Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2002-10-08 Ordinance Prepared by: Karen Howard, Associate Planner, City of Iowa City, 410 E, Washington Street, Iowa City, IA 52240; 319-356-5251 ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE CONDITIONALLY CHANGING THE ZONING DESIGNATION ON A 8.69 ACRE PROPERTY LOCATED NORTH OF STATE HIGHWAY 1 AND WEST OF MILLER AVENUE FROM HIGH DENSITY MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (RM-44) TO MEDIUM DENSITY MULTI-FAMILY - RESIDENTIAL (RM-20); CONDITIONALLY CHANGING THE ZONING DESIGNATION ON A t.45 ACRE PROPERTY LOCATED NoRT~ OF STATE HIGHWAY 1 AND WEST OF MILLER AVENUE FROM COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL (CC-2) TO MEDIUM DENSITY MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (RM-20); AND CONDITIONALLY CHANGING THE ZONING DESIGNATION ON A 1.45 ACRE PROPERTY LOCATED NORTH OF STATE HIGHWAY 1 AND WEST OF MILLER AVENUE FROM MEDIUM DENSITY SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (RS-8) TO COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL (CC-2). WHEREAS, Charles W. Ruppert, Marie Ruppert, Richard H. Ruppert, Robert L Ruppert, Maxine Ruppert, Katherine C. Hogan, Eugene Hogan, Cleldon F. Ruppert, Herman G. Ruppert, Betty Lou Ruppert, and Dean C. Cooper as Executor of the Estate of Rosamond V. Cooper (hereinafter "Owners") own the subject property legally described below; and WHEREAS, the 8.69-acre property (hereinafter "Tract 1") is not suitable for high density residential development, because it contains steep and critical slopes and wooded ravines, is directly adjacent to a Iow density single famity zone, has limited street access, and contains few pedestrian links north and south to major destinations; and WHEREAS, a certain portion of the property (hereinafter "Tract 2") is not suitable for commercial development, because it contains steep and critical slopes and wooded ravines, is separated from adjacent commercial development by rugged topography, and has limited street access; and WHEREAS, a zoning change from RS-8 to CC-2 for the 1.45 acre property (hereinafter "Tract 3") would increase the depth of potential commercial lots on the property to be consistent with adjacent commercially zoned property, thereby allowing adequate space to develop the property with commercial uses and for an adequate noise and sight buffer between commercial development and future residential development on property located north of the subject property; and WHEREAS, the Southwest District Plan, a component of the City's Comprehensive Plan, suggests commercial zoning for Tract 3 and RM-12, Low-Density Multi-Family zoning for Tract 1 and 2 of the subject property, with consideration for RM-20, Medium Density Multi-Family zoning, if appropriate conditions are met to satisfy public needs directly caused by the RM-20 zoning designation; and WHEREAS, Iowa Code 414.5 (2001) provides that the City of Iowa City may impose reasonable conditions with rezoning approvals, over and above existing regulations, in order to satisfy public needs directly caused by the zone change; and WHEREAS, the Owners acknowledge that certain conditions and restrictions are reasonable to address issues of compatibility with the adjacent single family neighborhood located north and west of the subject property as called for in the Southwest District Plan, to provide adequate street infrastructure, to prevent traffic congestion along local streets, to provide important pedestrian links between neighborhoods, and to ensure appropriate development of an environmentally sensitive property located along Highway 1, an important entranceway into Iowa City; WHEREAS, the Owners have voluntarily agreed to develop and use the subject property in accordance with the terms and conditions of a Conditional Zoning Agreement to address the public needs referenced above. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF IOWA CITY, IOWA: SECTION I. APPROVAL: Subject to the terms and conditions of the Conditional Zoning Agreement, attached hereto and incorporated by reference herein, the properties legally described below are hereby reclassified from their current zoning designation as follows: Ordinance No. Page 2 Tract 1: RM-44, High Density Multi-Family, to RM-20, Medium Density Multi-Family COMMENCING AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 16, TOWNSHIP 79 NORTH, RANGE 6 WEST, OF THE 5TM PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN; THENCE S00°30'48"W, ALONG THE WEST LINE OF SAID SOUTHEAST QUARTER, 493.66 FEET; THENCE N89°52'33"W, 337.07 FEET, TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF BENTON MANOR, AS RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 22, AT PAGE 22, OF THE RECORDS OF THE JOHNSON COUNTY RECORDER'S OFFICE, WHICH IS THE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE N89°59'59"~W, (A . RECORDED BEARING ALONG THE SOUTH LiNE OF SAID BENTON MANOR), 421.42 FEET, TO THE SOUTHWEST CORNER THEREOF, WHICH POINT iS ALSO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF LOT 25, OF WEEBER'S THIRD ADDITION OF IOWA CITY, IOWA, AS RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 9, AT PAGE 14, OF THE RECORDS OF THE JOHNSON COUNTY RECORDER'S OFFICE; THENCE S89°,44'56"W, ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID LOT 25, 225.28 FEET; THENCE WESTERLY 327.98 FEET TO THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF LOT 24 OF WEEBER'S THIRD ADDITION TO IOWA CITY, IOWA; THENCE S00°13'05"W, 161.77 FEET TO THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER, OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER, OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 16, TOWNSHIP 79 NORTH, RANGE 6 WEST OF THE 5TM PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN, AS RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 9, AT PAGE 13, OF THE RECORDS OF THE JOHNSON COUNTY RECORDER'S OFFICE; THENCE S00°06'07"W, 468.18 FEET; THENCE N57°55'37"E ALONG THE NORTHEASTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF IOWA PRIMARY ROAD NO. 1,369.85 FEET, TO A POINT WHICH IS 190.00 FEET, RADIALLY DISTANT NORTHWESTERLY OF CENTERLINE STATION 146+10; THENCE N71°35'52"E ALONG SAID NORTHEASTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE, 696.87 FEET; THENCE N00°30'48"E, 211.15 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. Tract 2: CC-2, Community Commercial, to RM-20, Medium Density Multi-Family COMMENCING AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 16, TOWNSHIP 79 NORTH, RANGE 6 WEST, OF THE 5TM PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN; THENCE S00°30'48"W, ALONG THE WEST LINE OF SAID SOUTHEAST QUARTER, 493.66 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE N89°52'33'~N, 337.07 FEET, TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF BENTON MANOR, AS RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 22, AT PAGE 22, OF THE RECORDS OF THE JOHNSON COUNTY RECORDER'S OFFICE; THENCE S00°30'48"W, 211.15 FEET, TO A POINT ON THE NORTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF IOWA PRIMARY ROAD NO. 1; THENCE EASTERLY 335.95 FEET ALONG THE NORTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF SAID IOWA PRIMARY ROAD NO. 1; THENCE NORTHERLY 168.23 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. Tract 3: RS-8, Medium Density Single Family Residential, to CC-2, Community Commercial COMMENCING AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SECT[ON 16, TOWNSHIP 79 NORTH, RANGE 6 WEST, OF THE 5TM PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN; THENCE S00°30'48"W, ALONG THE WEST LINE OF SAID SOUTHEAST QUARTER, 377.86 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE S89°52'33"E, 542.11 FEET; THENCE S02030'00"E, 115.92 FEET; THENCE N89°52'33"W, 548.21 FEET, TO A POINT ON SAID WEST LINE OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER; THENCE N00°30'48"E, ALONG SAID WEST LINE, 115.80 FEET, TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. SAID TRACT OF LAND CONTAINS 1.5 ACRES, MORE OR LESS, AND IS SUBJECT TO EASEMENTS AND RESTRICTIONS OF RECORD. SECTON I1. ZONING MAP. Upon final passage, approval and publication of the ordinance as provided by law, the Building Official is hereby authorized and directed to change the zoning map of the City of Iowa City, Iowa, to conform to this amendment. SECTON III. CONDITIONAL ZONING AGREEMENT. Following final passage and approval of this ordinance, the Mayor is hereby authorized and directed to sign, and the City Clerk to attest, the Conditional Zoning Agreement between the Owners of the subject property and the City. SECTION IV. CERTIFICATION AND RECORDING The City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed Ordinance Ne. Page 3 to certify a copy of this ordinance and the Conditional Zoning Agreement and to record the same in the Office of the County Recorder of Johnson County, iowa, at the Owner's expense, upon the final passage, approval and publication of this ordinance as provided by law. SECTION V. REPEALER. All ordinances and parts of ordinances in conflict with the provisions of this Ordinance are hereby repealed. SECTION VI. SEVERABILITY. If any section, provision or part of the Ordinance shall be adjudged to be invalid or unconstitutional, such adjudication shall'not affect the validity of the Ordinance as a whole or any section, provision or part thereof not adjudged invalid or unconstitutional. SECTION VII. EFFECTIVE DATE. This Ordinance shall be in effect after its final passa~Je, apl3'roval and publication, as provided by-law. Passed and approved this day of ,2002. MAYOR ATTEST: CITY CLERK Ordinance No. Page. it was moved by and seconded by that the Ordinance as read be adopted, and upon mil call them were: AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: Champion Kanner Lehman O'Donnell Pfab Vanderhoef Wilbum First Consideration ].0/8/02 Voteforpassage:Ayes: Pfab, Vanderhoef, Wilburn, Champion, Kanner, Lehman, O'Donnell. NAYS: None. ABSENT: None. Second Consideration Vote for passage: Date published Prepared by: Karen Howard, Assoc. Planner, 410 E. Washington St., Iowa City, IA 52240 (319) 356-5251 CONDITIONAL ZONING AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT is made by and between the City of Iowa City, Iowa, a Municipal Corporation (hereinafter "City") and Charles W. Ruppert and Marie ' Ruppert, husband and wife, Richard H. Ruppert, a single person, Robert L. Ruppert and Maxine Ruppert, husband and wife, Katherine C. Hogan and Eugene Hogan, wife and husband, Cleldon F. Ruppert, Herman G. Ruppert and Betty Lou Ruppert, husband and wife and Dean C. Cooper as Executor of the Estate of Rosamond V. Cooper (hereinafter "Owners"). WHEREAS, Owners, are legal title holders of the property legally described below; and WHEREAS, the subject property contains steep and critical slopes and wooded ravines, is directly adjacent to a Iow density single family zone, and contains few pedestrian links north and south to major destinations; and WHEREAS, the Southwest District Plan, a component of the City's Comprehensive Plan, suggests RM-12, Low-Density Multi-Family zoning for portions of the subject property, with consideration for RM-20, Medium Density Multi-Family zoning, if appropriate conditions are met to satisfy public needs directly caused by the RM-20 zoning designation; and WHEREAS, the City is considering rezoning a portion of the Owners' property located north of Highway I and west of Miller Avenue from High Density Multi- Family (RM-44) to Medium Density Multi-Family (RM-20) (hereinafter "Tract 1"); and WHEREAS, the City is considering rezoning a portion of the Owners' property located north of Highway 1 and west of Miller Avenue from Community Commercial (CC-2) to Medium Density Multi-Family (RM-20) (hereinafter "Tract 2"); and WHEREAS, the City is considering rezoning a portion of the Owners' property located north of Highway 1 and west of Miller Avenue from Medium Density Single Family (RS-8) to Community Commercial (CC-2)(hereinafter "Tract 2"); and WHEREAS, Iowa Code 414.5 (2001) provides that the City of Iowa City may impose reasonable conditions with rezoning approvals, over and above existing regulations, in order to satisfy public needs directly caused by the zone change; and WHEREAS, the Owners acknowledge that certain conditions and restrictions are reasonable to address issues of compatibility with the adjacent single family neighborhood located north and west of the subject property as called for in the Southwest District Plan, to provide adequate street infrastructure, to prevent traffic congestion along local streets, to provide important pedestrian linl~s between neighborhoods, and to ensure appropriate development of an environmentally sensitive property located along Highway 1, an important entranceway into Iowa City; WHEREAS, the Owner has agreed to develop and use this property in accordance with the terms and conditions of this Conditional Zoning Agreement to address the above referenced issues. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of mutual promises contained herein, the Parties agree as follows: 1. Charles W. Ruppert and Marie Ruppert, husband and wife, Richard H. Ruppert, a single person, Robert L. Ruppert and Maxine Ruppert, husband and wife, Katherine C. Hogan and Eugene Hogan, wife and husband, Cleldon F. Ruppert, Herman G. Ruppert and Betty Lou Ruppert, husband and wife and Dean C. Cooper as Executor of the Estate of Rosamond V. Cooper are the owners and legal title holders of approximately 11.6 acres of land located north of State Highway No. 1 and west of Miller Avenue, which property is more particularly described as follows: Tract I (RM-44, High Density Multi-Family, to RM-20, Medium Density Multi-Family) Commencing at the Northwest Corner of the Southeast Quarter of Section 16, Township 79 North, Range 6 West, of the 5th Principal Meridian; Thence S00°30'48'~/V, along the West Line of said Southeast Quarter, 493.66 feet; Thence N89°52'33'~/, 337.07 feet, to the Southeast Corner of Benton Manor, as recorded in Plat Book 22, at Page 22, of the records of the Johnson County Recorder's Office, which is the point of beginning; Thence N89°59'59'~V, (a recorded bearing along the South Line of said Benton Manor), 421.42 feet, to the Southwest Corner thereof, which point is also the Southeast Corner of Lot 25, of Weeber's Third Addition of Iowa City, Iowa, as recorded in Plat Book g, at Page 14, of the Records of the Johnson County Recorder's Office; Thence S89°,44'56'~/, along the South Line of said Lot 25, 225.28 feet; Thence westerly 327.98 feet to the Southwest Corner of Lot 24 of Weeber's Third Addition to Iowa City, Iowa; Thence S00°13'05'~/, 161.77 feet to the Northeast Corner of the Southeast Quarter, of the Northwest Quarter, of the Southwest Quarter of Section 16, Township 79 North, Range 6 West of the 5th Principal Meridian, as recorded in Plat Book 9, at Page 13, of the Records of the Johnson County Recorder's Office; Thence S00°06'07'~N, 468.18 feet; Thence N57°55'37"E along the Northeasterly Right-of-Way Line of Iowa Primary Road No. 1,369.85 feet, to a point which is 190.00 feet, radially distant Northwesterly of Centerline Station 146+10; Thence N71°35'52"E along said Northeasterly Right-of-Way Line, 696.87 feet; Thence N00°30'48"E, 211.15 feet to the point of beginning. Tract 2: (CC-2, Community Commercial, to RM-20, Medium-Density Multi-Family) Commencing at the Northwest Corner of the Southeast Quarter of Section 16, Township 79 North, Range 6 West, of the 5th Principal Meridian; Thence S00°30'48'~V, along the West Line of said Southeast Quarter, 493.66 feet to the point of beginning; Thence N89°52'33'~/, 337.07 feet, to the Southeast Corner of Benton Manor, as recorded in Plat Book 22, at Page 22, of the records of the Johnson County Recorder's Office; Thence S00°30'48'~/, 211.15 feet, to a point on the Northerly Right-of-Way Line of Iowa Primary Road No. 1; Thence easterly 335.95 feet along the Northerly Right-of-Way Line of said Iowa Primary Road No. 1: Thence Northerly 168.23 feet to the point of beginning. Tract 3: (RS-8, Medium Density Single Family, to CC-2, Community Commercial) Commencing at the Northwest Corner of the Southeast Quarter of Section 16, Township 79 North, Range 6 West, of the 5th Principal Meridian; Thence S00°30'48'~V, along the West Line of said Southeast Quarter, 377.86 feet to the Point of Beginning; Thence S89°52'33"E, 542.11 feet; Thence S02°30'00"E, 115.92 feet; Thence N89°52'33'~V, 548.21 feet, to a point on said West Line of the Southeast Quarter; Thence N00°30'48"E, along said West Line, 115.80 feet, to the Point of Beginning. Said Tract of land contains 1.5 acres, more or less, and is subject to easements and restrictions of record. 2. In consideration of the City's rezoning the subject property as described above, the Owners agree to certain conditions over and above City regulations in order to ensure that any future multi-family development is consistent with the Southwest District Plan, is sensitive to the topography of the property, is developed in a manner that is sensitive to the adjacent single family neighborhood, will prevent additional traffic on Harlocke Street, a local street, will provide the opportunity for important pedestrian links between neighborhoods, residential areas and adjacent commercial areas, will ensure that streets within the development are adequate to support traffic generated by both the commercial and medium density multi-family development, and will ensure appropriate traffic circulation and emergency vehicle access. _ . 