What is your major occupation? IPlaceanXiri.tlie
.'appropriatespace,l **
;Student
Retired'
%
20.6
**The occupation figures represent only the person
filling out the survey, they do not account for
more than one person being employed. Thus, these
figures cannot fully be used for comparisons.
9'
9.1
Homemaker
Agricultural
Construction
1.2
1,5
Manufacturing
Transportation
Communications or utilities
1.5
3.1
1.2
Wholesale or retail trade
I Finance
1.7
2'0
Insurance or real estate
Business or repair' services
2.6
Personal services
12.8
Health or medical services
1
Education
3.5
Public administration
7.0
T_ Other (what?)
j
7. How many bedrooms does your household have?
8. *How many bathrooms does your household have?
�1
9. The living quarters for your household consist of the
following rooms (check all that apply):
, °
1
Living room 72.4
Combined living room and dining room
* Dining room
8.8
• 9
Kitchen
2 -
.1
I.'
Basement
2.5
*Other rooms
10. If you have'a yard; is it (check one):
For your household only
Shared with others not in your household
o
6
20 4
7
Do not havd a yard
10.1
11. Oo.you rent or own your home? (Check one.) Renting
Buying
Own (house paid for) r
4.1
3.2
8.6
12. The monthly rent or mortgage payment (including taxes
and insurance) for your household is (check one): '•
2
Less than $100
$100to$199
$200 to.$299
$300 to $399 ,
$400 to $49b
6.4
32.4
7.1
13.3
4 S
2.8
$500 or more
3; Check the amount you paid for utilities•/excluding
%
telephone) for March, 1977: **
Lesrs than $50
$50 to $99
45.7
2 9
10.8
$100 to $199
00b or more
2.7
None (included in rent)
6.1
7. How many bedrooms does your household have?
0
0.9
1
18.2
` 2
25.9
3
33.2
4
16.5
5
2.9
6
0.9
7
0.3
8. How many bathrooms does your household have?
%
0
0.8
1
50.3
2
33.6
3
12.1
4
1.1
over 5
513
*Some included bedrooms here. Also, kitchen and dining
room were joint in some cases.
**March was unusually warm.
14. How many motor vehicles are there in your household?
15. Of the motor vehicles in your household, how many are
normally parked in the street?
16. On the following map of Iowa City, put an X to show where
you live. If you would prefer to live in another area of Iowa
City, circle that location on the map.
tm n
o
o,� o
NA
e.mcn
yr 'Pee
v
s r 'I. E
A HIGH SCHOOLS
V HOSPITALS
i UNIVERSITY OF IOWA
tl
MALLS, DOWNTOWN. ETC. WIbjOINDUSTRY M.. 1017
*Very few respondents (16%) designated a preferred
location. Of those responding, 8.3% preferred an
area further from the center, 2.8% preferred a
closer -in location, 3.8% preferred the area of
their present residence.
L
r
14. How many motor vehicles are there in your
household?
o.
V
0
7.0
1
44.1
2
33.0
3
7
4 1
2.2
over 5
1
15. Of the motor
how many are
vehicles in your household,
normally in the street?
•
parked
%
075.
1
14.
2
3.5
3
4
over 5
.3
A comparison of the
respondents'
residences and
the 1970
Census configuration
finds that
areas III and VI
are
under -represented,
and areas II
and VIII are over
-represented.',
Area
% survey
% population
respondents
1970 Census
•
I
21.2
18.1
II
21.4
14.2
III
7.1
18.0
IV
6.5
7.3
V
4.2
6.2
VI
5.9
18.4
VII
4.0
6.9
VIII
15.5
11.0
did not
14.2
specify area
Part B: What is Important to You in Housing
I I 1 What three features are most important in satisfying your
housing needs? Put a 1 in the box for the most important,
a 2 in the box for the second most important, a 3 for the
third most important.
1stI 2nd
a
Cost
Privacy and freedom from noise
Proximity to facilities, services
Type of neighborhood and neighbors
Size of housing unii
Housing design
Size of yard
Pa kin
36.2
22.7
8.5
15.3
7.8
6.4
.7
5
g
2. Would you be willing to pay more than you do now in
rent or housing cost for: YES I NO
A better location 22.
A larger yard IS.
Alarger house 28,
Additional amenities Igarage, off-street parking, 9
balcony, better construction, etc,)
3. If it would lower your rent or housing costs, would
you be satisfied with: YE
A less convenient location 25
A smaller yard 36
A smaller house 21
,.. Fewer amenities 23
4. In order to reduce housing costs, would you be
willing to live in the following housing types: '
Condominium (no yard, but shared open space)
Cluster development or garden home (small yard
and shared open space)
Townhouse or duplex (attached dwelling units with
smolt yard area and/or shared open space)
a
a o
'es NO
?. 58.
.439.
:5[45.
Rai
Weighted
3rd importance
o,
13.7 T 26.4
ra
3.6 1 1.2
The weighted importance was
determined by the following
method:
no, of 1st choices x 3 = _
no. of 2nd choices x 2 = _ •
no, of 3rd choices x 1 = _
weighted importance = sum/6
4. In the Special Survey, some people indicated that
they would like to have a grocery store and a drug-
store within walking distance of their homes; others
stated that even small stores of this type would dis-
turb the residential quality of the neighborhood.
In your opinion, should residential neighborhoods:
Exclude all commercial areas
Include small convenience stores and offices designed
to serve the neighborhood only
Allow large shopping malls, appropriately designed
%
YES
No
24.256.3
H,8
18.8
61.7
5: If you had the choice, how close
would you like your residence to be
to the followingfacilities? (Place an
X in the appropriate box.)
Grade school
High school
University
Grocery store
Drugstore
Other stores
Gas station
Playground or park
Library
City bus stop
Cambus bus stop
Highway
Apartment building
Mobile home court
Industry
Place of employment
Office park
Other (what?)
% % % °
0
cann'1 1.1 59 bloekf
nwto, block, block, 01.010
38.5 31.1 18.3 6.5
40.2 5.0 26.0 22.7
29.2 11.5 19.6 33.6
12.5 39.9 32.6 11.6
20.3 29.4 30.5 15.9
29.3 7.7 19.2 37.1
28.3 10.7 23.0 31
14.2 51.9 21.1 6.2
33.3 16.6 22.7 20.9
7.9 85.0 2.4 1.3
38.1 38.3 5.5 9.7
19.5 2.8 1 9.4 62.1
30.1 9.3 118.8 35.1
13.9 1.3 6.1 72.5
6. 7 3•.9 81.8
25.5 14.6 5.8 26.7
28.4 7, 5 11.3 37.1
2.3 4.3 3.3 2.0
t,
J
part C: Your Neighborhood
I . One of the chief areas of concern indicated in the Special
Survey was the high cost of housing. Additionally, many
people commented that they did not like apartment
buildings mixed in with single-family housing. Which do
you think is the best way to provide new multi -family
housing? (Check one.)
All new multifamily housing should be concentrated
in multistory 18.12 story) buildings adjacent to the
Central Business District
Same as above, but with 4.7 story buildings
New small multifamily (three story) complexes should
be scattered throughout the city, including existing
areas of single-familyhousing
New multi -family complexes should be confined
to large-scale developments
No opinion
2. Traditional single-family housing costs are very high
1 and constantly rising; in addition, such housing.
requires a lot of space and costly services. The
following is a comparison of approximate costs for
3 -bedroom, single-family houses with garages:
TRADITIONAL GARDEN
TOWNHOUSE
HOUSE
Lot cin: e.000.q It. 2.6O0co. lb 00 2,0to. It.
.
cool olllnDloreE lot 110.000 16.000 62,000604.000
Toulctnl ii5•� 170'000
Aside from the obvious initial savings and reduced '
mortgage costs for the garden homes and townhouses,
there are other savings to the homeowner and the city as
follows: energy conservation, maintenance costs, cost of
services less road to build and maintain, shorter garbage
routes, lower utility installation and maintenance costs.)
al neigborhoods, ?s
Do you thinksingle•!a en
should'IilY dleludewelbdesigned: YES
Townhouses 55.
Garden homes 67,
3. Would you consider purchasing:
*+ YES
A townhouse 31.
A garden home 7
--
r 1
1
M
up
1.
3
*On this question people commented they had insufficient
choice and detail, and would like to have chosen more
than one.
•` I
**There were many comments stating people might be interested
if they did not already own a house.
SECTION 11: IMPORTANT ISSUES
Part A: Iowa City Growth
1. How do you perceive Iowa City? (Check one.)
Small town
Large town
City
Metropolitan area
%
21.4
45.1
29.6
1.5
2. In what ways do the following
factors shape your perception of
of Iowa City? (Place an X in the
appropriate box.)
University
Type of people
Size of city
Stores
Restaurants
Bars
Surrounding agricultural area
Industry
Hospitals
Residential areas
Chydesign
Schools
Recreational opportunities
Libraries
Cultural opportunities
City police
%
coram,
yooJ
oal y
wally
a..0.,
poop
.......
88.9
4.4
4.3
77.1
12.0
6.0
71.8
19.6
4. 1
39.3
20.0
35.1
36.3
20.6
37.6
19.8
44.3
28,9
70.9
23.4
1.2
44.1
39.4
9.8
91.3
5.0
I 1.1
77.1
11.0
5.8
25.7
14.0
51.8
66.2
22.8
S.3
74.5
11.5
8.6
78.9
12.0
4.4
87.9
5.9
2.7
61.3
23.6
8.2
3. How do you like Iowa City as a place to live? (Check one.)
Like very much
Like
Okay
Dislike
Very much dislike
%
51.4
28.6
15.4
2.9
.6
I7
a
4. What do you think of the physical growth (development
and annexation) that has taken place in Iowa City since
19607 (Check one.)
%
Stronglyapprove
Approve.
No opinion '
Disapprove
10
40
31.
18
Strongly disapprove
6
S. Iowa City's population grew about 40 percent in the
decade from 1960 to 1970. Since then, growth has been
more moderate. Projections beyond the year 2000 show
that an increase in the growth rate is again possible. In
your opinion, Iowa City should (check one):
° °
Remain as it is now, as much as possible
Continue to grow, but at a moderate rate
24
48
Seek to grow larger at an increased rate
Let growth occur naturally—do nothing to interfere
3.
21
6. If Iowa City does grow, the city can act to direct this
growth somewhat, both physically and in terms of job
opportunities. Provision of utilities (especially sewers),
road construction, zoning and tax incentives are examples
of ways in which the city can control the direction and
nature of growth. Section 6 of this guide shows
advantages and disadvantages of possible alternatives for
development patterns within Iowa City. In your opinion,
new development in Iowa City should take the form of
(check one):
%
"Sprawl"
3.9
"Core"
16.2
"Multi -core"
29.6
"Natural"
34.9
No opinion
.9 3
7. Do you feel that the following would be acceptable
ways of maintaining economic health in Iowa City? *
%
YES
%
NO
Attract University -oriented industry
(e.g., data processing)
83.6
7.4
Attract medically -oriented industry
(e.g., pharmaceutical)
83.4
8.
Attract other light industry
(e.g., toot and die shop)
71.2
20.
Attract heavy industry (c.g., food processing)
22�t64.51
*If "yes", emphasis on non-polluting.
Part B: Transportation
1, Would these changes in service encourage your use
of the bus? *
%
YES
%
NO
A bus stop closer to your residenceP8,G48.5
Evening service
56.9.27.2
More routes
33.7
40.
More punctual service
More frequent service
30.
41.4
36.9
36.
I would never ride the bus.
X
X
2. In order to encourage alternate modes of
%
transportation, does Iowa City need more:
YES
NO
Bikeways
75.f
16
Sidewalks
37.243.9
3. Parking at shopping centers is usually provided
"-tree" to all customers. Actually; the cost of building
and maintaining the parking lot must be passed on to
the customers in terms of increased prices or
absorbed by the merchants. In downtown Iowa City,
the cost of parking can be paid for by the businesses
downtown through a "Park & Shop" program, or by
the people who park their cars downtown (by paying
a fee or meters). Which do you prefer? (Check one,) **
%
Park & Shop
52.7
Parkers pay
40.4
4. Residential parking on city streets Icheck one):***
%
Should be just as it is now
Should be restricted at all times to parking for residents only
42.9
U.
Should be increased by converting side streets into small
landscaped parking bays
24.7
*Frequent comments included:
"I already ride the bus."
"Bus service is adequate."
"We need evening and Sunday service."
**1.3% suggested both.
***A few suggested combinations.
Part C; Citizen Participation
:'-V' Citizon participation" means having
citizens like You participate in selling
goals and making recommendations.
Do you feel that your participation in
the following areas is necessary? (Put
%
%
an X in the appropriate box.)
YES
NO
UNDECIDED
Determining long-range goals
for Iowa City
53h
I
14.
14.9
Res ponding to proposals from the city
the,
pactions
government for significant actions
a n '
"o s
76
76.5
7,2
7.2
8.4
a
Participating in a neighborhood
improvement group an actions
'o n
9 V u I .
affecting
ffecting your neighborhood
in 0 neighborhood
e 9 h 130 r hood
67512.
67 - 5
1 2 .
12.1
Establishing a neighborhood
improvement c roup
group
9 1)
.4 .3
3.
21.6
I
l3
3. Should the following facilities be
"available to Iowa City residents at the
library or other community buildings?
%
ES
%
NO
$
NOOPINION
Large meeting rooms for community
groups and programs, performances
65.(15.7
14.5
Small meeting & conference rooms for
tutoring, committees, group studies
61
16,7
16.1
Display areas for work of local artists
and craftsmen
57A20.6
17.1
'Media production facilities (e.g.,
dry mounting, darkroom, slides,
signs, video and audio recording,
-. typewriters, photocopies, etc-)
.7
Media preview facilities (e.g., audio
B video recordings, 8mm 6 16mm
films, filmstrips, slides, television, etc.)
P9.8
.2
Downtown lounge areas for resting,
reading, restrooms, waiting, etc.
, 4
r :.
Part E: Energy Conservation
The cost of all types of fuel has risen sharply over ilia past few years
and is likely to continue to do so because of constantly increasing
use and diminishing supplies. The risk of energy shortages has made
it necessary for all citizens to conserve energy: this will mean some
additional costs initially as well as changes in lifestyle.
1. In your opinion, should the city
undertake or support the following
energy conservation measures? YES NO NO OPINION
' Recycling of waste materials 82,1 8. 6.2
a • `- Home insulation improvement
programs 9 319. 7.5
Energy-efficient construction
requirements
5.7 6. 4.0
Solar heating programs 4 A117'. 1 13.4
Tax on automobile use S A 8. 10.0
Tax on large cars only g 7 3. 10.2
Incentives for multi -family or cluster
developments 43h 29. 21.3
2. Would you be willing to pursue the following energy
conservation measures? YES NO
* Improving the insulati� n in your home if
low-interest lo; is are available 71. 15.0
Improving the insulation in your home if
low-interest loans are not available 61, C 24.6
Installation of a solar system if low-interest
loans are available 57.1271.9
Installation of a solar system if low-interest
loans are not available
33.150.3
Saving and separating waste. materials
(paper, bottles, cons) for recycling program if
pick-up services are provided 90.9 6.2
Saving and separating waste materials (paper,
bottles, cans) for recycling program if you are
responsible for delivery of materials tort recycling
cantor 5.7P7. c
*Many commented that their homes were already "well -
insulated".
Part F: Human Needs and Services
Because or the complex structure of human services involving
federal, state, and local agencies, some groups or areas or need may
not receive the attention they require. , ,•
•a o 4 •o
1, Do you think that the following
ti
services need improvement or
z
i
. expansion] (Place an X in the
>
p
>
r
--.-appropriate box.)
m
z
m
F
z
T.
m
¢
a
0
m
i
iz
o
a
o
z
K
a
o
Job training for people with
special problems
8.921.211.7
3.4
Job location for youth or other
special groups
r13
8.419.2
12.1
4.0
Emergency financial or material help
for people in crisis situation
3:7
7.819:1
9•
2.9
-
Deliquency prevention
and treatment measures
27 139.216.4
767
2.9
Rehabilitation programs
17.
6.
2.011.2
4.0
Day care for children
216.6
15.210.5
Day care for elderly or disabled
29.939.1914,61
6.3
2.9
Relief substitute care for families with
members needing constant care
21.9
59.6
21.0
6.9
3,0
Counseling
15 8
3.5
14.2
5.7
Homemaker services
12.6
25. 1
31
1 13
7.2
Services to elderly living along
(shopping, visiting,etc,l
34.3
4 1.2
11.8
4.8
1.8
Foster care
14.7
28.2
8.0
4.4
Group home care (for children, for
former mental patients, hallway
houses)
16.6
34.
3.910.3
6.9
Information and ossistance in
getting services
5.732,
13.9
7,5
3.2
�.1
The chief comments were:
1) Dont know anything about these.
2) This is not the city's business. (Responsibility
of county, state, or federal governments.)
The answers to this group of questions were remarkably
similar. Services for the elderly received the highest
positive response.
1
These services were unavailable to the following
number of people: i see- cat, _:: i".r'v,_ -•�
Unavailable Service
Job training for people with
special problems
6
Job location for youth or other
special groups
13
Emergency financial or material help
for people in crisis situation
ZS
Doliquency prevention
and treatment measures
4
Rehabilitation programs
1
Day care for children
40
Day care for elderly or disabled
22
Relief substitute care for families with
members needing constant care
18
Counseling
16
Homemaker services
12
Services to elderly living along
(shopping, visiting, etc.) .
19
Foster caro
1
Group home care (for children, for
former mental patients, halfway
houses)
10
Information and assistance in
getting services 121
number of responses
C
N
x
a
5
*Some people questioned what services were being referred
to.
Comments that plenty are available already.
Overwhelming response
**Comments -- None of these.
Too much welfare!