3. In consideration of the City's rezoning the subject property as described above, the Owners agree that the use and development of the subject property will conform to all of the requirements of the Iowa City Zoning Ordinance, as applicable, as well as the following additional conditions: a. Prior to any development of the subject property, the Owner shall submit an OPDH plan for review and approval in accordance with City ordinances. The OPDH plan shall address the elements and conditions outlined in this Agreement; and b. Vehicular access to the subject property will not be permitted from Harlocke Street; and c. A 100-foot buffer area will be maintained along the western property line of Tract 1 to provide adequate separation between single family zoning and larger multi-family buildings and parking lots. The first fifty feet from the property line shall remain landscaped open space free of buildings and parking areas. Landscaped parking lots and buildings no greater than 25 feet in height may be established within the 100-foot buffer area between 50 feet and 75 feet from the western property boundary of Tract 1. Landscaped Parking lots and buildings no greater than 60 feet in height may be approved as part of the OPDH plan within the 100-foot buffer area between 75 feet and 100 feet from the western boundary of Tract 1; and d. The property will be developed in a manner that is sensitive to the topography, with buildings located in a manner that will minimize disturbance to critical slopes. To minimize impervious surface, at least 75 percent of the required parking must be provided underneath the buildings; and e. Access to the property will be permitted from the IDOT-approved access point along Highway 1 directly across from Ruppert Road. The City will cooperate with the Owner in their efforts to obtain appropriate IDOT approval for upgrades to the access point to serve the development; and f. If, based on the City's trip generation model, streets within the development will carry more than 500 vehicle trips per day, such streets shall be designed and constructed in accordance with City specifications for collector streets, including provisions for pedestrian facilities. Exceptions to the collector design standards may be approved by the Director of Planning and Community DevelolSment'if warranted b-ased on the private nature and function of the street. g. If, due to the intensity of development on the subject property, a traffic signal and turn lanes are warranted at the intersection of Highway 1 and Ruppert Road, the owner of the property must at that time contribute funds to pay for any IDOT required intersection improvements and funds equal to half the cost of a traffic signal and associated installation costs; and h. A public or private street must be stubbed to the west property line of Tract 1 in a location to be determined by the City of Iowa City; and i. If and until a street connection is made to the west, a turnaround must be constructed and maintained to standards that will accommodate fire apparatus and emergency vehicles; and j. A public access and fire apparatus access easement will be granted over and across all private streets within any future development; k. The emergency vehicle access easement must extend to the north property line of Tract 1 at a location to be determined by the City. This access easement will provide emergency vehicle access to the property in the event that the primary access from Highway 1 is blocked. The access easement must remain clear of structures and any landscaping or trees that might obstruct emergency access. The location for said access will be determined during the OPDH process. I. A 15' wide pedestrian walkway easement will be granted to allow the opportunity for a pedestrian trail to be constructed generally along the Owners' northern property line of Tract 1 and Tract 2 from the end of Harlocke Street eastward and then northward following the Owners' western boundary of Tract 3 to provide the opportunity for the eventual connection to the public park space located along Benton Street near its intersection with Miller Avenue. To maintain public safety, views to and from the pedestrian trail will be maintained. Fences, walls, or planted vegetation that effectively obstruct views to and from the trail shall not be permitted along the pedestrian easement; and m. A 15' wide pedestrian walkway easement will be granted from the property's northern boundary of Tract 2 generally southward to connect with the street on the property that provides public access to Highway 1. This easement should connect with the east-west trail easement described in paragraph I., above. n. A 15' wide pedestrian walkway easement will be granted from the northern property boundary of Tract 1 beginning at the end of Hadocke Street and extending generally southward following the western boundary of Tract 1 to end at the southwest corner of the property adjacent to the Highway 1 right-of-way. o. The grant of pedestrian easements described in paragraphs I, m., and n., above, does not represent an obligation on the property owner's part to construct pedestrian trails. However, this paragraph should not be construed in a manner that exempts the property owner from constructing adequate pedestrian facilities to serve development on the subject property. 4 The OPDH plan review and approval process outlined in paragraph 3.a. above shall not supplant any other approval required pursuant to Iowa Law or Iowa City Ordinances, such as the Iowa City Sensitive Areas Ordinance, if applicable. 5 The Owners acknowledge that the conditions contained herein are reasonable conditions to impose on the land and under Iowa Code 414.5 (2001), and that said conditions satisfy public needs that are directly caused by the zoning change. 6 The Owners acknowledge that in the event any portion of the subject property is transferred, sold, redeveloped, or subdivided, all development and redevelopment will conform with the terms of this Conditional Zoning Agreement. 7 The Parties acknowledge that this Conditional Zoning Agreement will be deemed to be a covenant running with the land and with title to the land, and shall remain in full force and effect as a covenant running with the title to the land unless or until released of record by the City. The Parties further acknowledge that this Agreement will inure to the benefit of and bind all successors, representatives and assigns of the Parties. 8 Owners acknowledge that nothing in the Conditional Zoning Agreement will be construed to relieve the Owner from complying with all applicable local, state and federal regulations. 9 The Parties agree that this Conditional Zoning Agreement will be incorporated by reference into the Ordinance rezoning the subject property and that upon adoption and publication of the Ordinance, this Agreement will be recorded in the Johnson County Recorder's Office. Datedthis ~.~114 . day of Se~i~l~ ,2002. OWNERS CHARLES W. RUPPER'T' CHARLES W. RUPPER'I~ Attorney-in-Fact for Marie Ruppert, Maxine Ruppert, Robert L. Ruppert, Katherine C. Hogan, Eugene J. Hogan, Betty C. Ruppert, Cleldon F. Ruppert, Herman G. Rupped, Betty L. Ruppert and Richard H. Ruppert DEAN C. COOPER ~/ ESTATE OF ROSAMOND V. COOPER, DECEASED Dean C. Cooper, Exee_xf{or CITY OF IOWA CITY By:, Ernest W. Lehman, Mayor Attest: Marian K. Karr, City Clerk STATE OF IOWA ) ) SS: COUNTY OF JOHNSON ) ' On this ~-/5'/~,~ day of ~:>.-~'.~.- ,~.,~/ , 2002, before me, a Notary Public in and for the State of Iowa, pe~onally appeared Charles W. Ruppe~ to me known to be the pemon who executed the foregoing instrument and acknowledg~ ?~;" that he executed the same as his vOlun~ act and de~. Nota~ Public in and for the State ~~ ~ ~10~mmt~ N~ ~1 STATE OF IOWA ) ) SS: COUN~ OF JOHNSON ) On this ~ day of ~ ~ ~ 2002, before me, a Nota~ Public in and for the S~te of Iowa, pemon~y appeared ChaHes W. Rup~ to me known to be the pemon who executed the foregoing instrument in behaE of Marie Ruppe~, Maxine Rupee, Robe~ L Ruppe~, Katherine C. Hogan, Eugene J. Hogan, Be~ C. Ruppe~, Cleldon F. Rupee, He.an G. Ruppe~, Be~ L. Ruppe~ and Richard H. Ruppe~, and acknowl~g~ that he execut~ the same as the volunta~ a~ and de~ of said Marie Ruppe~, Maxine Ruppe~ Robe~ L. Ruppe~, KatherineC. Hogan, Eugene J. Hogan, Betty C. Ruppert, Cleldon F. Ruppert, Betty L Ruppert, Herman G. Ruppert and Richard H. Ruppert Notary Public in and for the State of Iow~ ] ,.t'~ ~JLEANNE M. SCHWARTINGJ 1~ ~.1Commission Number 224~?~1 STATE OF FLORIDAI ) I l= I ) SS: COUNTY OF CHARLOTTE) On this __ day of ~ 2002, before me, a Rotary Public in and for the State of FIm'ida, ~orsonally appeared Dean C. Cooper, to me known to be the person who executed the foregoing instrument and acknowledged that he executed the same as his voluntary act and deed. SUSAN l MURPHY NOTARY PUBliC S'['ATE OF FLORIDA ~/~~,~ [ COMM[SSION NO. CC828909 M~..~.OM MISSION EXP. APR, 22;2003 ,/Notary Public ifi~-fi-d f~ the -State/df Florida STATE OF FLORIDA ) ) SS: COUNTY OF CHARLOTTE) On thisr-'~'~'~:;~',~ day of ~ 2002, before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for/said state, personally appeared Dean C. Cooper, to me known to be the identical person named in and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that such person, as such fiduciary, executed the same as the voluntary act and deed of such person and of such fiduciary. ~~ ~lotary Public i~and for ne State of ~orida STATE OF IOWA ) ) ss; dOHNSON GOUNTY ) On this day of ,2002, before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for said County, in said State, personally appeared Ernest W. Lehman and Marian K. Karr, to me personally known, and who, being by me duly sworn, did say that they are the Mayor and City Clerk, respectively, of the City of Iowa City, Iowa; that the seal affixed to the foregoing instrument is the corporate seal of the corporation, and that the instrument was signed and sealed on behalf of the corporation, by authority of its City Council, as contained in (Ordinance) No. passed by the City Council, on the day ef ,2002, and that Ernest W. Lehman and Marian K. Karr acknowledged the execution of the instrument to be their voluntary act and deed and the voluntary act and deed of the corporation, by it voluntarily executed. Notary Public in and for the State of Iowa Prepared by: John Adam, Associate Planner, City of Iowa City, 410 E. Washington Street, Iowa City, IA 52240; 319-356-5236 ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE VACATING THE TWENTY- THREE-FOOT WIDE GRAND AVENUE COURT RIGHT-OF-WAY, COMMENCING FROM THE NORTH RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF MELROSE AVENUE AND EXTENDING NORTHWARD FOR A DISTANCE OF TWO HUNDRED NINETY-FIVE FEET WHEREAS, the applicant, the University of Iowa, has requested that the City vacate part of Grand Avenue Court adjacent to Melrose Avenue; and WHEREAS, said portion measures two hundred ninety-five feet along the north-south axis, by twenty- three feet along the east-west axis; and WHEREAS, the City does not regard the street as a crucial part of the general or local traffic circulation system; and WHEREAS, the University of Iowa has requested the vacation specifically for the redevelopment of property on the west side of Grand Avenue Court, which redevelopment includes the improvement of portions of Grand Avenue Court; and WHEREAS, it is in the City's interest to vacate said public right-of-way, or portions thereof, that may be a benefit to and be improved as a result of redevelopment; and WHEREAS, the property adjacent to the proposed right-of-way contains a house listed on the National Register of Historic Places and it is in the City's interest to protect the City's, the State's and the country's cultural and historic resources, WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission recommended vacation of this right-of- way subject to the preservation of the house and grounds at the abovementioned property, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF IOWA CITY, IOWA: SECTION I. VACATION: The City of Iowa City hereby vacates the right-of-way legally described as follows: THAT PART OF GRAND AVENUE COURT IN GRAND AVENUE COURT ADDITION TO IOWA CITY, JOHNSON COUNTY, IOWA (FINAL PLAT RECORDED IN BOOK 3, PAGE 101 AT THE Ordinance No. Page 2 JOHNSON COUNTY RECORDER'S OFFICE), LYING NORTH OF MELROSE AVENUE AND SOUTH OF THE NORTH LINE OF LOT 4 OF SAID GRAND AVENUE COURT ADDITION EXTENDED WESTERLY TO THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF LOT 15 OF SAID GRAND AVENUE COURT ADDITION, COMPRISING 6,785 SQUARE FEET, MORE OR LESS. SECTION II. REPEALER. All ordinances and parts of ordinances in conflict with the provision of this Ordinance are hereby repealed. SECTION III. SEVERABILITY. If any section, provision or part of the Ordinance shall be adjudged to be invalid or unconstitutional, such adjudication shall not affect the validity of the Ordinance as a whole or any section, provision or part thereof not adjudicated invalid or unconstitutional. SECTION IV. EFFECTIVE DATE. This Ordi- nance shall be in effect after its final passage, approv- al and publication, as provided by law. Passed and approved this day of ,2002. MAYOR A'I-I'EST: CITY CLERK Approved by T:~CD~lohn A~Ac{ive Files\VAC02-00003 ordinance.doc 5¢ THE UNIVERSITY OF IOWA October 3, 2002 ~., O,/~b'~, Stephen Atkins (~ City manager City of Iowa City Civic Center 410 East Washington Street Iowa City, IA 52240 RE: Grand Avenue Court Vacation, Cannon-Gay House Dear Steve: During last Tuesday's public hearing for the vacation of the south portion of the Grand Avenue Court right of way, the City Council asked a number of questions about the University's proposed development around the area of the Cannon-Gay House. The West Campus Residence Area Master Plan that was presented to the Council indicated the possibility of a large residence hall south of Grand Avenue along Byington Road in addition to the Athletic Learning Center. University representative, Larry Wilson, indicated at the public hearing that planning was proceeding on a new residence hall north of Grand Avenue, but that it is not known at this time whether or not another residence hall south of Grand Avenue would be built. The proposed building serves only as a placeholder for future development when the specific need is identified. However, it is probable that any building on this site would be of a substantial size and scale that would dwarf the Cannon-Gay house and not be a compatible setting for the house. The University therefore would want to keep open the option of how the house might be preserved to respond to future development needs as they emerge. By copy of this letter, the University indicates its intent to preserve the original portion of the Cannon-Gay House built in 1884 in some way, which might include moving it to a new location. The later additions to the house would not be included in this intent. We appreciate your efforts and those of the Council to develop a common understanding and agreement between the City and University. I trust that this letter sufficiently clarifies the University's intentions to preserve the original portion of the house and will allow the Council to approve the vacation of Grand Avenue Court as requested. Sincerely, Facilities Services Group c:Rod Lehnertz Larry Wilson Facilities Services Group - Administration 210 University Services Bldg Iowa City, IA 52242-1922 Phone: 319/335-1248 FAX: 319/335-1210 THE UNIVERSITY OF IOWA October 3, 2002 Stephen Atkins City manager City of Iowa City Civic Center 410 East Washington Street Iowa City, IA 52240 RE: Grand Avenue Court Vacation Related Traffic Study Dear Steve: As you know, there was considerable discussion about area traffic at last Tuesday's public hearing for the vacation of the south portion of Grand Avenue Court. Much of the discussion seemed to be generated by the University's Campus Planning Framework campus master plan that suggests the possibility of requesting the portion of Grand Avenue west of Byington be vacated at some future time. University representative, Larry Wilson, indicated at the hearing that there is no proposal for that vacation at this time or in the near future. If or when the University has under active consideration any project which might contemplate the vacation of a portion of Grand Avenue, it will be imperative to engage with the City's staff at the very earliest planning stages. This we will certainly do. We are concerned that any traffic study done now on this yet nascent issue would be outdated and would have to be replicated at a future time. We are most willing to discuss with City staff the results of traffic studies we have conducted in the area which might address the issue now before the Council, namely the vacation of the south portion of Grand Avenue Court. Further, we would also be pleased to work with City staff and to share our thoughts regarding the alignment and configuration of Byington Road under a variety of scenarios. We hope this letter addresses the concerns of the Council. Sincerely, Facilities Services Group C: Rod Lehnertz David Ricketts Larry Wilson Facilities Services Group - Administration 210 University Services Bldg Iowa City, IA 52242-1922 Phone: 319/335-1248 FAX: 319/335-1210 Marian Karr From: Lesley Menninger [lesley@avalon.net] Sent: Monday, September 30, 2002 1:25 PM To: cou ncil@iowa-city.org Subject: Cannon-Gay-McCIoskey House Dear Council Members: I am alarmed to learn that the City Council might not require the University in some legally binding way to protect and preserve the Cannon-Gay-McCloskey House. The University has torn down so many of the historic homes of Iowa City that it is clear it has little regard for the remaining ones or for the neighborhoods adjacent to its property. This house is, as you know, on the National Historic Register and ought to be protected, with a legal covenant if possible. It is a beautiful old well-kept brick home, difficult to move, I would think. Please, if you make the unfortunate decision to abandon Grand Ave. Court completely, at least insist on protection -permanently- for the above-mentioned home. Thank you. Lesley H. Menninger 130 Ferson Ave. Iowa City, IA 52246 Marian Karr From: Glenn Ehrstine [glenn-ehrstine@uiowa.edu] Sent: Friday, September 27, 2002 8:40 PM To: cou ncil@iowa-city.org Subject: Cannon-Gay-McCIoskey House Dear Council Members, I am writing regarding the Cannon-Gay-HcCloskey House at 320 Helrose, an Iewa City Historic Lan~nark. I understand that the University of Iowa has purchased property adjacent to the house for a new athletic learning center and dormitories. Te facilitate construction, the university has asked the city to vacate the Cannon-Gay-HcCloskey property. While the university recegnizes the value of the house and has expressed its intent to move it to a new location, it is apparently unwilling te sign a legally binding covenant to this end. Te my knowledge, this is the first serious challenge to the city's recent Historic Landmark Act. As both a university employee and private citizen, I feel strongly that state institutions should be held to the same requirements as private property owners in matters that affect the whole con, unity. I therefore urge all City Council members not to vacate the Cannon-Gay-McCloskey House without requiring the university to sign a legally binding covenant that will prevent the possible destruction of a local historic landmark. Not doing so will establish a precedent that will encourage future challenges to the city's historic landmarks. If we have already lost the Old Capitol dome, then we should make every effort to preserve the city's and state's remaining landmarks in the vicinity of the university. Respectfully, Glenn Ehrstine 228 South Summit Street Marian Karr From: jponto@avalon.net Sent: Friday, September 27, 2002 1:43 PM To: cou ncil@iowa-city.org Subject: Cannon-Gay house Dear Council members, It is my understanding that the University of Iowa intends to build a new athletic learning center in the area between Grand Ave and Melrose, which would necessitate Iowa City vacating a portion of Grand Ave Ct. It is also my understanding that this targeted area includes the Cannon-Gay House (320 Melrose). I am extremely concerned that the University may decide to demolish the Cannon-Gay House at some point in the future. This house has been designated an Iowa City Historic Landmark and is listed on the National Register. I believe strongly that this historic house should be protected from demolition. I believe that it should be preserved at its present site. However, if preservation at its present site is not possible, I would be supportive of moving it to another appropriate location nearby. I realize that City interests and University interests do not always align. In this case, however, I believe that the City's interests in historic preservation should take precedence over the University's interests in constructing new facilities. I believe that the objective of preserving this historic house can only be accomplished if the City requires that the University comply with national and local historic preservation standards and guidelines. Therefore, I respectively request that the Council agrees to vacate a portion of Grand Ave Ct if, and only if, the University agrees to sign a covenant agreement that it will abide by national (i.e., U.S. Secretary of the Interior) and local (i.e., Iowa City Historic Preservation Commission) historic preservation standards and guidelines regarding the Cannon-Gay House at 320 Melrose. Thank you for your consideration of this matter. Jim Ponto 618 Brown St. Iowa City The Historical Division of the Department of Cultural Affairs STATE HISTORICAL SOCIETY OF IOWA Where past meets future 20 September 2002 __ '--':~': C"~ , -, City Council City of Iowa City - 410 East Washington Street Iowa City, Iowa 52240 American Gothic House Re: The Wilber D. & Hattie Cannon House, 320 Melrose Avenue Eldon Dear Councilors: Blood Run NHL Larchwood It is my understanding that the Iowa City Council will be considering an application by the University of Iowa to vacate Grand Avenue Court. This action will be contingent Centennial Building on the University's agreement to abide by the Iowa City Historic Preservation Iowa City Ordinance and to follow the Secretary of Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation for the Matthew Edel Blacksmith Shop Cannon-Gay house, which the University currently owns. The Cannon-Gay house was Marshalltown listed on the National Register of Historic Place in October 1994 and has also been designated an Iowa City Landmark. Abbie Gardner Cabin Amolds Park In her 1993 nomination of the Cannon House, architectural historian Patricia Eckhardt described the house and its yard as "a peaceful oasis at the edge of the campus." The Iowa Historical Building accompanying text describes the University of Iowa removing the surrounding Des Moines neighborhood piece by piece. When neighborhoods are destroyed incrementally over decades, it is difficult to maintain perspective on the long-term impact. It becomes easy Montauk Governor's Home tO dismiss the loss of a single significant, historic building with the consolation that Union Sunday School other elements of our civic identity remain. However, our historic resources are finite, Clermont Museum Clermont and Iowa City has already lost numerous significant historic structures through University expansion, as well as the urban renewal process. Iowa City Therefore, I urge you to act on this opportunity to ensure the future preservation of the Cannon-Gay house. Furthermore, I would encourage the City and the University to Toolcsboro Indian Mounds work cooperatively toward the goal of preserving Iowa City's historic, architectural and Toolesb0r0 cultural character, while resolving the University's need for expansion. Numerous universities and municipalities elsewhere value both their civic and collegiate heritage Western Historic Trails Centre and have already established this precedent of cooperation. Council Bluffs Please contact me if you have any questions or if I may be of any assistance. Lowell Soike, Ph.D. Deputy State Historic Preservation Officer IOWA HISTORICAL BUILDING 600 East Locust · Des Moines, Iowa 50319-0290 Phone: (5153 281-6412. Fax: (5153 242-6498 or (5153 282-0502 www. uiowa.edu/'shsi/index.htm Cannon-Gay House Page 1 of 1 Marian Karr From: paula o. bmndt [pobrandt@avalon.net] Sent: Tuesday, October 01, 2002 6:12 PM To: council@iowa-city.org Su~ect: Cannon-Gay House Dear City Council Members: The 1884 Cannon-Gay House is both a National Register landmark and, more importantly, an Iowa City designated landmark. It has been recognized as being both a national and a local treasure. It is the job of the City and the community to protect it. Planners and architects are problem-solvers. If the University is told that as part of the deal to vacate Grand Avenue Court it must sign a legally binding covenant to save the Cannon-Gay House--keeping it where it is or moving it--the University WILL find a way to save the house. Anything less than a legally binding covenant will give them wiggle room. "We wanted to save the house, but it just wasn't possible, alas." Of course it's possible. The University employs plenty of smart people who can, and will, figure out a way to save this house if it is made clear to them that's part of the deal. Please do what you can to remind the University that they have a responsibility to protect our landmarks, too. Thank you. Best wishes, Paula Brandt 824 N. Gilbert St. 354-6948 10/1/02 Page 1 of 1 Marian Karr From: Jackie Briggs [jackiebriggs@earthlink. net] Sent: Wednesday, October 02, 2002 4:46 PM To: cou ncil@iowa-city.org Subject: Cannon Gay House Dear City Council: Friends of Historic Preservation encourages you to require the University of Iowa to sign a contract or covenant enforcing an adherence to the Secretary of Interior's Standards for preservation of this National Registered building. As part of the deal to vacate Grand Avenue Court, the University must sign a legally binding covenant to save the Cannon-Gay House--keeping it where it is or moving it--the University needs to be required to commit to saving the house. Enforcing this agreement would be in keeping with Iowa City's policies in the Southwest District Plan as well as the Iowa City Comprehensive Plan. Both these plans were drafted with the input of your constituents. As a private individual as well as Director of Friends of Historic Preservation, I cannot emphasize more strongly the importance of the Cannon Gay House as an integral part of the fabric of Iowa City's history. The University must be required to help preserve this history. A verbal promise is not good enough. It must be a legally binding agreement. Jackie Briggs Executive Director FRIENDS OF HISTORIC PRESERVATION FHP P.O. Box 2001 Iowa City, IA 52244 319/354-3411 --- j ackiebriggs~earthlink.net 10/2/02 Page 1 of 1 Marian Karr From: Jackie Briggs [jackiebriggs@earthlink. net] Sent: Monday, October 07, 2002 11:55 AM To: cou ncil@iowa-city,org Subject: Cannon-Gay House October 7, 2002 Council Members 410 E. Washington Street Iowa City, Iowa 52240 Dear Council Members: On behalf of the Board of Directors of Friends of Historic Preservation, I strongly encourage you to ensure the preservation of the Cannon-Gay House by requiring a contract or covenant from the University that would legally bind its owners to respect the building's place in local history. A letter of intent is not enough to ensure that an historic building remain standing. Unless legal protection is set up, future development needs of the University will eventually obliterate the Cannon Gay House. Agreeing to the vacation of the street on Grand Avenue Court without a legal document to preserve this 1880's home lays a cleat' path to the building's demolition. Linking the vacation with a covenant on the house is an appropriate way to ensure that the building remains standing. The University's letter dated October 3, 2002 from Andrew Ives states an intention to preserve the Cannon-Gay house "in some way." Friends of Historic Preservation feels that this letter of intent does not go far enough in guaranteeing the building's preservation. This document is not a binding agreement. The University should be asked to attach a covenant or binding contract to ensure the house is not torn down. Sincerely, Jackie Briggs Executive Director FRIENDS OF HISTORIC PRESERVATION --- j ackiebriggs~earthlink,net 10/7/02 Marian Karr From: WalkerslC@aol.com Sent: Monday, October 07, 2002 't2:06 PM To: ipfab@avalon.net; dee-vanderhoef@iowa-city.org; mmaharry@yahoo.com; dansk@mchsi.com; cou ncil@iowa-city.org Cc: marc-linder@uiowa.edu; mw[dness@mchsi.com Subject: Grand Ave Ct: Final text for Council Work Session Here is a fresh copy of the final text of my letter (attached and embedded in this text). The final addition is the new second paragraph. Thanks so much for taking the time to discuss it with me. Jean Walker 337-5201 Re: Grand Avenue Court and surrounding area Dear Council Members: Summary and General Points: I am writing to urge you to postpone consideration of vacation of any portion of Grand Avenue Court until a study has been made of its impact on the motor vehicle and pedestrian traffic in the Melrose Avenue-Grand Avenue-Byington Street area both now and in the future. I also request that representatives of people who live in the neighborhood be included in any plans to alter the existing vehicular and pedestrian transportation system in the area. WHAT IS THE RUSH TO VOTE ON VACATION OF GRAND AVENUE COURT NOW RATHER THAN SIX MONTHS FROM NOW? The UI already has the temporary closure of the street that it needs for the building of the Athletic Learning Center and for any elevation changes necessary for it. Also Rod Lehnertz, UI Architect, said at the 09/24/02 Council meeting that these elevation changes would still allow the Court to be passable. Therefore there is no need to rush to vote on vacation of the Court before a six month study is made of the area. In addition, to vacate the street now would be throwing away any bargaining power the City might have with the UI concerning the issue of the preservation of the Cannon-Gay house as well as the future street planning in the area. The UI has presented a proposed completed West Campus Master Plan to the City of Iowa City that makes sense from their point of view, but I believe the purview of the City and its councilors is to consider the needs of the whole of Iowa City and its citizens, not just approve what the UI asks for without careful deliberation. Changing the transportation plan in this area needs careful study both for its long- as well as short- term consequences for the City, and the closing off of a street in its midst would be ill-advised until a complete plan is in place. Otherwise the City could "paint itself into a corner" as regards any future modifications of the traffic flow that it might want to make. Once the Court is vacated to the UI, it will no longer be under the control of the City and the UI might very well start buildings that could make the options for the City even fewer. For example, it may be, after careful study, that the best solution for the City is to extend and widen the east end of Melrose so that it follows a more northerly path (that might involve part of the Court) to join Grand Avenue sooner than at present, thus bypassing Byington Road. This alternative would eliminate much of the problems of having to deal with Byington's steep grade changes and two sharp turns. In addition, it would give more protection, fr om a busy street, to the neighborhood houses and daycare centers along the east end of Melrose. And as the UI continues to buy up properties along ! Melrose and deeper into the areas south of Melrose, which could not become part of the UI's dream of a pedestrian campus unless Melrose were also to be vacated, it might not, in the long term, make that much difference to the UI whether Melrose stayed in its current alignment or followed a slightly more northerly path. (Which suggests that the UI needs to come forth with their long-term plan for the properties that they are purchasing in these areas ) I think that statements (such as those from various Council members) that vacation of the Court "probably' doesn't affect the traffic flow, or that "I'm pretty sure it doesn't enter into it", or that "I trust that they'll do these things", are not a sufficient basis for closing a City street. I believe we need some actual facts for the basis for such decisions. An extensive study of the Melrose Avenue area was done in the mid-1990s, with recommendations that reached far into the future, and these studies should not be ignored in the current consideration of this portion of Melrose Avenue. The University of Iowa's proposed plan would radically change this area In it they have assumed, prematurely, that the Court will be vacated. They have also placed a new building at the corner of Melrose and Byington that would leave few options for any future needed widening of the street at this corner, particularly as a variety of grades and two sharp turns in the street are involved. The repeated requests by Larry Wilson for the immediate vacation of Grand Avenue Court, in the face of these known street construction difficulties and in the face of sugqestions that the City spend six months to study the affected area first, appear to show disregard for the well-being of the City and its citizens - particularly as the UI is, at the same time, planning more buildings (possibly including another large residence hall) in the area, and a cancer treatment center and a new ramp further west on Melrose Avenue. Each of these new buildings will increase the traffic in the area. Apparently, the UI fenced off the Court without knowledge of the Council or getting an easement approved by them. And according to the UI's architect, Rod Lehnertz, the City's engineer Rick Fosse "suggested, instead of going through Council approval for change in elevations, we should start a stepped process toward a vacation of the street". The UI has now presented a plan to the City that would radically affect the City streets and Larry Wilson has said that the Court would be too near the Athletic Learning Center once it is built. In fact the building was started before the plan was adequately explained to the Council. In addition, the UI decided on their version of a realignment of Melrose Avenue and when councilwoman Vanderhoef suggested that the City might want a different alignment, Larry Wilson's reply was "Well, that hasn't been brought up at this time and we're well into development". To me this implies that the UI expected to continue its development with their alignment even though they should have consulted with the City in a meaningful way before breaking ground. It thus appears that a numbSr of premature decisions have been made in this matter. Therefore, it might be advisable for the UI to stop any further construction of the ALC or any other buildings in this area until the matter can be studied further, so that the UI does not have to make any costly readjustments to their building to conform to the current street configurations. Because of these premature decisions and the unclear plans of the UI, I think it would be paramount for the City and UI to study the area and when a comprehensive plan is developed, it is put in writing. (For example, this would clarify such matters as when Councilman Pfab asked Larry Wilson if the UI was thinking of running buses up Byington and Hr. Wilson replied, "Never. Only if the street would handle it.") (It also should be noted that the Athletic Learning Center and the proposed 2 building to its east appear closer to Melrose Avenue than the Cannon-Gay House is now, so if Melrose Avenue needed widening at its east end, it seems that it would have to be widened on the south side rather than the ALC side, thus putting this section of Melrose Avenue out of alignment with the rest of Melrose Avenue west of Grand Avenue.) Another reason for studying the area before vacating the Court is that since I made my presentation to the Council Sept. 24, representatives of the Church of Latter Day Saints and the UI Daycare centers have expressed their concerns about this closure. They, residents of Lucon Drive, and people I spoke with at the UI Law Building, use Grand Avenue Court and need it to remain open People using the Court are using it as a bona fide City street, not as some kind of 'shortcut'. The alternative is that these cars reach the junction of Grand Avenue and Melrose Avenue and, as they wait (sometimes for a considerable length of time due to the east-bound cars turning off Melrose onto Grand Avenue) to turn east on Melrose, they block the traffic trying to go west on Melrose. Thus it is not only the traffic local to the east end of Melrose that is affected, but all traffic from Riverside Drive and from the east side of Iowa City trying to go west on Melrose. Also, people trying to go east on Melrose from Grand Avenue get caught up in the westbound Melrose Avenue traffic stopped at the Melrose Court traffic lights. These problems have increased since the Court has been closed off by the UI. Specific points related to the September 23 working session of the Council and the September 24 formal Council meeting: 1. Larry Wilson suggested that the UI has a neighborhood too and they don't like people cutting through it for short cuts. The fact is that the UI is imposing a separate, new, and expanding neighborhood within an already existing neighborhood and is planning to change the streets of the existing neighborhood so the existing neighbors have a more difficult time negotiating their neighborhood. I find it amazing that the UI or any of the councilors would imply that one of our streets is inconsequential and unnecessary. It might be from the UI's perspective, but not from that of others in the area and throughout the City. 2. I have suggested that the councilors examine the traffic flow in this area from the City's perspective. The Council needs to ensure that facts back up the general statements (in favor of the UI) given by the UI (e.g., "it's a logical step", "it's a reasonable request", the Court "is not a necessary part of the arterial syste~') and that the Council remembers that the UI is speaking from the UI's point of view. 3. Various council members stated how great the UI has been to work with None of the examples given included the 30 years of debate about Melrose Avenue. None of the councilors were in office for the bulk of that time. Many of us in the Melrose Avenue neighborhood worked repeatedly, since 1973, to protect our neighborhood from what we perceived as its attempted destruction by the UI and to come up with a viable alternative to accommodate some of the UI's demands while preserving as pleasant a living environment as possible. I have no reason to doubt that the current Council's work relationship with the UI on the other recent projects was entirely satisfactory, but I feel there is a more difficult history concerning Melrose Avenue of which the vast majority of the Council Members do not seem to be aware. 4. Serious attention should be given to the suggestion of the UI providing skywalks for achieving their pedestrian area, rather than for them to ask the City to close off streets (including Grand Avenue). Such closures and re-alignments are also costly to taxpayers. 5. I think it suggests a lack of concern and of good faith by the UI on behalf of the City and its citizens that the UI is not willing to sign a covenant concerning the Cannon-Gay house. In addition, the argument that the house would be dwarfed by a large dormitory to its north is not valid in that it would be easily visible from Melrose Avenue (from which most people see it) and would not be dwarfed by the ALC or the current building to its east. Larry Wilson kept repeating that the original part of the house would be 3 preserved in some way. "In some was' would need to be clarified. 6. The UI and at least one councilperson denigrated Grand Avenue Court as narrow, not going anywhere, not used by anyone, in disrepair and seldom cared for. I believe these comments are subjective/untrue and should be verified before they are used in arguments for vacation of the street - and whether they should be used at all in that fashion is questionable. A walk along the Court would reveal that it is in pretty good shape and there are other City streets in worse shape that are considered usable. In addition, as the UI's longterm plan includes removing all the houses oh the east side of Grand Avenue Court, the Court could be widened and upgraded at that time, if it was necessary for the City's comprehensive traffic plan for the area. Co~ents on letters from the gI to the City, dated October 3, 2002: 1. Though the UI might not want to do a traffic study now (before consideration of vacation of Grand Avenue Court) to take into consideration the possible future closure of Grand Avenue, I think it is vital that the City's interests (for now and for the future) are considered and that the City does its own comprehensive study of this area before any street vacations are considered. 