The non -response to this question was about 300/
2. II you or someone you know has
v
-
-
had difficulty in obtaining any of
36
=
9
=
O
°
0
0
30
above services, please write the
10
S
H
mproved services in this community? Rank the
servicels) in the blankls) below
lect in order of importance by putting a t in the
70hte
most important, a 2 for secondmost
.M
3
and indicate the difficulty by
S
S
Junior and senior high school children
c°
Young adults
placing an X in the appropriate
Middle aged
c
c
v
m
-
box.?
p
o
❑
m
v
Chronically ill, physically or mentally handicapped
N
U
U
i
Low-income individuals or families
C
N
x
a
5
*Some people questioned what services were being referred
to.
Comments that plenty are available already.
Overwhelming response
**Comments -- None of these.
Too much welfare!
The non -response to this question was about 300/
90
36
22
16
30
10
10
10
roups do you think need •attention in planning
mproved services in this community? Rank the
lect in order of importance by putting a t in the
70hte
most important, a 2 for secondmost
and so forth.
Preschool children
Grade school children
Junior and senior high school children
Young adults
Middle aged
-
Elderly
4, What groups of people do you think need attention in
planning new or improved services in the community?
Rank the ones you would select in order of importance by
putting a 1 in the box for the most important, etc.**
Chronically ill, physically or mentally handicapped
Mentally or emotionally ill
Alcoholics, drug dependent
Low-income individuals or families
Transients
5. In what ways would you be willing to help pay to improve
or establish a service needed by your family or others in
the community? (Check all that apply,)
-
Fees
Taxes
Donation to agencies providing services
Cannotpay
Am not willing to pay
C
N
x
a
5
*Some people questioned what services were being referred
to.
Comments that plenty are available already.
Overwhelming response
**Comments -- None of these.
Too much welfare!
The non -response to this question was about 300/
0
•
Iowa City Plan -- People's Guide and Survey
Citizens' Concerns
On the last page of the questionnaire citizens were asked to state
what they thought were the most important issues facing Iowa City
today and to add additional comments. Over 80% of those answering the
questionnaire commented on numerous issues and concerns which were
tabulated in 14 categories as follows:
Commenting
*Downtowm Development and Urban Renewal 45
*Transportation and Trafficways 41
*11ousing 39
*Environment and Energy 38
*City Government and Services 37
Human Needs and Services 16
Neighborhoods and Zoning 16
Community Facilities 14
Taxes and Cost of Utilities 8
Parking Problems 7
Commercial Development (Other than Downtown) 6
Economic Base 5
Flood Control 4
*Major Concerns
(Note: Comments from 400 questionnaires were tabulated and counted
to obtain these percentages. All other questionnaires were
read and the information summarized.)
All questionnaires are available for reading and about 80 with particularly
interesting comments have been selected for a more rapid overall view.
Downtown Development and Urban Renewal
Single most frequent comment --
"Complete Urban Renewal."
Many comments --
"Save the mini -parks."
"Make downtown pedestrian oriented."
"Need public restrooms and places to sit."
Often mentioned --
'life need a good department store."
"Let's have a better variety of stores."
"Make downtown accessible."
"Don't let the flight from downtown continue."
Suggestions for downtown needs --
A hotel.
A good restaurant (some mentioned a Bishops).
Sidewalk cafe's.
Student housing.
Elderly housing.
Other comments --
"Don't tear down the old post office."
"Don't waste money on a fountain, the mini -park is a good focal point."
"More greenery."
"Less greenery."
"Keep the streets open."
Transportation and Trafficways
Most frequently mentioned --
"A good mass transit system."
Comments on bus service --
Extend routes.
Night service - evening service.
Bus shelters.
Children's fares.
Mini -buses for non -peak periods.
Decrease fares.
Increase fares.
"It's a great system!"
Service to other communities --
"Get transit service to Cedar Rapids."
"Revive passenger service on the Crandic."
Bikeways --
"Build lots more."
"Make curb cuts."
"Get the bikes off the roads and sidewalks."
"Make it safer and more people will ride."
"Provide facilities."
"Enforce the laws."
Trafficways --
"Get a decent traffic system in town."
"Get the traffic off campus and out of downtown."
"We need corridors - particularly N -S and E -W."
"Build SIB."
"Build Scott Boulevard."
"No more street widening."
"Improve the roadways."
Problem intersections pinpointed --
Gilbert and Jefferson
Gilbert and Market
1st Avenue and Muscatine
Denton and Riverside Drive
All the Highway G By-pass intersections
Court Street and 7th Avenue
Summit Street bridge
9
Pedestrian crossings needing improrenen: at Burlington and Clinton
at Gilbert St. crossing at Rcc. Center Ontran:o
at Park Rd. bridge
Housing
Overwhelming number or comments --
"Housing costs are too high!" - reference to both rental and
owned property
We need --
Student housing.
Elderly housing.
Affordable housing.
Apartments in the Central Business District.
Multifamily housing in South Iowa City.
Affordable condominiums.
Other comments centered around --
Tenant protection.
Rental property deterioration.
Discrimination against pets, children and homosexuals.
Poor design and "tacky" nature of m, . new apartment buildings.
Environment and Energy
Two major items of concern --
Energy conservation and ecological responsibility.
Suggestions for energy conservation --
Housing code requirements for insulation.
Research and incentives for use of solar energy and other alter-
native energy sources.
Car pool programs.
High parking fees to encourage mass transit use.
Suggestions for greater ecological responsibility --
Preservation of natural areas.
Recycling programs and 'Ban the Can'.
Resource conservation.
Clean seater and air.
Other environmental concerns
Noise pollution.
Water pollution.
"Preserve the riverfront." (One offer of $1,000 to help huy land.)
Beautification.
"Make tree planting requirements more extensive."
Historic preservation.
"Outlaw smoking in public places."
"More Project GREEN -type activities."
n A few other comments --
"Don't tax bigger cars."
"Repeal the tree planting ordinance."
"Put up buildings not trees."
City Government and Services
A VERY wide variety of comments!
Basic suggestions to Council and staff --
"Do something!"
"Quit dreaming!"
"Where are we going?"
"Encourage civic pride."
"This was a good city - you ruined it."
"This is a great place to live - keep it that way."
Comments on and to City Council --
"Needs to be more active."
"Needs to be more responsive."
"Stop ax -grinding!"
"We need leadership not divisiveness."
"You're doing a good job."
"We have a representative City Council."
"Don't hire any more consultants. Get competent city staff."
_ "Use our funds efficiently."
"Too much domination by the wealthy, special interest groups,
and the Chamber of Commerce."
"Get rid of manager -council form of government."
Comments on City staff --
"Much too large a staff."
"Too many incompetents."
"Do away with the Department of Community Development."
"Too much use of city cars for private trips - especially, Public
Works."
"They ,do a good job."
Police --
"They're greatl" (also Fire Department)
"Enforce all the laws."
"This is 'drug city' - do something."
"Get those cars parked for months off the streets."
"Don't cruise in cars - walk f, bicycle."
"We need more crime prevention - street lights above all."
City Services --
"Maintain - they're good."
"Charge more for garbage pick-up."
"Don't charge more for garbage pick-up."
"Snow plowing is terrible."
"Buy up the utilities."
"Fix the roads and sidewalks."
"Clean up the city." (it was suggested that: instead of parking,
fines there should be an option to clean up a city block.)
"Too expensive."
Citizen Participation --
"This is good - continue."
"Let's have more communication."
"Better P.R."
"Include us all the time - publish what you do."
"Get better information to citizens before action is taken."
"Spend more money to educate citizens."
City -University relationships --
"More town -gown cooperation essential."
"There's too much student influence. They're only here four years."
"Pay more attention to the taxpayers and long-time residents."
"We students are being rooked."
"Make the University pay for services."
"Get some state money to compensate for the tax loss on University
land."
"The University makes this town great."
"Plan together."
Other General Comments --
Consolidate with county government.
Animal control (more and less).
Need more cultural opportunities.
Human rights.
More emphasis on family.
Annex University Heights. (A couple of people from University
Heights filled out the questionnaire on the assumption that
annexation would take place sooner or later and they wanted
a say in what happens in the city.)
Human Needs and Services
Most frequently mentioned needs --
Elderly services.
Basic services essential.
Services and help for handicapped.
Daycare for school-age children (after school and summers).
Other needs -
Teenage problems.
Social services for juvenile delinquents.
Job service for youth.
Alcoholism treatment.
Drug addiction treatment.
Health and dental care for low-income groups.
Services for transients.
A number of people commented that --
"We don't need miy more daycare or childcare."
"These services are the responsibility of the County, State, and
Federal Government."
"'rhe city should not spend money on this - too much woifare."
"Let Goodwill and the Salvation Army do it."
0
0 0
Neighborhoods and Zoning
Strongest comments --
"Maintain our neighborhoods!"
"Initiate neighborhood groups and centers."
"Facilitate use of meeting rooms, office equipment, etc."
"Locate apartment buildings so they do not ruin neighborhoods."
"Build to produce 'real' neighborhoods."
"Enforce zoning strictly."
Other comments --
"Need for street lights."