2. See 5. above concerning the suggestion that the Cannon Gay house would be dwarfed by other new buildings. The UI needs to explain what it means by "its intent to preserve the original portion of the Cannon-Gay house in some was' (my underline). Thank you, Jean Walker Member of the Melrose Avenue neighborhood 335 Luc©n Drive Iowa City 337-5201 Re: Grand Avenue Court and surrounding area Dear Council Members: Summary and General Points: I am writing to urge you to postpone consideration of vacation of any portion of Grand Avenue Court until a study has been made of its impact on the motor vehicle and pedestrian traffic in the Melrose Avenue-Grand Avenue-Byington Street area both now and in the future. I also request that representatives of people who live in the neighborhood be included in any plans to alter the existing vehicular and pedestrian transportation system in the area. WHAT IS THE RUSH TO VOTE ON VACATION OF GRAND AVENUE COURT NOW RATHER THAN SIX MONTHS FROM NOW? The UI already has the temporary closure of the street that it needs for the building of the Athletic Learning Center and for any elevation changes necessary for it. Also Rod Lehnertz, UI Architect, said at the 09/24/02 Council meeting that these elevation changes would still allow the Court to be passable. Therefore there is no need to rash to vote on vacation of the Court before a six month study is made of the area. In addition, to vacate the street now would be throwing away any bargaining power the City might have with the UI concerning the issue of the preservation of the Cannon-Gay house as well as the future street planning in the area. The UI has presented a proposed completed West Campus Master Plan to the City of Iowa City that makes sense from their point of view, but I believe the purview of the City and its councilors is to consider the needs of the whole of Iowa City and its citizens, not just approve what the UI asks fbr without careful deliberation. Changing the transportation plan in this area needs careful study both for its long- as well as short- term consequences for the City, and the closing off of a street in its midst would be ill- advised until a complete plan is in place. Otherwise the City could "paint itself into a comer" as regards any future modifications of the traffic flow that it might want to make. Once the Court is vacated to the UI, it will no longer be under the control of the City and the UI might very well start buildings that could make the options for the City even fewer. For example, it may be, after careful study, that the best solution for the City is to extend and widen the east end of Melrose so that it follows a more northerly path (that might involve part of the Court) to join Grand Avenue sooner than at present, thus bypassing Byington Road. This alternative would eliminate much of the problems of having to deal with Byington's steep grade changes and two sharp tums. In addition, it would give more protection, from a busy street, to the neighborhood houses and daycare centers along the east end of Melrose. And as the UI continues to buy up properties along Melrose and deeper into the areas south of Melrose, which could not become part of the UI's dream of a pedestrian campus unless Melrose were also to be vacated, it might not, in the long term, make that much difference to the UI whether Melrose stayed in its current alignment or followed a slightly more northerly path. (Which suggests that the UI needs to come forth with their long-term plan for the properties that they are purchasing in these areas.) 2 I think that statements (such as those from various Council members) that vacation of the Court "probably" doesn't affect the traffic flow, or that "I'm pretty sure it doesn't enter into it", or that "I trust that they'll do these things", are not a sufficient basis for closing a City street. I believe ~ve need some actual facts for the basis for such decisions. An extensive study of the Melrose Avenue area was done in the mid-1990s, with recommendations that reached far into the future, and these studies should not be ignored in the current consideration of this portion of Melrose Avenue. The University of Iowa's proposed plan would radically change this area. In it they have assumed, prematurely, that the Court will be vacated. They have also placed a new building at the comer of Melrose and Byington that would leave few options for any future needed widening of the street at this comer, particularly as a variety of grades and two sharp tums in the street are involved. The repeated requests by Larry Wilson for the immediate vacation of Grand Avenue Court, in the face of these known street construction difficulties and in the face of suggestions that the City spend six months to study the affected area first, appear to show disregard for the well-being of the City and its citizens - particularly as the 131 is, at the same time, planning more buildings (possibly including another large residence hall) in the area, and a cancer treatment center and a new ramp further west on Melrose Avenue. Each of these new buildings will increase the traffic in the area. Apparently, the UI fenced off the Court without knowledge of the Council or getting an easement approved by them. And according to the UI's architect, Rod Lehnertz, the City's engineer Rick Fosse "suggested, instead of going through Council approval for change in elevations, we should start a stepped process toward a vacation of the street". The UI has now presented a plan to the City that would radically affect the City streets and Larry Wilson has said that the Court would be too near the Athletic Learning Center once it is built. In fact the building was started before the plan was adequately explained to the Council. In addition, the UI decided on their version of a realignment of Melrose Avenue and when councilwoman Vanderhoef suggested that the City might want a different alignment, Larry Wilson's reply was "Well, that hasn't been brought up at this time and we're well into development". To me this implies that the UI expected to continue its development with their alignment even though they should have consulted with the City in a meaningful way before breaking ground. It thus appears that a number of premature decisions have been made in this matter. Therefore, it might be advisable for the UI to stop any further construction of the ALC or any other buildings in this area until the matter can be studied further, so that the UI does not have to make any costly readjustments to their building to conform to the current street configurations. Because of these premature decisions and the unclear plans of the UI, I think it would be paramount for the City and UI to study the area and when a comprehensive plan is developed, it is put in writing. (For example, this would clarify such matters as when Councilman Pfab asked Larry Wilson if the UI was thinking of running buses up Byington and Mr. Wilson replied, "Never. Only if the street ~vould handle it?') 3 (It also should be noted that the Athletic Learning Center and the proposed building to its east appear closer to Melrose Avenue than the Cannon-Gay House is now, so if Melrose Avenue needed widening at its east end, it seems that it would have to be widened on the south side rather than the ALC side, thus putting this section of Melrose Avenue out of alignment with the rest of Melrose Avenue west of Grand Avenue.) Another reason for studying the area before vacating the Court is that since I made my presentation to the Council Sept. 24, representatives of the Church of Latter Day Saints and the UI Daycare centers have expressed their concerns about this closure. They, residents of Lucon Drive, and people I spoke with at the UI Law Building, use Grand Avenue Court and need it to remain open. People using the Court are using it as a bona fide City street, not as some kind of 'shortcut'. The alternative is that these cars reach the junction of Grand Avenue and Melrose Avenue and, as they wait (sometimes for a considerable length of time due to the east-bound cars turning off Melrose onto Grand Avenue) to turn east on Melrose, they block the traffic trying to go west on Melrose. Thus it is not only the traffic local to the east end of Melrose that is affected, but al_il traffic from Riverside Drive and from the east side of Iowa City trying to go west on Melrose. Also, people trying to go east on Melrose from Grand Avenue get caught up in the westbound Melrose Avenue traffic stopped at the Melrose Court traffic lights. These problems have increased since the Court has been closed off by the UI. Specific points related to the September 23 working session of the Council and the September 24 formal Council meeting: 1. Larry Wilson suggested that the UI has a neighborhood too and they don't like people cutting through it for short cuts. The fact is that the UI is imposing a separate, new, and expanding neighborhood within an already existing neighborhood and is planning to change the streets of the existing neighborhood so the existing neighbors have a more difficult time negotiating their neighborhood. I find it amazing that the UI or any of the councilors would imply that one of our streets is inconsequential and unnecessary. It might be from the UI's perspective, but not from that of others in the area and throughout the City. 2. I have suggested that the councilors examine the traffic flow in this area from the City's perspective. The Council needs to ensure that facts back up the general statements (in favor of the UI) given by the UI (e.g., "it's a logical step", "it's a reasonable request", the Court "is not a necessary part of the arterial system") and that the Council remembers that the UI is speaking from the UI's point of view. 3. Various council members stated how great the UI has been to work with. None of the examples given included the 30 years of debate about Melrose Avenue. None of the cour~cilors were in office for the bulk of that time. Many of us in the Melrose Avenue neighborhood worked repeatedly, since 1973, to protect our neighborhood from what we perceived as its attempted destruction by the UI and to come up with a viable alternative to accommodate some of the UI's demands while preserving as pleasant a living environment as possible. I have no reason to doubt that the current Council's work relationship with the UI on the other recent projects was entirely satisfactory, but I feel there is a more difficult history concerning Melrose Avenue of which the vast majority of the Council Members do not seem to be aware. 4 4. Serious attention should be given to the suggestion of the UI providing skywalks for achieving their pedestrian area, rather than for them to ask the City to close off streets (including Grand Avenue). Such closures and re-alignments are also costly to taxpayers. 5. I think it suggests a lack of concern and of good faith by the UI on behalf of the City and its citizens that the UI is not willing to sign a covenant concerning the Cannon-Gay house. In addition, the argument that the house would be dwarfed by a large dormitory to its north is not valid in that it would be easily visible from Melrose Avenue (from which most people see it) and would not be dwarfed by the ALC or the current building to its east. Larry Wilson kept repeating that the original part of the house would be preserved in some way. "In some way" would need to be clarified. 6. The UI and at least one councilperson denigrated Grand Avenue Court as narrow, not going anywhere, not used by anyone, in disrepair and seldom cared for. I believe these comments are subjective/untrue and should be verified before they are used in arguments for vacation of the street - and whether they should be used at all in that fashion is questionable. A walk along the Court would reveal that it is in pretty good shape and there are other City streets in worse shape that are considered usable. In addition, as the UI's longterm plan includes removing all the houses on the east side of Grand Avenue Court, the Court could be widened and upgraded at that time, if it was necessary for the City's comprehensive traffic plan for the area. Comments on letters from the UI to the City, dated October 3, 2002: 1. Though the UI might not want to do a traffic study now (before consideration of vacation of Grand Avenue Court) to take into consideration the possible future closure of Grand Avenue, I think it is vital that the City's interests (for now and for the future) are considered and that the City does its own comprehensive study of this area before any street vacations are considered. 2. See 5. above concerning the suggestion that the Cannon Gay house would be dwarfed by other new buildings. The UI needs to explain what it means by "its intent to preserve the original portion of the Cannon-Gay house in some way" (my underline). Thank you, Jean Walker Member of the Melrose Avenue neighborhood 335 Lucon Drive Iowa City 337-5201 Marian Karr From: michael maharry [mmaharry@yahoo.com] Sent: Monday, October 07~ 2002 3:17 PM To: www.cou ncii@iowa-city.org Subject: Cannon-Gay House As the chair of the Historic Preservation Commission, I would like to discuss and clarify some points regarding linking the vacation of Grand Ave. Ct. with historic preservation principles: 1) I do not believe a letter of intent is strong enough to ensure the safety of the Cannon-Gay house. Just as a high school athlete writes a letter of intent to play for a university, the athlete can change their mind and not attend without consequence. The university is able to do the same thing with their current wording. It's just not strong enough. Their recent history of demolition of the house across from the president's mansion on Clinton St., the plan to demolish the clearly-significant Voxman music building on the corner of Gilbert and Jefferson and the movement of the Shambaugh House and 'remodeling' the outside appearance represent a disturbing pattern of deemphasizing historic preservation. Recent history shows that they do not see it as a priority (beyond Old Capitol). 2) The Southwest District Plan which you are in the process of adopting states "there is a strong core, unity interest in Iowa City to preserve historic properties and there are a number of historically significant homes in this area." 3) The university's own plans state "preservation of buildings and outdoor spaces of historic and aesthetic value." as part of the framework of planning principles for future campus development. It doesn't seem they have followed this framework recently. I will be in attendance at your work session as well as tomorrow's meeting if you have any questions. Thank you. Sincerely, Michael Maharry MD Chair Iowa City Historic Preservation Commission Do you Yahoo!? Faith Hill - Exclusive Performances, Videos & More http://faith.yahoo.com 10/87/2002 16:2S U! MSG ~ 9~6~009 ~0.676 ~01 THE UNIVERSITY OF IOWA FAX MESSAGE Name: Fax No: .. Intemm E-M~I Add. ss: I~y-wilson~uiowa. edu ~ no: (~19) 38~814 Co~: Pa~e ~ of _. ~ O~I~ ~LL NOT ~ ~LE~ U~8 ~UES~ Pu~l/~ ~c~icc~ Omep 240 Uni~reJty 3o~ic~ Building Iow~ City, IA 32~42-1922 Phone ( 3 }g) 33~-12~ Campus Plannin~ Pax (31g) 10/07/2002 16:25 U! FSG ~ 93565009 N0.676 October 7, 2002 In response to the September 30~ message forwarded from Jackie Briggs, we would [ike to make a couple points related to current activities at Grand Avenue Court. The four University-owned structures on the west side of Grand Avenue Court were razed in preparation for a new Athletic Learning Center, only after extensive efforts to have the houses relocated. The University worked with 18 different entities, including Iowa City, Coralville, Habitat For Humanity and the Greater Iowa City Housing Fellowship in looking for ways to relocate the structures. Prior to demolition the University utilized the services of the Salvage Barn in order to recycle as much of the buildings as would be feasible. While every house has a history, unlike the Cannon-Gay-McCloskey House, these structures were not designated as historic landmarks or listed on the National Register of Historic Places. The University submitted to the City of Iowa City a letter, dated October 3, 2002 that displays our intent to protect the original Cannon-Gay-McCIoskey structure. The nature of that protection may include relocation of the structure to a seffing more f'~ing the architecture style and scale of the house. The University spends a great deal of time and money in protecting the history and heritage of the University community and views this historic house no differently. The University recently spent more than $300,000 to recapture the history and ' beauty of the Day House, one of the most historic houses In Iowa City. We also spent $250,000 earlier this year to relocate the historic Shambaugh House. While only two of many examples, both recognized by the Friends of Historic Preservation, they each define the continued commitment the University makes to historic preservation. Our stated intent to protect the Cannon-Gay-McCleskey House [s something we take very seriously. Regards Draw Ives Interim Director, Facilities Services Group SINGED COPY TO BE SENT TO THOSE COPIED IN THE ORIGINAL 9/30/02 MESSAGE Page 1 of 2 Marian Karr ~ C~-., From: Elnora Smith [elnora-smith@uiowa.edu] Sent: Tuesday, October 08, 2002 3:10 PM To: council@iowa-city.org Subject: Fwd: Protection for Cannon Gay House Previous email in reponse to the following from Jackie Briggs. ES 10/8/02 ............... Text of forwarded message ............... Date: Mon, 30 Sep 2002 15:07:07 -0500 To: william-klink~uiowa.edu, richard-hurtig~uiowa.edu, cheryl-herr~uiowa.edu, panayot-butchvarov~uiowa.edu, katherine-tachau~uiowa.edu, rex-montgomery~uiowa.edu, George Forell <george-forell@uiowa.edu>, Dorothy Johnson <dorothy-johnson~uiowa.edu>, David Gompper <david-gompper~uiowa.edu>, wallace-tomasini~uiowa.edu, willard-boyd~uiowa.edu, dorothy-johnson~uiowa.edu, john-finamore~uiowa.edu, david-klemm~uiowa.edu, sngspaziani~mchsi.com From: Lesley Menninger <lesley~avalon.net> (by way of John Menninger <john- menninger~uiowa.edu>) Subject: Protection for Cannon Gay House ............... Text of forwarded message ............... From: "Jackie Briggs" <jackiebriggs~earthlink.net> Dear Friends of Historic Preservation: As you probably know, the University recently demolished four historic houses on Grand Avenue Court. The new athletic learning center will be constructed in this location. University plans currently illustrate construction of dormitories in the remaining Grand Avenue Court vicinity, including at the current location of the Cannon-Gay-McCloskey House, which is listed on the National Register of Historic Places and has been designated an Iowa City Historic Landmark. Because the University is a State institution, it is not required by State law to comply with municipal regulations including historic preservation regulations. The University has requested that the City vacate Grand Avenue Court so they may purchase it for their use. Staff and the Planning and Zoning Commission has recommended that Grand Avenue Court be vacated contingent on the University's compliance with the historic preservation ordinance in regards to the Cannon-Gay-McCloskey House, which is located at the comer of Grand Avenue Court and Melrose. This would be enforced by a covenant on the property. The University did not state their unwillingness to sign a covenant until Tuesday at the City Council public hearing on the issue. The University representative stated UI intends to move the house and is willing to provide that in a letter. However, UI is unwilling to sign a legally binding covenant. I should also state, that a covenant would not necessarily prevent UI from moving the house. They did move the Shambaugh house. The Councilors' sentiment on Tuesday night seemed to be that they are willing to accept a letter of intent or simply to vacate Grand Avenue Court with no contingencies. 10/8/02 Page 2 of 2 Friends of Historic Preservation needs to make it clear that a stronger tactic needs to be held up to ensure the Cannon Gay House is protected. I encourage you to write the City Council, particularly Connie Champion and Ross Wilbum, and urge them to require the University to abide by historic preservation regulation regarding this historic house. Emails to the Council should be sent by Wednesday, October 2. The Council email address is www, counci!~iowa-city,org. Please pass the word along to your friends and associates. Jackie Briggs Executive Director FRIENDS OF HISTORIC PRESERVATION 10/8/02 October 8, 2002 ,~-,~, :. ,, ' ', !,.'~", E-mail Response to: Jackie Bdggs, Lesley Menninger, John Menninger, William Klink, Richard Hurtig, Cheryl Herr, Panagot Butchvarov, Katherine Tachau, Rex Montgomery, George Forell-, Dorothy Johnson, David Gompper, Wallace Tomasini, Willard Boyd, Dorothy Johnson, John Finamore, David Klemm, Sngspaziani In response to the message of September 30 forwarded from Jackie Briggs, we would like to make a couple points related to current activities at Grand Avenue Court. The four University-owned structures on the west side of Grand Avenue Court were razed in preparation for a new Athletic Learning Center, only after extensive efforts to have the houses relocated. The University worked with 18 different entities, including iowa City, Coralvitle, Habitat for Humanity and the Greater Iowa City Housing Fellowship in looking for ways to relocate the structures. Prior to demolition the University utilized the services of the Salvage Barn in order to recycle as much of the buildings as would be feasible. While every house has a history, unlike the Cannon-Gay-McCIoskey House, these structures were not designated as historic landmarks or listed on the National Register of Historic Places. The University submitted to the City of Iowa City a letter, dated October 3, 2002 that displays our intent to protect the original Cannon-Gay-McCIoskey structure. The nature of that protection may include relocation of the structure to a setting more fitting the architecture style and scale of the house. The University spends a great deal of time and money in protecting the history and hedtage of the University community and views this historic house no differently. The University recently spent more than $300,000 to recapture the history and beauty of the Dey House, one of the most historic houses in Iowa City. We also spent $250,000 earlier this year to relocate the histodc Shambaugh House. While only two of many examples, both recognized by the Friends of Historic Preservation, they each define the continued commitment that the University makes to histodc preservation. Our stated intent to protect the Cannon-Gay-McCIoskey House is something we take very seriousty. Regards, brew Iv s Andrew M. ives, Jr. Interim AVP and Director, Facitities Services Group E-mail cc: ,,~vw. counc±l~±o~va-c±t¥, o~cj (attention Connie Champion and Ross Wilburn) L\p\admin\fyO3\Jbriggs 100802.doc Prepared by: John Adam, Associate Planner, City of Iowa City, 410 E. Washington Street, Iowa City, IA 52240; 319-356-5236 ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE VACATING THE 100 BLOCK OF WEST HARRISON STREET RIGHT-OF-WAY AND A PORTION EXTENDING INTO THE FRONT STREET RIGHT-OF- WAY THEREOF; THAT PART OF HARRISON STREET BETWEEN THE FRONT STREET RIGHT-OF-WAY AND THE IOWA RIVER; THAT PART OF THE 100 BLOCK OF WEST PRENTISS BETWEEN THE WEST RIGHT-OF- WAY LINE OF MADISON STREET AND THE WEST RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF THE ALLEY IN BLOCK $ OF THE COUNTY SEAT ADDITION, EXTENDED; AND THE ALLEY RIGHT-OF-WAY IN BLOCK $ OF SAID COUNTY SEAT ADDITION WHEREAS, the applicant, the University of Iowa, has requested that the City vacate parts of Harrison and Prentiss Streets and an alley between them in the area adjacent to Front and Madison Streets; and WHEREAS, the City does not regard these streets as crucial components of the general or local traffic circulation system; and WHEREAS, the University of Iowa has requested the vacation specifically for the development of property in Block 5 of the County Seat Addition; and WHEREAS, the University of Iowa has stated that it will improve the paving and landscaping in and around said Block 5 for its own and for civic purposes; and WHEREAS, it is in the City's interest to vacate said public right-of-way, or portions thereof, that may be a benefit to and be improved as a result of redevelopment. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF IOWA CITY, IOWA: SECTION I. VACATION: The City of Iowa City hereby vacates the rights-of-way legally described as follows: THE 80-FEET-WIDE HARRISON STREET RIGHT-OF- WAY FROM THE WEST RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF MADISON STREET TO THE EAST RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF FRONT STREET; ALL OF THE FRONT STREET RIGHT-OF-WAY LYING EAST OF THE ALLIANT TRANSPORTATION / CRANDIC RAILWAY RIGHT-OF- WAY AND BOUNDED ON THE NORTH BY THE NORTH RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF HARRISON STREET EXTENDED WESTERLY AND BOUNDED ON THE SOUTH BY THE SOUTH RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF HARRISON STREET EXTENDED WESTERLY; THE 80- FEET-WIDE HARRISON STREET RIGHT-OF-WAY LYING WEST OF FRONT STREET AND EAST OF THE IOWA RIVER; THE 80-FEET-WIDE PRENTISS STREET RIGHT- OF-WAY FROM THE WEST RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF Ordinance No. Page 2 MADISON STREET TO THE WEST RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF THE ALLEY IN BLOCK 5, COUNTY SEAT ADDITION, EXTENDED SOUTHERLY; THE 20-FEET-WIDE PUBLIC ALLEY RIGHT-OF-WAY IN SAID BLOCK 5 OF COUNTY SEAT ADDITION; TOGETHER CONTAINING 55,285 SQUARE FEET OR 1.27 ACRES, MORE OR LESS. SECTION II. REPEALER. All ordinances and parts of ordinances in conflict with the provision of this Ordinance are hereby repealed. - SECTION III. SEVERABILITY. If any section, provision or part of the Ordinance shall be adjudged to be invalid or unconstitutional, such adjudication shall not affect the validity of the Ordinance as a whole or any section, provision or part thereof not adjudicated invalid or unconstitutional. SECTION IV. EFFECTIVE DATE. This Ordinance shall be in effect after its final passage, approval and publication, as provided by law. Passed and approved this day of ,2002. MAYOR A']-I'EST: CITY CLERK Appro. ved~ ~1/[?/'~ City Attorney's OffiCe T:~CD',John A~Active Files\VAC02-00004 ordinance.doc Ordinance No. Page. It was moved by and seconded by that the Ordinance as read be adopted, and upon roll call there were: AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: Champion Kanner Lehman O'Donnell . Pfab . Vanderhoef Wilbum First Consideration 10/8/02 Voteforpassage:AYES: Wi]burn, Champion, Lehman, 0'Donnel'l, Pfab, Vanderhoef. NAYS: Kanner. ABSENT: None. Second Consideration Vote for passage: Date published THE UNIVERSITY OF IOWA October 8, 2002 Stephen Atkins, City Manager City of Iowa City Civic Center 410 East Washington Street Iowa City, IA 52240 RE: Grand Avenue Cour[ and Harrison/Prentiss Streets Vacation Related Issues Dear Steve: It is impo~ant to the University to have Grand Avenue Cou8 vacated by the Ci~ of Iowa City. In my previous leEers, I expressed the Universi~'s intent to prese~e in some way the original 1844 Cannon-Gay house structure, but keep open the option of moving it to another location. Given the Universi~'s reputation for prese~ing buildings on the National Register of Historic Pla~s, such as the Shambaugh House, it seemed that this would address the Councils concerns. Similarly, in a separate le~er, I indicated the Univemi~'s willingness to provide tra~c data we have gathered and share our thoughts on the configuration of Byington Road, again thinking this would satis~ the Council's concerns. However, at last night's Council work session, there were still con~rns expressed by both the Planning and Zoning Commission and Council. I would therefore like to restate the Universi~'s willingness to cooperate fully with the Ci~ in addressing these issues. Per the City's request, the University is willing to sign a legally binding agreement to apply the guidelines of the Ci~'s Historic Prese~ation Ordinance to prese~e the original 1844 structure of the Cannon-Gay house. However, in so doing, we would retain the option of relocating the house. It is understood that consideration of a new location would initiate the Ci~'s no~al procedure of having the proposed site reviewed and approved by the o~ce of the National Register of Historic Places as well as the State Historical Socie~, just as was done with respe~ to the Shambaugh House. In accord with earlier telephone conversations and per the Ci~'s request, we would also be willing to pa~ner with the City in a traffic study of Melrose Avenue as it abuts or passes through Universi~ prope~. This would include sharing financially in the study and determining the future configuration of Byington Road. Facilities Services Group - Administration 210 University Services Bldg Iowa City, IA 52242-1922 Phc~e: 319/3354248 FAX: 319/335-1210 On another issue being considered by the City, the vacation of Prentiss, Harrison and the alley between Prentiss and Harrison is critical to the development of the proposed University parking lot and improved circulation and parking for CAMBUS. If the streets are vacated, but the land not conveyed to the University, the proposed parking lot could be built as an interim use, but it is important for the University's long-range plans to receive title to the vacated areas. I urge the Council to provide title to the parcels rather than convey them as a lease. We are agreeable to maintaining pedestrian access in the Prentiss and Harrison vacated rights-of-way. Steve, I trust that this restatement of the University's willingness to cooperate sufficiently addresses the Council's concerns so that the vacations can be approved at tonight's formal meeting. Sincerely, Interim AVP and Director Facilities Services Group c: Rod Lehnertz David Ricketts Larry Wilson Facilities Services Group - Adminis/ration 210 University Services Bldg Iowa City, IA 52242-1922 Phone: 319/335-1248 FAX: 319/335-1210 Prepared by: John Adam, Associate Planner, City of Iowa City, 410 E. Washington Street, Iowa City, IA 52240; 319-356-5236 ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE VACATING PORTIONS OF FRONT STREET SOUTH OF BURLINGTON STREET AND A PORTION OF THE 100 BLOCK OF WEST PRENTISS STREET WHEREAS, the applicant, the CRANDIC Railway Company, has requested that the City vacate portions of Front Street and West Prentiss Street; and WHEREAS, the City does not regard these streets as crucial components of the general or local traffic circulation system; and WHEREAS, the conveyance of these rights-of- way relate to a redevelopment project to be undertaken by the University of Iowa in areas contiguous with these rights-of-way; and WHEREAS, it is in the City's interest to vacate said public right-of-way, or portions thereof, that may be a benefit to and be improved as a result of redevelopment. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF IOWA CITY, IOWA: SECTION I. VACATION: The City of Iowa City hereby vacates the right-of-way legally described as follows: THAT PART OF WEST FRONT STREET IN IOWA CITY, JOHNSON COUNTY, IOWA LYING ELY OF OUTLOT 41 DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE NE CORNER OF OUTLOT 41 OF THE ORIGINAL TOWN PLAT, WHICH IS THE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE S 890 56' 41" E 13.32 FEET ALONG THE S LINE OF THE BURLINGTON STREET RIGHT-OF-WAY TO 'A POINT 15.00 FEET W OF THE CENTERLINE OF AN EXISTING RAILROAD TRACK; THENCE S 0° 06' 13" W 95.91 FEET ALONG A LINE PARALLEL WiTH SAID RAILROAD; THENCE S 40 02' 40" W 71.73 FEET TO A POINT 15 FEET WLY OF THE CENTERLINE OF AN EXISTING RAILROAD TRACK; THENCE S 70 29' 09~ W 65.65 FEET TO A POINT OF INTERSECTION WITH THE E LINE OF SAID OUTLOT 41; THENCE 0° 06' 45' E 232.50 FEET ALONG THE E LINE TO THE POINT OF Ordinance No. Page 2 BEGINNING, CONTAINING 2,332 SQUARE FEET AND SUBJECT TO EASEMENTS AND RESTRICTIONS OF RECORD. THAT PART OF FRONT STREET IN IOWA CITY, JOHNSON COUNTY, IOWA LYING ELY OF OUTLOT 24 OF COUNTY SEAT ADDITION DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCING AS A POINT OF REFERENCE AT THE NW CORNER OF . BLOCK.4, COUNTY SEAT ADDITION; THENCE N 890 42' 50" W 97.27 FEET ALONG THE S RIGHT- OF-WAY LINE OF VACATED COURT STREET TO A POINT 15.00 FEET W OF THE CENTERLINE OF AN EXISTING RAILROAD TRACK; THENCE S 0° 21' 36" W 329.75 FEET ALONG A LINE PARALLEL WITH SAID RAILROAD TRACK TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE SELY 177.78 FEET ALONG THE ARC OF A 714.28-FOOT RADIUS CURVE CONCAVE ELY (CHORD S 5° 55' 19" E 177.32 FEET) TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE SELY 47.00 FEET ALONG THE ARC OF A 714.28 FOOT RADIUS CURVE, CONCAVE ELY (CHORD S 140 56' 15" E 46.99 FEET); THENCE S 87° 07' 52" W 12.22 FEET TO A POINT OF INTERSECTION WITH THE E LINE OF OUTLOT 24 OF SAID COUNTY SEAT ADDITION; THENCE N 0° 06' 45" E 46.02 FEET ALONG SAID E LINE TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING AND CONTAINING 269 SQUARE FEET MORE OR LESS AND SUBJECT TO EASEMENTS AND RESTRICTIONS OF RECORD. THAT PART OF FRONT STREET IN IOWA CITY, JOHNSON COUNTY, IOWA DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE NW CORNER OF LOT 8 OF BLOCK 5 OF THE COUNTY SEAT ADDITION; THENCE S 0° 06' 45" W 101.29 FEET TO A POINT 15 FEET ELY OF THE CENTERLINE OF AN EXISTING RAILROAD TRACK; THENCE N 9o 15' 59" W 102.66 FEET ALONG A LINE PARALLEL WITH SAID RAILROAD CENTERLINE TO A POINT OF INTERSECTION WITH THE S RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF HARRISON STREET EXTENDED W; THENCE S 89° 53' 24" E 16.73 FEET ALONG SAID RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE TO THE POINT · OF BEGINNING, CONTAINING 847 SQUARE FEET MORE OR LESS AND SUBJECT TO EASEMENTS AND RESTRICTIONS OF RECORD. THAT PART OF PRENTISS STREET IN IOWA CITY, JOHNSON COUNTY, IOWA DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE SE CORNER OF LOT 5 OF BLOCK 5 OF COUNTY SEAT ADDITION; THENCE S 80.00 FEET ALONG THE WLY RIGHT- OF-WAY LINE OF THE ALLEY IN BLOCK 5, Ordinance No. Page 3 EXTENDED, TO A POINT OF INTERSECTION WITH THE S RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF PRENTISS STREET; THENCE S 89° 52' 40" W 79.62 FEET ALONG SAID LINE TO A POINT 15.00 ELY OF CENTERLINE OF AN EXISTING RAILROAD TRACK; THENCE N 170 30' 03" W 84.05 FEET ALONG A LINE PARALLEL WITH SAID RAILROAD CENTERLINE; THENCE NLY 102.00 FEET ALONG THE N RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF PRENTISS ' STREE'I: TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING, CONTAINING 7,264 SQUARE FEET MORE OR LESS AND SUBJECT TO EASEMENTS AND RESTRICTIONS OF RECORD. SECTION II. REPEALER. All ordinances and parts of ordinances in conflict with the provision of this Ordinance are hereby repealed. SECTION III. SEVERABILITY. If any section, provision or part of the Ordinance shall be adjudged to be invalid or unconstitutional, such adjudication shall not affect the validity of the Ordinance as a whole or any section, provision or part thereof not adjudicated invalid or unconstitutional. SECTION IV. EFFECTIVE DATE. This Ordi- nance shall be in effect after its final passage, approv- al and publication, as provided by law. Passed and approved this day of ,2002. MAYOR A'I-rEST: CITY CLERK Approved by Ci~ A"ttomey's Offic~ T:\PCD~John A~Active Files\VAC02-00003 ordinance.doc Ordinance No. Page It was moved by and seconded by as read be adopted, and upon roll call there were: that the Ordinance AYES:NAYS:ABSENT: Champion Kanner Lehman O'Donnell Pfab Vanderhoef Wilbum First Consideration 1 n/R/o? Voteforpassage: AYES: Champion, Lehman, O'Donne]], Pfab, Vanden-hoer, Wilbur'n. NAYS: Kannet-. ABSENT: None. Second Consideration Vote for passage: Date published Prepared by: Shelley McCafferty, PCD, 410 E. Washington Street, Iowa City, IA 52240; 319-356-5243 (REZ02-00011) ORDINANCE NO, 02-4042 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE PRELIMINARY OPDH-12 SITE PLAN FOR LOT 259 OF WINDSOR RIDGE PART 15, GLENBROOK CONDOMINIUMS, A 4.06-ACRE, SINGLE-LOT SUBDIVISION AT THE INTERSECTION OF COURT STREET AND CAMDEN ROAD. WHEREAS, the applicant, Arlington L.C., is owner and legal title holder of approximately 4.06 acres of property located at the intersection of Court Street and Camden Road; and WHEREAS, the applicant has requested an amendment to the Preliminary OPDH-12 for Lot 259 of Windsor Ridge Part 15 to allow the addition of four townhouse-style dwelling units for a total of 46 dwelling units; and WHEREAS the Planning and Zoning Commission has determined that this amendment does not significantly alter the density or design of the original OPDH-12 for Lot 259 of Windsor Ridge Part 15; and WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission has determined that the proposed amendment is in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan, and that the proposed amended Preliminary OPDH-12 Plan is in technical compliance with all applicable provisions of the City Code; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF IOWA CITY, IOWA: SECTION I. APPROVAL..The amended Preliminary OPDH-12 Plan for the property described below is hereby approved: Lot 259 of Windsor Ridge Part 15, in accordance with the plat recorded in Book 41, at Page 212 of the Records of the Johnson County Recorder's Office. Said parcel of land contains 4.06 acres, and is subject to easements and restrictions of record. SECTION I1. CERTIFICATION AND RECORDING. The City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to certify a copy of this ordinance and a copy of the amended Preliminary OPDH-12 Plan for this property, and record the same in the Office of the County Recorder, Johnson County, Iowa, at the Owner's expense, upon the final passage, approval and publication of this ordinance, as provided by law. SECTION II1. REPEALER. All ordinances and parts of ordinances in conflict with the provisions of this Ordinance are hereby repealed. SECTION IV. SEVERABILITY. If any section, provision or part of the Ordinance shall be adjudged to be invalid or unconstitutional, such adjudication shall not affect the validity of the Ordinance as a whole or any section, provision or part thereof not adjudged invalid or unconstitutional. SECTION V. EFFECTIVE DATE. This Ordinance shall be in effect after its final