"Use cluster development plan."
"Need wider streets in new residential areas."
"Respect rights of property owners."
"Let's have less zoning restrictions."
Planning for City Growth
The gist of most of the comments here was --
"Let's make sure we have real planned growth. No more sprawl!"
"Make a good landuse plan and stick to it."
"Plan for mixed areas."
Community Facilities
Recreational facilities --
Library
Schools
"They're great!"
Expand!
More tennis courts (lighted).
More parks (mandatory park dedication).
Swimming pool for schools.
Swimming pool open before 8:00 am for working people.
Skating rink (indoor).
Downtown supervised playground for children.
Recreation for elderly.
About equal in number of comments:
"Build a new library."
"Expand the present library - don't need new one,"
Branch libraries needed. (Pew comments only.)
Keep educational alternatives (e.g. Sabin).
Improve academically - elementary, junior high and high school
programs.
Study location of new elementary school.
School board factions are detrimental to the system.
Maintain our good school system.
Other suggestions --
Cable T.v.
Art center - enriched cultural life not based on University.
Community gardens.
Meeting places for community groups especially young adults.
More ramps for handicapped (e.g. in library).
Taxes and Cost of Utilities
Comments basically centered around
Too high taxes and utility rates.
Property owners bear an unfair burden.
Get the University on the tax rolls.
Have city sales tax to distribute burden of providing services
to University students.
Parking
Residential areas --
Increase off-street requirements.
No parking on residential streets.
Parking for residents only.
Downtown --
Increase parking fees to encourage use of bus.
Lower or eliminate parking fines.
No meters.
Parking ramp and no on -street parking.
No parking ramp - there's enough parking now.
Need more downtown parking - spread out.
Blake downtown accessible to cars.
Commercial Development
About equal number of comments --
No more shopping centers - revitalize downtown.
More shopping centers.
Other comments --
Centers are ugly (Towncrest, h'ardway).
General shopping facilities in Iowa City are poor.
Need a mall on the west side of town.
Need north end mall.
Make commercial zone around airport.
Economic Base
i
Comments centered on the need for attracting both light and heavy (non-
polluting) industry, and the importance of creating more non -university
jobs and employment opportunities.
Need an industrial park.
Better tax base essential.
Flood Control
Most comments were about the necessity for control or Ralston Crook and
prevention of similar problems occurring as other creek areas are built up.
I
0 0
"Make Ralston Creek a greonbelt."
"Don't spend more money on Ralston Creek."
"Throw out the Flood Plain ordinance."
General Comments on People's Guide and Survey
Positive - (Not surprisingly heavily outweighed negative comments in number.)
"Good questionnaire."
"Excellent!"
"Interesting and thought-provoking."
"Applaud your efforts and hope it pays off."
"Thanks for asking."
"Spend more money on educating citizens in this way - repeat
annually (bi-monthly)."
"Please print results in Daily Iowan."
"We want to know the results."
"Print up 'People's Guide' to give to newcomers."
Negative -
"Stop wasting money on surveys."
"!!ow much did this cost me?"
"Too much time and money spent on consultants and useless
questionnaires."
"The questionnaire was biased - you know what answers you want."
"Too long."
"Not detailed enough."
"Didn't ask the right questions."
"Not enough choices on questions."
"Paid no attention to results of sample survey."
"Who's going to listen?"
"Nothing will change."
It should be noted that almost all the people who had negative comments
on the survey took the time to fill it out in detail and to write
a number of other comments.
INTRODUCTION
This report is part of a series being prepared to
assist
s
Iowa City in the development of a new city pla
report relates the importance of natural physical features
of the Iowa City area to urban development. By using
soils, topography and watersheds as planning guides
both the efficiency and environmental quality of Iowa
City can be improved.
SOIL COMPOSITE
Soils mapped and analyzed by the Soil Conservation
Service of the U.S. Department of Agriculture were
rated as to their potential for urban development. Devel-
opment hazards given primary consideration were the
degree of wetness and slope. Other factors considered
were the bearing capacity, shrink -swell potential, shear
strength, compressibility, and the consolidating charac-
teristiC of the soil. These hazards and characteristics
were applied and interpreted for thirteen different land
uses and the thirty-nine different soil groups found in
the Iowa City area. Each soil group was rated and
mapped according to its limitations (slight, moderate,
moderate to severe, and severe) for general urban devel-
opability. The fold -out map illustrates these limitations.
LIMITING FACTORS FOR URBAN DEVELOPMENT
Slight Being relatively free of develop-
ment hazards, these soils are suit-
able for most uses without costly
adjustments for site development.
Moderate There are few uses unsuitable for
these soil types but site character-
istics may require special design
considerations. Topography is
level to moderately sloping (0 to
9%). Drainage classes range from
well drained to somewhat poorly
drained. Difficulties encountered
will often include soil wetness,
poor shear strength, and high
shrink -swell potential.
Moderate to Severe
Limitations associated with these
soils are difficult to overcome but
with careful planning these soils
are acceptable for many uses.
Topography varies from moder-
ately sloping to steep 19 to 25%).
Drainage in these soils ranges
from somewhat poorly drained to
very poorly drained. Many of
these soils have a high clay con-
tent with resultant slow percola-
tion and high moisture retention.
The construction of foundations
must take into account the dan-
gerously high shrink -swell poten-
tial of these soils.
Severe Limitations are severe enough to
make use questionable. This does
not mean that these areas cannot
be used, but rather that the cost
of overcoming the limitations may
be prohibitive. Two major devel-
opment hazards include prolonged
wetness with frequent flooding
or excessively steep slopes (great-
er that 15%). It is generally rec-
ommended that these areas re-
main in their natural state not only
to avoid high development costs
but also to preserve unique areas
for open space and conservation
uses.
Soil requirements vary for different land uses and some
uses are more restricted by soil characteristics than others.
Generally high intensity land uses (commercial, heavy
industrial, etc.) are least suited to soils with a great num-
ber of limitations. The following chart relates the com-
patibility of particular land uses to the areas of devel-
opment limitations (shown on the fold -out map). For
example, conservation land uses are well suited to all
soil types while industrial uses are best suited to soil types
with slight limitations.
SOIL/LAND USE
COMPATIBILITY
CHART
">
JE
�
o
>
Land Use
in
i
m
Agriculture0
-
-
x
Public/Semi-public+
0
0
x
Conservation
+
+
+
0
+
x
1 DU/H (0.4 DU/A)
+
+
20 DU/H(8DU/A)
+
+
-
x
40 DU/H (16 DU/A)
+
0
-
x
80 DU/H (32 DU/A)
+
-
x
x
160 DLI/H 164 DU/A)
+
0
-
x
Office
+
0-
x
Commercial
+
0
-
x
Warehouse
+
0
-
x
Research
+
+
-x
Industrial
+
-
x
x
Compatibility
+High
-Low
x
Very
Low
0 Moderate
DU= Dwelling Unit
H = Hectare= 10,000 m'
A = Acre = 43,560 sq. ft.
TOPOGRAPHY
Glaciation, climate, surface water, and man have influenced
the topographic character of the Iowa City area. Based on
topographic characteristics, five topographic types or regions
can be recognized. The five regions are depicted above.
Region 1 is a relatively flat area with slopes generally less
than 2%. A significant portion of Region 1 is within the
100 -year floodplain of the Iowa River and several major
streams. Poor drainage is often a problem within these
areas. Region 2 is characterized by moderately sloping
12%•5%) uplands. The majority of the region lies within
the lower Ralston Creek watershed and contains most of
Iowa City's early development. Man has channelized many
of the streams within this region. The deep bends of the
Iowa River almost surround Region 3. Steep bluffs topped
by moderately sloped 'uplands characterize this region.
Drainage consists primarily of short gullies which discharge
surface runoff directly into the Iowa River. Region 4 is
located in portions of west and northeast Iowa City. Mod-
erately wide stream valleys, moderate to steep valley walls,
and narrow ridgetops characterize this region. Region 5 is
geologically the youngest of the topographic regions and
is characterized by relatively short, narrow stream valleys,
steep valley walls (slopes greater than 10%), and narrow
ridgetops.
Potentials and limitations for urban doveloprnenl exist
within each of the topographic regions. Moderately sloped
land is generally best suited for development as it provides
adequate drainage and few erosion hazards. Potential
problems of flat topography include poor drainage, flooding,
and wet soils. Construction difficulties and erosion hazards
are two potential problems associated with steep slopes.
To minimize development costs, erosion and flooding, to
maintain open space throughout the city, to preserve natural
features and vegetation, and to encourage development in
the most suitable areas, the following guidelines are
recommended:
SLOPE/NATURAL STATE REQUIREMENTS
% Average % of Site to
Slope Remain in Natural State
10 30
15 40
20 50
25 60
30 75
35 90
40 100
The average, slope will vary from site to site and is not
necessarily dependent on its location within a particular
region. As an example, the Burlington Street hill (between
Madison and Capitol) has a slope of approximately 7% while
the Washington Street hill (between Madison and Capitol)
has a slope of approximately 129%.
4
1977
all
Aq,
,:, :-�
Q 4=��, r�
'� ,3�i
��
�:,
;rte, �::..
TV
WATERSHEDS
Watersheds are a basic planning unit in that they define
areas which are drained by a single stream. By using water-
sheds as planning areas, problems which are related to
watersheds, drainage, flooding and sewer service, can be
more easily defined and treated. Currently Iowa City has
two problems, flooding and sewer service, which can be
minimized by a planning process which utilizes the charac-
teristics of watersheds as planning guidelines.
Flooding is caused by an excessive amount of water
entering a stream within a relatively short period of time.
Most urban development increases runoff as paving, roofs
and even lawns reduce the amount of water absorbed into
the ground. Thus, most of our urban development has
aggravated a natural situation by increasing both the
volume and the velocity of surface runoff. Onsite detention
of storm water can delay runoff sufficiently to reduce
flooding. By using onsite detention, downstream develop-
ment does not have to bear the burden of additional
flooding caused by new upstream development, Addition-
ally, by using watershed characteristics as criteria, land
which drains directly into the Iowa River is more appropri-
ate for intensive development than land drained by small
streams, due to the larger flow capacity of the river.
By using watersheds as planning units for sanitary sewers,
sufficient capacity can be planner) and unnecessary lift
stations avoided. Iowa City currently serves portions of
the Iowa River, Ralston, Willow, Clear, and Rapid Creek
watersheds. The restriction of new urban development
requiring sanitary sewers to the Iowa River, Ralston,
and Willow Creek watersheds would assure the future
operational efficiency of the sewer system. Additional
potential development areas that could be served with only
a minimal loss of efficiency include: the Rapid Creek
watershed immediately surrounding the 1-80 interchanges;
the Snyder Creek watershed west of Scott Boulevard and
above 200 meter (650 feet) elevation; and the Clear Creek
watershed south of Melrose Avenue. The possibility of
adjusting the Iowa City limits to include the entire Ralston
and Willow Creek watersheds and other areas which could
effectively be served by the city sewage system is a
measure which could increase the effectiveness of water-
shed information in land use planning.
Prepared for the Camprnhansive Plan Coordinating Committee: Richard
Blum (Chainwn), Pall Cain, Carel dePmsse, Jane Jakobsen, Mary
Neuhnuser, Robert Ogesen. David Parrot, Juanita Veltar.
By the Depnienunt of Community Duvelopntent, Dennis R. Kraft, Dlreatar,
City of Iowa City, Iowa 52240; Rick Geshwilm, Senior Planner (Witter
shads); Margaml Gfallen, Assistant Planner ITopogmPhyl; Doug Boolhroy,
Assistant Planner ISOM: Jorge Rendon, Planning Technician; Jeanne
Sonuky. Planning Arcluucian. Debbe Simpkins, Senior Clork/TYPist.
Printed on log% recycled pane'. Jame. 1977.
WATERSHEDS
®
�
- �+°' A.
IOWA
CITY
OWI
o�go�m
WATERSHEDS
Watersheds are a basic planning unit in that they define
areas which are drained by a single stream. By using water-
sheds as planning areas, problems which are related to
watersheds, drainage, flooding and sewer service, can be
more easily defined and treated. Currently Iowa City has
two problems, flooding and sewer service, which can be
minimized by a planning process which utilizes the charac-
teristics of watersheds as planning guidelines.
Flooding is caused by an excessive amount of water
entering a stream within a relatively short period of time.
Most urban development increases runoff as paving, roofs
and even lawns reduce the amount of water absorbed into
the ground. Thus, most of our urban development has
aggravated a natural situation by increasing both the
volume and the velocity of surface runoff. Onsite detention
of storm water can delay runoff sufficiently to reduce
flooding. By using onsite detention, downstream develop-
ment does not have to bear the burden of additional
flooding caused by new upstream development, Addition-
ally, by using watershed characteristics as criteria, land
which drains directly into the Iowa River is more appropri-
ate for intensive development than land drained by small
streams, due to the larger flow capacity of the river.
By using watersheds as planning units for sanitary sewers,
sufficient capacity can be planner) and unnecessary lift
stations avoided. Iowa City currently serves portions of
the Iowa River, Ralston, Willow, Clear, and Rapid Creek
watersheds. The restriction of new urban development
requiring sanitary sewers to the Iowa River, Ralston,
and Willow Creek watersheds would assure the future
operational efficiency of the sewer system. Additional
potential development areas that could be served with only
a minimal loss of efficiency include: the Rapid Creek
watershed immediately surrounding the 1-80 interchanges;
the Snyder Creek watershed west of Scott Boulevard and
above 200 meter (650 feet) elevation; and the Clear Creek
watershed south of Melrose Avenue. The possibility of
adjusting the Iowa City limits to include the entire Ralston
and Willow Creek watersheds and other areas which could
effectively be served by the city sewage system is a
measure which could increase the effectiveness of water-
shed information in land use planning.
Prepared for the Camprnhansive Plan Coordinating Committee: Richard
Blum (Chainwn), Pall Cain, Carel dePmsse, Jane Jakobsen, Mary
Neuhnuser, Robert Ogesen. David Parrot, Juanita Veltar.
By the Depnienunt of Community Duvelopntent, Dennis R. Kraft, Dlreatar,
City of Iowa City, Iowa 52240; Rick Geshwilm, Senior Planner (Witter
shads); Margaml Gfallen, Assistant Planner ITopogmPhyl; Doug Boolhroy,
Assistant Planner ISOM: Jorge Rendon, Planning Technician; Jeanne
Sonuky. Planning Arcluucian. Debbe Simpkins, Senior Clork/TYPist.
Printed on log% recycled pane'. Jame. 1977.
s
FM.T
IITIES
DEP%RTMEN( OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
32/5
■
1;
INTRODU&ION
This report is part of a series being prepared to assist Iowa
City in the development of a new City Plan. Utilities (in-
cluding water, storm and sanitary sewers, electricity, natural
gas, and telephone) are necessary components of a quality
urban environment. Future population growth as well as
industrial and commercial development are directly related
to the ability of the community to provide these services
through public or private agencies. The following report
summarizes the history, existing conditions, and future im-
plications of these utility systems.
WATER TREATMENT
AND DISTRIBUTION
The city water system serves all of Iowa City except the
University of Iowa which has its own water supply, treat-
ment and distribution facilities. The city also provides
water for University Heights. The water system for Iowa
City was owned and operated by a private concern, the
Iowa City Water Service Company, from 1882 until
September, 1961, when the city purchased the entire
system. Cunle, both treatment and distribution facilities
are municipally owned and operated. The original pumping
station was built in 1882 at the intersection of Madison and
Bloomington Streets. In 1910, four rapid sand filters and
a clear well were built. Through the years, several additions
have increased the capacity and efficiency of the plant. In
1964, a new plant was completed just south of the old plant.
Since 1964, both plants have operated to serve the citizens
of Iowa City.
The major source of water for Iowa City is the Iowa River
which drains an area of 828,800 hectares (3200 square miles)
above the city. The Coralville Dam, approximately 8.0 kil-
ometers (5 miles) upstream from the treatment plant intake
system, controls the flow downstream and provides a min-
imum flow of 2.8 cubic meters (100 cubic feet) per second
(approximately 367.2 liters or 97 million gallons per day)
during periods of low runoff. This flow is more than ade-
quate and the most economical means to meet the water
needs of Iowa City in the future. The water from the river
is treated through the processes of flocculation, sedimen-
tation, filtration, and chlorination.
In 1962, a deep well was dug north of the plant to supplement
the river water supply and serve as a standby system. This
479.8 -meter (1,574 -foot) well is capable of producing 5.7
million liters per day (mid) or 1.5 million gallons per day
(mdg). When used, the well water helps raise the temper-
ature of the river water and aids in removing tastes and
FIGURE 1
IOWA CITY WATER TREATMENT PLANT
1976
CHLORINE
ALUM UME
CLARIFIERS FILTERS
BRIT
REMOVER PUMPS
CLEAR WELL
IOWA CARBON
RIVER ALUM LIME HI H HEAD CITY
CHLORINE
MAINS
PUMPS MIXING SEDIMENTATION BASIN
CHAMBER
I
FILTERS
DEEP WELL
pees
CLEAR WELL
CHLORINE
odors. Water from the deep well is Oed directly to the
clear well without treatment except for chlorination. Even
though the deep well water is high in solids, iron, alkalinity,
hardness, sulfates and sodium, it provides a consistent
and dependable supplementary water source.
The city presently has a storage capacity of 18.9 million
liters (5 million gallons) and a clear well capacity for storage
of 2,800,000 liters (735,000 gallons). Underground reser-
voirs, each with 7.6 -million -liter (2 -million -gallon) capacities,
are located on Melrose Avenue between Westgate and
Emerald Streets and Sycamore near Crosby Lane. Aground
storage tank with a 3.8 -million -liter (1 -million -gallon) capacity
is located near the intersection of Prairie du Chien Road
and Kimball Avenue. A system of pumps and booster
pumps deliver the treated water throughout the distribution
system. Five interconnections between the University of
Iowa and the city distribution systems provide potential for
intersystem distribution if the need arises. The Coralville
-. water system is also connected to Iowa City's system in
order to provide additional water for emergency situations.