passage, approval and publication, as provided by law. /~j~d and approved this 8th dayof October 'I~'KYO'R ATTEST~ - ,2O 02 00000 ppdadm/ord/?? Ordinance No. 02-4042 Page. 2 It was moved by Wi 1burn and seconded by Vanderhoef as read be adopted, and upon roll call there were: that the Ordinance AYES:NAYS:ABSENT: Champion Kanner Lehman O'Donnell Pfab Vanderhoef Wilburn First Consideration 9/24/02 Voteforpassage: AYES: Wi]burn, Champion, Kanner, Lehman, O'Donnel], Pfab, Vanderhoef. NAYS: None. ABSENT: None. Second Consideration ................... Vote for passage: Date published 10/16/02 Moved by Wilburn, seconded by Vanderhoef, that the rule requiring ordinances to be considered and voted on for passage at two Countil meetings prior to the meeting at which it is to be finalyy passed be suspended, the second consideration and vote be waived and the ordinance be voted upon for final passage at this time. AYES: Lehman, O'Donnell, Pfab, Vanderhoef, Wilburn, Champion. NAYS: Kanner. ABSENT: None. 000003 YTIC~ ~:,¥010T ~d3JC) YTI~ CONSULTANTS, 1NC, 1917 S. GILBERT STREET · IOWA CITY IOWA 52240-4363 OFFICE: 319-351-8282" FAX: 319-351~8476 (E-MAIL: MMSCONSULTANTSIC~CS.COM) September 25, 2002 James E. Lichty L.S. Mr. Ernest Lehman, Mayor c/o Marian K. Kart, City Clerk 410 E. Washington Street Iowa City, IA 52240 Re: Amended Preliminary OPDH-12 Site Plan Glen Brook Condominiums REZ02-00011 r-o Dear Mayor Lehman: The above-referenced matter was before the City Council at its September 24, 2002 meeting. By a vote of 7-0 the Council approved the first reading of an ordinance rezoning the above- referenced property to OPDH-12. This same rezoning matter is on the Council's agenda for its October 8~ meeting. The applicant, Arlington, L.C., respectively requests that the City Council collapse the second and third reading of the rezoning ordinance so that the applicant can receive final approval for the rezoning at the October 8~ meeting. Having the Council collapse the second and third reading of the rezoning request would be appreciated so that the application can begin construction after October 8t~ but prior to the end of the construction season. Thank you in advance for the Council's attention to this matter. sser, ASLA'--- '-°' DAM/dams cc; John Moreland, Arlington L.C. Shelly McCafferty, City Planning and Community Development Prepared by: Robert Miklo, Sr. Planner, 410 E. Washington Street, Iowa City, IA 52240; 319-356-5240 ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CITY CODE TITLE 14, CHAPTER 6, ENTITLED "ZONING," ARITCLE H, ENTITLED "INDUSTRIAL ZONES," SECTION 1, ENTITLED "GENERAL INDUSTRIAL ZONE," WHEREAS, the General Industrial Zone, I-1 zone, is intended to provide for the development of most types of industrial firms; and WHEREAS, the repair of commercial and industrial trucks would provide a service to industrial uses located within the I-1 zone; and WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission has recommended that service and repair of commercial and industrial trucks be allowed in the I-lzone as a provisional use. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF IOWA CITY, IOWA: ~. Chapter 6 entitled "Zoning Chapter," Article H entitled "Industrial Zones," Section 1 entitled "General Industrial Zones," be amended to add the following provisional use. (C) PROVISIONAL USES. (6) Service and repair of commemial and industrial trucks, provided: a. No vehicle is stored for more than 45 continuous days on the preperbj. b. The parking and trailer storage area is surfaced with asphalt, concrete, or a similar dust-free surface designed and maintained to prevent the flow of water onto adjoining properties. c. Screening is preserved, planted, constructed, and maintained according to Section 14-6S- 11 of this chapter. Screening shall also be provided aJong any lot lines which abut a designated arterial street in a manner sufficient to effectively obscure the truck service/repair facility from view from the arterial street, using the screening standards in Section 14-6S- 1 lB of this chapter. ~. All ordinances and parts of ordinances in conflict with the provisions of this Ordinance are hereby repealed. SECTION III. SEVERABILITY. If any section, provision or part of the Ordinance shall be adjudged to be invalid or unconstitutional, such adjudication shall not affect the validity of the Ordinance as a whole or any section, provision or part thereof not adjudged invalid or unconstitutional. SECTION IV. EFFE(':.TIVE DATE. This Ordinance shall be in effect after its final passage, approval and publication, as provided by law. Passed and approved this day of ,20.__ MAYOR ATTEST: CITY CLERK d,l~,-Affo~ey's ~ Ordinance No. Page. It was moved by and seconded by that the Ordinance as read be adopted, and upon roll call there were: AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: Champion . Kanner "- Lehman O'Donnell Pfab Vanderhoef Wilbum First Consideration 9/24/02 Voteforpassa~e: AYES: Champion, 'Kanne~', Lehman, 0'Donne]l, Pfab, Vanderhoef, Wi]burn. NA'YS: None. ABSENT: None. Second Consideration 10/8/02 Voteforpassage: AYES: 0'Donnell, Pfab, Vanderhoef, Wi]burn, Champion, Kanner, Lehman. NAYS: None. ABSENT: None. Date published DEFEATED Prepared by: John Adam, Associate Planner, 410 E. Washington Street, Iowa City, IA 52240; 319-356-5236 ORDINANCE NO .................... AN ORDINANCE AMENDING TITLE 10, ENTITLED "USE OF PUBLIC WAYS AND PROPERTY," CHAPTER 5, ENTITLED "CITY PLAZA," SECTION 9, ENTITLED "CITY PLAZA USE PERMITS," SUBSECTION E, ENTITLED "PERMANENT AND TEMPORARY STRUCTURES" AND AMENDING TITLE 14, ENTITLED "UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE," CHAPTER 4, ENTITLED "LAND CONTROL AND DEVELOPMENT," ARTICLE E, ENTITLED "DESIGN REVIEW," TO ELIMINATE REQUIRED APPROVAL BY THE CiTY COUNCIL OF DESIGN REVIEW COMMI'I-I-EE DECISIONS AND GRANTING APPROVAL POWER SOLELY TO THE DESIGN REVIEW £OMMI-i-FEE. WHEREAS, the Design Review Committee is composed of City Staff, each specializing in different aspects of zoning and design; and, WHEREAS, the scope of design review includes urban renewal sites, projecting signs, designated tax abatement or tax increment financing projects and any properties subject to the multi-family infill design guidelines; and, WHEREAS, the criteria guiding the various types of review are sufficiently objective to allow fair and impartial interpretation by professional staff; and, WHEREAS, the purpose of this ordinance is to make more efficient the design review process by removing the requirement for City Council approval of Design Review Committee recommendations. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF IOWA CITY, IOWA: SECTION 1. AMENDMENT. I. Title 1 0, entitled "Use of Public Ways and Property," Chapter 5, entitled "City Plaza," Section 9, entitled "City Plaza Use Permits," Subsection E, entitled "Permanent and Temporary Structures," Paragraph 3, entitled "Additional Criteria," is hereby amended by: a) repealing subparagraph b in its entirety and adopting a new subparagraph b as follows: b. No building permit for the construction of any temporary structure or any building extension to be constructed pursuant to this Chapter shall be issued until plans for said construction have been reviewed by the Design Review Committee. The Design Review Committee shall, within thirty (30) calendar days of receipt of said plans, set forth in a formal motion its findings either approving, approving with conditions, or disapproving the application. A majority of votes cast at any meeting at which a quorum is present shall be decisive. A written report will be forwarded to the applicant and the building official. The Committee's findings on each application shall be set forth in a written report, to be filed in the office of the City Clerk as public record. b) adopting a new subparagraph c as follows: c. Appeal to the City Council: Any applicant aggrieved by any decision of the Design Review Committee regarding an application may appeal the action to the City Council. Such an appeal must be in writing and must be filed with the City Clerk no later than ten (10) business days after the filing of the abovementioned written report of the Committee. The City Council shall, within a reasonable time, hold a public hearing on the appeal, give the public notice as required by State law, as well as provide written notice to the applicant and decide the appeal within a reasonable time. In deciding such an appeal, the City Council shall consider whether the Committee has exercised its powers and followed the guidelines established by law and this Article, and whether the Committee's action was patently arbitrary or capricious. In exercising the abovementioned powers, the City Council may, in conformity with the provisions of this Article, reverse or affirm, wholly or partly, or may modify the order, requirement, decision or determination as ought to be made, and to that end shall have the powers of the Committee from whom the appeal is taken." II. Title 14, entitled "Unified Development Code," entitled Chapter 4, "Land Control and Development," entitled Article E, "Design Review," Section 2, entitled "Applicability," subsection A, is hereby amended by adopting a new paragraph A.3 as follows: "3. Design review may be required at the discretion of the City Council in any urban renewal or urban revitalization areas enabled under Chapter 403 of the Code of Iowa, as amended, or in any other areas so designated by the City Council after appropriate legislative determination." III. Title 14, entitled "Unified Development Code," Chapter 4, entitled "Land Control and Development," Article E, entitled "Design Review," Section 3, entitled "Procedures," subsection A, is hereby amended by repealing subsection A in its entirety and adopting a new subsection A as follows: "A. Initiating Review: Prior to issuance of a sign permit for an exterior sign or of a building permit to alter the exterior of an existing structure subject to the design review process or to construct a new building that is subject to the design review process, the project shall require the review and approval of the Design Review Committee." IV. Title 14, entitled "Unified Development Code," entitled Chapter 4, "Land Control and Development," entitled Article E, "Design Review," Section 3, entitled "Procedures," subsection C, paragraph 2, is hereby amended as follows: a) subparagraph a.(2) is hereby amended by repealing subparagraph a.(2) in its entirety and adopting a new subparagraph a.(2) as follows: (2) Within thirty (30) calendar days of submission of the application materials, the Design Review Committee shall approve, approve with conditions or disapprove the application. If the Committee does not act within thirty (30) calendar days of the date of submission, the application shall be deemed approved, provided, however, that the applicant may agree to an extension of time. b) Paragraph 2.b is hereby amended by repealing paragraph 2.b in its entirety and adopting a new paragraph 2.b as follows: "b. Committee Review and Approval: The Committee's findings on each application shall be set forth in a formal motion either approving, approving with conditions, or disapproving the application. A majority of votes cast at any meeting at which a quorum is present shall be decisive. The Committee's findings on each application shall be set forth in a written report, to be filed in the office of the City Clerk as public record. c) Paragraph 2.c is hereby amended by repealing paragraph 2.c in its entirety and adopting a new paragraph 2.c as follows: c. Appeal to the City Council: Any applicant aggrieved by any decision of the Design Review Committee regarding an application may appeal the action to the City Council. Such an appeal must be in writing and must be filed with the City Clerk no later than ten (10) business days after the filing of the abovementioned resolution. The City Council shall, within a reasonable time, hold a public hearing on the appeal, give the public notice as required by State law, as well as provide written notice to the applicant, and decide the appeal within a reasonable time. In deciding such an appeal, the City Council shall consider whether the Committee has exercised its powers and followed the guidelines established by law and this Article, and whether the Committee's action was patently arbitrary or capricious. In exercising the abovementioned powers, the City Council may, in conformity with the provisions of this Article, reverse or affirm, wholly or partly, or may modify the order, requirement, decision or determination as ought to be made, and to that end shall have the powers of the Committee from whom the appeal is taken." V. Title 14, entitled "Unified Development Code," Chapter 4, entitled "Land Control and Development," Article E, entitled "Design Review," Section 5, entitled "Guidelines," is hereby amended by deleting Section 5 in its entirety and adopting a new Section 5 as follows: "When reviewing a project subject to design review, the Design Review Committee shall adhere to the following guidelines. In no case may these guidelines be used to attempt to replace or override the requirements of the Iowa City Zoning Ordinance." SECTION II. REPEALER. All ordinances and parts of ordinances in conflict with the provision of this Ordinance are hereby repealed. SECTION III. SEVERABILITY. If any section, provision or part of the Ordinance shall be adjudged to be invalid or unconstitutional, such adjudication shall not affect the validity of the Ordinance as a whole or any section, provision or part thereof not adjudged invalid or unconstitutional. SECTION IV. EFFECTIVE DATE. This Ordinance shall be in effect after its final passage, approval and publication, as provided by law. Passed and approved this ....... day of ..................... 2002. MAYOR A'I-I'EST: ......................... CITY CLERK Approve~d b~,: ~ .... City Attorney's Office T:\PCD~John A\Active Files\DRC ord. 2002.10.07.do¢ Ordinance No. DEFEATED Page It was moved by and seconded by that the Ordinance as read be adopted, and upon roll call there were: AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: Champion Kanner Lehman O'Donnell Pfab Vanderhoef Wilbum First Consideration 10/8/02 Voteforpassage:AYES: Lehman, 0'Donnell. NAYS: Pfab, Vanderhoef, Wilburn, Champion, Kanner. ABSENT: None. Second Consideration Vote for passage: Date published City of Iowa City MEMORANDUM Date: October 1, 2002 To: City Council and City Mana~..~ ~,/.~D¢~.~ From: Karin Franklin, Director, P~ v ~ Re: Design Review Process Enclosed in the Council packet is an ordinance revising the review process for design review to eliminate Council approval of plans. This is proposed in an effort to streamline the process. The design review process currently includes review by a staff committee that includes individuals with design training and code enforcement expertise. This committee works with builders and developers who are undertaking projects in areas in which the Council has determined design review is required. Design review is required for any urban renewal project in the downtown, any exterior work which overhangs the pedestrian mall downtown (usually signs), projects subject to the multi-family infill guidelines, and generally any projects receiving tax incentives. The projects for which final Council approval is required are only the urban renewal projects and any exterior work that overhangs the pedestrian mall. After working with the applicant, the committee makes a determination as to the design of the project involved and approves or disapproves the design. In those cases where Council approval is required, a recommendation is sent to the Council and the Council acts on a resolution approving the design. The most recent case before the Council was the sign for Universi-tees. Signs are the most frequent subject matter of the design review cases that come before the Council. Council review can add two to five weeks to the process, depending on the Council's schedule. The only urban renewal parcel remaining for major construction is Parcel 64-1a; the Council reviewed the design of that project during the approval process of the preferred developer. The time period for Council review and the staff work involved in putting an item on the Council's agenda have precipitated this proposal. Cc Shelley McCafferty Jann Ream Julie Tallman Prepared by: John Adam, Associate Planner, 410 E. Washington Street, Iowa City, IA 52240; 319- 356-5236 ORDINANCE NO .................... AN lANCE AMENDING TITLE 10, ENTITLED "USE OF PUBLIC AND PROPERTY 5, ENTITLED "CITY PLAZA," SECTION 9, :ITY PLAZA USE SUBSECTION E, ENTITLED "PERMANENT AND STRUCTURES" AMENDING TITLE 14, ENTITLED "UNIFIED ENT CODE," CHAPTER ENTITLED "LAND CONTROL AND DEVELOPMI "ARTICLE E, ENTITLED "DESIGN flEW," TO ELIMINATE REQUIRED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF DESIGN IEW COMMI'I-I'EE DECISIONS AND G APPROVAL POWER SOLELY TO THE IGN REVIEW COMMI'I-I'EE. WHEREAS, the Design Committee is compos of City Staff, each specializing in different as zoning and design; WHEREAS, the scope of design lew includes renewal sites, projecting signs, designated tax abatement tax increm~ financing projects and any properties subject to the multi-famil' desi guidelines; and, WHEREAS, the criteria guiding the types of review are sufficiently objective to allow fair and impartial inter by professional staff; and, WHEREAS, the purpose of this ordinan~ make more efficient the design review process by removing the requil City Council approval of Design Review Committee recommendation'. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINE THE CITY JNCIL OF THE CITY OF IOWA CITY, IOWA: SECTION 1. AMENDMENT. I. Title 10, entitled "Use Ways and Property," 5, entitled "City Plaza," Section 9, entil "City Plaza Use Permits," section E, entitled "Permanent and Ten ~orary Structures," Paragraph 3, :itled "Additional Criteria," is hereby by: a) repealing sub iraph b in its entirety and adopting a new s~paragraph b as follows: J b. No building permit for the construction of any temporary structure or any building extension to be constructed pursuant to this Chapter shall be issued until plans for said construction have been reviewed by the Design Review Committee. The Design Review Committee shall, within thirty (30) calendar days of receipt of said plans, set forth in a formal motion its findings either approving, approving with conditions, or disapproving the appl A majority of votes cast at any meeting at which a quorum ~s shall be decisive. A written report will be forwarded to the and the building official. The Committee's findings on each Iion shall be set forth in a written report, to be filed in the office of the ( ty Clerk as public record. / b) adopting a new subparagr ~h c as follows: / c. Appeal to the City Coun, Any applicant aggrievec~/by any decision of the Design Review regarding an applic.