The treatment plant, located at the intersection of Madison
and Bloomington Streets, has a current average pumping
capacity (design capacity) of 30.3 mid (8.0 mgd) and a peak
pumping capacity of 43.5 mid (11.5 mgd). An additional
5.7 mid (1.5 mgd) can be pumped from the deep well. The
plant can and has operated at maximum capacity, but this
is limited to a few days in succession.
The American Insurance Association (Fire Underwriters)
,requires a system which provides uniform distribution,
equal pressure, and as few deadend mains as possible.
15.24 -centimeter (6 -inch) mains in residential areas and 20.32
centimeter (8 -inch) mains in high value districts are also
recommended. Iowa City's existing system has over 241
kilometers (150 miles) of mains ranging from 5.08 to 50.8
centimeters (2 to 20 inches). This system should be capable
of delivering a recommended 18,900 liters (5,000 gallons) per
minute to high value districts, 1,900 to 3,800 liters (500 to
1,000 gallons) per minute to residential districts, and 7,600
liters (2,000 gallons) per minute to schools and commercial
areas. The 5.08- and 10.16 -centimeter (2- and 4 -inch) mains
are not large enough to provide the recommended quantities
of water, however, the city is currently following a policy
for replacement of the 5.08 -centimeter (2 -inch) mains and
for requiring 15.24 -centimeter (6 -inch) mains installed in
new subdivisions.
The demand for water has continually increased in Iowa City.
In 1970 the average daily demand was 15.9 million liters per
day (4.20 mgd); the peak day demand was 23.5 mid (6.20
mgd). By 1975 the average daily demand had risen to 17.8
mid (4.69 mgd), the peak day to 28.5 mid (7.52 mgd). Grow -
Ing affluence, population, and industrial and commercial
development will create additional increases in water de-
mand. Presently, plant treatment capacity is more than
adequate for meeting peak dema.tds and should be capable
of meeting future demands to the year 2000. After that date,
even if peak demands exceed plant capacity, plant expansion
will not necessarily be required. A policy of meeting pre-
dominate demand patterns and reducing peak demand by
consumer education and regulation could eliminate the
need to expand capacity. There are alternatives to plant
expansion which could result in substantial savings to all
Iowa City residents.
SAN11VARY & STORM
SEWERS; WASTE-
WATER TREATMENT
The Iowa City sanitary sewage system serves the University
of Iowa, University Heights, and most of the developed
areas in Iowa City. Small areas in the north part of the city
and along the Iowa River in the south part of Iowa City are
not served at this time.
Construction of the sanitary sewage system began around
1890. Raw wastewater was discharged from the sewers
directly into the Iowa River until 1935 when the first sewage
treatment plant was built. Some storm sewers were sepa-
rated from the sanitary sewers at that time to minimize the
volume of water treatment. Continued city and university
growth following World War II led to the overloading of
the sewer system and sewage treatment facilities. During
the period between 1962 and 1973, a number of major im-
provements and additions to the system were made. An
expansion of the water pollution control plant in 1956-66
more than doubled the capacity of the original treatment
plant. New facilities for handling solid waste were com-
pleted in 1973. In 1971, a major storm water separation pro-
gram was completed in the older portions of the city. Several
new trunk and outfall sewer systems have been built over
the past several years. Treatment facilities also include two
lagoons on the north side of Interstate 80, one of which is
privately owned and operated. These lagoons will be
abandoned in the future when sewers are extended into
these areas.
The majority of city sewers are gravity -flow systems. Be-
cause of topographic constraints only those watersheds
which flow into the Iowa River immediately above the ex-
isting sanitary sewage treatment plant can be served eco-
nomically and efficiently by the existing sewage system.
Ten lift stations permit small portions of the Clear Creek,
Rapid Creek, Snyder Creek and other watersheds to be
served. Because pumping sewage is expensive in terms of
capital and operating costs, and is wasteful of energy, city
policy generally prohibits the construction of additional lift
stations. These constraints place obvious limits on the
potential areas of future development within or surrounding
Iowa City.
Additional limitations are presented by the capacities of
existing trunk sewers. Extensions of sewer lines are im-
practical if there is not enough capacity in the existing trunks
for additional wastewater. A detailed study of existing trunk
capacities will be made in the near future. However, it has
been estimated that 15,500 additional persons can be served
by extensions of the existing system. (Approximately
55,000 persons can be served within the existing system.)
The water pollution control plant is a trickling filter -separate
sludge digestion plant. The design average daily flow is
30.3 million liters (8.0 million gallons) per day; the design
peak flow is 60.6 mid (16.0 mgd). During periods of wet
weather, peak flows received at the plant exceed the plant
design peak flow of 60.6 mid (16.0 mgd). The excess flows
are bypassed to the river without treatment.
0
r
FIGURE2
WATER POLLUTION CONTROL PLANT FLOW
IN IOWA CITY: JULY, 1975 -JUNE, 1976
WATER S WASTEWATER: PRECIPITATION:
MILLION LITERS CM/MONTH
(MILLION GALLONS) (IN./MONTH)
30 1 AVERAGE DAILY WASTEWATER FLOW
(SM AVERAGE GAILY WATER CONSUMPTION
10 15M
12.8) PRECIPITATION 100)
AX 3(Y)
01 ..::::::::::::q:::: y::::::::::: a— ::::::::::r:::::., 0
J A S O N DIJ F M A M J
I07r, ) E 1976
The water pollution control plant is operated under two
regulatory permits, one issued by the Environmental Pro-
tection Agency and the other by the Iowa Department of
Environmental Quality. The effluent limitations of the two
permits are identical through July 1, 1979. The city currently
exceeds these effluent limitations at times. Consultants have
recommended that, in order to comply with the permit re-
quirements, a new treatmeht plant be built south of the cor-
porate city limits and the existing plant be abandoned. The
existing sewers would also be rehabilitated to eliminate inflow
(water entering the sanitary sewer system through down-
spouts, sump pumps, or similar means) and minimize infil-
tration (rainwater or ground water which enters through
seepage or cracks in the sewer lines), thereby minimizing
the amount of necessary water treatment. The new plant
should be designed for an average daily flow of about 41.6
mid (11.0 mgd). Onsite detention of storm water runoff
would be utilized to minimize the peak flow design capacity.
Storm sewers serve most areas in Iowa City, although ser-
vice is minimal in the north and east central portions. Storm
water is generally discharged at various locations along the,
major streams within the city. As stated previously, most
of the storm sewers have been separated from the sanitary
sewers. Even though onsite detention of storm water is
now required for new development, storm sewers will con-
tinue to be required throughout the city.
ELECTRICITY
Iowa City's electricity needs are served by the Iowa -Illinois
Gas and Electric Company. The company's main source
of generated power is not within Iowa City; the power is
received through primary transmission lines from conven-
tional power plants in the Quad Cities and a nuclear plant
in Cordova, Illinois. Eleven substations located throughout
Iowa City reduce this power to the potential used in secon-
dary transmission lines. Transformers further reduce voltage
to the customers' requirements. Six of the older substa-
tions (A, B. D F S, N, on the ntap abovel have the
capacity to reduce the power from 13 to 4 kilovolts. The
newest substat, located peripherally, can reduce the
power from 69 to 13 kilovolts, which enables the substation
to handle a larger load. These peripheral substations extend
the service to rural areas. Iowa -Illinois also serves two
substations for the University of Iowa, to supplement the
University's own transforming equipment.
Four gas turbines, located in Coralville, are designed to in-
crease Iowa City's capacity in peak periods. Each turbine
is rated at 20 megawatts for —18°C (0°F) temperatures
and 15 megawatts for 37°C (99°FI temperatures. These
turbines are frequently used in hot weather when there is
greater demand, and when turbines are generating power
at a lower production level. The Coralville turbines are also
used when the main units are down for maintenance.
FIGURE 3
ELECTRICAL CONSUMPTION IN IOWA CITY:
HIGH AND LOW NET LOADS
1976
MEGAWATTS
IQ
J r Al H T e -
MONTHS -1978
Demand for electricity varies seasonally, as shown in Figure
3. The net load in July, 1976 occasionally surpassed 90
megawatts during peak periods. Peaks during the winter
months have not exceeded 65 megawatts.
Daily peaks in electrical consumption during the summer
usually occur between 3:00 and 5:00 pm. During the rest
of the year peaks are generally around noon, except in
cases of extremely cold weather, when there may be an
additional peak between 6:00 and 7:00 pm.
According to company representatives, the Iowa -Illinois
Gas and Electric Company is presently willing to provide
unlimited electricity and foresees no problem in meeting
future demand.
Iowa -Illinois is required by city ordinance to install power
cables underground in new residential subdivisions. The
cables serving the urban renewal area will be underground.
However, the company does not plan to convert overhead
lines to underground cables in other areas. Although under-
ground cables are presently more expensive to install than
overhead lines, the cost differential is diminishing for most
intraurban lines.
NATURAL GAS
Iowa -Illinois Gas and Electric Company procures the natural
gas for Iowa City from the Natural Gas Pipeline of America.
The main pipeline extends from Ainsworth, Iowa to Cedar
Rapids. Smaller communities along the pipeline also use it
as their natural gas source. Two of the main pipelines
have a pressure of 42.2 kilograms/square centimeter
(kg/cm2) or 600 pounds/square inch (psi); the third carries
28.1 kg/cm2 (400 psi). The border stations, shown on the
foldout, cut the pressure down to 7.0 kg/cm2 (100 psi).
Regulator stations located throughout the city reduce the
pressure to 1.05 kg/cm2 (15 psi). Pipelines radiating from
the regulators are designed in a circular system so that
nearly all points can be served by more than one regulator
station. This assures all customers of receiving service in
the event of a shutdown of a particular regulator.
Pipes leading to homes in the older areas of town are 10.6
to 15.2 centimeters (4 to 6 inches) with a pressure of 0.02
kg/cm2 (0.25 psi). In the newer areas, the gas is carried in
smaller, 5.08 -centimeter (2 -inch) pipes at higher pressure,
which is more economical.
Figure 4 shows the substantial increase in natural gas con-
sumption during the winter months. Industrial consump-
tion, which remains fairly stable throughout the year, re-
quires a relatively small amount of the natural gas consumed.
A single-family house may require from 150,000 BTU/hr.
to 225,000 BTU/hr. depending on size and insulation. The
company foresees no problem in supplying natural gas to
homes, but industries are already looking toward alternative
sources of energy. Certain industries are now under con-
tract to receive natural gas from April through October,
with the understanding that gas will not be provided during
the peak -use months.
TELEPHONE
Northwestern Bell supplies a total of 55,960 telephones (in-
cluding extensions) to approximately 25,000 Iowa City cus-
tomers. These customers make close to 218,0001ocal calls
and 29,000 long distance calls on an average workday. The
amount of weekend calls is much less. As more financial
transactions occur by telephone (such as bill -payment
service) the telephone will become more important as an
energy-saving device.
Northwestern Bell projects the telephone needs twenty
years in advance to ensure adequate capacity in new
growth areas. At the present time, monthly charges for
residential phones do not equal the cost of services. The
telephone company compensates for this loss with revenue
from businesses, long distance calls, and special services.
FIGURE4 '
GAS CONSUMPTION IN IOWA CITY: Telephone wires in new areas are always placed under -
HIGH AND LOW DAILY READINGS ground. Lines in older areas will not be converted to under -
1976 ground cables because of cost. Underground cables cost
about 30% more than overhead lines initially, but long-term
MILLION MILLION maintenance of overhead wires makes them equally
' CUBIC METERS CUBIC FEET expensive.
1.0
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
J F M A M J J A S 0 N 0
MONTHS -1976
30
20
R7
- Presently, natural gas is one of the least expensive fossil
fuels. Before 1974, there was no limit to the amount of
'.,�• natural gas Iowa -Illinois would supply to its customers. In
1974, when the brunt of the gas shortage was felt, a
350,000 BTU/hr, limit was set on supplies to new and
existing customers. Today the limit on extension is 3
million BTU/hr.
i
Calls from Iowa City are handled by main switching centers
in Davenport, Des Moines, Omaha, and Chicago. At these
points, a call is switched to the most efficient system (wire,
microwave, or satellite) to handle that particular call.
Seventy-five percent of the long distance calls generated
in Iowa City are transmitted through wire systems which
have the capacity to transmit 1,000 calls simultaneously.
The other 25% of the long distance calls are transmitted by
the microwave system (much like radio waves). Located ap-
proximately 40.2 kilometers (25 miles) apart, the microwave
lowers boost the waves to the receiving tower at the call's
destination. The towers must be located at a high elevation
since they need an unrestricted path of 91.4 meters (300 feet)
on either side of the beam's center for transmitting the
microwaves. The tower in Iowa City is 97 meters (318 feet)
tall, located off Interstate 80 at the Highway 1 exit
(41041 '10" latitude and 91030'47- longitude). As shown
on the map, the Iowa City tower transmits toward Cedar
Rapids at an angle of 339021' and transmits toward
Muscatine at an angle of 126°39'. The radiating portion of
ilia tower which transmits to Cedar Rapids is 93.7 meters
(307.5 feet) above ground; the portion which transmits to
Muscatine is 63.4 meters (208 feet) above ground. The mi
crowave system utilizes the 3,700 to 4,200 megacycles hand.
Each wave can carry up to 1,800 conversations. The micro
wave system is anticipated to carry a larger percentage of
calls in the future..
10
FIGURE 5
UTILITY LINES ON SINGLE-FAMILY LOT
-------- ELECTRIC
G — — — NATURAL GAS
—S _ — — — — SANITARY SEWER
T — TELEPHONE
W — -- WATER
A. TYPICAL SITE PLAN
B. PROPOSED S1TE PLAN
LOT
E®
SERVICE
DISTRIBUTION
SITE FACTORS
j .-
i The present system of service distribution is characterized
by a mixture of overhead and underground utilities. Total
underground utilities predominate in most of the recent
development, mainly because of city requirements. How-
ever, in many of the older areas of the community over-
head utilities remain. These telephone and electric wires
M often conflict with desirable tree plantings and have an ob-
jectionable appearance. The replacement of all overhead
lines with underground service would be a positive design
benefit and would reduce storm related damages and loss
of services.
Underground utilities generally share rights-of-way with
I,. the trafficway system. Utility easements and exclusive
rights-of-way also exist. In many cases the underground
i lines, cables, and pipes are provided by digging separate
i trenches for each utility at various locations. A typical
single-family lot is shown in Figure 5A.
some of the utility service lines could be placed in the same
trench, or at least relatively close to each other. Water and
sanitary sewer pipes can be placed in the same trench, the
water line at least 45.7 centimeters (18 inches) above the
sanitary sewer. Both must be at least 1.1 meters (3.5 feet)
below the surface to prevent freezing. Electric and tele-
phone lines can also be placed in the same trench, the tele-
phone lines several centimeters above the electric lines.
L These lines are usually laid at a minimum depth of 0.6
meters (2 feet). Natural gas lines can be placed within
J several centimeters of the telephone and electric or the
water and sanitary sewer with little problem. One major
difficulty with placing all utilities in the same trench is co-
ordinating the various utility companies for the initial in-
stallations. Another problem is that, in the event of prob-
lems with the underground utilities, it would be difficult to
dig up one line without damaging other lines and thus cre-
ating additional service disruption and expense.
Obvious advantages exist when only two service trenches
exist on a lot instead of three or more. Energy and devel.
opment costs would be reduced if fewer trenches were
dug. The property owner would have fewer areas to avoid
when constructing fences or patios, or landscaping the
yard. (Trees and shrubs should be a minimum of 0.3 to 0.6
meters, or 1 to 2 feet, from utilities). Figure 5B depicts a
single-family lot where utility service areas are minimized.
Utility companies should also avoid placing utilities in the
exact center of parkways along streets. Where utilities oc-
cupy these centers, it is often difficult to plant street trees.
Placing the utility lines on one side usually leaves room for
trees. (See Figure 6.)
Electric substations may present an objectionable appear-
ance to the surrounding neighborhood. Their location is
dictated by distance and demand factors which are fairly
flexible. Landscaping should be required to screen the ob-
jectionable views.
FIGURE 6
STREETTREE PLANTINGS
STREET
X '•A'•7' ..
•�-�UTILITY LINE-..
LOT
Utility lines located at the center of the parkway Ins shown abovel
force troes to be planted too close to the street and walk. When
utility lines are offset from the center of the parkway Ibelowl,
trees can be properly located.
Prepared for ilia Comprehensive Plan Coordinating Committee: Richard
Blum (Chairman), Pall Cain, Carol deProsse, Jona Jakobsen, Mary
Neuhmtser, Robert Oposen, David Perrot, Juanita Vetter.
By the Depamunenl of Community Development, Dennis R. Kraft,
Director, City of Iowa City, Iowa 52240; Rick Geshwiler, Senior Planner,
Douglas Beothmy, Assistant Planner; Margaret Garrott, Assistant
Planner, Debra Martrahn, Assistant Planner; Jeanne Somsky, Editor,
Graphics Technician; Dahlia Simpkins, Senior Clerk /Typist.
Printed on 100% racyeled paper. May, 1077.
MINUTES
RALSTON CREEK COORDINATING COMMITTEE
JUNE 27, 1977
MEMBERS PRESENT: Glenn Boutelle
Charles Eastham
Jim Powers
Jane Jakobsen
Chet Orelup
Larry Padget
Bruce Glasgow
Carol deProsse
Roxanne Haldeman
Helen Kavanaugh
Julie Vann
REQUEST FOR CITY MANAGER ASSISTANCE
The Ralston Creek Coordinating Committee requests the asssistance of the
City Manager in determining any place Ralston Creek HCDA funds can be
exchanged for general obligation bonds in either FY78 or FY79 so that
land may.be purchased for the East Side Detention Structure immediately
without the need to go through 12-18 month period for an Environmental
Impact Statement.