~tion may appeal the action to the City Council. an appeal must b~n writing and must be filed with the City Clerk no than ten (1Q~ business days after the filing of the abovementioned :ten report ~/f the Committee. The City Council shall, within a reason time, a public hearing on the appeal, give the public notice as State law, as well as provide written notice to the applicant and the appeal within a reasonable time. In deciding such an appeal, th~ ty Council shall consider whether the Committee has exercised its and followed the guidelines established by law and this Arti, whether the Committee's action was patently arbitrary or cap ' '~g the abovementioned powers, the City Council m, in confor ity with the provisions of this Article, reverse or affirm or or may modify the order, requirement, decision as ht to be made, and to that end shall have the of the from whom the appeal is taken." c) adopting a new ~ d as follows: d. Judicial A leah If not satisfied with the de sion of the City Council, the appli, may appeal to the Johnson Cot :ty District Court within calendar days after the City Council's .~cision. II. 4, entitled "Unified Development Code,' entitled Chapter 4, "Land and Development," entitled Article E, "Design eview," Section 2, entitled "Applicability," subsection A, is hereby amended by :lopting a new paragraph A. 3 as follows: "3. Design review may be required at the discretion of the City Council in any urban renewal or urban revitalization areas enabled under Chapter 403 of the Code of Iowa, as amended, or in any other areas so designated by the City Council after appropriate legislative determination." Ill. Title 14, entitled "Unified Development Code," Chapter 4, entitled "Land Control and ~ment," Article E, entitled "Design Review," Secti 3, entitled "Procedures," tion A, is hereby amended by repealing su ction A in its entirety and adoptin new subsection A as follows: "A. Initiating Review: dor to issuance of a sign an exterior sign or of a building nit to alter the exterior of ~xisting structure subject to the design process or to constru~ new building that is subject to the design ;w process, the p shall require the review and approval of the Review Comm IV. Title 14, entitled "Unified ~ment Co entitled Chapter 4, "Land Control and Development," entitled n Review," Section 3, entitled "Procedures," subsection C, paragraph 2, amended as follows: a) subparagraph a.(2) is hereby amended g subparagraph a.(2) in its entirety and adopting a new subparagral: ~ as follows: (2) Within thirty (30) calendar d~ of of the application materials, the Design Review .~ approve, approve with conditions or disapprove the Committee does not act within thirty (30) calendar da date of ! ~ission, the application shall be deemed approved ~rovided, however, the applicant may agree to an extension of ti b) Paragraph 2.b is by repealing ~h 2.b in its entirety and adopting a new ~h 2.b as follows: "b. Committee Revi and Approval: The Committee's ~dings on each application shall set forth in a formal motion er approving, approving with or disapproving the applicatior A majority of votes cast at meeting at which a quorum is present be decisive. The Commi findings on each application shall be forth in a written re to be filed in the office of the City Clerk as public record. c) Paragra~ 2.c is hereby amended by repealing paragraph 2.c in its entirety and ad. ting a new paragraph 2.c as follows: 4 C. Appeal to the City Council: Any applicant aggrieved by any decision of the Design Review Committee regarding an application may appeal the action to the City Council. Such an appeal must be in writing and must be filed with the City Clerk no later than ten (I0) business days after the filing of the abovementioned resolution. The City Council sh within a reasonable e, hold a public hearing on the appeal, the public notice as rec ;d by State law, as well as provide notice to the applicant, and the appeal within a reasonabh In deciding such an appeal, City Council shall consider the Committee has exercised its and followed the guidel established by law and this Article whether the Committe action was patently arbitrary or cat n exercising the abc powers, the City Council may, in mity with the of this Article, reverse or affirm, wholly or or may the order, requirement, decision or determination ought to made, and to that end shall have the powers of the the appeal is taken." d) adopting new Paragraph 2.d a; "d. Judicial Appeal: If not satisfi th the decision of the City Council, the appellant may appeal to th~ ~hnson County District Court within thirty (30) calendar days after th~ Council's decision." V. Title 14, entitled "Unified Code," Chapter 4, entitled "Land Control and Development," Arti~ led "Design Review," Section 5, entitled "Guidelines," is hereby ame by Section 5 in its entirety and adopting a new Section 5 as "When reviewing a ect subject to s~gn review, the Design Review Committee shall adh. to the following uidelines. In no case may these guidelines be used attempt to replace override the requirements of the Iowa City Zoni Ordinance." SECTION II. REPEALI All ordinances and parts ~f ordinances in conflict with the provision of this are hereby repealed. SECTION III. If any section, .ion or part of the Ordinance shall be ad.ju( to be invalid or unconstituti, such ad.iudication shall not affect the ' of the Ordinance as a whole or section, provision or part thereof n, invalid or unconstitutional. SECTION IV. EFFECTIVE DATE. This Ordinance shall be in effect after its final passage, approval a~l publication, as provided by law. / ! Passed and approved this day of , 2002~ MAYOR AI~'EST: CITY CLERK A \\citynt\shared\PCD~John A\Active Files\DI 12.09.27.doc Prepared by: Susan Dulek, Asst. City Attorney, 410 E. Washington Street, Iowa City, IA 52240; 319-356-5030 ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CITY CODE TITLE14, ENTITLED "UNIFORM DEVELOPMENT CODE," CHAPTER 5, ENTITLED "BUILDING AND HOUSING," ARTICLE E, ENTITLED "HOUSING CODE" TO REQUIRE THAT ALL LANDLORDS AND TENANTS EXECUTE A LEASE ADDENDUM AND BY DELETING THE REQUIREMENT THAT THE CITY PROVIDE WRITTEN NOTICE OF HOUSING VIOLATIONS BEFORE ISSUING A MUNICIPAL INFRACTION. WHEREAS, Resolution 01-353 established a Neighborhood Housing Relations Task Force (hereinafter "Task Fome") to fulfill the goal of improving peaceful habitation in Iowa City and appointed eleven individuals representing the interests of tenants, landlords, and neighborhoods to serve on the Task Force; WHEREAS, the Task Fome met fifteen times between November 7, 2001 and May 22, 2002; WHEREAS, the Task Force held one public forum to elicit comments from the public on its proposal; WHEREAS, the Task Force submitted its "Proposed Initiatives/Report of Task Force" (hereinafter "the Report") with the City Council on June 27, 2002; WHEREAS, in addition to proposals to amend policy, the Report recommends code amendments to require that an addendum be attached to every residential lease setting out, among other items, the maximum occupancy of the rental unit, and that the City not be required to provide written notification to owners and landlords of housing code violations before issuing a municipal infraction; WHEREAS, tenants are not always aware of the maximum occupancy limits of their rental unit; WHEREAS, landlords are not always aware that the persons who actually occupy the rental unit are different than those who signed the lease or that the police have responded to repeated disorderly house and loud party complaints; WHEREAS, staff anticipates that it will take approximately three (3) years to determine the maximum occupancy for each of the approximate 15,000 rental units; WHEREAS, the current ordinance provides that the City must provide a written notice of a Housing Code violation; WHEREAS, oral notification will allow the City to act on Housing Code violations in a more timely manner and will aid in fulfilling the Task Force's goal of improving peaceful habitation in Iowa City; WHEREAS, state law does not require the City to serve a written notice of violation prior to issuing a municipal infraction; and WHEREAS, it is in the public interest to adopt this amendment. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CITY, IOWA: SECTION I. AMENDMENTS. 1. Title 14, entitled "Unified Development Code," Chapter 5 entitled "Building and Housing," Adicle E, entitled "Housing Code," Section 3, entitled "Definitions," is hereby amended by adding a new definition as follows: Tenant: Any occupant of a dwelling unit who is not an owner or operator of said dwelling unit or who is entitled under a rental agreement to occupy a dwelling unit to the exclusion of another. Title 14, entitled "Unified Development Code," Chapter 5 entitled "Building and Housing," Article E, entitled "Housing Code," is amended by adding a new Section 22 to be entitled "Lease Addendum" as follows: Beginning with written or oral rental agreements entered into after the effective date of this ordinance, the owner or operator shall execute with all tenants a Lease Addendum, which is furnished by the City Department of Housing Inspection Services, that provides the fo]lowing: a) The maximum occupancy limit of the dwelling unit as established by the City if said limit is available. The maximum occupancy limit is available for purposes of this section if it is on the Housing and Inspection Services web page on the City web site at the link entified "rental permit." Owners, operators, and tenants may access said limit via the internet or by telephoning the Housing and Inspection Services Department or by visiting Housing and Inspection Services Department personally. Owners, operators, and 'tenants have the affirmative duty to determine whether the maximum occupancy limit is available. b) The names of the tenants, pursuant to the rental agreement, who may occupy said unit, and their driver's license numbers and the state that issued said licenses. Ordinance No. Page 2 c) Acknowledgement that the owner, operator, and tenant are responsible for maintaining the maximum occupancy limits and that violation of the maximum occupancy limits can result in a fine to the owner, operator, and tenant. d) Identification of specific non-habitable spaces and rooms that cannot be used for sleeping purposes. e) Acknowledgment that there is no parking on the grass or on the public sidewalk. f) Trash and recycling requirements, but only if the rental property is four (4) dwelling units or less. g) A recitation of the language of Iowa City City Code section 8-5-5, the crime of disorderly house. . h) City web site address. i) Contact information for the neighborhood association serving that address. j) Information on where to locate the Iowa Residential Landlord Tenant Law (Iowa Code chapter 562A) including a web site. k) Who is responsible for snow removal and lawn mowing. The Owner or Operator shall provide a photocopy of the executed Lease Addendum to the inspector upon request. Title 14, entitled "Unified Development Code," Chapter 5 entitled "Building and Housing," Article E, entitled "Housing Code," Section 14, entitled "Notice of Violation" is hereby deleted in its entirety. SECTION II. REPEALER. All ordinances and parts of ordinances in conflict with the provision of this Ordinance are hereby repealed. SECTION III. SEVERABILITY. If any section, provision or part of the Ordinance shall be adjudged to be invalid or unconstitutional, such adjudication shall not affect the validity of the Ordinance as a whole or any section, provision or part thereof not adjudged invalid or unconstitutional. SECTION IV. EFFECTIVE DATE. This Ordinance shall be in effect after its final passage, approval and publication, as provided by law. Passed and approved this day of ,2002. MAYOR ATTEST: CITY CLERK Approved by City Attorney's Office Ordinance No. Page. It was moved by and seconded by that the Ordinance as read be adopted, and upon roll call there were: AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: Champion Kanner '- Lehman O'Donnell Pfab Vanderhoef Wilbum First Consideration 9/24/02 Voteforpassage: AYES: Vandet'hoef, t~`i'lbut'n, Champ'ion, Kannet-, Lehman, O'Donne]'l, Pfab. NAYS: None. ABSENT: None. Second Consideration 10/8/02 Voteforpassage:AYES: O'Donne]'l, Pfab, Vanderhoef, l~`i]but'n, Champ'ion, Kannet', Lehman. NAYS: None. ABSENT: NOne. Date published GREATER IOWA CITY AREA APARTMENT ASSOCIATION 800 2"a Street, Suite 500 Coralville, Iowa 52241 October 4, 2002 ~ ~ ,:-~ City Council Members ~:~..,. '~' ~'.. Marion Karr ?~c ~,,~ Steve Atkins Eleanor Dilkes I am writing to you concerning the many calls that I as President of the Apartment Association and Ted Chambers as Secretary/Treasurer have received about the proposed lease addendum. The Association appointed a group to review the addendum and talk with concerned members. I would like to share the results of the group's findings. The primary concern of the Apartment Association, and its landlord members, is the requirement that certain information be acknowledged by the landlord and the tenant in the context of a lease addendum. From all of the information available, and reviewing the proposed ordinance, the City's drafting of this ordinance, including the lease addendum, was not supplied to the Task Force for review. The Apartment Association anticipated that it would have input into the ordinance and especially on the issue of a lease addendum. The alternatives to a lease amendment seem preferable and consistent with the objective of receiving an acknowledgement by landlord and tenant of the various ordinances of the City. The occupancy restrictions, for example, are based upon the city zoning and housing codes and a landlord and tenant need not enter into a contractual relationship in order to acknowledge the existence and applicability of a city code. The Apartment Association respectfully requests that this matter be referred to the Task Force for further clarification consistent with the objectives of notice and acknowledgment. The alternative to clarifying the ordinance at this time will most certainly be inconsistent application, extensive legal actions to interpret the intent of the ordinance with the addendum and the application of the addendum language to landlords and tenants. This additional cost and inconvenience is something that can be averted simply by clarifying these issues in advance. We appreciate your consideration, Anne Vespa, President Greater Iowa City Area Apartment Association Marian Karr From: Dh3580@aol.com Sent: Monday, October 07, 2002 2:17 PM To: cou ncil@iowa-city.org Subject: City Council agenda item #13 re proposed ordinance for rental units City Council: Re: Proposed rental unit ordinance I urge the City Council to TABLE consideration of this new ordinance until it can be reviewed in a more comprehensive manner. 1. It is my understanding that the final written draft of this proposal is not available at this time. This should be a requirement prior to any public debate or action by the Council. 2. The general proposal as described in the Press Citizen lists requirements that: ....... may already be in current leases; thus, another addendum not necessary ....... may require redundant actions with current landlord policy/procedures and city code. ...... elicits questions of procedure, city staff requirements for enforcement, and cost to administer. ...... poses some legal and civil rights questions from both the landlord and tenant perspective. 3. This proposal still does not address the current enforcement issue of CURRENT rental housing code with a FEW problem landlords. MOST landlords and tenants follow the guidelines of the City and of the Task Force recommendations. What are the barriers for current enforcement with these FEW PROBLEM LANDLORDS? Why should everyone be penalized by a new and complex system that costs many extra tax dollars for a few violators? PLEASE VOTE TO TABLE THIS PROPOSAL FOR FURTHUR REVIEW AND CONSIDERATION. Doris Houser 3580 Vista Park Dr Iowa City, Iowa Page 1 of 1 Marian Karr -'~//~ From: IvetteApts@aol.com Sent: Monday, October 07, 2002 8:49 PM To: council@iowa-city.org Subject: Residential lease addendum Dear City Council members: I am a property manager and owner of apartments in the Iowa City and Coralville area, and want to address the residential lease addendum that has been proposed. Are you aware that The Greater Iowa City Apartment Association has a Uniform Residential Lease that it painstakingly updated a few years ago? It is available for a small fee to anyone, landlord or other who needs it. The council or its new committee may want to view it before making a final determination on the new addendum items, as many of the items suggested are already on the lease. As a property manager, I would like to see the following items on the Rental Permit itself; the current zone, occupancy, and parking allowed, and the owner as well as the property manager. The Rental Permits currently have only the person listed who attended the inspection ( owner or property manager ), and the expiration date of the permit. It seems a more obvious place to put these items. Why is tenant license information required? Who will audit these addendums? What is the penalty to the landlord who cannot produce one? Will the addendums be provided free from the City or will we have to purchase them? And finally, I would request the City Council delay any further vote on this lease addendum until a more final list is available for interested parties to view. At this point, the only written information that I have seen was the Sept. 21 Press- Citizen article, and feel that is not enough information for the City Council to give a committee free range on listing any items that it wants. Thank you very much for your consideration on this matter. Sincerely, Kayla Cress Rentals by Ivette Property Management Service 10/8/02 Prepared by: Eleanor M. Dilkes, City Attorney, 410 E. Washington Street, Iowa City, IA 52240; 319-356-5030 ORDINANCE NO. ORDINANCE AMENDING TITLE 6, PUBLIC HEALTH, CHAPTER 7, SMOKING I_N FOOD ESTABLISHMENTS, SECTION 5, EXCEPTION, TO CLARIFY THAT EACH ESTABLISHMENT SHALL BE ALLOWED ONLY ONE TEMPORARY ONE-YEAR EXCEPTION. WHEREAS, Section 6-7-5(B) of the City Code provides new establishments and establishments making a change in operation the opportunity for a temporary one-year exception from the provisions of Chapter 7; and WHEREAS, it is prudent to clarify that each establishment shall be allowed only one temporary one-year exception. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF IOWA CITY, IOWA: SECTION I. AMENDMENT. Section 6-7-5(B) of the City Code is amended by adding the following sentence to the end of said subsection: "An establishment shall be allowed only one temporary one-year exception hereunder." SECTION II. REPEALER. All ordinances and parts of ordinances in conflict with the provisions of this Ordinance are hereby repealed. SECTION II1. SEVERABILITY. If any section, provision or part of the Ordinance shall be adjudged to be invalid or unconstitutional, such adjudication shall not affect the validity of the Ordinance as a whole or any section, provision or part thereof not adjudged invalid or unconstitutional. SECTION IV. EFFECTIVE DATE. This Ordinance shall be in effect after its final passage, approval and publication, as provided by law. Passed and approved this .... day of ,20 MAYOR ATTEST: CITY CLERK City Attorney's Office eleanor/ordJsmoking-amend,doc Ordinance No.. Page __ It was moved by and seconded by that the Ordinance as read be adopted, and upon roll call there were: AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: Champion . Kanner Lehman O'Donnell Pfab Vanderhoef Wilbum First Consideration 9/24/02 Voteforpassage: AYES: Lehman, Pfab, Vanden'hoer, Nilburn, Champion, (anne~'. NAYS: O'Donnell. ABSENT: None. Second Consideration ].0/8/02 Vote for passage:AYES: Pfab, Vanden'hoer, Ni I bu~'n, Champion, Kannet', Lehman. NAYS: O'Donnell. ABSENT: None. Date published Prepared by: Jeff Davidson, PCD, 410 E. Washington Street, Iowa City, IA 52240; 319-356-5252 ORDINANCE NO. 02-4043 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING TITLE 9, ENTITLED "MOTOR VEHICLES AND T_RAFFIC," CHAPTER 7, ENTITLED "VEHICLE SIZE, WEIGHT AND LOAD," TO RESTRICT LARGE TRUCK TRAFFIC ON FIRST AVENUE FROM THE INTERSECTION OF SCOTT BOULEVARD TO THE INTERSECTION OF D STREET. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF IOWA CITY, IOWA: ~. The purpose of this amendment is to restrict large truck traffic on First Avenue from the intersection of Scott Boulevard to the intersection of D Street. SECTION II AMENDMENT. Section 9.7.4(B) is hereby amended by deleting Paragraph 2 and substituting in lieu thereof: 9.7.4(B)(2) No truck or other commercial vehicle with a license of over 16 tons, except those specifically exempted herein, shall be operated on Kirkwood Avenue and Lower Muscatine Road from the intersection of Kirkwood Avenue with Gilbert Court to the intersection of Lower Muscatine Road with Sycamore Street, or on First Avenue from the intersection with Scott Boulevard to the intersection with D Street. ~. All ordinances and parts of ordinances in conflict with the provisions of this Ordinance are hereby repealed. SECTION IV SEVERABILITY. If any section, provision or part of the Ordinance shall be adjudged to be invalid or unconstitutional, such adjudication shall not affect the validity of the Ordinance as a whole or any section, provision or part thereof not adjudged invalid or unconstitutional. SECTION V EFFECTIVE DATF This Ordinance shall be in effect after its final passage, approval and publication, as provided by law. .,~~a~proved this 8t__hdayof October' , 20_ 02 . MAYOR CITY CLEI~- - jccogt~org/tmcktra f. doc Ordinance No. 02-4043 Page 2 It was moved by Vanderhoef and seconded by Pfab that the Ordinance as read be adopted, and upon roll call there were: AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: X Champion _ . X Kanner X - Lehman X O'Donnell X Pfab X Vanderhoef X Wilbum First Consideration 9/10/02 Voteforpassage: AYES: 0'Donne]l, Pfab, Vanderhoef, Wilburn, Champion, Kanner, Lehman. NAYS: None. 'ABSENT: None. Second Consideration 9/24/02 Voteforpassage: AYES: Wilburn, Champion, Kanner, Lehman, O'Donnell, Pfab, Vanderhoef. NAYS: None. ABSENT: None. Date published 10/16/02 Prepared by: Susan Dulek, Asst. City Attomey, 410 E. Washington Street, Iowa City, IA 52240; 319-356-5030 ORDINANCE NO. 02-4044 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CERTAIN CHAPTERS OF CITY CODE TITLES 6, 7, 10, AND 14 TO INCREASE THE MUNICIPAL INFRACTION CIVIL PENALTIES FOR VIOLATING NUISANCE PROVISIONS, SNOW REMOVAL REQUIREMENTS, BUILDING CODE, HOUSING CODE, ELECTRICAL CODE, MECHANICAL CODE, PLUMBING CODE,' FIRE CODE, AND UTILITIES' USE OF RIGHT-OF-WAY REQUIREMENTS. WHEREAS, Resolution 01-353 established a Neighborhood Housing Relations Task Force (hereinafter "Task Force") to fulfill the goal of improving peaceful habitation in Iowa City and appointed eleven individuals representing the interests of tenants, landlords, and neighborhoods to serve on the Task Force; WHEREAS, the Task Force met fifteen (15) times between November 7, 2001 and May 22, 2002; WHEREAS, the Task Force held one public forum to elicit comments from the public on its proposals; WHEREAS, the Task Force submitted its "Proposed Initiatives/Repod of Task Force" (hereinafter "the Report") to the City Council on June 27, 2002; WHEREAS, in addition to proposals to amend policy, the Report recommends code amendments to increase the fines for municipal infractions for nuisances and other code violations that impact on neighborhoods; WHEREAS, staff recommends that municipal infractions for violations of the building code, the housing code, the electrical code, the plumbing code, mechanical code, fire code, and public utilities' use of the right-of-way also be increased, which is consistent with the Task Force's recommendations; WHEREAS, in order to enhance deterrence of nuisances and related neighborhood problems and violations of the building code, housing code, mechanical code, plumbing code, electrical code, fire code, snow removal requirements, and utilities' use of right-of-way requirements, the fines for municipal infractions should be increased; and WHEREAS, it is in the public interest to adopt these amendments. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CITY, IOWA: SECTION I. AMENDMENTS. 1. Title 6, entitled "Public Health and Safety," Chapter 1, entitled "Nuisances," is amended by adding a new Section 7 entitled "Violation" which reads as follows: Violation of this Chapter shall be a municipal infraction punishable by a penalty as provided for in Title 1, Chapter 4, Section 2, Subsection D. 2. Title 5, entitled "Public Health and Safety," Chapter 1, entitled "Nuisances," Section 3, entitled "Public Nuisances Prohibited; Authority to Abate," Subsection A is repealed in its entirety and a new Section A is added which reads as follows: The creation or maintenance of a public nuisance is unlawful and prohibited, subject to penalties set forth in Title 1, Chapter 4, Section 2, Subsection D. 3. Title 6, entitled "Public Health and Safety," Chapter 2, entitled "Hazardous Substances," is amended by adding a new Section 4 entitled "Violation" which reads as follows: Violation of this Chapter shall be a municipal infraction punishable by a penalty as provided for in Title 1, Chapter 4, Section 2, Subsection D. 4. Title 6, entitled "Public Health and Safety," Chapter 3, entitled "Weed Control," is amended by adding a new Section 5 entitled "Violation" which reads as follows: Violation of this Chapter shall be a municipal infraction punishable by a penalty as provided for in Title 1, Chapter 4, Section 2, Subsection D. Ordinance Ho. 02-4044 Page 2 5. Title 6, entitled "Public Health and Safety," Chapter 3, entitled "Weed Control," the initial unnumbered paragraph in Section 2, entitled "Nuisances Declared; Violations," is repealed in its entirety and a new unnumbered paragraph is added which reads as follows: The failure of a person owning, controlling or in possession of property to observe any of the following shall be subject to the penalties provided in Title 1, Chapter 4, Section 2, Subsection D. 6. Title 6, entitled "Public Health and Safety," Chapter 4, entitled "Noise Control," is amended by adding a new Section 7 entitled "Violation" which reads as follows: Violation of this Chapter shall be a municipal infraction punishable by a~ penalty as provided for in Title 1, Chapter 4, Section 2, Subsection D. 7. Title 6, entitled "Public Health and Safety," Chapter 9, entitled "Graffiti," is amended by adding a new Section 4 entitled '¥iolation" which reads as follows: Violation of this Chapter shall be a municipal infraction punishable by a penalty as provided for in Title 1, Chapter 4, Section 2, Subsection D. 8. Title 10, entitled "Use of Public Ways and Property," Chapter 5, entitled "City Plaza," Section 6 is repealed in its entirety and a new Section 6 is added which reads as follows: Removal of accumulations of snow and/or ice on City Plaza resulting from building runoff shall be the responsibility of the adjoining property owner. Violation of this Section shall be a municipal infraction punishable by a penalty as provided for in Title 1, Chapter 4, Section 2, Subsection D. 9. Title 14, entitled "Unified Development Code," Chapter 1, entitled "Streets, Sidewalks and Public Right of Way," Article A, entitled "Streets, Sidewalks and Public Right of Way Generally," Section 8, entitled "Snow and Ice Removal" is amended by adding a new Subsection E which reads as follows: Violation of this Section shall be a municipal infraction punishable by a penalty as provided for in Title 1, Chapter 4, Section 2, Subsection D. 10. Title 14, entitled "Unified Development Code," Chapter 5, entitled "Building and Housing," Article A, entitled "Building Code," Section 4 is hereby repealed in its entirety and a new Section 4 is added which reads as follows: Violation of this Article shall be a municipal infraction punishable by a penalty as provided for in Title 1, Chapter 4, Section 2, Subsection D. 11. Title 14, entitled "Unified Development Code," Chapter 5, entitled "Building and Housing," Article B, entitled "Plumbing Code," is amended by adding a new Section 6, which reads as follows: Violation of this Article shall be a municipal infraction punishable by a penalty as provided for in Title 1, Chapter 4, Section 2, Subsection D. 12. Title 14, entitled "Unified Development Code," Chapter 5, entitled "Building and Housing," Article C, entitled "Electrical Code," by adding a new Section 28 which reads as follows: Violation of this Article shall be a municipal infraction punishable by a penalty as provided for in Title 1, Chapter 4, Section 2, Subsection D. 13. Title 14, entitled "Unified Development Code," Chapter 5, entitled "Building and Housing," Article D, entitled "Mechanical Code," Section 4 is repealed in its entirety and a new Section 4 is added which reads as follows: Violation of this Article shall be a municipal infraction punishable by a penalty as provided for in Title 1, Chapter 4, Section 2, Subsection D. 14. Title 14, erititled "Unified Development Code," Chapter 5, entitled "Building and Housing," Article E, entitled "Housing Code," by adding a new Section 22 which reads as follows: Violation of this ^rticle shall be a municipal infraction punishable by a penalty as provided for in Title 1, Chapter 4, Section 2, Subsection D. 15. Title 7, entitled "Fire Prevention and Protection," Chapter 1, entitled "Fire Code," Section 4 is repealed in its entirety and a new Section 4 is added which reads as follows: Violation of this Article shall be a municipal infraction punishable by a penalty as provided for in Title 1, Chapter 4, Section 2, Subsection D. Ordinance No, 02-4044 Page 3 16. Title 14, entitled "Unified Development Code," Chapter 2, entitled "Public Utilities and Use of City Right of Way," Article A, entitled "General Provisions," Section 13, entitled "Penalties" is repealed in its entirety and a new Section 13 is added which reads as follows: Any violation of this Chapter shall be considered a simple misdemeanor, a municipal infraction, or an environmental infraction. Municipal infractions shall be punishable by a penalty as provided for in Title 1, Chapter 4, Section 2, Subsection D. 17. Title 1, entitled "Administration," Chapter 4, entitled "General Penalty," Section 2, entitled "Civil Penalties for Municipal Infractions," is amended by adding a new Subsection D, entitled "Civil Citations for Neighborhood Related and Nuisance Infractions" as follows: Civil penalties for municipal infractions of sections 6-1-7, 6-2-4, 6-3-5, 6-4-7, 1~-9-4, 7-1-4, 10-5-6, 14-1A-8E, 14-2A-13, 14-5A.4, 14-5B-6, 14-5C-28, 14-5D-4, and14-5E-22 shall be punishable as provided in the following schedule for each day a violation exists or continues: First offense $250.00 Second offense $500.00 Third offense $750.00 SECTION II. REPEALER. All ordinances and parts of ordinances in conflict with the provision of this Ordinance are hereby repealed. SECTION III. SEVERABILITY. If any section, provision or part of the Ordinance shall be adjudged to be invalid or unconstitutional, such adjudication shall not affect the validity of the Ordinance as a whole or any section, provision or part thereof not adjudged invalid or unconsti- tutional. SECTION IV. EFFECTIVE DATE. This Ordinance shall be in effect after its final passage, approval and publication, as provided by law. R d a approved th' dayof Nctnh~r ,2002. tvWC, yo R CI~ERK Approvr~~ by City Attorney's Office sue/ord&res/NTFordfinesCornbined.doc Ordinance No. 02-4044 Page 4 It was moved by 0' Donnel 1 and seconded by Vanderhoef that the Ordinance as read be adopted, and upon roll call there were: AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: X Champion X Kanner X Lehman X O'Donnell ){ Pfab X Vanderhoef X Wilbum First Consideration 9/10/02 Vote for passage: AYES: Va~derhoef, Wi 1 burn, Champion, Lehman, 0' Donnel 1. NAYS: Pfab, Kanner. ABSENT: None. Second Consideration 9/24/02 Voteforpassage: AYES: Wilburn, Champion, Lehman, 0'Donnell, Pfab, Vanderhoef. NAYS:Kanner ABSENT: None, Date published 10/16/02 Prepared by: Susan Dulek, Asst. City Attorney, 410 E. Washington Street, Iowa City, IA 52240; 319-356-5030 ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE ~IDING CERTAIN CHAPTERS OF CITY CODE TITLES 6, 10, AND '14 TO THE MUNICIPAL INFRACTION CIVIL PENALTIES FOR VIOLATING PROVISIONS, SNOW REMOVAL REQUIREMENTS, BUILDING CODE, G CODE, ELECTRICAL CODE, CODE, PLUMBING CODE, AND UTILITIES' USE RIGHT-OF-WAY REQUIREMENTS. WHEREAS, Resolution a Neighborhood Hou,~ Relations Task Force (hereinafter "Task Force") to fulfill Ioal of improving peaceful in iowa City and appointed eleven individuals re the interests landlords, and neighborhoods to serve on WHEREAS, the Task Force 5) times between 7, 2001 and May 22, 2002; WHEREAS, the Task Force held one forum to public on its proposals; WHEREAS, the Task Force submitted its Initiatives/Report of Task Force" (hereinafter "the Report") to the City Council on WHEREAS, in addition to proposals to ame~ cy, the Report recommends code amendments to increase the fines for municipal i~ for nuisances and other code violations that impact on neighborhoods; WHEREAS, staff recommends that municipal ~ns for violations of the building code, the housing code, the electrical code, the plumbi~ mechanical code, fire code, and public utilities' use of the right-of-way also be in is consistent with the Task Force's recommendations; WHEREAS, in order to enhance deterrer of nui,~ and related neighborhood problems and violations of the building code, code, ;hanical code, plumbing code, electrical code, fire code, snow removal utilities' use of right-of-way requirements, the fines for municipal infracti¢ and WHEREAS, it is in the public interest to NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINI: BY THE CITY COUNC OF THE CITY OF CITY, IOWA: SECTION I. AMENDMENTS. 1. Title 6, entitled "Public Health an( Chapter 1, entitled ~nces," is amended by adding a new Section 7 entitled )lation" which reads as follows: ,, Violation of this Chapter sh be a municipal infraction punishable I~y a penalty of $250 for a $500 for the second offense, and $750 f~r the third offense. 2. Title 6, entitled "Public He~ and Safety," Chapter 2, entitled "Hazardous Substances," is amended by addinl ection 4 entitled "Violation" which reads as follows: Violation of ~his shall be a municipal infraction punishable by a I~enalty of $250 for a i s fi 3n, $ 500 fl ~r the second offense, and $750 for thc~third offense. 3. Title 6, entitled "Pul: :h an ~ Safety," Chapter 3, entitled "Weed Control,~ is amended by adding vS/e~ ntitle J "Violation" which reads as follows'. ~ Violation of t~fs Chapter shall be a municipal infraction punishable by a per~ty of $250 for a ~'s first violation, $500 for the second offense, and $750 for the thir~ offense. 4. Title 6, "Public Health and Safety," Chapter 4, entitled "Noise Control," is ~mended by adding a new Section 7 entitled "Violation" which reads as follows: Violation of this Chapter shall be a municipal infraction punishable by a penalty of $250 Ordinance No. Page 2 for a person's first violation, $500 for the second offense, and $750 for the third offense. 5. Title 6, entitled "Public Health and Safety," Chapter 9, entitled "Graffiti," is amended by adding a new Section 4 entitled "Violation" which reads as follows: Violation of this Chapter shall be a municipal infraction punishable by a penalty of $250 for a person's first violation, $500 for the second offense, and $750 for the third offense. 6. Title 10, entitled "Use of Public Ways and Property," Chapter 5, entitled "City Plaza," Section 6 is repealed in it~, and a new Section 6 is added which reads as follows: Removal ~ns of snow and/or ice on City Plaza resulting from building runoff shall 9 responsibility of the adjoining property owner. Violation of this Section shall nunicipal infraction punishable by a penalty of $250 for a person's first violation, ~e second offense, and $750 for the third offense. 7. Title 14, entitled Development Code," Chapter 1, entitled Sidewalks and Public Right of Wa' icle A, entitled "Streets, Sidewalks and Right of Way Generally," Section I and Ice Removal" is amended a Subsection E which reads as follows: Violation be a municipal infraction , by a penalty of $250 for a person's first violation ~ for the second offense, and offense. 8. Title 14, entitled "Unified Code," Chapter 5, "Building and Housing," Article A, entitled "Building Section 4 is hereby in its entirety and a new Section 4 is added which lows: Violation of this Article shall be a penalty of $250 for a person's first violation, $750 for the third offense. 9. Title 14, entitled "Unified Develo Chapter entitled "Building and Housing," Article B, entitled "Plumbing Code," is nded by ad g a new Section 6, which reads as follows: Violation of this Article shall be a penalty of $250 for a person's first violation, $500 for . and $750 for the third offense. 10. Title 14, entitled "Unified Development 5, entitled "Building and Housing," Article C, entitled "Electrical Code," by adding ew Section 28 which reads as follows: Violation of this Article shall be punishable by a penalty of $250 for a person's first violation, $500 for and $750 for the third offense. 11. Title 14, entitled "Unified Developmen 5, entitled "Building and Housing," Article D, entitled "Mechanical Code is entirety and a new Section 4 is added which reads as follows: Violation of this Article shall [ municipal ,n punishable by a penalty of $250 for a person's first violation, the second offe and $750 for the third offense. 12. Title 14, entitled "Unified Code," Cha 5, entitled "Building and Housing," Article E, entitled "Housing ~ by adding a new as follows: Violation of thi~ hall be a municipal infraction unishable by a penalty of $250 for a person's first viola $500 for the second offen,, and $750 for the third offense. 13. Title 7, entitled "Fire Protection," Chapter entitled "Fire Code," Section 4 is repealed in a new Section 4 is added which .~ads as follows: Violation of thi shall be a municipal infraction shable by a penalty of $250 for a person's fi $500 for the second offense, $750 for the third offense. 14. Title 14, Inified Development Code," Chapter 2,ed "Public Utilities and Use of City Right "Article A, entitled "General Provisions 13, entitled "Penalties" is repealed and a new Section 13 is added which Is as follows: Any ,lation of this Chapter shall be considered a sim misdemeanor, a municipal or an environmental infraction. Municipal shall be punishable by a penalty of $250 for a person's first violation, $500 for the offense, and $750 for the third offense. SECTION II. REPEALER. All ordinances and parts of ordinances in conflict with the provision of this Ordinance are hereby repealed. Ordinance No. Page 3 SECTION III. SEVERABILITY. If any section, provision or part of the Ordinance shall be adjudged to be invalid or unconstitutional, such adjudication shall not affect the validity of the Ordinance as a whole or any section, provision or part thereof not adjudged invalid or unconsti- tuff, IV. EFFECTIVE DATE. This Ordinance shall be in its final passage, approval as provided by law. day of ,21 MAYOR ATTEST: CITY CLERK City Attorney's Office sue/ord&res/NTFordfines,doc