As the first order of business the Public Works Director stated that under
the Federal guidelines for expenditure of HCDA funds all of the remaining
Ralston Creek projects would have to have an Environmental Review Record.
It is almost 100% certain that the entire package of remaining projects
would also need Environmental Impact Statements since they would be tied
in with Hickory Hill. The Hickory Hill project alone would necessitate
an Impact Statement. It is anticipated that an Environmental Impact
Statement will take 12-18 months.
The Public Works Director expressed his disappointment at not noticing
this problem sooner since it would have been easily possible to use the
GO bonds sold for downtown mall improvements to finance Ralston Creek
projects and use HCDA funds, scheduled for Ralston Creek, on downtown
urban renewal projects. Since the urban renewal project already has an
approved Impact Statement there would be no delay for either urban renewal
or Ralston Creek.
The actions of Free Environment and John McLaughlin were discussed at
length.
As a result of these discussions the Committee decided it was most important
to buy the land in the East Side Detention Structure to preclude further
development.
0
RCCC MINUTES
June 27, 1977
Page 2
10
Jim Powers, Larry Padget, and Chet Orelup were present from Powers and
Associates. They presented an update report on the technical aspects of
the Ralston Creek Watershed Management Plan which is attached to these
minutes.
Their calculations indicated that storm water detention structures in
Hickory Hill and on the east side of town would result in significant
decreases in flooding directly downstream from the structures; however,
the further downstream toward the Iowa River the less the effect of the
detention structures. The reason for this is that over 50% of the water-
shed is already developed and the detention structures control only flow
from the other 50% that is not developed.
The consultant discussed channel enlargement measures to be done in
conjunction with the storm water detention structures. The Committee
expressed surprise and disappointment that it would be necessary to
even discuss channel enlargement since this would be extremely difficult
to do physically and politically.
The consultant stated that if the storm water detention structures were
designed for the 100 year storm this by necessity reduced the level of
flood protection for smaller storms such as for the 5, 10, and 15 year
storm. There was discussion about how the structures could be made to
provide protection for the smaller storms. It was stated that sluice
gates could be installed on the discharge pipes so that there was
protection for small storms and after the rainfall had ended the sluice
gates could be opened to drain the structures more quickly than what
otherwise occurs with small pipes.
It was the concensus of the Committee that the consultant should come
back the next meeting with data on sluice gated structures.
It was also the concensus that the consultant should investigate the
cost of channel enlargements and bridge replacements.not with an eye
toward actually doing these but with an eye toward eliminating these
is a realistic possibility simply because of the cost.
Another meeting was set for July 27, at 7:30 p.m. in the City Manager's
Conference Room.
of Public Works
T I U1 I TH I I S
- 1 2
Team
7 8AM-Ma istrates 8
•30PM-Human Rel. LOAM -Staff Meeting s) ap
Staff (Conf Roan) (Conf Roan) 7:30PM-P&Z Formal
•30PM-P&Z Info 3:30PM-Housing Can (Chars)
(Eng Conf Roan) (Conf Roan)
•30PM-Council BPM g.�. �r
(Chambers) �oareet g
. n
18AAM--Magistrates
lz
lj
"8AM-Magistrates
Court (Chambers)
LOAM -Staff Meeting
Court(Chambers)
30PM-Igonnal
4PM-Cacmittee on
(Conf Roan)
7:30PM-Carp Plan
buncil (Conf Rn)
Community Needs
3:30PM-Board of
Coord. cchmittee
M-UAY (Friends
(Rec Center)
Adjustment (Chamb
(Conf Rom)
feeting Rom)
4C:330PM-Resouurooes
(Confe%an)
7:30PM-Council
(Chambers)
L9 20 18AM-Magistrates LZ
10AM-Staff Meeting I Court (Chambers) SAM -Urban Renewal
(COnf Roan) 7:30PM-AirFort (Conf Roan)
(Conf Roan)
70PM-Crspcil (hambers)Fonnal
'B-Magistrates
NW ig strate)`v
1:30PM-Informal ;30PM-Council
Council (Conf Rm)
7:30PM-Rna
ran Riah (Cnarnbers)
)AM -Staff Meeting `Court (Chas)
(Conf Roan) 4:15PM-Lilrary Bd
:301"M-Riv rfront (Lib Auditorium)
'onm (COn Roan) 7:30PM-Carp Plan
:30PM-P' lstgn Crk Coord Cadhittee
Coord onvattee (Conf Rom)
(Conf Roan)
:,
Mr. Neal G. Berlin, City Manager
City of Iowa City
i City Building
Iowa City, IA 52240
Dear Mr. Berlin:
RECEIVED JUN 2 7 1977
CIT Y007- VVINE31MA
CITY HALL • FOURTH S LAFAYETTE
WINONA, MINNESOTA • 66967
TELEPHONE [607) • 462-8660
452.4532 452.2881 452.4612
LIBRARY POLICE FIRE
June 24, 1977
Since last December, the Ad Hoc Committee for Adequate and Assured Community
Development Program Funding has represented the smaller communities' interests as
Congress considered the Housing and Community Development Act of 1977.
The Ad Hoc Committee's original goals were straight forward:
1. Continuation of Hold -Harmless
2. Adequate funding levels for discretionary grants
After seeking support from the National League of Cities, National Association of
Housing and Redevelopment Officials and other national organizations, the Ad Hoc Com-
mittee became aware of two conditions:
1. Hold -harmless was politically dead.
2. No one was representing the smaller communities in
the Community Development legislative process
To remedy this situation, the Ad Hoc Committee immediately formed a legislative
policy and informational program. It contacted over 400 -smaller -communities throughout
the United States and provided expert testimony at Senate and House Committee hearings.
The Ad Hoc Committee also organized a nationwide lobbying drive with City Councils to
advise their congressional delegations of smaller communities needs.
To date, the Conference Committee 'is being formed with the Senate bill fulfilling
the following smaller communities' objectives:
1. Multi-year commitments to smaller cities (without
an "up to three years" limitation).
2. "Fund those units of general local government which are
presently carrying out a comprehensive community develop-
ment program with entitlements under subsection (h) before
making new commitments."
3. Establish multi-year grants in amounts meaningful to the
city's size, community development program undertaken,
performance capacity, prior and present funding levels, age
of housing and poverty.
3221.1
4. Reservatior� funds earmarked for multi -ye
commitments assure availability for futurF fiscal
years as is presently the case for hold -harmless
communities receiving entitlements under section 106(h).
Despite our success on these points, we are not at the end of the tunnel. It is
critical that we continue our effort at the Conference Committee level for two reasons:
Mthe National Rural Housing Coalition is lobbying against the Senate verison, and
no other interest is supporting the smaller communities' position.
The Ad Hoc Committee's effort during the past six months has made it increasingly
clear that smaller communities are t ad 1 represented either on boards
Policyb e exts ional organizations. The Comnunity Deve opment struggle has
just begun; we will soon enter the ru a stage. In 1979, the Act will be up for
review so the legislative battle will start again in 1978. Consequently, we need an
organization that will truly represent, counsel and advise smaller conmunities.
i To fulfill this need, the Ad Hoc Commit ee is establishing a permanent organization
theSmaller Commun1t;e Nat onal-_Asso ation to represent communities under 50,000
population. The primary purpose of the Smaller Communities National Association will be
to assist communities under 50,000 population with respect to the Community Development
Program under Title I of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974, as amended.
It will provide information on a continuing basis to participating communities regarding
the applicable procedures and requirements of the Community Development Program. This
will include an exchange of information between smaller communities participating in the
Community Development Program. The Smaller Communities National Association will provide
comments and recommendations to the Department of Housing and Urban Development on formal
rule making and related activities. Particular emphasis will be placed on practical
implications of program requirements statuatory language and proposed revision for
communities under 50,000 population.
All communities under 50,000 population will be eligible to participate in the
organization. Participating communities will pay an annual fee, to be determined after
incorporation. The fee will probably range between $500 and $1000, depending upon the
size of the community and enrollment. All the organization's income will be used to
fund its operating expenses. Recently, the present Department of Housing and Urban
Development General Counsel gave an opinion that membership fees in such an organization
as Smaller Communities National Association would be an allowable expense.
The Housing and Community Development Act of 1977 promises to be the most responsive
piece of legislation for smaller communities, but only if we continue to voice our needs
collectively. Assess the representation you have received from the various national
organizations. Did they represent your community this past year during the entire
Community Development legislative process? Can you afford not to be adequately represented?
The Community Development Program is the only game and the Smaller Communities
National Association is the only team who will play for us, but, we have to pay.
To successfully launch the Smaller Communities National Association we will need the
membership of those communities that participated in the Ad Hoc Committee for Adequate and
Assured Community Development Program funding. I will be calling you during the week of
June 27, 1977 to discuss the Smaller Communities National Association. I look forward to
your comments.
Sincerely,
Roger vH. Ganser,Director
Department 'of Community Development